Android's 'Open' System Isn't So Open After All

But don't want to spend $12 to read it.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/googles-android-claimed-79-...

When Apple lets you modify iOS like AOSP ROM's, come back and tell us about it.

Isn't that like jailbreaking?

http://goo.gl/97Al8

There is nothing more open than a nexus device and an aosp based os. Not only can you do whatever you want with it, it's a LOT cheaper than anything else out there, half the price of an iPhone.
Options are limitless with a nexus, don't even have to run any google applications. A far cry from jail breaking an idevice.
I will never - ever - own anything but a nexus. I believe it's my device and I can do whatever I please with it. A nexus gives me that option.
If you haven't picked up a nexus 5, you're missing out.

Another way to look at these "restrictions" imposed by Google are as attempts to reduce/prevent further fragmentation of the Android market. You want to call your phone Android, then it has to do these Android things.

Remember the so-called "evolution" of windows laptops -- just about every manufacturer adding "something special" to distinguish their laptop from the others, leading to heaps of non-removable crapware and other "enhancements." Sony and HP were especially good at this, for example adding funky hardware requiring proprietary drivers.

The result in the Windows laptop market was a lot of weird almost-the-same yet just-different-enough systems to make use (and especially support) a vast pain.

Google has learned with earlier versions of Android, and earlier Android phones -- I hope -- that they need to have both carrot and stick to "encourage" things like making software upgrades and patches available in a timely fashion to the installed base. There are a vast number of very old Android phones out there with loads of known vulnerabilities, and no way for their users to get their software updated (because there's no money in it for the mfg or the carrier, both blaming the other for making updates available).

(Gee, if only there was a smartphone mfg who provided sw updates and new versions for their phones for free...)

Steps to make the Android experience more uniform (and survivable) for the market? Sounds like a good idea to me!

But... But... They're using their market power to restrict our ability to innovate! BS -- innovate all you want, but if it doesn't meet the requirements, call it anything you want, but you can't pass it off as Android.

What does it mean to be open, and why is Apple considered closed behind those garden walls?

Apple has a couple OEM apps, and that's it, you can use anything in the store, even if it competes with the OEM Apple apps, such as Maps. Google is requiring Google apps be used with Android and Google search be the default search engine. Apple doesn't force its apps on the user. The apps can be moved out of the way and others used in its place.

How would you feel if Microsoft said that in order for you to use Windows, you MUST use Microsoft Office applications and Bing as your default search engine. And how would you like it if Windows prevented you from using anything other than MS Office? Where is the openness there? Microsoft would have every government in the universe filing lawsuits for antitrust, monopolies, unfair biz practices, etc. I vaguely remember something like that happening many years ago. Maybe that was called innovation.

That that's the rub, Android is supposed to be open, but with some strings, or maybe cables, attached. Is Android an operating system, or is it now also including a portfolio of apps as part of that product definition that extends beyond an OS?

Being open has a certain perception. Being exclusionary has another perception. Open can not coexist with exclusionary.

I have a feeling Apple is heading that way as their install base grows. It will begin over in Europe where they will bring suit against Apple to fore the decoupling of included iOS features. That's what happened to Microsoft and windows.

Yes it is. The difference however is that Android is offered under the terms of the Apache license, which permits the end user to freely make modifications to the software. Apple doesn't permit that because iOS is closed-source software.

The phone manufacturer may attempt to invalidate the warranty however for making modifications to the software, but that's a slightly different can of worms.

]

I guess if Apple wanted to they could prevent a user from restoring a j/b iPhone back to it's original state, but they don't so that's what jail breakers do if they need to take advantage of the warranty.

If folks really think that the iPhone world is more open than the Android world, then I think we have moderately strong evidence that the famous Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field has even persisted after his departure!

There have been some mighty fine aspects of several Apple products, but being open by most common understanding has not generally been one of them.

Read the referenced article, it discusses how the Android platform touts itself as being open, but there are huge terms and conditions attached to that openness. When conditions are attached, it is not as open as one would think. Perhaps Google is distorting reality now. Google requires Google to be the default search engine with Android, I use iOS and can choose any search engine.

It is like the local cable that constantly promotes it has more choices. I'm still seeing the same three channel packages, very little choice.

Can you name another manufacturer providing products running iOS other than Apple? Can you even license iOS and run it on other processors like Android? Can a manufacturer add extensions - not apps, extensions that customize iOS? So, Apple isn't like the cable company, it's the AT&T of the first half of the 20th century. "We're the phone company and no, you can't attach anything to our system."

I can hardly believe that it has been thirty (30) years since the athletic babe chucked the sledgehammer at the ugly guy on the giant screen during the Super Bowl.

What's even more incredible is that after all those years, and after the remarkable success of the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, the Apple "True Believers"™ still haven't run out of things to whine about.

No. Running an OS on hardware from multiple companies does not make the OS open. What other OS can those hardware companies run on their handsets? Go ahead, list all of those optional OS that the hardware manufacturers, or end users, have to choose from. Take all the space you need.

No, what is the point here? Again, running an OS on hardware from multiple manufacturers does not make the OS open. And this has been discussed billions of times already... the total product consists of the integration of hardware and software. The desired product experience can not be assured, as in quality assurance, if many different hardware producers are running the OS. Just look at the Windows space for that proof. You pick up an iPhone, you know what you are going to experience.

Not that I know of. Again, what's the point? More importantly, tell those that use iOS what specific functions and custom features we are missing out on that these extensions provide. Make the list. I still read people complaining that iPhones do not have card slots, and to that I ask, why should the iPhone have a card slot?

I have never run into a situation where I am prohibited from running whatever I wanted on an iPhone. Apple has it's own apps, and allows competing apps. Mapping is a perfect example. Let's see, in that case, Google wasn't keeping the iOS Map app feature set up to par with the Android version, so Apple went and did their own Map app. And Apple still allows Google to put a map app on the iPhone. This sort of forces Google to advance the iOS map app, or look really bad next to the Apple map app. Apple's openness made Google better. Google played its hand as the sole provider of a map app at the time, and lost. Openness won.

This thread is about openness and the apparent hypocrisy of a market competitor that touts itself as the example of openness while behaving in a not-so-open manner.

Perhaps the best known and common example is Nokia. While their share has fallen in the past few years you can buy essentially the same device using either Android or Windows for phones. ASUS manufacturers tablets that run either Android or Windows, not necessarily in the same device interchangeably, but different models that run one OS or the other. I believe Lenovo has the same along with others

The point being iOS devices are available from only one source. Take it or leave it. The OS operates in one manner and cannot be enhanced to take advantage of additional hardware capabilities which may be present.

Here the point is not the box you are trying to build in "give me a list" but the capability of a developer working in both/either hardware or software to innovate. If it doesn't come out of Cupertino, it isn't worth having. You can always say "There's an app for that" but the functionality of a popular app many would consider as essential can't be added as a feature of the OS, it has to be an add-on.

Which describes the difference you are raising. Google has restrictions for licensing Android. So does virtually every other manufacturer that provides an "open" product. You license the code and accept the restrictions with the knowledge you can implement enhancements and additions to the base code which differentiate your product from others. Android, even with its restrictions allows people to extend the functionality of the base operating system as long as the core functions operate as licensed.

Nokia is your best example? Does Nokia still exist? If it does, it is not a factor at all. Their share has fallen is quite an understatement. So what kind of marketshare do those devices that can run Windows or Android have? Your list of devices as examples running optional OS simply does not have weight given the total market size and insignificant size of these examples that appear to run more than one OS. Your example does not demonstrate openness of the Android OS, or that iOS is any less open.

“The OS operates in one manner and cannot be enhanced to take advantage of additional hardware capabilities which may be present” What does that mean? How many manners should the OS operate? Again, a list please. Why don’t you explain how operating in one manner is a bad thing. That is just not the way Apple does things, and apparently it is very successful. More so than a hardware that can run more than one OS, severalfold. iOS devices have been available from one source, doesn’t seem to be a problem.

I’m not trying to build a box, I want you to provide the list of these features/capabilities that iOS is apparently deprived of.

I think Apple has produced a pretty good and versatile platform in both hardware and software. There are hardware additions you can add if you so choose, and there are plenty of apps from which to choose. So please provide this list of deficiencies that the iPhone and iOS suffers from. Apple has done a great job choosing the design of its products. It knows it shouldn’t attempt to be all things to all people all the time. Some products try to be everything to all people all the time, and it is a disaster. And people are still hung up over the lack of a card slot in an iPhone.

But you left out the important part of the article regarding the restrictions, and attached strings, and the degree of “openness” of the Android platform. Google is required to be the default search engine and Google apps are required in the bundle, and some other things. Google is going down a path tried and failed before. It didn’t work for MS in the Windows world. Google can still innovate without forcing their search engine or apps on those that license the Android OS.

Default *as shipped* to the customer. I see *nothing* in the article you reference that prevents someone from installing another search engine and making it the default on an Android phone. Also (since I actually have an Android, do you?) I know that you can move the Google specific apps to a screen more than one swipe away from the home screen, and move the "Play Store" icon off the home screen. Just because Google wants the phones to be shipped this way doesn't mean that users are *locked in* to this setup. Once you get your phone, you can change the very things you are bitching so much about.

As for Apple hardware, I cannot count the number of family, friends, and colleagues who have iPhones with cracked screens. For whatever reason, the percentage of people I know with an Android with a cracked screen (currently 1 person) is much lower compared to the iPhone friends with a cracked screen (many, many). The Android percentage of the market is much higher, yet Android makers seem to be able to design phones that don't break if you look at them sideways. That and the fact that iPhones have tiny screens compared to most any Android these days. Those two factors tell me, an engineer, all I need to know about the iPhone hardware. If the company cannot design the basic human interface of the phone (the screen) to be durable, without having to have an Otterbox or other case to protect it, I don't really have to dig any deeper. After all, the screen is the most basic part of any smartphone. How many of your friends with iPhones have cracked screens?

Cheers,
--Hawk

Isn't that like jailbreaking?

http://goo.gl/97Al8

That's an odd comparison. On my stock phone (Motorola Defy XT with Android 2.3), I can install any application I want that duplicates behavior of a Google-provided app, and make it the default handler for the actions ("intents") that the Google-branded app previously provided. I can select Google, Yahoo!, or Bing as the default search engine.

On my rooted phone, running CyanogenMod, I installed the Google apps explicitly because I wanted them; they don't even come with CM because they're not open source, and my phone would work fine without them. CM is perfectly legitimate software -- it's compiled from the freely available Android Open Source Project; it didn't require hacking up vendor ROMs. Pretty much the definition of open.

The branded Google apps themselves are not open source, but as many have pointed out, there's no obligation to use them and no preclusion to replacing them with equivalent apps. It just seems that manufacturers are required to include them on devices when they sell them. It generally requires root access to remove them from the system partition where they tend to be pre-installed, but that's not surreptitious, or particularly elusive on most released phones.

From one of the posted links:
The documents show that Google has imposed strict restrictions on device makers that want access to its search engine, YouTube or the more than one million apps in its Play Store. In return, the device makers must feature other Google apps and set Google search as the default for users, according to the agreements.

Nothing in there about android openness.
Not really a bad price to pay to use Google services.
Notice the "one million apps" - me thinks this is a little off!

Justifiably, you should take that figure with a grain of salt, because Google reported it.

http://readwrite.com/2013/07/24/google-play-hits-one-million...

I makes me want to ask the question PS3 or Xbox?
almost the same result! Lmao!

Will someone please provide the list that details the specific deficiencies that iOS and the iPhone suffers from because Android is allegedly open and has more than one source for hardware?

And make sure it is from the perspective of the general public end-user.

You can't prove a negative any more than you can provide a list of features Android is missing. Like I stated, you are trying to build a box and no one will provide you the nails for your boards.

Geez, the sky is falling.

Google just requires that the manufacturer ship the Android device with Google as the default. You can change it to anything you wish afterwards. Bing, Yahoo, whatever can be used after it gets to the end user.

Trust me, this is a good thing. years ago, HTC tried to lock one of their devices to Bing as the only search engine. Luckily the open system allowed that to be worked around easily. Google is just trying to prevent that type mistake again.

Multiple suppliers means:
Hardware with a swappable battery. A memory card slot. Just the fact that Android openness gives use small as well as large (my preference) screens. I can choose an AMOLED screen, or an IPS LCD. I can choose a standard unit, or a hardened waterproof unit. Light durable plastic cabinet from one supplier, or a more aesthetic aluminum cabinet. Different suppliers can skin the interface 'launcher' to look and function differently. Or you can just add your own launcher.

Or you can limit yourself to a non-swappable battery, no memory slot, one size, one display, one cabinet and one interface that they tell you you get. If that works for you, great. I want the choices.

Why whine if you have what you want, and I have what I want?

Looks like you are squirming, getting painted into the corner, etc.

All I can conclude is after all the distractions, diversions, insinuation and innuendo, you have nothing to list as a true iOS/iPhone deficiency when compared to Android.

A negative can indeed be proven, I do it all the time. I prove why things are bad and shouldn't be considered. I'm not sure what you mean with the talk about nails and boards. Just list the deficiencies of iOS when compared to Android. What is so bad and deficient with iOS? I don't care what Android is missing. I want to hear from you and others that pound iOS and the iPhone for the egregious deficiencies. What are the deficiencies?

Why are you staying away from Box Car's question about pointing out deficiencies in Android? That's the corner you are trying to stay away from isn't it?

As has been pointed out, the entire Apple product line is a closed proprietary universe. If it doesn't come from Cupertino, it just isn't available. Perhaps a more easily understood analogy would be everyone at Apple drives the same car. All of them have the same color paint, the same size body, the same number of doors and the same engine. The only difference is a heavy price paid for having a larger fuel tank. Google, with it's Android Operating system is the rest of the automobiles available. You have many different choices in not only style, but color, doors, capacity and most importantly size. Like the auto industry being required by the Department of Transportation to build certain features into their vehicles, Google requires manufacturers to include certain features into their products. It comes down to choice, and some people value choice more than others.

Can't really bash Google for some mopping up in their own back yard, however they still stay the most open mobile platform out there ... and they allow for end user or vendor modifications. can't say that much about Apple's iOS ...

Coming from an Android user, the only real deficiency with Android isn't even Google's fault, but that of the device manufacturers. The manufacturers eventually stop supporting their old technology, even when that technology can handle the newer versions of Android. This requires enthusiasts such as Cyanogenmod to take up the slack and provide the support the manufacturers will not.

Despite this deficiency, or rather because of it, you get many different flavors of Android. All of which meet a specific need of the developer. For example, my own ROM for my device is a tweak of a pre-existing custom ROM, which itself was based on a stock 2.3.3 ROM. However, the things I've changed in the custom ROM were all to suit my particular tastes. For example, my ROM has better encryption than the current version of Android, and has an improved cache. It has more than a few visual tweaks to emulate more current flavors of Android, and both the look and the under the hood enhancements are what make my ROM different from any other ROM.

In the case of Apple, you don't have this deficiency. But you also don't have many choices. About the only choices available to the Apple user are whether they want gold, silver, or black aluminum shells, or whether they want day-glo colors. Of course they can choose the amount of internal storage, but other than color and memory, what choice do you have? Can you choose to have a 5-1/2" screen? Can you choose to replace the iOS launcher with a launcher that completely strips out the icons, leaving only the words? Can you even change fonts on your iPhone?

So why is diesel staying away from the question? Maybe he just doesn't know, which is understandable. As an Apple user he may well think Apple is the bee's knees. More likely, it's an unwillingness to admit to himself that Android has fewer deficiencies yet more options than Apple does.

I started the thread and asked first. BoxCar evaded the question and tried to turn it around with the nails and boards, distraction, insinuation and innuendo.

The interesting thing is that I don't see iPhone users relentlessly beating on Android users, but Android users can't stop beating on the iPhone world. So all I am doing is asking the Android advocates to answer a few questions. I'm not beating on Android, not criticizing Android. I still haven't seen any real hard, conclusive, irrefutable answers that make it look like using an iPhone is a huge mistake. I'm just asking some simple questions that nobody is stepping up to answer.

I still read that the iPhone is hobbled because it doesn't have a card slot. I've been using an iPhone since Day 1 and never needed a card slot. What am I missing? Please tell me! PLEASE!!!!! These same people must still be mourning the demise of the floppy disk, and blame Apple for that too.

What are you missing?

Nothing.

Wait...what?

That's right. I said nothing. If iOS does everything you want it to do, then you're missing nothing. However, the entire thread is about how Android isn't as open as it is claimed to be. In some areas, yes the Android ecosystem is not as open as perceived. You can't find an ad blocking app on the Play Store. You have to sideload it or use fdroid. However, while the Play Store isn't the open playground it once was, it's still pretty much a hands-off environment in that app developers do not need to send their app to Google and wait while the app is approved.

Personally, I do believe a bit of oversight in the Play Store would be a good thing, but the merits of both approaches have been exhaustively discussed both here and in other places, and there's no point in repeating them.

The point you seem to be dancing around and are apparently deliberately avoiding, is the fact that the Android OS itself is able to be modified to include features the Google developers haven't thought of. Options such as built-in theming that can replace every element of Android, from the status bar right down to the very font the system uses. Options such as built-in privacy protection that allows you to deny an app access to such items as the IMEI of the phone, the SIM card serial number, and even the location of the phone itself. I could go on, but simply Google "Exposed Framework" to see what is possible with Android.

So while the Play Store isn't as open as it once was, the fact Android itself can be extended and modified without approval from Google is why Android is more open than iOS. However, as I said at the beginning of this post, if iOS does everything that you want it to do, then you're missing nothing.

None of the things noted in the original article can't be changed totally by end users. If you're not happy with Google being your default search engine, you can change it to Bing, DuckDuckGo, or whatever you want. If you don't like the desktop manager, you can replace it. I don't really like Touchwiz, so I replaced it with Nova Launcher. If you don't like the placement of the Play Store icon, as mentioned in the article, you can move it off the desktop entirely.
Apple really needs to open source Ios to enable enthusiasts to mod it and allow it to be all it can be. Right now it's hobbled by Apple's xenophobic policies.

You still aren’t getting it. I am asking a question, a question that apparently can’t be answered clearly and concisely. And I am not going to allow the question to be ignored and have it bounced back at me to answer for you.

The iOS and iPhone are relentlessly pounded for being “closed”. Android is considered open. I’m asking for a list of the specific deficiencies that an enduser would suffer from as a result of this alleged “closed” environment, and so far there has been nothing but evasion.

Strephon, your reply came the closest to an answer, but I have to tell you, you addressed the needs of a developer, a hacker, and nothing much 99.999999999% of the users out there would care about. I made it clear that I want to hear the iOS/iPhone deficiencies that an enduser, make that your typical non-hacker enduser, would experience and feel slighted. Here’s the closest thing I see as an answer so far:

“All of which meet a specific need of the developer. For example, my own ROM for my device is a tweak of a pre-existing custom ROM, which itself was based on a stock 2.3.3 ROM. However, the things I've changed in the custom ROM were all to suit my particular tastes. For example, my ROM has better encryption than the current version of Android, and has an improved cache. It has more than a few visual tweaks to emulate more current flavors of Android, and both the look and the under the hood enhancements are what make my ROM different from any other ROM.” -Strephon

Can you be more specific as to what is on the ROM and how it affects the user experience for the typical user? What’s the tweak? Better encryption? Improved cache? Am I really supposed to be impressed that your ROM is different than any other ROM? Tell me why? So what enduser experience do you have that is so superior to the iOS and iPhone as a result of your special ROM?

And I have to think that you very vocal bashers of iOS/iPhone are nothing more than hackers. And the market impact of these hackers is what minuscule percent of the total Android market? And that is why I can’t take these comments about the iOS being closed too seriously.

I’m not avoiding your attempt to bounce my question back at me, when you have not answered my question. All you are doing is complaining that I’m asking you bashers to back up your bashing. I’m not bashing Android. I don’t have to explain any differences between Android and iOS. I’m calling the bashers out. And just like on a school yard, those that are getting called out go complaining to the teacher that they are getting picked on.

nrbovee, you said, “Apple really needs to open source Ios to enable enthusiasts to mod it and allow it to be all it can be. Right now it's hobbled by Apple's xenophobic policies.”

Please, tell us what iOS isn’t and what it can be.

I’m doing things on my iPhone that are challenges on a VAX 11/780 (which are still in use). I’m doing things on my iOS devices that were outstanding achievements on engineering workstations a few years ago. I can complete engineering computations on my iPhone in realtime that would take hours of CPU time with the 11/780 or workstation. I wrote a CAD package for iOS that does complex design on an iPhone. All those things that were presented cannot help what I achieve with an iPhone, nor is the perception of “closed” even a consideration.

So, what does this thread have to do with GPS? Since that what this forum is about.

This is the old Apple vs everyone else war that has been running since Apple vs IBM.... Good grief, time to let this go.

Take a deep breath. You're starting to sound like a crazy person. In my opinion this thread is turning into a bit of a farce.

You open the discussion by referencing a somewhat biased article claiming that "Android" (actually, Google) is "not as 'open' as YOU think we believe it is". Fair enough.

Then you start insisting on being provided with lists of things that the "average user" is being deprived of if they choose an iDevice. Strephon answered that: "Nothing."

Now you're comparing your iDevice to a VAX 11/780. Yes, it is a marvel by comparison, but so are the current Android devices and even... (gasp!)... Microsoft's latest mobile offerings. "Openness" has nothing to do with THAT aspect of it.

As you said, YOU started this thread. Don't get all weird on us just because you don't like the answers.

Ken, the site has a smartphone and tablet forum. Topics in the aforementioned forum aren't necessarily related to GPS.

Sorry, you are right. I had tabbed on Recent posts and not Forums. My Bad.

I'm bowing out of this thread, as diesel is just moving the goalposts because he doesn't like the answers he gets. By moving the goalposts, he has revealed that this was never intended to be a real discussion. For you see, he accuses Android users of bashing iOS. He is doing the exact same thing he accuses others of, except he is bashing Android. That is hypocrisy, plain and simple.

@KenSny: It's cool.

http://goo.gl/DyIWQQ

VersatileGuy, I'm not getting any answers... don't you find that suspect?

This is like Kaffee vs Jessup... Jessup was very cagey and evasive, but he was indeed guilty. I'm asking Jessup if he ordered the Code Red.

Streph, please collect and quote where I bashed Android.

"I'm bowing out of this thread, as diesel is just moving the goalposts because he doesn't like the answers he gets. By moving the goalposts, he has revealed that this was never intended to be a real discussion. For you see, he accuses Android users of bashing iOS. He is doing the exact same thing he accuses others of, except he is bashing Android. That is hypocrisy, plain and simple." -Strephon

I'm looking forward to seeing my quotes where I bashed Android.

It might be easier for you to just put together that list of crippling disadvantages that iOS/iPhone suffers from because it is "closed". Yaknow, the things I have been asking for since iOS was being bashed for being closed. And I'm just waiting to hear why your ROM is so special.