Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th Feb 2014 23:38 UTC

Another day, another fear-mongering 'Android is closed!'-article at Ars Technica. After Peter Bright's article last week (sharply torn to shreds by Dianne Hackborn), we now have an article with the scary title "New Android OEM licensing terms leak; 'open' comes with a lot of restrictions".

The title itself is already highly misleading, since one, the licensing terms aren't new (they're from early 2011 - that's three years old), and two, they're not licensing terms for Android, but for the suite of Google applications that run atop Android.

This article makes the classic mistake about the nature of Android. It conflates the Android Open Source Project with the suite of optional proprietary Google applications, the GMS. These old, most likely outdated licensing terms cover the Google applications, and not the open source Android platform, which anyone can download, alter, build and ship. Everyone can build a smartphone business based on the Android Open Source Project, which is a complete smartphone operating system.

Permalink for comment 582952
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 14th Feb 2014 17:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
Member since:

That's not what you said and you were very clear when you said, "So, let's get this straight once and for all. People do not buy iPhone and iPads because of marketing or the Apple brand - they buy them because they're genuinely good devices that are an optimal fit for many, many people."

Since you didn't agree when I previously said the same, what made you change your mind? Remember, you did argue against the idea.

Reply Parent Score: 3