Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 15th Aug 2011 12:04 UTC
Google Okay once again I'm breaking my own one-week time-off from OSNews due to, you know, taking a break and being too busy with other things, but this one is big - very big. Also, only the second time in OSNews history we've used the 'breaking'-tag. Google has just announced it is going to buy Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion (more here). While providing Google with a dedicated mobile phone business, it also gives Google ownership of one of the most valuable mobile technology patent portfolios in existence. Update: Responses from the Android ecosystem are positive. HTC: "We welcome the news of today's acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem." Sony Ericsson & LG: "We welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners."
Thread beginning with comment 485270
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Mistake by Google
by Neolander on Tue 16th Aug 2011 09:23 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Mistake by Google"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

LOL, what are you talking about? Gingerbread was released in Dec 2010, but Google announced it WAY before then. I couldn't find the exact announcement date, but I found a couple of articles from June 2010 that talked about it, so they announced it at LEAST a good six months before releasing it. I think they announced ice cream sandwich back in January.

Then they could 1/announce it later and 2/synchronize release on all manufacturers. I really think that's a communication problem, due to Google doing stuff in their corner instead of communicating with their partners. When Microsoft label a new version of Windows as released, you find it in every computer store in the following month, generally less.

And anyway, it looks like the Droid Incredible (the phone I have) will finally be getting Gingerbread, only 8 months after it was released. That is INEXCUSABLE!! And companies are still as of a month or two ago) releasing phones with Froyo (2.2) installed. I just want a phone where I can get new updates in a month or so, or in less time than that if it's minor update to fix a vulnerability. IMHO, I don't think that's too much to ask for.

Now, as a first goal, they're announcing 18 months ( http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/android-momentum-mobile-and-... ), and claiming they can do more later (without going into more details about what's "more"). So guess that's not enough for you. Myself, as long as I have my minor security updates, I'm happy.

I'm sort against feature updates on old devices the way we do them currently, because manufacturers test them insufficiently on old hardware (remember iOS 4 on iPhone 3G ?), and as such these updates break stuff and can't be installed with confidence. If manufacturers are not going to test their updates, they can say it and not release the update at all, that's fine by me. I paid for a set of features when I bought my device, no need for more. But security and stability are features, so they need to take care of them through minor updates.

I mean, more as in better overall quality, but I suppose that is subjective, depending on what you want to do.

Guess so too. So far, only few mobile apps have proved themselves worthy of staying very long on my devices. These mostly corrected what the manufacturer had done wrong in the bundled feature set (home screen widgets, Opera Mobile/Mini), which is forbidden by Apple. Others were essentially funny toys to play with for a minute, then became quickly boring.

Would love to, if they would just release one on Verizon ;) In the US, if you want a carrier with decent coverage, your only two optiosn are AT&T and Verizon. And well, I've had enough experience with AT&T to know that I'd rather tongue the sweaty asshole of a Kenyan marathon runner than to deal with those f**ktards again.

Can't you buy the phone unlocked ? Following the links from www.google.com/nexus, I've quickly found this one : http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Nexus-Unlocked-Phone--U-S-Warranty/dp...

I buy all of my phones unlocked for two reasons. First, it makes me see the real price of things, which is always enlightening and forces me to ask myself the question "what do I need ?" instead of going for what's essentially a credit contract. Second, I can use whatever mobile plan suits my needs best, instead of going for the crazily-priced ones. Third, carriers don't tamper with my phones before I use them, which means no stupid carrier-specific bundled crap and useful stuff like tethering is still there.

Having said all that, things are not exactly rosey on iOS either... you just have to decide which set of annoyances on either platform bother you the most ;)

Or, as I say it, which is the least painful ;)

Edited 2011-08-16 09:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Mistake by Google
by Neolander on Tue 16th Aug 2011 16:24 in reply to "RE[7]: Mistake by Google"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

-two reasons +three reasons, of course. This is what happens when you edit your posts too much like me ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Mistake by Google
by WorknMan on Tue 16th Aug 2011 16:37 in reply to "RE[7]: Mistake by Google"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Now, as a first goal, they're announcing 18 months ( http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/android-momentum-mobile-and-..... ), and claiming they can do more later (without going into more details about what's "more"). So guess that's not enough for you.


What exactly is their definition of 'timely'? And if the new update comes out 18 months and 1 day after the phone is released? Then their customers are shit out of luck? Imagine if you bought a PC and the manufacturer told you that you could only have updates for 18 months ...

Myself, as long as I have my minor security updates, I'm happy.


Well, that's exactly the problem... if they do the security update for the current version of Android and you're still running the previous version because your vendor never released the update to you, then you're boned.

I'm sort against feature updates on old devices the way we do them currently, because manufacturers test them insufficiently on old hardware (remember iOS 4 on iPhone 3G ?), and as such these updates break stuff and can't be installed with confidence.


LOL, what is old hardware? The iPhone 3g was released in June of 2008; that's less than 3 years old. That's not exactly ancient. And anyway, in Android's case, we're not talking about old hardware here - my phone less than a year and a half old!

If manufacturers are not going to test their updates, they can say it and not release the update at all, that's fine by me. I paid for a set of features when I bought my device, no need for more.


Again, would you have the same attitude about a PC? 'Well, I bought this PC running Windows 7 (or whatever) and it's working ok, so no need to ever want any upgrades ...' And what are phones but small PCs that fit in your pocket?

Can't you buy the phone unlocked ? Following the links from www.google.com/nexus, I've quickly found this one : http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Nexus-Unlocked-Phone--U-S-Warranty/dp.....


I could, but I'd need a CDMA version for it to work on Verizon ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Mistake by Google
by Neolander on Tue 16th Aug 2011 17:21 in reply to "RE[8]: Mistake by Google"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

What exactly is their definition of 'timely'? And if the new update comes out 18 months and 1 day after the phone is released? Then their customers are shit out of luck? Imagine if you bought a PC and the manufacturer told you that you could only have updates for 18 months...

The PC ecosystem is different, because OEMs are not in charge of providing updates, neither feature nor security. There is no intermediate layer between the OS and the user. Given that they have the skill, users can install whatever update they want themselves and see if it works, even if it implies voiding the warranty because it is NOT the HW+SW combination you have paid for, and as such there is no guarantee that it will work.

On phones, locked BIOSes are preventing that, and forcing you to depend on the OEM.

Now, if you're talking about security updates in particular, that's another story of course... I think they should be provided for at least the lifetime of the earliest hardware sold, if not that of the latest hardware sold.

Well, that's exactly the problem... if they do the security update for the current version of Android and you're still running the previous version because your vendor never released the update to you, then you're boned.

I'm talking about security updates for every version during a reasonable time after release. Not something as extreme as Microsoft does with Windows, of course, since phones are much more short-lived than desktops, but at least 2 years after the new version is released, which is the typical frequency at which people buy a new phone.

LOL, what is old hardware? The iPhone 3g was released in June of 2008; that's less than 3 years old. That's not exactly ancient. And anyway, in Android's case, we're not talking about old hardware here - my phone less than a year and a half old!

Old in the sense of non-current. At the time iOS 4 was released, the iPhone 3G was 18 months old IIRC so it seems that if you're an Apple customer you're also out of luck as far as feature updates are concerned ;) .

Again, would you have the same attitude about a PC? 'Well, I bought this PC running Windows 7 (or whatever) and it's working ok, so no need to ever want any upgrades ...' And what are phones but small PCs that fit in your pocket?

PCs are very different, from a customer-vendor relationship point of view. I can ask for more, because the PC ecosystem gives me more power. If I want to install Windows 7 on my XP PC, and it's sufficiently powerful for that, all I have to do is to buy Windows 7 and install it on my computer. But on a phone, if I don't like the bundled OS, it's too bad because there's no universal, supported way of replacing it.

Basically, phones are more like fridges than PC as far as upgradeability is concerned. And that's why vendors can force so much on you. If you want this to stop, best thing to do would be to fight against locked BIOSes and myriads of incompatibly nonstandard hardware platform with closed-source drivers. These are the main problems to be tackled.

I could, but I'd need a CDMA version for it to work on Verizon ;)

Ah... Can't help there indeed ;) Guess that's the price you pay for living in a country that's too large to settle with a single radio standard.

Edited 2011-08-16 17:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1