Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th Aug 2013 19:14 UTC
Google Jean-Baptiste Queru, or JBQ for short, maintainer of the Android Open Source Project at Google, has announced that he's quitting his job.

Well, I see that people have figured out why I'm quitting AOSP.

There's no point being the maintainer of an Operating System that can't boot to the home screen on its flagship device for lack of GPU support, especially when I'm getting the blame for something that I don't have authority to fix myself and that I had anticipated and escalated more than 6 months ahead.

By the way, in this context, 'to escalate' means handing something over to your superiors so they can handle it. I believe this definition of the word is uncommon outside of the US.

The issue here is exactly what it sounds like: there are currently no factory images/binaries available for the latest Nexus device, the new Nexus 7. The problem is that the GPU in the new Nexus 7 is made by Qualcomm, a company which is incredibly hostile towards the open source community. This isn't the first time Qualcomm has sabotaged an AOSP launch - all Nexus devices with Qualcomm chips, the Nexus 1, 4, and the new 7, faced these problems.

Because he is apparently very good at pattern recognition, JBQ states that he already anticipated this issue six months ago, but that it hasn't been solved. A recent tweet from him is quite telling:

That feeling when lawyers sabotage the launch you spent 6 months working on? I haz it. Sad sad sad sad sad sad.

This is bad news for Google, and bad news for Android. JBQ has done an amazing job on AOSP, and I'm very sad to see him leaving his post. As of this moment, it's not yet known whether he will leave Google entirely or not.

Thread beginning with comment 569151
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Google's problem
by jared_wilkes on Thu 8th Aug 2013 15:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Google's problem"
Member since:

Nonsense. ARM designs chip core designs to be built, modified, and manufactured by others. (I don't even understand what you mean when you say ARM has nothing to compete with an S4 when the S4 uses the ARMv7 instructions and is highly similar to a Cortex-A15. Is ARM supposed to compete with Qualcomm when it comes to integrated multibaseband radios, where QC really distinguishes itself, too?) They are doing fine. ARM does NOT need to compete with its licensees. What you and Google want is the leading SOC to be manufactured by someone with Google's values... ARM doesn't need or care about that. In fact, they make the same profit either way.

Edited 2013-08-08 15:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Google's problem
by dsmogor on Thu 8th Aug 2013 15:49 in reply to "RE[4]: Google's problem"
dsmogor Member since:

That's what I mean. Their A15 design looks not to be practical for independent SOC companies leaving them with cortex A9 to compete with supperior S4.
ARM needs to step up with "A12" design to mend that. They shape versality of ARM ecosystem, not to mention the fact they only earn a penny on ISA licensing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Google's problem
by jared_wilkes on Thu 8th Aug 2013 17:04 in reply to "RE[5]: Google's problem"
jared_wilkes Member since:

Currently, Apple, Samsung, and Qualcomm are kicking ass using ARM designs to make their own SOCes.

We've now moved from blaming Qualcomm for not having Google's values to blaming ARM for not providing a new ARM design that some other SOC manufacturer would then use to make something (presumably) superior to Apple, Samsung, and Qualcomm's designs whether or not that company would do exactly what would be highly convenient for Google and/or Apple, Samsung, and Qualcomm taking the same design and still making something superior SOCes that leads the industry that OEMs would still prefer over something that wouldn't be a problem for Google(because Nvidia hasn't been particularly good at it, TI left the industry, etc).

Do you not understand how nonsensical this sounds?

Edited 2013-08-08 17:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2