LWN.net Logo

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 5, 2007 20:08 UTC (Mon) by i3839 (subscriber, #31386)
In reply to: It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) by einstein
Parent article: It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

This link has some info. It sounds good, but if you read the FAQ it's clear that companies using Android can lock it up and load it with closed source crap if they want.


(Log in to post comments)

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 6, 2007 4:44 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Well that's normal for any Linux thing. 

Users and providers can add any amount of proprietary crap they feel like.. Currently on the
desktop users load up ndiswrappers, nvidia drivers, google desktop, and all that sort of
thing.

It used to be common for distributions to do that sort of thing, until people got tired of it.
The big examples that come to mind right now would be RealPlayer and Yast (before Suse was
bought by Novell). Used to be marketted as 'value added add-ons' or some such thing.

People have spent years and flame wars on flame wars and use licenses like the LGPL, Mozilla,
and BSD for the specific _purpose_ of allowing non compatable and closed source licenses. 

The Linux Kernel folks derided the FSF goons for trying to prevent distributers from locking
down the OS via hardware by pushing the adoption of GPLv3 license.

So if google is allowing 'Android' to be used as a platform to lock down devices against users
and allow carriers to add a lot of proprietary cruft then that is
_exactly_what_the_copyright_holders_want_ to allow according to their licensing choices.

Google is mearly taking advantage of OSS and Linux to provide a base for marketing and running
their proprietary applications.. Exactly like how the licenceses used in Linux allow.

So Android OS isn't going to do change the status quo.

Now is this a horrible thing? 

Well yes and no. It's not because it's reality. Carriers won't adopt Linux without being able
to lock down end users. They are assholes like that and I find that behavior very
distastefull. But by allowing them to do this the Linux kernel developers are going to be able
to get open source drivers for the various hardware bits in mobile devices.

The end effect is that all a user has to do is find some way to break the DRM on these phones
and then they can have these devices 'liberated'. Linux makes this much more easier, then,
say, OS X does.

And this lowers the bar for people like the OpenMoko/Neo1973 folks. They can use the same
hardware, the latest and greatest stuff, as the big guys do but they don't have to do the DRM
against end users. I know for a fact that many people dislike carriers for the locking down
and the proprietary cruft they force down the throats on end users. 

Then it will be open market forces that leads to a more 'liberated' phone and handheld rather
then licensing games.. although the GPLv3 can help a long way I think.

Linux will help lower the bar dramaticly to competition between handheld makers and
carriers... In a open market this usually means a big win for us.

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 6, 2007 10:46 UTC (Tue) by i3839 (subscriber, #31386) [Link]

I guess my original point was that it is a good start and that the idea of an open phone stack
is great, but because it can be locked up, it doesn't mean that the companies supporting
Android als support the openess. Otherwise the list would be highly impressive, now it doesn't
say much at all.

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 6, 2007 14:26 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Well your defiantely right with that. 

What I like is the fact that Google is being open about the OS. 

The carriers in the USA like to lock down phones and such, but I suspect that the actual phone
manufacturers do not.

This means that as long as the Linux kernel folks are able to impress on the hardware makers
that closed source drivers are unacceptable then that means as long as I avoid buying the
carrier-subsidized phones then I can run whatever software I'd like on it.

AGain the importance of Android hinges on the ability for consumers to be able to find and
purchase unlocked phones and wheither or not the drivers for the phone are open or not. 

If we end up with nothing but closed source video drivers and closed source kernel modules for
controlling the hardware on these phones then Android is a complete bust and worthless. 

(that being said.. I am eagerly waiting the final hardware revision of the Neo1973 to be put
to market. Now I'll have 3 operating systems to run on it.. OpenMoko, Qtopia, and Android )

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 6, 2007 14:33 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Another thing to keep in mind is that a huge barrier to totally open phones like the Neo1973
is the lack of support for the end user.

Sure there is going to be good GTK and QT software for the Neo1973, but normal functionality
and applications that consumers are used to on their regular handsets are going to be totally
missing on the Neo197.

If Google's Android has the ability to provide for a common unified platform for mobile
handsets then the ability for regular folk to migrate from a nasty locked-down carrier phone
to a completely open phone will be much increased. 

All the creature comforts of one phone should work just fine on another.

If then consumer demand is for openness and the ability to use their fancy unlocked phones
then you'll see the gradual minimization of the current proprietary horror that is the cell
phone industry.

It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)

Posted Nov 6, 2007 19:48 UTC (Tue) by robilad (subscriber, #27163) [Link]

The whole point of Android is to be open ... enough for the proprietary vendors, so that they
can close it off again, in order to differentiate themselves. And with differentiation come
applications that only run on one phone, but not on the other.

It's funny to see Google repeat the story of Java ME, though, with all the beaming, good
intentions, hooray for proprietary software built on open source/standards, and all that.

Copyright © 2008, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds