1. They provide some way to upgrade the software and actually bother maintaining it a few years. Not like people buy TVs at the rate Android is evolving.
2. They provide some way to install 3rd party applications
3. Give you root
Generally what's bothering me about Android is that although it is kinda open-source, the drivers for the device you buy most likely aren't. We need a way to get around this and actually be able to upgrade the system or maybe even install some other Android-distro.
I didn't understand what Intel has to do with it, I presume (?) that Android runs on ARM processors. Because if the TVs end up having Intel Atoms, they will soon have Microsoft Windows 9 TV Home Starter Edition(TM).
Are they not making the mistake that Microsoft made, by trying to push Android into too many different hardware situations.
I forget what the name of the head Windows CE developer was who told Bill Gates that devices needed their own specific platform, but I feel Google should heed that advice.
I have no doubt that Android will be fine for many hardware applications, but the question to my fell HNers is, should it?
1. They provide some way to upgrade the software and actually bother maintaining it a few years. Not like people buy TVs at the rate Android is evolving.
2. They provide some way to install 3rd party applications
3. Give you root
Generally what's bothering me about Android is that although it is kinda open-source, the drivers for the device you buy most likely aren't. We need a way to get around this and actually be able to upgrade the system or maybe even install some other Android-distro.
I didn't understand what Intel has to do with it, I presume (?) that Android runs on ARM processors. Because if the TVs end up having Intel Atoms, they will soon have Microsoft Windows 9 TV Home Starter Edition(TM).