Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Apr 2010 22:19 UTC
Google Andy Rubin is a vice president for engineering at Google, and he is responsible for the Android mobile operating system project. He recently had an hour long chat with The New York Times' Brad Stone, sharing his insights into things like openness, the lack of secret APIs in Android, and several other things. Of course, the jabs at Apple were prevalent.
Thread beginning with comment 421172
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Nycran
by Nycran on Wed 28th Apr 2010 04:38 UTC
Nycran
Member since:
2006-02-06

I think Andy needs to distinguish between "openness" and "freedom". I care about my freedom on a phone, that is, I want to be able to install whatever I like, however I like, whenever I like, but personally I couldn't care less if I don't have access to the source code for the operating system or the programs that I choose to install.

Android gives me my freedom which is great and important, although I acknowledge many people don't care so much about that.

Ultimately Android will succeed or fail on the same basis as any other product. Quality (both in OS and hardware), usability, and most definitely marketing (phones are in part fashion accessories after all).

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Nycran
by lemur2 on Wed 28th Apr 2010 06:28 in reply to "Comment by Nycran"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I think Andy needs to distinguish between "openness" and "freedom". I care about my freedom on a phone, that is, I want to be able to install whatever I like, however I like, whenever I like, but personally I couldn't care less if I don't have access to the source code for the operating system or the programs that I choose to install.


It is not that simple with software to divorce "openness" from "freedom".

Having the source code visible for anybody and everybody to inspect is the only way to be assured that software is written to the best interests of the users and not the authors. Malware can only ever be closed source.

You won't ever be free of scenarios like this:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20003340-245.html
... unless everybody who uses the same software has the ability to look at the source code of all of the software that you use on your machine.

Also, a software user cannot be free of control by the software authors if there is no other possible supplier of that software. Likewise, the only way for anyone to establish a position for themselves as a sole-source software supplier is to fail to provide source code.

Reply Parent Score: 3