
Google's Android platform: not so open after all - nickb
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080715-googles-android-platform-not-so-open-after-all.html
======
gamble
'Openness' has always seemed like a fragile foundation for a mobile platform.
Mobile operators are the least 'open' companies out there, and they hold all
the keys in this market.

If Android apps really are going to be unrestricted, then the first
applications everyone will download are VOIP and SMS gateways. Are mobile
operators really going to tolerate a platform that circumvents long-distance
and SMS surcharges?

If they don't allow applications like this, Android doesn't really have much
going for it relative to the iPhone.

~~~
wave
_Are mobile operators really going to tolerate a platform that circumvents
long-distance and SMS surcharges?_

You can use Skype on AT&T Tilt (or any Windows) mobile phones. It works with
WiFi and 3G data network. People are downloading and using VOIP application on
their mobile phones.

------
wave
I don't know if Google is trying to test the new SDK on few developers before
releasing it, but their development platform is not as open as they stated to
be. Example: once I started developing and getting into details, I noticed
applications are prevented from getting the current outgoing and incoming call
data ([http://groups.google.com/group/android-
developers/browse_thr...](http://groups.google.com/group/android-
developers/browse_thread/thread/932df5d2c689920d/c2cb6bcda795e825)) This data
is already available on other platforms.

------
azharcs
I hate when Google acts democratic about web and its technologies when it
clearly shows they are getting ready to be autocratic.

All Warfare is based on Deception - Sun Tzu, Art of War

~~~
ardit33
Google = Microsoft 2.0

(same tactics)

I wonder in how many of those 50 finalists is google investing on, therefore
giving them a huge leg up while the rest is left with outdated SDKs.

~~~
trenchfever
Google obviously values the market more than the ethics. As any self
respecting company should. Playing in the mobile arena is better for Google
than not playing at all. We chose to allow service providers to arbitrate the
network and it's not as if our loyalty has anything to do with Google's
success?

Consumers are swines. The pile of crap that this world is today is testament
enough.

~~~
azharcs
We thought of Google as good guys in a mean world, We felt good with Google's
success in the early years. I have personally recommended Google to at least
all the people i know of(ball park figure might be around 100). Our loyalty
was very important for Google's success, which they might be glad to deny now.
For the first time, Microsoft looks like a better company than Google when it
comes privacy issues(they don't go around selling personal details of
users),openness and being truthful to users(they accepted they made a huge
mistake with Vista).

Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people(Google) into thinking they
can't lose.

------
tx
Why would you even want to develop on someone's corporate platform to begin
with? Apple or Adobe or Microsoft or Google or whoever... In the end, you
_always_ get fucked, either by your "patron" or by market forces, when your
"platform" loses out.

This ain't 90s anymore.

~~~
elai
Other than openmoko, that platform is???

~~~
mechanical_fish
Whatever happened to openmoko? They appear to have released actual hardware
while I wasn't looking! Does anybody have one, and how do they like it?

~~~
sharksandwich
I ran across this review the other day

[http://blog.wolfman.com/articles/2008/07/11/openmoko-
freerun...](http://blog.wolfman.com/articles/2008/07/11/openmoko-freerunner-
first-impressions)

Sounds like it's got a lot of promise, but a long way to go before it's ready
for mainstream use

~~~
jcl
Hadn't seen that one, thanks. The most thorough review I've found so far is
the Ars Technica one, which is older but comes to similar conclusions:

<http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/open-moko-software.ars>

