On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Stefan Monnier <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Furthermore Linux has been and will continue to be far more successful > > in specialized markets where Windows is not entrenched. In which case > > any shift towards more specialized devices can be a win for Linux. > > A win for Linux is not necessarily a win for Free Software. E.g. most > phones using a Linux kernel aren't more Free for the end user since they > can't replace that kernel (and rest of the firmware) with their own. > > I may be mistaken but I believe the ability to remove apps remotely is > > specific to apps installed via the market. Furthermore there is no one > > stopping phone makers from using their own build of Android free of > remote > > app removal. > > Yes, phone makers have a lot of freedom. But the issue is whether end > users have such a freedom. > I'm not arguing that. Ultimately all this backlash towards Android and even iPhones is unwarranted and pointless. Do you think if they went away the smartphone segment would suddenly be free? Do you think any smartphone platform or hardware provider cares whether you tether your phone, or use voip? If you are worried about user freedom or people not having control over their own devices, your wasting your time complaining about the platform or even the phone providers. They are not the gate keepers. > > > The firmware does not have anything to do with Android, only the phone > > makers. Google/Android doesn't control the phone makers, and a phone > > maker is free to make the device as hackable as they like. > > At least Google makes no effort to keep the end products free, In what sense? > and > even actively supports freedom-adverse features such as the ability to > remove apps remotely. Again this is specific to apps installed via the Android Market, not apps installed from any other source (which unlike the iPhone, is trivial to do). I don't know if it has been used, but recently there was a phishing app put on the marketplace. Be that as it may, if you sit down for a moment and think about it, you'd realize that any company (specifically one with a lot of cash flow) offering such a service has to provide a kill switch. That is the sad reality. Unlike Apple, Google was very upfront about it, putting it in the TOS of the Android Marketplace. > So it's not really true that it's all the fault > of the phone makers rather than Google/Android's. > I'm not sure what you expect of Google/Android. Can you give a concrete example? > Of course, none of this is a big surprise: Google has always been very > supportive of Open Source but not of Free Software. > I think this is redefining "Free Software". http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses http://source.android.com/license > > Stefan > > _______________________________________________ > mlug mailing list > [email protected] > https://listes.koumbit.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-listserv.mlug.ca >
_______________________________________________ mlug mailing list [email protected] https://listes.koumbit.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-listserv.mlug.ca
