What's gonna happen when Motorola acquisition is completed? Will there be a Googorola App Store? Seems like Google is preparing their ecosystem to squash competitors... Android competitors.
You think it would be the first time a company has put out reports in favor of certain companies? Companies and the employees that work within them make millions off of scams like that. paying people off to spew bulls**t.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillyGies
A new report CLAIMS. Let's not try and pawn this off as the truth AI
It is the same everywhere I see and go. Very few news websites even newspapers nowadays still have their credibility intact. The function of sites like this is to push forward whatever there is out there so you could make your own further research regardless. It would be the same albeit in the other direction if you visit the opposing sites.
This is over a huge number so we can use it a a good rule of thumb. Of course, when they say over $4 B, we do not know how much over so we could round to 0.23 or even 25¢ as average charge per app.
On Android there is ALWAYS the option to install apps from outside Google's Market - on standard, non-rooted devices. You can install Amazon Market if you want, or download a .apk directly from a website.
What some developers were doing was offering a 'free' app that had unlockable 'features' that you'd pay for through PayPal or something, so they wouldn't have to give Google their cut, even though it was advertised on Google's Market. Google is simply enforcing rules on their market. You can still download Android Apps from sources other than Google's Market.
Right now, all I can think of that is left of the Android 'free and open' model is that you can lobotimize your device by installing unverified APK's (like you can on an jailbroken iOS device), or flash a custom ROM (which you usually only do because the carrier screwed up the stock ROM with bloatware, crapware and adware).
For anything else, you'll have to use what Google wants you to use, otherwise your device can not actually be called 'Android', it will not have any of the Google Apps, no access to the Google market, and will not be supported by any of the services Google is rolling out like Google Music or Google Wallet. Effectively it is almost as closed as iOS or WP7, and the minor details that are left over (you can look at the sourcecode but not contribute to it, you can start your own Android market, and... yes what exactly?) are completely irrelevant to 99% of all end-users.
Right now, all I can think of that is left of the Android 'free and open' model is that you can lobotimize your device by installing unverified APK's (like you can on an jailbroken iOS device), or flash a custom ROM (which you usually only do because the carrier screwed up the stock ROM with bloatware, crapware and adware).
For anything else, you'll have to use what Google wants you to use, otherwise your device can not actually be called 'Android', it will not have any of the Google Apps, no access to the Google market, and will not be supported by any of the services Google is rolling out like Google Music or Google Wallet. Effectively it is almost as closed as iOS or WP7, and the minor details that are left over (you can look at the sourcecode but not contribute to it, you can start your own Android market, and... yes what exactly?) are completely irrelevant to 99% of all end-users.
Aren't many vendors and carriers locking down the ROM's, too? I'd say the only way Android OS is open is when it comes to what the vendors or carriers can do to the device before it gets in your hand... but if that's the definition of open then iOS is also open.
Difference is that there are many markets Android owners can but from. Some devices come preinstalled with links to non Google app stores.
While this is true, I fail to see how this should be considered an end-user 'advantage' of the supposedly 'free and open' nature of Android.
To me, it seems a hell of a lot more user-friendly and convenient to have everything in one place, to have a single, safe payment system, to get all updates from the same place and not having to deal with untrusted APK's or application and app store incompatibilities.
Aren't many vendors and carriers locking down the ROM's, too? I'd say the only way Android OS is open is when it comes to what the vendors or carriers can do to the device before it gets in your hand... but if that's the definition of open then iOS is also open.
From what I can tell most OEMs provide easy tools for unlocking a bootloader and others.don't lock them due.to negative consumer feedback
Also considering Google just.rereleased chrome beta for android to be again compatible with custom roms I'd say that's a good sign they will continue to support developers. The constant contact between CM team devs and Android engineers is also a good sign.
While this is true, I fail to see how this should be considered an end-user 'advantage' of the supposedly 'free and open' nature of Android.
To me, it seems a hell of a lot more user-friendly and convenient to have everything in one place, to have a single, safe payment system, to get all updates from the same place and not having to deal with untrusted APK's or application and app store incompatibilities.
Which is why the stock android market (play store -_-) exists...if you optionally choose a third party store you abide by that stores rules.
However, I wish people would stop falling for the "we're open and Apple isn't" BS. There really aren't all that many differences in the business model (which isn't surprising because Google uses Cupertino as its R&D department). The main differences are that the Google store is full of malware and that Google goes out of its way to sell your private information.
However, I wish people would stop falling for the "we're open and Apple isn't" BS. There really aren't all that many differences in the business model (which isn't surprising because Google uses Cupertino as its R&D department). The main differences are that the Google store is full of malware and that Google goes out of its way to sell your private information.
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
It is the same everywhere I see and go. Very few news websites even newspapers nowadays still have their credibility intact. The function of sites like this is to push forward whatever there is out there so you could make your own further research regardless.
I personally think very few readers do much in the way of "further research". I've seen inaccurate or outright false claims repeated over and over as fact when the truth really is out there if they wanted to take the time to look for themselves. AI stories are no different, with some members/visitors misreading rumor as fact and repeating it elsewhere. Remember: News and rumors since 1997. You have take the responsibility of paying attention when reading to note which is which.
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
It seems to be OK if pointing out the lie is the truth, but you'll probably need to expose the lie for that to be effective. I think you'll have trouble with that in this case, since his comments seem to be pretty much spot on, so you'd probably deserve a point. On the other hand, no one will miss you if you're banned, again... so, laissez les bons temps rouler!
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
You take him too seriously. I'm fairly certain he already knows that Google doesn't sell any personal information, and quite the contrary their privacy policies prohibit it with an independent auditor verifying they do what they say they do. Nor does he really believe that Google Play/Android Market is full of malware anymore than the AppStore is full of dishonest developers harvesting personal information. It's more a bit of grandstanding and use of literary license. No biggie and certainly not worthy of a personal insult. I'd leave it alone.
From what I can tell most OEMs provide easy tools for unlocking a bootloader and others.don't lock them due.to negative consumer feedback
Also considering Google just.rereleased chrome beta for android to be again compatible with custom roms I'd say that's a good sign they will continue to support developers. The constant contact between CM team devs and Android engineers is also a good sign.
And d-range... stop with the bs
I would appreciate it if you address me in a reply to something I actually posted myself, instead sneaking it into a reply to something someone else posted. This comes off a little under-handed.
Apart from that, thanks for the insightful commentary. Do you have anything to add to that, something from which I can deduce which parts of what I wrote I should stop writing, or do you want to keep it at just 'stop with the bs'?
You take him too seriously. I'm fairly certain he already knows that Google doesn't sell any personal information, and quite the contrary their privacy policies prohibit it with an independent auditor verifying they do what they say they do. Nor does he really believe that Google Play/Android Market is full of malware anymore than the AppStore is full of dishonest developers harvesting personal information. It's more a bit of grandstanding and use of literary license. No biggie and certainly not worthy of a personal insult. I'd leave it alone.
understood, I'll refrain from calling him a low-down dirty liar.
I would appreciate it if you address me in a reply to something I actually posted myself, instead sneaking it into a reply to something someone else posted. This comes off a little under-handed.
Apart from that, thanks for the insightful commentary. Do you have anything to add to that, something from which I can deduce which parts of what I wrote I should stop writing, or do you want to keep it at just 'stop with the bs'?
eh, I guess it would've been fair for me to ask what you mean by "app store incompatibilities" before I assumed your comment to be bullshit...you get a lot of half-truths and lies in regards to Apple competition on this forum.
So with that said, what do you mean by "App store incompatibilities?"
And yea...installing an untrusted app is a risky move which is why no one recommends anyone go online and look for untrusted apks...
And yea...installing an untrusted app is a risky move which is why no one recommends anyone go online and look for untrusted apks...
...and by default the Android OS prevents that. A user has to make a conscious choice to change the tick-box setting to accept installs from unapproved sources AFAIK.
Comments
I'm all for this. Their store, their rules.
Damn. You are always so sensible. So reasonable. Kind of in touch.
Do you belong on these kinds of forums?
And I agree with you on the matter at hand.
HAHAHA
Open market
HAHAHA
Open OS
HAHAHA
Open Business model...
HAHAHA
Open BS...
Every step they make looks towards the Apple model...
Difference is that there are many markets Android owners can but from. Some devices come preinstalled with links to non Google app stores.
You think it would be the first time a company has put out reports in favor of certain companies? Companies and the employees that work within them make millions off of scams like that. paying people off to spew bulls**t.
A new report CLAIMS. Let's not try and pawn this off as the truth AI
It is the same everywhere I see and go. Very few news websites even newspapers nowadays still have their credibility intact. The function of sites like this is to push forward whatever there is out there so you could make your own further research regardless. It would be the same albeit in the other direction if you visit the opposing sites.
X 0.70 = $0.16 to developers X 25 B = $4 B.
This is over a huge number so we can use it a a good rule of thumb. Of course, when they say over $4 B, we do not know how much over so we could round to 0.23 or even 25¢ as average charge per app.
On Android there is ALWAYS the option to install apps from outside Google's Market - on standard, non-rooted devices. You can install Amazon Market if you want, or download a .apk directly from a website.
What some developers were doing was offering a 'free' app that had unlockable 'features' that you'd pay for through PayPal or something, so they wouldn't have to give Google their cut, even though it was advertised on Google's Market. Google is simply enforcing rules on their market. You can still download Android Apps from sources other than Google's Market.
For anything else, you'll have to use what Google wants you to use, otherwise your device can not actually be called 'Android', it will not have any of the Google Apps, no access to the Google market, and will not be supported by any of the services Google is rolling out like Google Music or Google Wallet. Effectively it is almost as closed as iOS or WP7, and the minor details that are left over (you can look at the sourcecode but not contribute to it, you can start your own Android market, and... yes what exactly?) are completely irrelevant to 99% of all end-users.
Right now, all I can think of that is left of the Android 'free and open' model is that you can lobotimize your device by installing unverified APK's (like you can on an jailbroken iOS device), or flash a custom ROM (which you usually only do because the carrier screwed up the stock ROM with bloatware, crapware and adware).
For anything else, you'll have to use what Google wants you to use, otherwise your device can not actually be called 'Android', it will not have any of the Google Apps, no access to the Google market, and will not be supported by any of the services Google is rolling out like Google Music or Google Wallet. Effectively it is almost as closed as iOS or WP7, and the minor details that are left over (you can look at the sourcecode but not contribute to it, you can start your own Android market, and... yes what exactly?) are completely irrelevant to 99% of all end-users.
Aren't many vendors and carriers locking down the ROM's, too? I'd say the only way Android OS is open is when it comes to what the vendors or carriers can do to the device before it gets in your hand... but if that's the definition of open then iOS is also open.
Difference is that there are many markets Android owners can but from. Some devices come preinstalled with links to non Google app stores.
While this is true, I fail to see how this should be considered an end-user 'advantage' of the supposedly 'free and open' nature of Android.
To me, it seems a hell of a lot more user-friendly and convenient to have everything in one place, to have a single, safe payment system, to get all updates from the same place and not having to deal with untrusted APK's or application and app store incompatibilities.
Aren't many vendors and carriers locking down the ROM's, too? I'd say the only way Android OS is open is when it comes to what the vendors or carriers can do to the device before it gets in your hand... but if that's the definition of open then iOS is also open.
From what I can tell most OEMs provide easy tools for unlocking a bootloader and others.don't lock them due.to negative consumer feedback
Also considering Google just.rereleased chrome beta for android to be again compatible with custom roms I'd say that's a good sign they will continue to support developers. The constant contact between CM team devs and Android engineers is also a good sign.
And d-range... stop with the bs
While this is true, I fail to see how this should be considered an end-user 'advantage' of the supposedly 'free and open' nature of Android.
To me, it seems a hell of a lot more user-friendly and convenient to have everything in one place, to have a single, safe payment system, to get all updates from the same place and not having to deal with untrusted APK's or application and app store incompatibilities.
Which is why the stock android market (play store -_-) exists...if you optionally choose a third party store you abide by that stores rules.
I'm all for this. Their store, their rules.
I agree.
However, I wish people would stop falling for the "we're open and Apple isn't" BS. There really aren't all that many differences in the business model (which isn't surprising because Google uses Cupertino as its R&D department). The main differences are that the Google store is full of malware and that Google goes out of its way to sell your private information.
I agree.
However, I wish people would stop falling for the "we're open and Apple isn't" BS. There really aren't all that many differences in the business model (which isn't surprising because Google uses Cupertino as its R&D department). The main differences are that the Google store is full of malware and that Google goes out of its way to sell your private information.
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
It is the same everywhere I see and go. Very few news websites even newspapers nowadays still have their credibility intact. The function of sites like this is to push forward whatever there is out there so you could make your own further research regardless.
I personally think very few readers do much in the way of "further research". I've seen inaccurate or outright false claims repeated over and over as fact when the truth really is out there if they wanted to take the time to look for themselves. AI stories are no different, with some members/visitors misreading rumor as fact and repeating it elsewhere. Remember: News and rumors since 1997. You have take the responsibility of paying attention when reading to note which is which.
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
It seems to be OK if pointing out the lie is the truth, but you'll probably need to expose the lie for that to be effective. I think you'll have trouble with that in this case, since his comments seem to be pretty much spot on, so you'd probably deserve a point. On the other hand, no one will miss you if you're banned, again... so, laissez les bons temps rouler!
Question to the mods, if it can be proven that a member is a liar, and I call him a low down dirty liar because he constantly repeats his lies and is proven wrong time and time again yet keeps coming back with the same bullshit can I call him a low down dirty liar and not get a point?
I want to know before I call jragosta a low down dirty liar because I do not wish to be banned again.
You take him too seriously. I'm fairly certain he already knows that Google doesn't sell any personal information, and quite the contrary their privacy policies prohibit it with an independent auditor verifying they do what they say they do. Nor does he really believe that Google Play/Android Market is full of malware anymore than the AppStore is full of dishonest developers harvesting personal information. It's more a bit of grandstanding and use of literary license. No biggie and certainly not worthy of a personal insult. I'd leave it alone.
From what I can tell most OEMs provide easy tools for unlocking a bootloader and others.don't lock them due.to negative consumer feedback
Also considering Google just.rereleased chrome beta for android to be again compatible with custom roms I'd say that's a good sign they will continue to support developers. The constant contact between CM team devs and Android engineers is also a good sign.
And d-range... stop with the bs
I would appreciate it if you address me in a reply to something I actually posted myself, instead sneaking it into a reply to something someone else posted. This comes off a little under-handed.
Apart from that, thanks for the insightful commentary. Do you have anything to add to that, something from which I can deduce which parts of what I wrote I should stop writing, or do you want to keep it at just 'stop with the bs'?
You take him too seriously. I'm fairly certain he already knows that Google doesn't sell any personal information, and quite the contrary their privacy policies prohibit it with an independent auditor verifying they do what they say they do. Nor does he really believe that Google Play/Android Market is full of malware anymore than the AppStore is full of dishonest developers harvesting personal information. It's more a bit of grandstanding and use of literary license. No biggie and certainly not worthy of a personal insult. I'd leave it alone.
understood, I'll refrain from calling him a low-down dirty liar.
I would appreciate it if you address me in a reply to something I actually posted myself, instead sneaking it into a reply to something someone else posted. This comes off a little under-handed.
Apart from that, thanks for the insightful commentary. Do you have anything to add to that, something from which I can deduce which parts of what I wrote I should stop writing, or do you want to keep it at just 'stop with the bs'?
eh, I guess it would've been fair for me to ask what you mean by "app store incompatibilities" before I assumed your comment to be bullshit...you get a lot of half-truths and lies in regards to Apple competition on this forum.
So with that said, what do you mean by "App store incompatibilities?"
And yea...installing an untrusted app is a risky move which is why no one recommends anyone go online and look for untrusted apks...
And yea...installing an untrusted app is a risky move which is why no one recommends anyone go online and look for untrusted apks...
...and by default the Android OS prevents that. A user has to make a conscious choice to change the tick-box setting to accept installs from unapproved sources AFAIK.