or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Facebook to reportedly unveil iOS competitor at April event
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Facebook to reportedly unveil iOS competitor at April event - Page 3

post #81 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Hmmm... that would also give new "home" on Android a double meaning.

 

Exactly, that's why I think it's a new homescreen launcher.

 

Also, perhaps part of the rumors come from HTC getting an early exclusive with it.  Then Facebook releasing it later to all other devices.

 

We'll see.

post #82 of 106
Can't be a fork of Android if HTC (or any other major phone manufacturer) is building it. Google will step in and stop its release just like they did when Acer tried to make a phone running Aliyun. All the main Android vendors are part of the OHA which forbids making devices that run an Android fork.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #83 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:47am
post #84 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

This is getting ridiculous. I can at least understand why Amazon, who has had the Kindle for years, and Mozilla would want to make a mobile OS, but Facebook is just a bit daft. Who's next, Dropbox OS and GoDaddy OS?

Facebook MUST find a way to start making money. So this makes perfect sense,

There are those who live most of their lives on Facebook. What better way to enable them than to give them a Facebook integrated phone, that leverages their friends and family contacts directly into the phone directory? This might actually be the shot in the arm Facebook has been looking for ...

The put ads in the iOS apps newsfeed. Ever since they went to a native app, they started getting revenue.

Also, Facebook contacts already integrate into android like any other Android app that uses the contact framework correctly on Android.

I can see why people think they might do a phone. They have admitted that their Android app was not that good and were internally trying to get people to use it to make it better. I'm guessing this is a re-launch of a new app.
post #85 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Why do you guys keep saying Facebook doesn't make money from its Mobile customers? All the so called experts called Facebook's Quarter strong because it netted $64 million on 1.6 billion of revenue. It beat market expectations by 40 percent, and 23 percent of it's earnings were from Mobile Advertising, which was up 14 percent in the previous quarter. Check it out.

Ah thanks... I didn't know that. 1smile.gif

23% is pretty good. But with more and more people accessing Facebook from a mobile device (I think it's over 60%) I'm sure they want to make more money from mobile.

Perhaps that's why they are making a mobile OS ?
post #86 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Aliyun uses the Linux kernel, which obliges them to release their source.  Last I heard they have not done so.  So the very best that could be said about their intentions isn't flattering to them on any level. 

 

If they later decide to honor their legal obligations under the GPL we can then talk about the compatibility issues you raised, but as it is they're already in violation of their own most fundamental code requirements.

 

That has absolutely nothing to do with it. Acer made a phone that ran Aliyun for Alibaba to sell. Google didn't like that and pressured Acer at the last minute (threatened is more like it) not to release it since Google considers Aliyun an Android fork.

 

Even if the source code for Aliyun was released it would have done nothing to stop Google from throwing their weight around. Google likes to think they're open source, but they're not. Companies that are part of the OHA have guidelines to follow which puts severe constraints on what they are allowed to modify on Android. It is definitely not open source.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #87 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:48am
post #88 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Aliyun uses the Linux kernel, which obliges them to release their source.  Last I heard they have not done so.  So the very best that could be said about their intentions isn't flattering to them on any level. 

 

If they later decide to honor their legal obligations under the GPL we can then talk about the compatibility issues you raised, but as it is they're already in violation of their own most fundamental code requirements.

The user-space of the Android operating system is not under the GPL.  It uses the Apache license, which doesn't require anyone to release the source code of any changes.  

 

Only changes to the kernel itself (with a few exceptions) need to be released under the GPL.  

 

http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html

post #89 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:46am
post #90 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


Given that you take such a light view of Acer using other people's GPL'd code without complying with the legal obligations of doing so, I'd like to see the source for your complaints about Google to better understand how it actually came down.

 

Again with trying to change the subject to somehow make it appear Google acted out of legal issues arising from the licensing of the source code.

 

Google pressured Acer simply because they couldn't have Acer building a device that uses an Android fork in China, potentially taking away millions of users of "regular" Android and causing even more fragmentation. It has nothing to do with licensing it legal requirements as you imply.

 

Andy Rubin commented on the Acer/Aliyun situation and stated Aliyun was a non-compatible fork of Android and OHA members cannot build devices for them. He even invited Alibaba to join the OHA and take advantage of all the "hard work" OHA members had put into developing Android.

 

That last part is hilarious considering Google controls Android and is responsible for development, not the OHA as he implies. Google makes Android source code available for OHA members who then use it in their devices. It's a one-way street from Google to the OEM's, not a two-way street as "real" open source software is.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #91 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

What are the first five words of my original post?

 

Garbage to try and confuse the issue. Par for the course.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #92 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:46am
post #93 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

...

 

The two circumstances (Acer's GPL violation and their OHA viiolation) are indeed related because, with the addition of supporting piracy, they paint a clear picture of Acer's disregard for any of their obligations with this OS. ...

 

You can try to spin it however you like, but the fact is that the OHA as some sort of independent entity is a farce. The OHA is run by Google with an iron fist, no other "member" has a say. And, the requirements for Android branding are amorphous at best and subject to change without notice.

 

We've seen this before with the Skyhook scandal, and the situation with Acer brings the true nature of the OHA into sharper focus. Google may use whatever legalistic quibbles they can to justify their "OHA" directives, but the very simple truth is that they have made Android branding contingent on not forking Android. That's the bottom line and there aren't any facts out there that change that truth.

 

And, yes, I know you'll try to spin that last statement to mean that I'm not interested in the facts, but the truth, again, is that the facts -- not the propaganda, misdirection, and obfuscation -- do not contradict, but entirely support my assertions. But, relax, it's ok, Google's not going out of business, dude.

post #94 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

How does is compute to an Facebook OS? Secondly, what would it even mean? Like Solipsismx said, every service will have their OS.

 

...and this is how the Android crumbles.

Certainly Samsung rolling their own, and Android being segmented into tons of phones running custom forks of the OS and/or outdated versions of the OS doesn't help that platform.

 

Unfortunately, the checklist-featurelist-more-is-better "genius" pundits and analysts are incapable or unwilling to understand that, and will continue spinning the news in a way that serves their option trading strategy rather than the truth.

post #95 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:48am
post #96 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

You can try to spin it however you like, but Acer saw enough value in it to sign it (note that Amazon hasn't, so it's not like it's the only way to support Android).

 

But after choosing to sign it, they then chose to violate, just as they did with their GPL obligations.  See the pattern here?  It may be that your hatred of Google has so blinded you that you cannot, but the rest of the world does.

 

There you go again, trying to confuse the issue. This has absolutely nothing to do with "GPL obligations". It's entirely about how Google controls the OHA, its "members" have no say whatsoever (not really much of an "Alliance"), and that Google "enforces" many "requirements" that aren't spelled out. It's also about how the "Open" part of OHA is, like everything else Google apple the "open" label to, complete BS.

 

Suck it up and relax, dude.

post #97 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:49am
post #98 of 106

This is probably nothing more than an announcement of a new version of their app, nothing more. It makes no sense for Facebook to release a phone, especially when most people don't even like or want to use Facebook. This would end up being a major Facebook fail - not unlike their IPO.

post #99 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

What are the first five words of my original post?

Using the Linux kernel doesn't require them to release any OS source code. Try educating yourself....

Open source licenses are complex with lots of exceptions...
post #100 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 9:48am
post #101 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

There you go again, trying to confuse the issue.  I never wrote that the GPL obligations were the root of the problem, merely that they were just one more of several examples of the root problem: Acer has no respect for their legal obligations with regard to this OS. 

 

Your frequent reliance on straw men ...

 

And, there you go again, introducing unrelated issues into the discussion, including your ridiculous "straw men" reference, to cover Google's ass with confusion.

 

I never wrote that you said, "GPL obligations were the root of the problem," yet, here you are denying that you said it to point out how I'm creating straw men.  Ironic, ain't it?

 

But, again, this has nothing to do with GPL issues, it's about the iron fisted tyranny Google exercises through the OHA, while from the other side of its mouth Google trumpets how "open" it and Android is. It's about rank hypocrisy.

 

But, relax, dude, Google isn't going to shut down. They'll be spying on us all for years to come. Probably for longer than you are trolling us. Zzzzzzzzz.

post #102 of 106

Sounds like everyone is saying the same thing from different angles, but here's the point about "Open" as I see it:

 

"Open" in "Open Handset Alliance" does not mean everyone gets to fork their own incompatible version.  That would go against the whole purpose of an alliance dedicated to making the OS valuable.

 

"Open" in this case means that everyone can see and contribute to the basic source code (unlike, say, Windows Phone).  They can tweak their version for speed.  They can also add on their own proprietary extensions if they wish, such as HTC did at first with their pen APIs that were later integrated, or the way that Samsung allows multiple windowed apps, or the manufacturer-specific widgets for their particular homescreen launchers like Sense or TouchWiz.  This is their way of differentiating themselves and attracting users.

 

However, for something to be called "Android version x", it must pass the compatibility tests for that version.  Otherwise, it's not Android version x.  This allows for developers to create apps that are cross-device / version compatible, which is what the majority do.

 

All that said, it seems a moot discussion if it's just a launcher that Facebook is doing.

post #103 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Sounds like everyone is saying the same thing from different angles, but here's the point about "Open" as I see it:

 

"Open" in "Open Handset Alliance" does not mean everyone gets to fork their own incompatible version.  That would go against the whole purpose of an alliance dedicated to making the OS valuable.

 

"Open" in this case means that everyone can see and contribute to the basic source code (unlike, say, Windows Phone).  ...

 

"Open" in the context of the OHA means exactly this and nothing else: You can do whatever you want as long as Google approves it, and there are plenty of things they won't let you do, many of which they will decide on after the fact, and they will use this control to take control of industries like location services.

 

In other words, "open" in this context is as much BS as it usually is when Google uses the word.

post #104 of 106
This seems to be a way to shut google+ off of android and a apple copy on the built in the OS, all on 1 hacker way.
post #105 of 106

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:31pm
post #106 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Not surprisingly, AppleInsider's enemy-du-jour piece from last week turned out to have a headline completely unrelated to what's actually happening - and equally unsurprising, we have to go to the outside world to learn that FB's offering isn't a competing OS at all:

Facebook Introduces New 'Home' Screen for Android Devices, Arrives April 12th



http://www.macrumors.com/2013/04/04/facebook-introduces-new-home-screen-for-android-devices-arrives-april-12th/

AI's story came from the outside world too, from Techcrunch.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Facebook to reportedly unveil iOS competitor at April event