or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Play time over for 60K low-quality apps as Google fights Android spam
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Play time over for 60K low-quality apps as Google fights Android spam - Page 2

post #41 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

That's not true. Amazon forked Android and made their own version. Because of that Google no longer allows access to Google Play. Amazon isn't member of the OHA, so they are allowed to do this with Android. Amazon made the choice to fork Android, but they didn't "deny" access to Google Play - their right to access Google Play was termiated when they forked Android. Quit trying to make it sound like Amazon closed it off as a choice and could allow access if they desired. Amazon will never get access to Google Play.

Members of the OHA (any major Android phone vendor) has very strict guidelines as to what they can modify in order to maintain compatibility and allow access to Google Play.

And what's the big deal about not accessing the Google Play store? Amazon has their own app store and all the worthwhile apps are on there.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #42 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

And what's the big deal about not accessing the Google Play store? Amazon has their own app store and all the worthwhile apps are on there.
Your original post claimed Amazon made a choice. They never had a choice - when they forked Android they lost access to Google Play. Now you're trying to change the argument as you were proven wrong.

And it does matter. It shows that Google isn't as open as people claim and they have a different set of rules depending on which version of Android you use.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #43 of 62
Here is your entire post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Maybe you want to take your own advice and read what open source actually means and then compare it to Android. Android is far from open source and is widely regarded as the "least open" of the open source projects out there.

Android used on Samsung, Motorola and other popular devices is not the same version of Android that is free to download and customize any way you want (like Amazon did). Once you do that you're no longer allowed access to Google Play.

Open Source is a buzz word thrown around by fandroids who don't have a clue about software development. But hey, it sounds cool to say you use a product that's "open".

The overarching point you tried to make is that Android is not open. In doing so you gave several reasons why it is open, namely the skins that manufacturers use and Amazon's fork of Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Bull. Yet so typical. Take what I said out of context (or outright make something up) so you have something to point out where I made a mistake or contradicted myself. My original post (which in un-edited):

Android used on Samsung, Motorola and other popular devices is not the same version of Android that is free to download and customize any way you want (like Amazon did). Once you do that you're no longer allowed access to Google Play.

Your reading comprehension is poor if you took my original quote and somehow thought I was talking about skins. I'm clearly talking about two versions of Android - the one Samsung and others use and the one Amazon uses.

No matter what company uses Android or what they do to it, the basic software is still Android, which Google allows anyone to download and modify. You're trying to say that because Google restricts access to it's app store to versions of Android that have a limited amount of differentiation from the base it is not open.
post #44 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Your original post claimed Amazon made a choice. They never had a choice - when they forked Android they lost access to Google Play. Now you're trying to change the argument as you were proven wrong.

And it does matter. It shows that Google isn't as open as people claim and they have a different set of rules depending on which version of Android you use.

Of course they made a choice, they chose to make their own forked version of Android and make a app store where they get the 30% cut from their customers and anyone else who wants to use their app store.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #45 of 62
Quote:
No matter what company uses Android or what they do to it, the basic software is still Android, which Google allows anyone to download and modify.

 

AOSP = Android Open Source Project  is Open Source (which is the kernel that Amazon is able to modify and build from)

 

"Android" itself is Google Proprietary Software.  Google Compatibility Testing, Branding, Private API's, UI interface guidelines, Modified Kernel, Google Services and Play Store.   AKA, Google wants to Mine the end users data, and in return provides a fully functional OS with its services.  A Manufacture is even allowed to change out or Add duplicating services, as long as Google is still able to acquire end user data points with provided services (which is the Google Compatibility Testing). But in no way is a Manufacture able to inhibit the flow of user data back to Google. 

 

Android is NOT Open Source.  You (as an end user)  do not have the ability to change or modify/Omit Google's data Logging API's or modify the Kernel to restrict Particular services. 

 

AOSP is a free micro kernel that you are free to do with what you please.  It is similar to Android only in parts of the Kernel, but that is all. 

post #46 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by malta View Post

Might want to look that up.  Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software
  and 
http://opensource.org/docs/osd
 
in case you actually want to learn what open means. But, I know better.

So like Apple WebKit?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #47 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

What products does Google describe as open besides Android and Chrome?

WebM
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #48 of 62
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
WebM

 

Well, open to violating others, at least. lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #49 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

For every Fandroid who has ever uttered the term "walled garden" to refer to the iTunes app store, that crow has to taste pretty bitter right about now.

 

The Apple App Store is still a walled garden, with no alternative unless we jailbreak.  That hasn't changed.

 

And Google's Play store is now a walled garden with no alternative unless you sideload.  See what I did there?  ;)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Why allow those apps into their store to begin with?


Lots of us used to ask that about Apple, back when they were letting all sorts of crap in just to build the number of apps.

 

Finally, Apple had enough, and did several purges of thousands of apps that were just web page pointers, fart and flashlight apps, were "too sexy", and so forth.  Of course, sometimes they went a bit too far, like when they banned that Pulitzer Prize satirist at first.  Or the other way, when they approved that "baby shaker" killer app.

 

As long as they fix things up, then for both Google or Apple, better late than never.

 

For the record, IMO it's no better when Apple does it.  (Or no worse.)

 

Publish the guidelines, if the app is in a gray area, publish the changes.  But making the changes on the sly without sufficient explanation isn't fair to developers of either the iOS or Android persuasion.  My 2¢, anyway.

 

Edit:  Interesting take this morning from Ars:  http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/04/apples-recent-app-store-crackdowns-a-sign-of-things-to-come/


Edited by John.B - 4/10/13 at 9:00am

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #50 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

Here is your entire post.
The overarching point you tried to make is that Android is not open. In doing so you gave several reasons why it is open, namely the skins that manufacturers use and Amazon's fork of Android.
No matter what company uses Android or what they do to it, the basic software is still Android, which Google allows anyone to download and modify. You're trying to say that because Google restricts access to it's app store to versions of Android that have a limited amount of differentiation from the base it is not open.
You are a poor troll. I never once mentioned skins yet you seem determined to try and steer the discussion that way. Skins are irrelevant to the discussion at hand - whether Android is open (which it's not).

I used access to Google Play as an example, but it's not the only one. I see you're carefully avoiding discussion of the OHA and what rules members have to follow. If you read that and come back to say Android is open, well, I want some of what you're smoking. For example, Acer tried to make a phone for Alibaba that ran Aliyun (an Android fork). Google pressured Acer not to release the phone (the day before the announcement) and Acer complied, or else they could lose membership in the OHA (and lose the ability to make and sell Android phones with full access to Google services). Yeah, that sure sounds like open software to me.

The version of Android that Amazon forked isn't really open source either. There are many different aspects that define open source software - it's not black and white. For example, who controls the source code? In many open source projects different companies can modify the source code and submit the modifications back to the project. In this way you have many developers contributing to the software and a system in place where improvements and source code updates (like bug fixes) are checked by multiple parties before being approved to become a part of the software. For Android all the source is controlled by Google. Samsung can't modify Android and then have their modifications added to the Android pool. Neither can Amazon. Google is the one responsible for all of Android and they don't accept outside contributions. All Amazon can do is modify something Google has provided to them and use it as they see fit. It's open source on a one-way street.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #51 of 62

I can't tell if people are just being willfully ignorant to try and slam google or if they generally have no idea...

 

Google Play is a store, but not the only way to acquire apps for an android phone.

iTunes is a store, and the only way to get an app on your phone without jailbreaking.

 

My wife works for an NGO, and they recently implemented a program in Nepal/Bhutan in which data collection/transmission was performed using smartphones with an application that was specifically programmed for them.

 

They went with Android for obvious reasons - Their application isn't available on Google Play (probably never will be), and they were able to install it on the phones (some model of samsung) without needing to "jailbreak" the phones. They basically just drag-and-dropped from a hard drive to the phone, and it all worked. Their application on their phones, no need to clear it with google.

 

If they'd wanted to do the same on iPhones, they would have had to either jailbreak their phones or submit the application to Apple, have it show up on the app store and then download it via iTunes.

 

Sure, the Google Play store isn't Craig's List, but that doesn't mean that Android is a "walled garden" or a closed platform in the way that the iPhone/iTunes ecosystem is. I think everybody here except for a few mouthbreathers know this and this thread is just a bunch of fanboys on both sides of the fence pretending ignorance to make a point. Another typical day at AI!

post #52 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


How does google define "crappy"?

"android"

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply

android sucks, but not as much as the people who come here to defend it.

New for MS dorks - Microsoft sucks just as much as the losers that come to AI to defend it

Reply
post #53 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


Google is the one responsible for all of Android and they don't accept outside contributions.

 

http://source.android.com/source/submit-patches.html

post #54 of 62
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 #55 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

I can't tell if people are just being willfully ignorant to try and slam google or if they generally have no idea...

Google Play is a store, but not the only way to acquire apps for an android phone.
iTunes is a store, and the only way to get an app on your phone without jailbreaking.

My wife works for an NGO, and they recently implemented a program in Nepal/Bhutan in which data collection/transmission was performed using smartphones with an application that was specifically programmed for them.


They went with Android for obvious reasons - Their application isn't available on Google Play (probably never will be), and they were able to install it on the phones (some model of samsung) without needing to "jailbreak" the phones. They basically just drag-and-dropped from a hard drive to the phone, and it all worked. Their application on their phones, no need to clear it with google.


If they'd wanted to do the same on iPhones, they would have had to either jailbreak their phones or submit the application to Apple, have it show up on the app store and then download it via iTunes.


Sure, the Google Play store isn't Craig's List, but that doesn't mean that Android is a "walled garden" or a closed platform in the way that the iPhone/iTunes ecosystem is. I think everybody here except for a few mouthbreathers know this and this thread is just a bunch of fanboys on both sides of the fence pretending ignorance to make a point. Another typical day at AI!

100% Bull Shite! 1oyvey.gif

You DO NOT NEED to jailbreak an iOS device to install in-house developed / business specific Apps for your users.

You DO need to have an iOS Developer Enterprise Account

Yes, it is somewhat expensive. Although as an NGO, you might consider contacting an Apple Rep to see if any rebates could be negotiated.
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 #56 of 62
@Superbass

One of my clients is an NGO, and I feel your need to do things as inexpensive as possible.

However, promoting a platform that exists and continues to propagate from App piracy is a moral deterrent personally... even if I do use other Google services... although I'm constantly looking at other alternatives and implementing them for my clients (Vimeo instead of YouTube for example).

Outside of the US... Android... specifically Samsung and phones with SD card slots are popular, because the "smart and cost-conscious consumer" does not use the Google App Store for anything other than free Apps. Almost all paid apps (games mostly) are side-loaded from other sources, many of which are exact clones with language translation.

As a "content creator" for some 35 years now... yes... I have a problem with that. irked.gif
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 #57 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by iang1234 View Post

 

http://source.android.com/source/submit-patches.html

 

That's for AOSP. And do you think you're going to be able to submit anything more than bug fixes? You think Google will let you, for example, make a major wholesale change to Android (like adding a new feature)?

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #58 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post


100% Bull Shite! 1oyvey.gif

You DO NOT NEED to jailbreak an iOS device to install in-house developed / business specific Apps for your users.

You DO need to have an iOS Developer Enterprise Account

Yes, it is somewhat expensive. Although as an NGO, you might consider contacting an Apple Rep to see if any rebates could be negotiated.

 

Beat me to it. Although I'm not sure how you can say this is expensive. If you're hiring a developer and creating in-house Apps then $299 per year is going to be the least of your expenses.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #59 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

If they'd wanted to do the same on iPhones, they would have had to either jailbreak their phones or submit the application to Apple, have it show up on the app store and then download it via iTunes.

 

They could use the Enterprise tools that Apple provides or make a WebApp.

 

Neither of which require any interaction with Apple's App store at all.

 

None of this plug in to drag and drop either, custom configurations containing the App can be pushed out to iOS devices.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #60 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

100% Bull Shite! 1oyvey.gif

You DO NOT NEED to jailbreak an iOS device to install in-house developed / business specific Apps for your users.

You DO need to have an iOS Developer Enterprise Account

Yes, it is somewhat expensive. Although as an NGO, you might consider contacting an Apple Rep to see if any rebates could be negotiated.

Thanks for the link. You answered the question I had, and for a company it's really not that expensive.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #61 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

That's for AOSP. And do you think you're going to be able to submit anything more than bug fixes? You think Google will let you, for example, make a major wholesale change to Android (like adding a new feature)?

Yes, that's how group messaging made its way into 4.2.

post #62 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

You are a poor troll. I never once mentioned skins yet you seem determined to try and steer the discussion that way. Skins are irrelevant to the discussion at hand - whether Android is open (which it's not).


I used access to Google Play as an example, but it's not the only one. I see you're carefully avoiding discussion of the OHA and what rules members have to follow. If you read that and come back to say Android is open, well, I want some of what you're smoking. For example, Acer tried to make a phone for Alibaba that ran Aliyun (an Android fork). Google pressured Acer not to release the phone (the day before the announcement) and Acer complied, or else they could lose membership in the OHA (and lose the ability to make and sell Android phones with full access to Google services). Yeah, that sure sounds like open software to me.


The version of Android that Amazon forked isn't really open source either. There are many different aspects that define open source software - it's not black and white. For example, who controls the source code? In many open source projects different companies can modify the source code and submit the modifications back to the project. In this way you have many developers contributing to the software and a system in place where improvements and source code updates (like bug fixes) are checked by multiple parties before being approved to become a part of the software. For Android all the source is controlled by Google. Samsung can't modify Android and then have their modifications added to the Android pool. Neither can Amazon. Google is the one responsible for all of Android and they don't accept outside contributions. All Amazon can do is modify something Google has provided to them and use it as they see fit. It's open source on a one-way street.
I probably am the worst person at trolling. I've never tried it.  You made mention of the Samsung version, which would be a skin.

I haven't read the rules of the OHA but I am aware that there are “official" versions of Android that have access to Google services and forked versions that don't get access.  I think the mere existence of a fork like Amazon's is evidence that Android is open.  Whether there are restrictions on how far you can take Android before losing Google's official blessing has no bearing on whether the core software of Android is freely available to be downloaded, modified, and contributed to, which is my understanding of open.
Edited by wakefinance - 4/10/13 at 4:57pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Play time over for 60K low-quality apps as Google fights Android spam