[Android] Android: How open is open?

[benny1967]

Given the recent rants about Maemo not being 'open' enough... and seeing the buzz about Android now... I only want to remind you that Android comes with strings attached, too.

It's great to see how it runs on tablets (because it actually shows how versatile the tablets are), but for those who care about freedom, I recommend reading this section (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28mobile_device_platform%29#Criticism) on wikipedia as a start.

It's not all black and white and of course Android is moving the industry in the right direction (as maemo does). I only want to point out that, in terms of freedom and openness, it's not the knight in shining armor some of you seem to think it is. Based largely on non-copyleft licenses and backed by a shady company like Google, it doesn't make me jump on the bandwagon too eagerly. ;)

[tso]

im guessing that one big thing here is that google will not be selling any phones, as such they have to make sure their adds get seen. to do that they need to play nice with the operators, at least in usa, as they have a habit of slapping their own branding on the firmware.

still, i sometimes wonder if some take this open/free stuff a bit far. it seems some are angry at openmoko for going partially qtopia. this introduce qt onto the platform, and some seem to react like a vampire vs garlic...

[jzencovich]

From what I understand, portions of Android are closed. for now. (mostly the backend Assembly/C code)

But as soon as the first devices start shipping, Google is supposed to release everything. Keep in mind that the SDK is not yet in its final version, nor has much attention been given expressly at security.

[brontide]

Google has committed to releasing the whole OS and SDK under the apache or GPL. I don't see the problem here.

[siancu]

I'm curious to see which of Google's apps (if any) will be open sourced.

[benny1967]

Google has committed to releasing the whole OS and SDK under the apache or GPL. I don't see the problem here.

If it's GPL, it's fine. Apache is not a copyleft-license. From what I understand, they plan to prefer Apache.

[siancu]

Only parts of it (like the kernel) will be GPL. The rest will be Apache. The phone manufacturers, OEM's and the other companies in OHA would have never accepted GPL. Google has already stated this.

[GeneralAntilles]

But as soon as the first devices start shipping, Google is supposed to release everything.

Yes, well, we can talk when they actually ship a device. ;) For now, it's really only so much hot air.

[memson]

I was speaking to JBQ (Jean-Baptiste Queru ex-Be Inc engineer) on his blog. I was hoping to pimp the idea of the N8x0 to him (read the linked blog post below) as his wife Eugenia (ex-OSNews editor) has an N800 and an N810. But... well.. he gave a few reasons as to why it's not going to happen. Also, look at the legalities he raised. Are we all sure we are complying with the Android license? He implied we are not.

http://jbq.livejournal.com/151129.html

[siancu]

Probably when the full source code will be released, there won't be any legal issues with running it on the tablets. GPL and Apache both allow you to do this.

[benny1967]

"-finally, the current SDK license explicitly disallows using code on any actual device. redistribution isn't allowed to."

???

OMG... I didn't even know this. They're really building up a reputation.

[Bundyo]

Its not even OSS yet, so why are you so surprised :)

[memson]

Probably when the full source code will be released, there won't be any legal issues with running it on the tablets. GPL and Apache both allow you to do this.


Yeah, this is what I think he meant about source being available - at least from the Google side. I think he was also implying that Nokia needed to open up more of the closed stuff on the base Debian level (wifi driver for example) to make it simpler to integrate. From my point of view, I'm guessing that can be worked around.... else Android would not be running at all.

[memson]

"-finally, the current SDK license explicitly disallows using code on any actual device. redistribution isn't allowed to."

???

OMG... I didn't even know this. They're really building up a reputation.


They just want to control the platform until it is released. At the moment, forking it, or even selling devices running it, would be a real disaster in both marketing and brand continuity for Google, so they've purpously made that impossible.

[siancu]

They just want to control the platform until it is released. At the moment, forking it, or even selling devices running it, would be a real disaster in both marketing and brand continuity for Google, so they've purpously made that impossible.

Well, that makes a lot of sense. So no surprises here.

[brontide]

"-finally, the current SDK license explicitly disallows using code on any actual device. redistribution isn't allowed to."

???

OMG... I didn't even know this. They're really building up a reputation.

It's not even close to ready yet, they don't want people presuming anything about what hardware it will run on or the performance of that system. It's a very reasonable restriction at this point in development. I would only be mad at google if they don't follow through on licensing in 6 months when there is a shipping product.

That said, I was really surprised to see how well it ran even in this very early incarnation and can't wait to see it kick some butt once it's released.