Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 17th May 2013 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Google Ars nails it: "The answer is that Google did announce what amounts to a fairly substantial Android update yesterday. They simply did it without adding to the update fragmentation problems that continue to plague the platform. By focusing on these changes and not the apparently-waiting-in-the-wings update to the core software, Google is showing us one of the ways in which it's trying to fix the update problem."
Thread beginning with comment 561971
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Hiding the problem...
by darknexus on Sat 18th May 2013 08:32 UTC in reply to "Hiding the problem..."
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Unavoidable I'm afraid. Google has finally realized that while open source is excellent for academia and research projects, once you want to actually make money from it you're in hot water as any person or company can take your code, modify it, and benefit from it without giving a damn thing back to you. And don't go on about the GPL, there are plenty of ways around that one too if you're motivated, and cash is one hell of a motivator. Like it or not, Google is a business. They need to profit from projects eventually, and so far Google themselves haven't made much from Android. Can't really blame them for wanting to turn that around. No money, no more Android.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Hiding the problem...
by rklrkl on Sat 18th May 2013 08:55 in reply to "RE: Hiding the problem..."
rklrkl Member since:
2005-07-06

> ... once you want to actually make money from it you're in hot water as any person or company can take your code, modify it, and benefit from it without giving a damn thing back to you.

I suspect Red Hat would disagree with you on this one. There's several free clones (why I don't know - you only need one surely?) of RHEL such as CentOS, Scientific Linux, Oracle Linux etc. and yet Red Hat makes a very healthy profit.

> And don't go on about the GPL, there are plenty of ways around that one too if you're motivated, and cash is one hell of a motivator.

Nice to you see you don't care about any legal aspects and it should be noted that GPL is actually enforced legally (and extremely successfully - I don't know of any case where it lost, but I couldn't be wrong there).

> and so far Google themselves haven't made much from Android.

Except for the advertising revenue and, er, 30% of all Android app sales. That's probably quite a big pile there.

I think if you quoted Canonical as struggling for money, you might have had a better case - Ubunutu's download page now comes with a donation beg and the Amazon lens tie-up just smells of sellout/desperation.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Hiding the problem...
by darknexus on Sat 18th May 2013 09:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Hiding the problem..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Why is it that everyone quotes the same tired examples? Red Hat's business model is completely different from Google's. Red Hat's money comes not only from the sale of their os (which is the lesser income by far) but from support contracts. This is common in the enterprise world, where you purchase support contracts so that, should something go wrong with your systems, you can call up someone and demand they figure it out and fix it. This is where Red Hat makes its money and yes, they do it well. However, whether they use open source or closed source wouldn't matter much to them in the end. They target the corporate world, and what the corporate world wants most is someone to bitch at when something doesn't work. In that world, Windows server contractors and Linux are on an equal footing. Suggesting that Red Hat and Google are anything alike smacks of desperation and the inability to form a complete argument.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Hiding the problem...
by tidux on Sat 18th May 2013 16:06 in reply to "RE: Hiding the problem..."
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

It's called the GPL. If Android had licensed Android as GPLv2 instead of Apache, we wouldn't be having these problems.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Hiding the problem...
by JAlexoid on Mon 20th May 2013 01:32 in reply to "RE[2]: Hiding the problem..."
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

FYI: The copyright owner is not bound by any license. I can release all my code as GPL and then turn around and make a fully proprietary version.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Hiding the problem...
by Fergy on Sat 18th May 2013 17:50 in reply to "RE: Hiding the problem..."
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Unavoidable I'm afraid. Google has finally realized that while open source is excellent for academia and research projects, once you want to actually make money from it you're in hot water as any person or company can take your code, modify it, and benefit from it without giving a damn thing back to you. And don't go on about the GPL, there are plenty of ways around that one too if you're motivated, and cash is one hell of a motivator. Like it or not, Google is a business. They need to profit from projects eventually, and so far Google themselves haven't made much from Android. Can't really blame them for wanting to turn that around. No money, no more Android.

Yeah completely open projects like Firefox apparently don't exit in your head. Also the money Google has made with Android don't exit in your head.

I wonder what Firefox OS will do. It is completely open like Firefox and smartphone makers can work on it at the same time as Mozilla. Fragmentation is also very hard to get when your platform is web+Firefox.

Reply Parent Score: 2