2010/11/9 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > > > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Miroslav Pokorny < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> The community are reactive or watchers rather than actively participating >> inthe entire creative, design and coding process from start to end. > > > I don't really think this kind of approach is realistic. Compare Android > and Limo... > > -- >
I realise that the average person out there, does not have the time, or opportunity to contribute any significant amount in the grand scheme of things, but like so many things perception is important. If G wants to say Android is "open" then one needs to understand what "open" means to most people. Well Linux seems to have grown and takes advantage of significant engineers being paid for by large corporations with a more open approach. The community sees a lot more of what and how the development evolution process continues. Every argument for G's closeness such as "why" Tor(coud be wrong) they delay dumps can be equally balanced by a counterargument. The "Open" in "Open Source" is not only about the source code being available, because as we kknow theres a lot more to writing "stuff" than just files, its about people communicating, expression ideas, solving problems, gaining consensus on what should happen, and then writing some code. For me some of these items arent as "open" as they could be. If one forgets about source the same values i previously mentioned about my kind of "open" are also not true of Apple and IOS. Nobody really nows what Apple is working on next for IOS for pretty much the same reasons. The only advantage w/ Android is we can grab the source if we really want to. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
