or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google VP Andy Rubin says Android 'openness' hasn't changed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google VP Andy Rubin says Android 'openness' hasn't changed

post #1 of 85
Thread Starter 
In response to recent reports that have portrayed Google Android as being closed, Android boss Andy Rubin spoke out Wednesday in a blog post defending the platform, asserting that the company's approach to openness remains the same.

Last week, Bloomberg BusinessWeek reported that Google had begun to restrict its partners in order to deal with the growing issue of fragmentation on the Android platform.

Rubin, who is Google's vice president of engineering and a former Apple engineer, hinted that the news was merely a method of spreading 'fear, uncertainty and doubt' by titling the blog post "I think Im having a Gene Amdahl moment," a reference to the former IBM employee who coined the phrase.

"Recently, theres been a lot of misinformation in the press about Android and Googles role in supporting the ecosystem. Im writing in the spirit of transparency and in an attempt to set the record straight," Rubin wrote.

Throughout impressive growth over the past two and a half years, Google has "remained committed to fostering the development of an open platform for the mobile industry and beyond, " said Rubin.

He asserted that device makers are still free to modify Android to customize "any range of features" for their devices, while adding that manufacturers looking to market their devices as Android-compatible or include Google applications must conform with "some basic compatibility requirements."

According to Rubin, Google's "anti-fragmentation" program has been in place since Android 1.0 and remains a priority for the company. Each of the Open Handset Alliance members agreed not to fragment Android when it was first announced, he noted.

A recent survey from Baird Research indicated that 87 percent of Android developers view fragmentation as a problem for the Android platform. Developers expressed concerns over both device fragmentation and store fragmentation.

"Our approach remains unchanged: there are no lock-downs or restrictions against customizing UIs," he continued. "There are not, and never have been, any efforts to standardize the platform on any single chipset architecture."

Responding to claims that Google's closing of the Android 3.0 Honeycomb source code meant the platform was no longer open source, Rubin promised that the code would be released once the Android team finished bringing features from the tablet-focused Honeycomb to smartphones.

"This temporary delay does not represent a change in strategy. We remain firmly committed to providing Android as an open source platform across many device types," he said.

Apple and Google are locked in a fierce battle over control of both the smartphone and tablet market. Last October, Nielsen revealed that Android had overtaken iOS as the top-selling smartphone platform. According to one analytics firm, however, spectacular growth by the iPad has resulted in a iOS having a larger share of web visits than Android when all devices are taken into consideration.
post #2 of 85
It's always been an indescribable mess, just like everything else from Google.
post #3 of 85
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
post #4 of 85
Can he retweet the definition of OPEN again? I forgot.. really.
post #5 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by makingdots View Post

Can he retweet the definition of OPEN again? I forgot.. really.

He forgot too.
post #6 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

No, Eastasia (Microsoft) is our ally and has always been our ally. Westasia (Google) is our enemy and has always been our enemy. I expect all of your best efforts and cooperation to go to war against Westasia and see our victory through to the end!
post #7 of 85
Someone should make a small Android toy that speak "I'm open, I'm open, I'm open, I'm open..." all day. It will sell well.
post #8 of 85
I don't fault Google for preaching openness while being, as one might say, DRACONIAN. They're a business whose primary interest is to make money, and if they want to take advantage of the people who blindly believe that Google's a humanitarian charity and not a for-profit business, then kudos to them. It's the fanboys who swallow the drivel who annoy me. And people think Apple fans are deluded. I don't think even the most rabid Apple fanboy pretends that people at Apple make awesome products just out of the goodness of their hearts.
post #9 of 85
If Google is so open like they say Android is, then they would have put dissenting viewpoints on their "global warming" members. They selected every single member on that based on their belief that global warming is real. Yeah, that's open right there.
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
post #10 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualia View Post

I don't think even the most rabid Apple fanboy pretends that people at Apple make awesome products just out of the goodness of their hearts.

You obviously don't read AI comments that often.
post #11 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by His Dudeness View Post

If Google is so open like they say Android is, then they would have put dissenting viewpoints on their "global warming" members. They selected every single member on that based on their belief that global warming is real. Yeah, that's open right there.

What are you talking about?

Open =! "Fairness"
post #12 of 85
This proves what I've been talking about. "Don't be evil" quickly turns into "We're morally better than everyone else" which quickly turns into "We can do no evil". Rubin believes in Google's own BS. The bottom line is: they want people to call their closed cake "open".

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #13 of 85
Closed is the new Open.

Also, I thought 3.0 was never meant for smartphones? Now they will be re-engineering it back for smartphones? So... then it will be open source again? Maybe?

If I were a handset or tablet maker if I wasn't sh*tting my pants right about now I should be.
post #14 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by makingdots View Post

Can he retweet the definition of OPEN again? I forgot.. really.

if (Google feels like it at the time)
{
mkdir android ;
cd android ;
repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ;
repo sync ;
make
}

else
{
your_company=f**ked;
}
post #15 of 85
He must be thinking that people are stupid.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #16 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

if (Google feels like it at the time)
{
mkdir android ;
cd android ;
repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ;
repo sync ;
make
}

else
{
your_company=f**ked;
}

Looks like you've mixed java and shell there. Btw, local variable your_company is never read.
post #17 of 85
This article explains things in simplistic terms. How can anyone not understand them.

Android is open. If you doubt that go to Android site at http://source.android.com/index.html where you can download the source code or learn how to port android to your own devices. Seems pretty open to me. You can also read the licensing details.

What is not open are things like the google market, google navigation, google earth, google translate etc. These never were open source so nothing has changed here. If you want these you need to fall in line with some google standards.

It could not be easier to understand.

Quote:
Apple and Google are locked in a fierce battle over control of both the smartphone and tablet market.

Smartphone market – yes. Tablet market – no. The biggest threat to iPad so far is Xoom which has sales in the vicinity of 100,000 compared to iPad 300,000 in three days. Not much of a battle here yet.
post #18 of 85
That's the source code to the current version of the OS.

The policy that is being debated is one where Google will release the newest source code (3.0) to select partners. Then to everyone else at some later time. That is not open.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb View Post

This article explains things in simplistic terms. How can anyone not understand them.

Android is open. If you doubt that go to Android site at http://source.android.com/index.html where you can download the source code or learn how to port android to your own devices. Seems pretty open to me. You can also read the licensing details.
post #19 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Closed is the new Open.

Also, I thought 3.0 was never meant for smartphones? Now they will be re-engineering it back for smartphones? So... then it will be open source again? Maybe?

If I were a handset or tablet maker if I wasn't sh*tting my pants right about now I should be.

Google must be crazy for doing a Tablet and Smartphone OS seperatly mustn't they? What sort of idiotic company would put out two OS's with the intention of merging them into a single release at a latter date? Oh, hang on Apple already did that with the release of iOS 4.3 on iPhone and iPad. Mustbe good then!

The next revision of Android will be merging both the tablet optimized version and the smartphone version into a single release fyi. As someone proclaiming that handset and tablet manufacturers should be "sh*ting their pants", you sure know little about Android or the release schedule of it.

Anyhow, I bet the likes of HTC are really afraid, especially as they've just taken over the market cap of both Nokia and RIM.

It really does surprise me the amonunt of attention Android gets on Apple related sites.
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
post #20 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualia View Post

I don't fault Google for preaching openness while being, as one might say, DRACONIAN. They're a business whose primary interest is to make money, and if they want to take advantage of the people who blindly believe that Google's a humanitarian charity and not a for-profit business, then kudos to them. It's the fanboys who swallow the drivel who annoy me. And people think Apple fans are deluded. I don't think even the most rabid Apple fanboy pretends that people at Apple make awesome products just out of the goodness of their hearts.

I'm not going to defend Google on their Open Source initiative, but you make yourself look like an ass talking out of it as if you know jack about Atmospheric Physics and Geological Physics. Keep talking. Please. Just ignore my comments.

Keep spreadin' the faith that Global Warmin' [no longer even called that as it's Climate Change, or as a Mechanical Engineer I call it Global Heat Redistribution in a Nonlinear Dynamics Model creating pockets of deltas beyond traditional tolerances to such an extreme it's impacting trade winds and seasonal averages well founded since we've become an Industrial World] Faith because I find it ironic that people actually think this Atmospheric Regulated System has some infinite amount of tolerance for subterranean byproducts without damaging the basic cycle of healthy Photosynthesis, etc.
post #21 of 85
Relevant portion from a recent article: Hi! We're Google and we're pretty not evil.

"The point is, that other software, the open source software, that stuff should be open. It should be free and open for anyone to change and inspect and use how they wish. We need to trust our users to do the right thing. And our users need to be able to trust us.

Manufacturers, however, are sneaky bastards, and can't be trusted at all. That's why we're withholding the Honeycomb source from our trusted users and partners and manufacturers.

You'll just screw it up, and then everyone will blame us.

It's for your own good really."

http://www.isights.org/2011/04/hi-we...ot-evil-1.html
post #22 of 85
"Open", "Do No Evil", "Change You Can Believe In", "Yes We Can", "Vote For Change", etc. These are all marketing slogans that people eat up that have no real meaning.
post #23 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyTab View Post

It really does surprise me the amonunt of attention Android gets on Apple related sites.

Yet you are here.
post #24 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualia View Post

I don't fault Google for preaching openness while being, as one might say, DRACONIAN. They're a business whose primary interest is to make money, and if they want to take advantage of the people who blindly believe that Google's a humanitarian charity and not a for-profit business, then kudos to them. It's the fanboys who swallow the drivel who annoy me. And people think Apple fans are deluded. I don't think even the most rabid Apple fanboy pretends that people at Apple make awesome products just out of the goodness of their hearts.

gSheep
post #25 of 85
The interesting part of Rubin's blog post to me was this statement:

" but throughout we’ve remained committed to fostering the development of an open platform for the mobile industry and beyond."

Android is for the mobile industry and [industries] beyond. Contrast that with Apple's focus on the end user.
post #26 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

You obviously don't read AI comments that often.

Care to explain WTH you are actually implying because I can't find any connection to reality, and I've been reading AI comments for years.

Usually, people commenting here like Apple products for what they are, and they pay good money to use them. You can slap all kinds of qualifications on 'people who like Apple products', but none of them imply the typical Apple user thinks Apple is not out there to make money, just like every other business. Over here no-one seems to feel bad about directly filling Apple's pockets, as long as their products are great, which they are, at least in my opinion.

You are really preaching to the wrong choir and being a hypocrite if you try to spin things as if Apple 'fanboys' buy Apple because they like how 'open' it is, or how altruistic Apple is for giving us the privilege of buying their stuff. On the one hand you probably don't have any problem saying that Apple products are 'overpriced', while on the other hand you are now trying to imply that the people who buy these 'overpriced products' with REAL MONEY, yet report insanely high customer satifaction numbers, do so because they think Apple is like a charity. A bit like how fandroids seem to think Google is being 'open' or 'free' just for their own good.

Or summarizing: you are making no sense and you are quickly starting to climb my top-10 of most useless trolls around here.
post #27 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

No, Eastasia (Microsoft) is our ally and has always been our ally. Westasia (Google) is our enemy and has always been our enemy. I expect all of your best efforts and cooperation to go to war against Westasia and see our victory through to the end!

Eurasia not Westasia. Quite humorous that Motorola is painting Apple as 1984, yet their partner Google is being about as misleading as it gets with their definition of the word "open". Which isn't really an advantage anyway since people still have to root Android devices just like those will Jailbreak their iPhones.

In regards to the move, it was probably a smart move for Google to make in terms of stopping fragmentation, amusing to see Android fans tripping over their companies flip-flop in ideologies (and the ensuing PR shit storm). At least they still have their widgets!

Quote:
Originally Posted by d-range

Care to explain WTH you are actually implying because I can't find any connection to reality, and I've been reading AI comments for years...

While I agree somewhat with your statement just look at the first reply to the topic. There are others on the forum who seem to think everything ever produced by Google (and Microsoft) is complete garbage. Yes it's an Apple forum. But informed opinions are good too.
post #28 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyTab View Post

Google must be crazy for doing a Tablet and Smartphone OS seperatly mustn't they? What sort of idiotic company would put out two OS's with the intention of merging them into a single release at a latter date? Oh, hang on Apple already did that with the release of iOS 4.3 on iPhone and iPad. Mustbe good then!

The next revision of Android will be merging both the tablet optimized version and the smartphone version into a single release fyi. As someone proclaiming that handset and tablet manufacturers should be "sh*ting their pants", you sure know little about Android or the release schedule of it.

Anyhow, I bet the likes of HTC are really afraid, especially as they've just taken over the market cap of both Nokia and RIM.

It really does surprise me the amonunt of attention Android gets on Apple related sites.

Nobody here is questioning the merge of 3.0 and 2.3 - although I bet that takes most of the year.

The discussion is about the OPenness of Android. Apparently the reason Android users love Android is it's commitment to Open Source, that has now shown to be a marketing fraud designed to fool people of limited intelligence, and manufacturers. It is not open if you control who gets it, and when. Far better to licence from MS, rather than play this crap shoot with Google.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #29 of 85
Quote:
Anyhow, I bet the likes of HTC are really afraid, especially as they've just taken over the market cap of both Nokia and RIM.

it certainly helps to be a preferred partner. Are they this time? Who knows. Entire manufacturing plants, and industrial schedules lie closed until Google gives it's open platform to everybody who wants it, so they can close it for users. It's more a farce than a tragedy. Gartner is predicting Android's share to fall by 2015 with MS gaining, I think this a bit favourable to MS, but if Google play silly buggers then it will happen. Far better to pay $X per handset then to let your competitors get 6 months on an open platform.

As for how this affects the Oracle suit, it can't help. As for whether HoneyComb is good enough as a tablet, and will gain traction this year - unlikely. Android may well have shot it's bolt.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #30 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

I'm not going to defend Google on their Open Source initiative, but you make yourself look like an ass talking out of it as if you know jack about Atmospheric Physics and Geological Physics. Keep talking. Please. Just ignore my comments.

Keep spreadin' the faith that Global Warmin' [no longer even called that as it's Climate Change, or as a Mechanical Engineer I call it Global Heat Redistribution in a Nonlinear Dynamics Model creating pockets of deltas beyond traditional tolerances to such an extreme it's impacting trade winds and seasonal averages well founded since we've become an Industrial World] Faith because I find it ironic that people actually think this Atmospheric Regulated System has some infinite amount of tolerance for subterranean byproducts without damaging the basic cycle of healthy Photosynthesis, etc.

My favorite is people who say "we can't have global warming because we got more snow than normal". I guess it never occurred to them that the amount of snowfall is determined by the amount of moisture that is picked up over the pacific (and, to a smaller extent, the Great Lakes and other bodies of water). If the average air temperature is warmer, it will pick up MORE water. Then, when it gets over land and cools, it drops more snow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Nobody here is questioning the merge of 3.0 and 2.3 - although I bet that takes most of the year.

The discussion is about the OPenness of Android. Apparently the reason Android users love Android is it's commitment to Open Source, that has now shown to be a marketing fraud designed to fool people of limited intelligence, and manufacturers. It is not open if you control who gets it, and when. Far better to licence from MS, rather than play this crap shoot with Google.

Google's hypocrisy is astounding. I guess they've painted their way into a corner and can't find a way out.

"There is no fragmentation" followed by "We're working to ensure consistency"

"We're open" followed by "we're not allowing changed to 3.0"

"We're open" followed by "partners have to follow Google guidelines"

And so on.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #31 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

While I agree somewhat with your statement just look at the first reply to the topic. There are others on the forum who seem to think everything ever produced by Google (and Microsoft) is complete garbage. Yes it's an Apple forum. But informed opinions are good too.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not denying you have fanboys and trolls in both camps, and they all post here.

The guy I was replying to was implying that the typical Apple fanboy 'pretends Apple makes awesome products just out of the goodness of their hearts' in the same way that the Google fanboys can't seem to look past the 'open!', 'free!' kind of PR BS that Google is brainwashing them with, making them forget that Google is also simply after the money. To them Android is a tool to make them money through their other services, and there is no altruistic feelings or 'don't be evil' philosophy behind any of that, just cold, hard cash. Just like Apple, or any other commercial business.

My point was, that at least the Apple fanboys don't try to hide the fact that Apple is also just in it for the money using drivel about openness and freedom. All I get from the typical fandroid is meaningless rants about walled gardens, freedom, choice, openness. It's almost as if you are debating with real politicians, nothing they say has any bearing on reality, at least not from a practical point of view, yet they manage to brainwash hordes of people to eat their shit like mindless drones.
post #32 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Yet you are here.

I own and invest (quite happily might I add) in Apple hardware and software. I also invest in Apple's competitors products which is why I vest an interest in articles like this.

If there is a rule stating that one must have an allegiance to Apple and only Apple, please direct me to it and I will never post again.

Thanks.
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
post #33 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb View Post

Android is open. If you doubt that go to Android site at http://source.android.com/index.html where you can download the source code or learn how to port android to your own devices. Seems pretty open to me. You can also read the licensing details.

What is not open are things like the google market, google navigation, google earth, google translate etc. These never were open source so nothing has changed here. If you want these you need to fall in line with some google standards.

It could not be easier to understand..


So it's open, except for the parts that are closed.
And Google decides when it's open and when it's closed and for how long.
It could not be easier to understand.
post #34 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

Looks like you've mixed java and shell there. Btw, local variable your_company is never read.

Oh that makes sense then, Rubin just has a bug in his new build script!
post #35 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

I'm not going to defend Google on their Open Source initiative, but you make yourself look like an ass talking out of it as if you know jack about Atmospheric Physics and Geological Physics. Keep talking. Please. Just ignore my comments.

Keep spreadin' the faith that Global Warmin' [no longer even called that as it's Climate Change, or as a Mechanical Engineer I call it Global Heat Redistribution in a Nonlinear Dynamics Model creating pockets of deltas beyond traditional tolerances to such an extreme it's impacting trade winds and seasonal averages well founded since we've become an Industrial World] Faith because I find it ironic that people actually think this Atmospheric Regulated System has some infinite amount of tolerance for subterranean byproducts without damaging the basic cycle of healthy Photosynthesis, etc.

Just curious, but did you happen to paste a reply to the wrong page? While interesting, and I like your viewpoint, I was wondering if I should report you for "political poisoning" of this thread.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #36 of 85
I found this thread and it's comments quite interesting:

WARNING: Rough language

http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/1764.html#comments

This whole "openness" thing is starting to run wild me-thinks.

Why do I think that Google, HTC, Moto and the rest of them are sticking up their noses collectively at licensing, copyrights, etc., and trying to get as much "junk" out there as possible, so that in the end when it makes it to court, the judge wouldn't "dare" to pull the rug out, and the offending devices with it.

I'm thinking "1mil. shards of tech-shrapnel" when this "open" thing explodes... or I mean, "implodes".
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #37 of 85
love watching the gSheep battle the iSheep.
post #38 of 85
Why can't anybody here take something at face value? Neither Google nor Apple is in their business to provide products merely for the benefit of humanity, and neither makes that claim. The fact that anybody can interpret "open source" as "charity" is baffling. I don't think even one phone in a thousand sells because Android is open source, so why take issue with the idea? Open is not anti-Apple and Apple is not anti-open. It just happens to suit Apple to be more restrictive with their software and Google to be less restrictive. It's unnecessary to read into it any more than that.
post #39 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

Why can't anybody here take something at face value? Neither Google nor Apple is in their business to provide products merely for the benefit of humanity, and neither makes that claim. The fact that anybody can interpret "open source" as "charity" is baffling. I don't think even one phone in a thousand sells because Android is open source, so why take issue with the idea? Open is not anti-Apple and Apple is not anti-open. It just happens to suit Apple to be more restrictive with their software and Google to be less restrictive. It's unnecessary to read into it any more than that.

That realistic view on Google, is not, however what was been sold by Google. Look at their conference when they attacked the closed nature of Apple, and its potential monopoly. The closed nature of iOS is also a major talking point for Android users. Frankly I cant whip out an iPhone amongst geeks without someone mentioning it, and how they liked to play, and how OS would win the day . Etc.

Then there is Rubin's tweet.

The definition of open: "mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; m

Which now shold come with the caveat: For Preferred users only. Not for you, you aint got the correct Public key.


( for not techies - that command, to get the source code for android, will now not get the latest)
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #40 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by All Day Breakfast View Post

The interesting part of Rubin's blog post to me was this statement:

" but throughout weve remained committed to fostering the development of an open platform for the mobile industry and beyond."

Android is for the mobile industry and [industries] beyond. Contrast that with Apple's focus on the end user.

Android is an ad delivery channel, no more, no less. Google has no reason to make it other than trying to make money through another route and buy insurance against other mobile OS vendors being able to cut them off. (Default Bing/yahoo/whatever search - oh no!) No 'openness', not making a better user experience... sort-of trying to stop Apple from dominating, but again for pure business reasons, not some freedom-fighting bull$hit line they use.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google VP Andy Rubin says Android 'openness' hasn't changed