Linked by snydeq on Fri 12th Aug 2011 19:05 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Google has finally acknowledged that its characterization of Android as open source is false and, in the end, this can only make the mobile platform stronger, InfoWorld's Galen Gruman argues. 'It's hard for believers to accept that open source brings with it difficulties, but look at the consistent failure of the other open source mobile platforms -- Moblin, Maemo, and MeeGo -- that all devolved into grad-student-like thought experiments and personal pet projects. Users don't want that, and ultimately products are sold to users.' Instead, Google has been quietly taking parts of Android back in house to develop them purposefully and deeply, and as Google has asserted more control over Android, it's improved.
Thread beginning with comment 484858
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Wrong
by Aragorn992 on Sat 13th Aug 2011 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wrong"
Aragorn992
Member since:
2007-05-27

"
Why?? Seriously There is nothing that you can't do on MacOSX or Windows that you can do on Linux or BSD based OSes.


So they finally put APT on Windows? Can I also mount my home folder on a software raid-1 partition?
Can I hack a wireless network from MacOSX, now?
Can I choose among different desktop environments?
Can I configure a Windows system for complete security? Can MacOSX run on a ten years old computer as a network firewall?
Most of all, can I legally use Windows of MacOSX free of charge?
Oh and can I patch stuff or even report a bug on those systems?
"

So in summary, all the things you listed that Linux apparently can do and Win/MacOS apparently cannot are next to useless for 99.9% of people.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Wrong
by JAlexoid on Sat 13th Aug 2011 22:48 in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Yeh... But refuting a factually incorrect statement is useful to 100% of people.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Wrong
by Aragorn992 on Sun 14th Aug 2011 05:36 in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong"
Aragorn992 Member since:
2007-05-27

Yeh... But refuting a factually incorrect statement is useful to 100% of people.


The only part of the piece that I replied to, that was accurate, was that Linux is free. And using the cost as something that Linux "can do" and Windows "can't" is well .. lets just say, creatively pushing the limits of logic ;)

See another post for more info: http://www.osnews.com/thread?484833

Refuting a factually incorrect statement is useful to most but doing it with lies has the opposite effect.

Reply Parent Score: 2