Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 9th Dec 2011 19:10 UTC
Permalink for comment 499577
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-05-03
Your point is well taken, but Google could achieve the same results simply by using their Android trademark as the stick.
i.e. If you want to use the Android name and logos with your product, you must do X, Y and Z etc... Otherwise you would have to identify it with AOSP or your own fork.
Some suggested XYZ conditions:
X)If you apply custom skins they must be easily user removable so they can get back to pure Android if they so desire.
Y)Guarantee to keep device software updated in a timely manner, and for a reasonable length of time. At said end point any locks applied by OEMs or vendors must be removed.
Z)An anti Carrier IQ, Explicit Opt-Ins for any intrusive tracking, clause.
Google already uses their Market and other service Apps to gain some control. They have the tools they need to prevent fragmentation, they just need to consider some kind of practical compromise between the user and OEM/Vendor's needs.
Even here in this forum, it wouldn't take very long to create a pretty comprehensive want-list of reasonable conditions to be placed on the use of Google's Android trademarks.
What would be yours?