The Android Thread

[achilles]

Emulators are not illegal. Names are. There was a DMCA complaint against it by Sony and hence has been removed. Google will remove any app that is infringing someone else's copyrights.

 

 

lol open standards...

H.264 is patent encumbered and anyone using it is liable to pay huge amounts as and when MPEG-LA demands. That was the reason behind chrome dropping it, not open or closed. Also, chrome dropped "native" H.264 support. You can still use plugins for it.

Also, if you think H.264 is an "industry standard", Flash is even more so. It is used more widely on the web than any other competing technology, has full specifications available to general public, has many alternative non-adobe implementions available to be used.

 

Apple fanboys like you are the ones who use "open" words more than anyone else. You pounce on anything and everything Android and label it a contradiction to open even when you don't even understand what open is or if the matter at hand does not even relate to being open. Apple keeps promoting everything it does as being open and you boys keep lapping it up like there is no tomorrow. Facetime was supposed to be an "open standard". I haven't seen as much of even an API doc from Apple for it.

 

 

yes. It is to enable open innovation because right now MPEG-LA is locking in as many people and companies as possible into H.264 by allowing free usage but their license clause allows them to begin charging whenever they please. The fees amount will also be upto their whims and fancies and can run into millions of dollars putting many small start ups out of business. The clauses also allow discretionary charging so the patent holders can pick and choose to put a rival company of their choice out of business overnight by charging them much more than the others. I don't know why people are making such a big deal out of Chrome dropping the support when Opera and even market leader firefox don't support H.264 natively from the very beginning because of this very reason. Chrome is just following them, not creating a new idea.

Moreover, they are still not "blocking" H.264. As mentioned by you, H.264 is still consumable through flash and all of them do allow other plugins too for users still wanting H.264 support without flash unlike a certain fruit company which blocks one of the most widely used web technology, which is gauranteed to remain free and allows you to develop your own implementations without licensing issues, and still heralded as the champion of open web.

Edit: Another point. Google mentions in their post that they want to direct their resources towards other codecs instead of spending the same on H.264 development. It is completely their prerogative where they spend their energy and money on. They don't want to spend it on H.264 but if anyone else wants to work on it, they are not stopping them either. In a similar way, Apple just stopped their own Java versions on mac and started directing users towards openJDK for future support. Why is again that not questioned when this is?

 

These two posts contain such utter crap, they are prime examples for the saying "if you can't convince them, confuse them". Anti Apple people like you need to get real.

 

Huge money as and when MPEG-LA demands? Just pulled that out of your Google colored hat, did you? From Wikipedia: "On August 26, 2010 MPEG LA announced that H.264 encoded internet video that is free to end users will never be charged for royalties. All other royalties will remain in place such as the royalties for products that decode and encode H.264 video. The license terms are updated in 5-year blocks." In simpler wors, no money will be charged if the video delivered via the web is free.

 

Never mind the fact that something like this hasn't happened since 2003 when the h.264 standard came in, or that h.264 is vastly superior to Ogg or even WebM which has it's own patent related problems. H.264 is a requirement for Blu-Ray decoding, all streaming video is encoded in H.264 from Netflix and all content on iTunes & Amazon is in H.264.

 

Chrome dropped native support but anyone can use plug-ins. Oh how generous. Plug-ins like Flash, which come built into Chrome? Flash is as far from open as Android is to having a killer game. Speaking of which, doesn't Android itself still support h.264, and so does YouTube? Why the split message from the same company?

 

Do you understand what open is? So harping "open" when it suits you guys is alright but when someone else catches you for practices which are completely against the spirit you just change what it means? From Skyhook's lawsuit against Google: "Google’s established practice in determining Android compliance consists of two steps. The first step requires each Android-enabled device, and its embedded software, to be run against the Compatibility Test Suite (CTS), a software-based test platform that objectively evaluates whether the device and software are compatible with the published Android specifications. The second step involves a review of the device and software based on an amorphous outline of additional, non-standardized requirements known as the Compliance Definition Document (CDD). This entirely subjective review, conducted solely by Google employees with ultimate authority to interpret the scope and meaning of the CDD as they see fit, effectively gives Google the ability to arbitrarily deem any software, feature or function “non-compatible” with the CDD.

 

On information and belief, Google has notified OEMs that they will need to use Google Location Service, either as a condition of the Android OS-OEM contract or as a condition of the Google Apps contract between Google and each OEM. Though Google claims the Android OS is open source, by requiring OEMs to use Google Location Service, an application that is inextricably bundled with the OS level framework, Google is effectively creating a closed system with respect to location positioning. Google’s manipulation suggests that the true purpose of Android is, or has become, to ensure that “no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other”, unless it is Google.The whole thing can be read here.

 

Open. The world is wonderful. Harp it again.

 

FaceTime is based on open standards and was supposed to be an open standard itself. Jobs said they will work on making it one. Maybe they're still working on it.

 

Discretionary licensing. Tell me, does Google has a separate school for pessimism or do you guys just get it naturally? There are more than 30 holders in the pool. The pool was formed to prevent crap like this. There has been no evidence in almost a decade that this will happen but ofcourse Google, who isn't in on the pool thinks it will be shortchanged.

 

Flash is the champion of open web? Did Adobe squirt so much come into Google's eyes it's blurring definitions? Flash is Adobe's technology. It is controlled by 1 corporation. The source code is with Adobe. Apple blocked flash off iOS because flash isn't good enough for mobiles. And Adobe haven't shown otherwise in more than 4 years. Plus it's not like it's hurting any iOS buyer in any way.

 

Java? Is it even relevant for users today? Anyway, OpenJDK has Apple, Oracle & IBM contributing to it with "Apple contributing most of the key components, tools and technology required for a Java SE 7 implementation on Mac OS X, including a 32-bit and 64-bit HotSpot-based Java virtual machine, class libraries, a networking stack and the foundation for a new graphical client". And Java for Mac OS will continue to be available from Apple atleast for Lion.

 

Seriously man, such crap in these two posts is enough for me to take anything you've ever posted seriously.

[Superfrag]

 

Do you understand what open is? So harping "open" when it suits you guys is alright but when someone else catches you for practices which are completely against the spirit you just change what it means? From Skyhook's lawsuit against Google: "Google’s established practice in determining Android compliance consists of two steps. The first step requires each Android-enabled device, and its embedded software, to be run against the Compatibility Test Suite (CTS), a software-based test platform that objectively evaluates whether the device and software are compatible with the published Android specifications. The second step involves a review of the device and software based on an amorphous outline of additional, non-standardized requirements known as the Compliance Definition Document (CDD). This entirely subjective review, conducted solely by Google employees with ultimate authority to interpret the scope and meaning of the CDD as they see fit, effectively gives Google the ability to arbitrarily deem any software, feature or function “non-compatible” with the CDD.

 

On information and belief, Google has notified OEMs that they will need to use Google Location Service, either as a condition of the Android OS-OEM contract or as a condition of the Google Apps contract between Google and each OEM. Though Google claims the Android OS is open source, by requiring OEMs to use Google Location Service, an application that is inextricably bundled with the OS level framework, Google is effectively creating a closed system with respect to location positioning. Google’s manipulation suggests that the true purpose of Android is, or has become, to ensure that “no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other”, unless it is Google.The whole thing can be read here.

 

This point can be explained simpler with using two terms ; Android-O and Android-G.

 

Android-O is the proper open sourced OS, with no proprietary code and no restrictions for anyone to use. HOWEVER, this does not include any of the proprietary Google Apps that are associated with Android. CyanogenMod, IMO the best Android-O project does not have the Google Apps inbuilt, it needs to be flashed separately. In fact, when it WAS inbuilt before CM5, Google had sent them a C&D letter since they did not have permission from Google to include it. From then on, they made the Google Apps package separately, which needs to be flashed separately.

 

Although, one can do without Google Apps, since there are good alternatives for all the proprietary Google Apps, but obviously when people think of Android, they think of Google Apps.

 

Android-G is Android-O with the Google Apps, and since Android-G contains proprietary stuff in it it's not open sourced. (Not fully, anyways). This would be the version that is sold popularly, and any Android-O product is deemed as a failure or DOA, as we've seen evidently. However, to use Android-G, the company/manufacturer must pass Google's requirements, which IMO is acceptable, since Google wants to make sure its software is functioning optimally. (Talking about Maps, GMail, etc)

 

Obviously, this means that it's not really open source, not fully anyways. Google has allowed manufacturers and various companies to modify the code, but they can't modify it too much (I'm assuming) or they won't pass Google's testing process. I remember the Desire Z and Desire HD being delayed due to the same reason, there was some problem the Sense UI faced related to Google's testing procedure. The T-Mobile G2, which is basically the US version of Desire Z did not face any delay since it did not run Sense UI.

 

I suppose Google felt that using Skyhook location services hampered the performance of Google Maps, Places and Navigation, but this is hopeful thinking, the hater/pessimist will say that Google did not want anyone to use any other location services other than its own.

[Shantz]

@Achilles: the streaming is free for end users but the companies who are streaming it can be made to pay. And how many times do I have to repeat, Google hasn't "started" doing this. Firefox and opera are already shunning H.264 for many years.

 

Android requirements have already been clarified by Superfrag. As I told on last few pages as well. Android is open, Google apps are not. If you want google apps and want to use Android trademark, you need to fulfill CDD requirements, if you don't want Google apps, you don't need to. You can take Android code and build/sell your own device without talking to Google even once. Guys like you who have never contributed to any open source projects and get all their "definitions" from apple blogs are always confused. This is true for a lot of open source projects. All of them varying degrees of licenses and for a lot of them you HAVE to fulfill their compatibility requirements to distribute your derivatives, and for most of them you cannot use their trademarks for your own derivatives.

 

I never said Flash is the champion of open web. I said that when Apple blocks Flash, it is called "champion of open web" by fan boys like you, but when Google just drops native support for a technology, still allowing its usage through plugins, you come out all guns blazing saying they are closed? If you want h.264, you can use a plugin. This is called open. If you still want native support, you can still download chrome source and compile it with native H.264 support. This is called open.

 

Facetime is based on open standards but others are not? Dude, while you speak from Apple presentations, I speak from experience. I have developed commercial video conferencing solutions and coded for them from very own hands. Almost all of them are all built on open standards. But building on open standards doesn't mean the end result is open. Just like all the solutions I coded are closed and not compatible with each other, FaceTime is closed as well. Why declare it as an open standard when till 1 year later you don't have anything to show for it. Heck, they don't even allow anyone from outside mac/ios world to talk to it or even apps in their own ecosystem.

 

Anyways, explaining all this again and again to you is a waste cuz guys like you are so blinded by how Apple "interprets" open that writing these walls of text is probably OHT for you (or some times I feel whether you even bother to read it at all lol) Come back and talk when you have more information than reading wikipedia and macworld blogs.

[Hot-Drake-Pixel]

I never said Flash is the champion of open web. I said that when Apple blocks Flash, it is called "champion of open web" by fan boys like you, but when Google just drops native support for a technology, still allowing its usage through plugins, you come out all guns blazing saying they are closed? If you want h.264, you can use a plugin. This is called open. If you still want native support, you can still download chrome source and compile it with native H.264 support. This is called open.

 

True that. I experienced true oneness in a mobile platform after moving to Android. You dont like something, get the project and enhance yourself, if you know how to that is. And stop bitching n whining for the lack of your own knowledge.

 

Lets take Market Place for instance. Amazon had other plans with the app store. They picked up the project and enhanced it to their specs and they now have an awesome app store. Better than google's own market place in my opinion.

[Solitaire]

This thread is hot

 

@HKP

 

I wish I could use Amazon's market. Damn regional restrictions. Will have to wait a few months. Had to sideload Angry Birds Rio lol.

[Hot-Drake-Pixel]

Although, one can do without Google Apps, since there are good alternatives for all the proprietary Google Apps, but obviously when people think of Android, they think of Google Apps.

 

This. Most fruit market vendor miss this one out. Google let's you compete with them in their own platform. And apple on the other hand .No wonder apple rejected Google Nav, Amazon cloud player and many such apps. List goes on.

[Hot-Drake-Pixel]

This thread is hot

 

@HKP

 

I wish I could use Amazon's market. Damn regional restrictions. Will have to wait a few months. Had to sideload Angry Birds Rio lol.

Even I cant download apps from Amazon because of ATT. They have disabled the option to download apps from unknown source. Guess I will root my phone and then I am good to go.

 

Oh BTW Angry Bird RIO is exclusively on android.

[Solitaire]

 

Oh BTW Angry Bird RIO is exclusively on android.

 

Isn't it on iOS too? And last I heard it was coming to WebOS too.

[Death Stryke]

^

@HKP

Exclusive on android? Kisne bola tujhe? Its been on the appstore since Day1. Seriously, google much? It was exclusive to the amazon appstore only for android. U think Rovio will make it exclusive on android where its free

Edited April 9, 2011 by Death Stryke

[Hot-Drake-Pixel]

^

@HKP

Exclusive on android? Kisne bola tujhe? Its been on the appstore since Day1. Seriously, google much? It was exclusive to the amazon appstore only for android. U think Rovio will make it exclusive on android where its free

 

 

Yup, exclusively on Amazon App Store for android and was free for a while.

[Death Stryke]

This. Most fruit market vendor miss this one out. Google let's you compete with them in their own platform. And apple on the other hand .No wonder apple rejected Google Nav, Amazon cloud player and many such apps. List goes on.

 

I dont see whats wrong in Apple protecting their interests? Apple makes no bones about the fact that they are completely closed source when it comes to iOS. They aren't telling otherwise right? So why call them out for not allowing other competing platforms? From what I heard, they are launching their own cloud music solution with iOS5. I'm not aware about maps though. I do read that they are hiring maps specialists. And i dont think completely closed source = evil/bad/not good? Open source enthusiasts might disagree, but closed source softwares are omnipresent.

 

At the end of the day, The appstore is doing very well and developers are very happy with it. Its making them money, Apple is providing them proper tools to make polished apps. More importantly, its making them HUGE money and apple is helping them ease out the process by taking care of all the local/regional legalities and just ensuring the devs get their share. The word is unanimous on which appstore is commercially viable today what with apple handling all the legal requirements with paid applications in different countries etc. AFAIK, you cant put up a paid application here in India on the android market?(I may be wrong here) Amazon, well, it will be a while before it can sort out all the legalities before people worldwide can purchase applications from their store. As of now, only US is benefitted from it.

Edited April 9, 2011 by Death Stryke

[Solitaire]

I dont see whats wrong in Apple protecting their interests? Apple makes no bones about the fact that they are completely closed source when it comes to iOS. They aren't telling otherwise right? So why call them out for not allowing other competing platforms? From what I heard, they are launching their own cloud music solution with iOS5. I'm not aware about maps though. I do read that they are hiring maps specialists. And i dont think completely closed source = evil/bad/not good? Open source enthusiasts might disagree, but closed source softwares are omnipresent.

 

At the end of the day, The appstore is doing very well and developers are very happy with it. Its making them money, Apple is providing them proper tools to make polished apps. More importantly, its making them HUGE money and apple is helping them ease out the process by taking care of all the local/regional legalities and just ensuring the devs get their share. The word is unanimous on which appstore is commercially viable today what with apple handling all the legal requirements with paid applications in different countries etc. AFAIK, you cant put up a paid application here in India on the android market?(I may be wrong here) Amazon, well, it will be a while before it can sort out all the legalities before people worldwide can purchase applications from their store. As of now, only US is benefitted from it.

 

Methinks what he's saying is that Apple doesn't let anyone compete freely with them for apps from other major companies for features which they themselves provide or intend to make hay from later. Unlike Google. I don't think that's a reflection on open or closed source and I hardly think Amazon or Google would have submitted an app that was half-baked or worked badly.

[Death Stryke]

Methinks what he's saying is that Apple doesn't let anyone compete freely with them for apps from other major companies for features which they themselves provide or intend to make hay from later. Unlike Google. I don't think that's a reflection on open or closed source and I hardly think Amazon or Google would have submitted an app that was half-baked or worked badly.

 

I think it is. Apple, like any other company, protects its own interests (present or future). I dont know whether to call it good or bad, because I see such "protecting own (present or future) interests" practices by many other companies, not just apple. Google, by virtue of it giving android for free and not intending to make money out of android itself as they say, have nothing to protect as such, so they will allow anyone to make anything as long as Android is gaining traction. What they are doing with honeycomb notwithstanding, its still essentially only make money from ads etc (right?) Since its open, it would not have an issue with any competing manufacturers or platforms etc. its just two different ideologies of doing business. Neither is wrong.

[Shantz]

I think it is. Apple, like any other company, protects its own interests (present or future). I dont know whether to call it good or bad, because I see such "protecting own (present or future) interests" practices by many other companies, not just apple. Google, by virtue of it giving android for free and not intending to make money out of android itself as they say, have nothing to protect as such, so they will allow anyone to make anything as long as Android is gaining traction. What they are doing with honeycomb notwithstanding, its still essentially only make money from ads etc (right?) Since its open, it would not have an issue with any competing manufacturers or platforms etc. its just two different ideologies of doing business. Neither is wrong.

^^ I agree. Both approaches have their own merits and both companies have the right to choose what they want to do with their resources and their OSs.

[Superfrag]

This thread is hot

 

@HKP

 

I wish I could use Amazon's market. Damn regional restrictions. Will have to wait a few months. Had to sideload Angry Birds Rio lol.

 

http://android.modaco.com/content/software/336184/using-the-amazon-appstore-from-outside-the-us-including-paid-apps/

[Hot-Drake-Pixel]

I dont see whats wrong in Apple protecting their interests? Apple makes no bones about the fact that they are completely closed source when it comes to iOS. They aren't telling otherwise right? So why call them out for not allowing other competing platforms? From what I heard, they are launching their own cloud music solution with iOS5. I'm not aware about maps though. I do read that they are hiring maps specialists. And i dont think completely closed source = evil/bad/not good? Open source enthusiasts might disagree, but closed source softwares are omnipresent.

 

At the end of the day, The appstore is doing very well and developers are very happy with it. Its making them money, Apple is providing them proper tools to make polished apps. More importantly, its making them HUGE money and apple is helping them ease out the process by taking care of all the local/regional legalities and just ensuring the devs get their share. The word is unanimous on which appstore is commercially viable today what with apple handling all the legal requirements with paid applications in different countries etc. AFAIK, you cant put up a paid application here in India on the android market?(I may be wrong here) Amazon, well, it will be a while before it can sort out all the legalities before people worldwide can purchase applications from their store. As of now, only US is benefitted from it.

 

How is apple protecting its interest by blocking Google Nav? I was stuck with mapquest for almost 2 years now. End of the day we users miss out on awesome apps because of control freak apple.

 

Not letting competitive apps is lack of confidence in my books.

 

Also you make it sound like app store service is end of all. Don't forget apple takes out hefty 30% from every app earnings. Plus for any new developer initial investment is higher as opposed to that of Android. You need a mac to do an apple app, go figure. On top of that you pay for iOS Developer program $99, every year.

 

 

 

Methinks what he's saying is that Apple doesn't let anyone compete freely with them for apps from other major companies for features which they themselves provide or intend to make hay from later. Unlike Google. I don't think that's a reflection on open or closed source and I hardly think Amazon or Google would have submitted an app that was half-baked or worked badly.

 

Exactly. So much for openness. Apple has done it several times. Reject an app for no good reason. Then sheepishly update the application development guideline behind the scene.

[Shantz]

How is apple protecting its interest by blocking Google Nav? I was stuck with mapquest for almost 2 years now. End of the day we users miss out on awesome apps because of control freak apple.

 

Not letting competitive apps is lack of confidence in my books.

 

Also you make it sound like app store service is end of all. Don't forget apple takes out hefty 30% from every app earnings. Plus for any new developer initial investment is higher as opposed to that of Android. You need a mac to do an apple app, go figure. On top of that you pay for iOS Developer program $99, every year.

 

Exactly. So much for openness. Apple has done it several times. Reject an app for no good reason. Then sheepishly update the application development guideline behind the scene.

True. Apple's app store is good for devs but it is not without its own pitfalls. You can spend a fortune and lot of time/effort on developing an app and then Apple can just reject it on their whims and fancies. Even if your app is accepted the first time, it can be removed at any time or if you provide an update they don't like. Even otherwise, you have to keep waiting without updates for your apps to be reviewed. If there is a critical bug discovered, forget about releasing a fix asap. Lots of devs are complaining about these issues.

But of course, if your app is accepted, then in most cases, as it stands right now, it will bring more money in app store instead of market.

[Solitaire]

http://android.modaco.com/content/software/336184/using-the-amazon-appstore-from-outside-the-us-including-paid-apps/

 

yeah I saw that already. First thing I did was google up every way to circumvent regional restrictions. However, I don't want to take that much trouble to get at RIO or some other "free for a day" app. Especially since I have to sign up for some virtual card or other stuff online. As well as actively avoiding putting up any address anywhere on the net linking me to any identity in the US. Atleast not until I go for the interview and get my visa. Why else do you think I've been avoiding most contests these days? I'm paranoid about big brother lol As it is someone doing a background check might find that I've been living in San Diego, California with some intense google searching even if I haven't

Edited April 9, 2011 by Gaurav - Solitaire

[Phoenix Wright]

Sideloading Rio? It's free on the Android Market!

[Solitaire]

Sideloading Rio? It's free on the Android Market!

 

It was only on the Amazon market / app store back when I sideloaded it.