Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (32)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 16 hrs, 35 mins ago -
[ANNOUNCE] CSSU-thumb thread - stable Thumb2 on N900 (2,264)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by panjgoori - 2 days, 10 hrs ago -
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (254)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 3 days, 8 hrs ago - more...
wmarone |
2010-09-16
, 22:42
|
|
Posts: 1,746 |
Thanked: 2,100 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#91
|
Originally Posted by maluka
Where exactly is Google doing this, and how? Really, just stating that "Google is the new Microsoft" and explaining EEE doesn't lend a whole lot to your argument.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-09-16
, 22:43
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#92
|
Originally Posted by maluka
I think that's a bit much (FUD?). As I understand it, in general Google opens A LOT of its code both for public scrutiny, adoption, as well as push forward standardization of good technologies. If they had a closed-source model, I could see this being more relevant, but it seems more like condemning Google for innovating but only because of their size.
Google is the new Microsoft
Microsoft’s old tactics were:
1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the ‘simple’ standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace...and_extinguish
What's the alternative? To stop making new things, introducing new ideas, or improving on existing things? Or are you suggesting that Google taper its innovation in some proportion to its bottom line?
| The Following User Says Thank You to Capt'n Corrupt For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-09-16
, 23:30
|
|
Posts: 741 |
Thanked: 900 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
@ Auckland NZ
|
#93
|
Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt
Android is all HYPE and the definition of lipstick on a pig.
I think that's a bit much (FUD?). As I understand it, in general Google opens A LOT of its code both for public scrutiny, adoption, as well as push forward standardization of good technologies. If they had a closed-source model, I could see this being more relevant, but it seems more like condemning Google for innovating but only because of their size.
What's the alternative? To stop making new things, introducing new ideas, or improving on existing things? Or are you suggesting that Google taper its innovation in some proportion to its bottom line?
It claims to be Linux yet none of its apps work on Linux or benefit the GNU/Linux ecosystem due to running a private fork of the upstream kernel. It claims to be Java yet none of its apps work in standard Java. It claims to be Open yet the development happens behind closed doors until Google hands the code to handset makers.
Android is the new Microsoft and an enemy of the GNU/Linux ecosystem and Open Standards.
It has followed Microsoft’s tactics:
1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the ‘simple’ standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.
|
|
2010-09-16
, 23:49
|
|
Posts: 136 |
Thanked: 47 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ SF East Bay, Cali
|
#94
|
*Just jokes of course...* So what happens if Oracle wins, does this means Google rolls with Meego? Meego FTW!
|
|
2010-09-17
, 17:05
|
|
Posts: 71 |
Thanked: 36 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ CT, USA
|
#95
|
It claims to be Linux yet none of its apps work on Linux or benefit the GNU/Linux ecosystem...
Android is Linux, just as Redhat is Linux. All Linux distributions include out-of-tree patches, and Android is no different.
...due to running a private fork of the upstream kernel.
This is because Android doesn't use a standard C library, however, most embedded Linux solutions don't either. It has little to do with wakelocks.
It claims to be Java yet none of its apps work in standard Java.
Android doesn't claim to be Java, it claims to use Dalvik which uses Java syntax but not the bytecode or VM.
It claims to be Open yet the development happens behind closed doors until Google hands the code to handset makers.
I don't see how this different from Maemo or Meego. But, I think the existence of cyangenmod and nitdroid lend to the openness of Android.
Android is the new Microsoft and an enemy of the GNU/Linux ecosystem and Open Standards.
I'm not sure how much contribution Google has made in terms of lines of code, but Summer of Code projects have contributed enormously to free software in general and GNU/Linux specifically.
It has followed Microsoft’s tactics:
1. Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
2. Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the ‘simple’ standard.
3. Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.
You've described Microsoft, but I don't see how any of this applies to Google. In fact, their actions--like webm for example--suggest quite the opposite. To validate your argument, you'll need to offer specific examples.
|
|
2010-09-17
, 21:53
|
|
Posts: 2,829 |
Thanked: 1,459 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Finland
|
#96
|
Originally Posted by chowdahhead
You don't see how it is different than Meego?
It claims to be Open yet the development happens behind closed doors until Google hands the code to handset makers.
I don't see how this different from Maemo or Meego. But, I think the existence of cyangenmod and nitdroid lend to the openness of Android.
Do you know difference between hacking and developing open source while being able to submit code to upstream?
If I were almighty I would use so much tar and feater...
btw.
Do you want to know different things what I see? It´s this weird feeling in my head.
 |
| Tags |
| bride-of-darl, chicks roosting, scoracle |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:44.