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.
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.
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:
<h1 class="title">Facebook Introduces New 'Home' Screen for Android Devices, Arrives April 12th</h1>
Comments
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
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.
deleted
AI's story came from the outside world too, from Techcrunch.