> > > If you build/install Android on a device, then it only contains what > you put there, and you can just as easily remove it. If you let > somebody else build/install android on a device and not give you root > access, then it is painful. > > If you build/install Gentoo on a device, then it only contains what > you put there, and you can just as easily remove it. If you let me > build/install Gentoo on your device and not give you root access, then > it is painful. > > If you let me reflash the firmware on your Gentoo system so that it > uses my UEFI keys and firmware update keys and doesn't let you change > them, and I set it up with a bootloader that checks your > kernel+initramfs signatures and decrypts the rest of your hard drive > using a TPM-supplied key and a verified boot path, and an initramfs > that checks the signature on your /usr and mounts everything else > noexec, then you're going to have some serious headaches. And yes, > you actually can do all of this with Gentoo, though almost nobody > bothers (ChromeOS is based on Gentoo and does use a variation on this, > with licensed devices having a switch to disable the signature > checks). I'd have to check but I think Linux actually supports (maybe > via a patch) signature verification on execing images, in which case I > can let you mount whatever you want +x and you still won't be able to > run your own stuff. > > Your problem isn't with Android the OS. Your problem is with the > experience your phone vendor is giving you. All that lockdown stuff > that you seem to hate is 100% supported by the Linux kernel - you're > just not turning it on with a typical distro install. > > > > >> FOSS developers seem to mostly be stuck in X11-land - it scratches > >> their itch which tends to be on the desktop. While touch screen is > >> "just another input device" the fact is that you need to design your > >> entire application UI around it. ... > > > > why do you thinks some foss user interfaces can not be created for this > > situation? > > > > I'm not saying that they cannot be created. I'm simply pointing out > that nobody is bothering to do so. Anybody can write a web-based MUA > comparable to Gmail or a web-based replacement to Google Docs, and > release it as FOSS. However, it takes a lot of work and for various > reasons most seem content to use an X11-based version of each. In the > case of LibreOffice I think the origins are actually in software that > was intended to be sold commercially, but failed (which is probably > why they've been trying to cleanup the code for years). > > For a mobile OS your life is made even more difficult by Android, > since many who would tend to write a competing OS probably consider it > good enough. > > I'm really not interested in yet another android so much as more open > hardware to run android on. Vendors are getting better about allowing > unlocking, but driver support/etc is still a mess. > > Oh, and I don't like the general move of APIs into Google Play > Services. That really needs to be split into two applications. One > would provide APIs for stuff actually related to Google (like Google > authentication, buying stuff on the Play Store, Google Wallet, and so > on), and that could be closed. The other would provide all the stuff > like WebView APIs where rapid updates are desirable, and it should be > FOSS. > >
I know what you mean. This is all more or less true, but what can we do in this situation? I will try to move toward whatever promotes openness, and please do not tell me that ubuntu is not more open that android. In android I cant even have pure native apps! some parts of an application should always be in java.
