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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
deleted
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.
Ah thanks... I didn't know that.
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 ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
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.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
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
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
What are the first five words of my original post?
Garbage to try and confuse the issue. Par for the course.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
...
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360
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.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
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.
deleted
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.
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...
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
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.