That's quite the can of worms, Steven. But its the crux of the matter: There are so many different flavours, and within that, different yardsticks. We're mincing definitions when the discussion is boiled down to something as overly simplified as "Android is released under an OSI compatible license. Hence, it's open, end of discussion".
Can Android be more open? Yes. Can it be more closed? Yes. But to be perfectly fair, and it would take me 10 pages to fully nuance why I feel this is true, Android is far more open than not. In particular, it's more open in 2 ways that count the most for me personally: (1) Porting some fairly recent version of android to random hardware of my own choosing seems like something that's within the realm of possibility. The hobby project that has ported android to iPhones is the proof of this principle. (2) If I'm developing for android and I need a look at internals to figure out whats going on, I can do that. These are but 2 of a bajillion axes of 'open', but these are important to me, and I'm guessing, to most others frequenting this newsgroup. -- 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.
