Hi Rod, I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when the reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the closing of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first article is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that Google uses to keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even aware of.
Cheers, Carlo On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote: > Hi Carlo, > > Have to take issue with the second article. Anyone that has followed Android > through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to open up > Honeycomb. Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on this > year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of Android > (Gingerbread and Honeycomb). I'd say Google let a handful of top > manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will > let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year. And > considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I can > understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit! > > I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code > (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only. > No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the > developers menu. Too bad nobody uses them ;) > > Cheers > > Rod! > > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Reg, > > I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection between > left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at these > articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android platform while > loudly claiming that it is free and open. > > http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/ > > http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3 > > Cheers, > Carlo > > On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote: > >> Hi Paul >> >> Reg Whitely >> >> Home: 08 9921 7272 >> Mob: 04 8899 7313 >> Email: [email protected] >> >> >> >> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote: >> >>> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy >>> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response: >>> >>> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and >>> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in >>> doing >>> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk." >>> >>> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg >>> sounds a bit spooked. >> >> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to >> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use >> android and linux! >> >> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion only >> because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am on >> Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me and >> my family and friends as much as possible. >> >> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray >> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my >> acquaintance - not!. >> >> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this >> situation. >> >> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it is >> current only to 2010: >> >> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/ >> >> Reg >> >> >> >>> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted. >>> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against >>> the risk then a good thing has happened. >>> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-) >>> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but >>> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the >>> potential risks. >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- >>> Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> >>> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> >>> Unsubscribe - <mailto:[email protected]> >>> >> >> >> >> >> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- >> Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> >> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> >> Unsubscribe - <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- > Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> > Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> > Unsubscribe - <mailto:[email protected]> > -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> Unsubscribe - <mailto:[email protected]>
