Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 20th May 2012 22:50 UTC
Google "Google said on Saturday that Chinese authorities have approved its $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility Holdings, the last regulatory hurdle to a deal that would allow the world's No. 1 Internet search engine to develop its own line of smart phones." The main requirement from the Chinese government? Google needs to keep Android open and free for at least five years. I'm guessing that's the time Baidu needs to properly fork Android.
Thread beginning with comment 518732
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re:
by kurkosdr on Sun 20th May 2012 23:00 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

Since when Android is "open source"? Their source misses neccessary multimedia codecs, it's not just the Google experience apps. Othetwise we wouldn't need ReplicantOS. I am really not a free software evangelists, but if i you can't compile it from the sources, it's not open source, it's mixed model. I guess China meant Android's source to remain "as open as it is now".

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2.2; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/FRG83G) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: 1

RE: Re:
by stabbyjones on Sun 20th May 2012 23:30 in reply to "Re:"
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

You can build from source but the reason it's incomplete because of proprietary hardware/software like:

Orientation Sensor
Wifi
Bluetooth
GPS
Graphics
NFC
CDMA
WiMAX

It's currently well nigh impossible to build a completely free mobile phone. Don't blame Android for something that's been happening for the last 30 years.

The fact that you can build your own OS from source with proprietary blobs is light years ahead of what we used to have. No choice at all.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Re:
by henderson101 on Mon 21st May 2012 01:23 in reply to "RE: Re:"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

Moreover, ARM is not a specific processor, it's a processor spec. Manufacturers are free to add and remove whatever they wish from the final processor, so any OS that supports ARM is up against the whim of the processor used by the manufacturer. As most of the features of the processor (or SOC) are often supplied as proprietary, the OS in question will have binary blobs. This is without taking in to account discrete chips used to supply functionality not on the die. Chip manufacturers are in the business of putting hurdles and NDAs in the way of hardware development because it drives business.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Re:
by vaette on Mon 21st May 2012 11:58 in reply to "RE: Re:"
vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

One of the reasons to look forward to Intel phones. There is a lot of geek hate for the x86 line, but Intel has been great at standardizing things and usually offering reference implementations (or at minimum, given Linux developers and such the information necessary to make implementations).

This wont cover quite everything of course, but just getting a fully documented processor, bus and GPU into a phone will be huge process. We should already thank Intel for USB, which is helping us with all phones already. It certainly wasn't cheap to develop, but Intel still pretty much gave their work away to anyone and everyone to integrate.

Reply Parent Score: 2