"The [Google] reportedly said it will terminate its Android-related partnership and technology licensing if "the partner" releases products running Aliyun OS."
Yikes! So much for Google having an open-source OS that anyone can freely use when they use their power and position to force vendors not to fork an "open" OS.
"The [Google] reportedly said it will terminate its Android-related partnership and technology licensing if "the partner" releases products running Aliyun OS."
Yikes! So much for Google having an open-source OS that anyone can freely use when they use their power and position to force vendors not to fork an "open" OS.
I'm guessing one is allowed to do whatever they want with it just not give it another name. Having a "open" OS doesn't mean that they have to bend over and "open" their butt cheeks.
"The [Google] reportedly said it will terminate its Android-related partnership and technology licensing if "the partner" releases products running Aliyun OS."
Yikes! So much for Google having an open-source OS that anyone can freely use when they use their power and position to force vendors not to fork an "open" OS.
They have the power and position as per the OHA agreement. Hence why they didn't say anything to Amazon because they couldn't because Amazon isn't part of the OHA.
They have the power and position as per the OHA agreement. Hence why they didn't say anything to Amazon because they couldn't because Amazon isn't part of the OHA.
It really isn't complex nor nefarious.
I don't think that's in any way accurate. They allow you to fork the OS,but when you do you can't say it's Android since it's no longer Android, it's just based on Android. Also note they canceled the entire event, which could have easily ben avoided if it was just needing a name change back to Android.
The most likely answer is Google is afraid Android forks killing Android and their revenue schemes streams (:))that they used their position to prevent Acer from using this Android fork. It may not have been dropping Acer altogether but could have been not allowing them access to the paid Google features for that fork, which Acer may have thought it could still use under their current license.
In no way do I think Google had a problem with their name.
I'm guessing one is allowed to do whatever they want with it just not give it another name. Having a "open" OS doesn't mean that they have to bend over and "open" their butt cheeks.
So Apple didn't have to allow Google to fork WebKit? Of course they did. That licensing allows such options. What is not allowed is Google stealing Apple's WebKit trademark after they fork the engine.
I don't think that's in any way accurate. They allow you to fork the OS,but when you do you can't say it's Android since it's no longer Android, it's just based on Android. Also note they canceled the entire event, which could have easily ben avoided if it was just needing a name change back to Android.
The most likely answer is Google is afraid Android forks killing Android and their revenue schemes streams that they used their position to prevent Acer from using this Android fork. It may not have been dropping Acer altogether but could have been not allowing them access to the paid Google features for that fork, which Acer may have thought it could still use under their current license.
In no way do I think Google had a problem with their name.
Eh. Doesn't really matter to me. The way I understood it had something to do with comparability and that Aliyun (sp?) Was stealing Google apps and putting them on their app store.
That still is misleading because overall activations are also announced to court third party developers.
You're right, a better metric would be "activations by OS version that are active in the play store". However, there may be no reliable way to measure it. There is nothing useful to read from that activations number and developers are better off ignoring it.
They have the power and position as per the OHA agreement. Hence why they didn't say anything to Amazon because they couldn't because Amazon isn't part of the OHA.
It really isn't complex nor nefarious.
Last I checked (a few seconds ago) Acer isn't part of the OHA either.
I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that's cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers, made over $9k her first month and she convinced me to try. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. Earning potential with this is endless! Here's what I do Rich4.com
The announcement that everyone missed except android central was the fact that Google changed the feature upgrade system to include them within the Google play services framework. This means that Google can now implement api's that can be used on different versions of Android, and this will limit most fragmentation problems.
For example, a feature of jelly bean was photo sphere. This was packaged with android 4.1. But now with the new Google play framework, photo sphere can be called upon by developers to add to their camera applications.
Google has essentially made upgrading to a new version of android irrelevant. Most likely updates to Android from now on will be security updates and Linux kernel updates.
Some people discussed that this was Google way of getting back at Amazon. Since amazon doesn't use Google Play services framework, any updates to Android (in terms of features) won't be included in the AOSP build, so amazon won't be able to use them (so Kindle owners won't be getting Google Play Games Services)
The OS calculation is done this way to provide developers with better information on the target demographic. Activations are a bit different because even if the owner never access the play store, they're still likely to use Google's own services with the applications which are included.
The bolded part is not necessarily true and basically a bold assumption on your part. It seems far more likely to me that if a user never accesses the store, that they aren't using the phone as a "smartphone" at all and are thud not using Google's services either.
Isn't it interesting how many topics about competitors there are on AppleInsider? How many articles that are intended to draw so much negative reaction to the articles. Its almost like flame bait....everyone can can post about how much they dislike the subject of the article and feel good about themselves. AI gets all the clicks and page views for the advertisers. Everyone gets to post and vent their frustration and dislike for the subject of the articles. has anyone ever questioned why there are soooo many articles about Apple competitors here?
Hill60, you've often showed a lack of understanding about the Android OS, and probably for good reason. There's Android, and then there's "Google Android" and Google hasn't done a great job of making the distinction clear. Danny Sullivan at Marketing Land wrote one of the best explanations, and added some darn good suggestions too, in a piece from this past September. Have a read at your leisure. I think it might clear up some of your obvious confusion and perhaps help make your future comments about the "openness" of Android more informative.
Then both could be blocked and real discussion could ensue.
But you can't block Tallest Skil because he's a moderator.
We actually need our own individual meta-forums where we can block or allow whomever we want. The "true" forum would be all the posts from everyone but we could all do our own sub-set, or "mix" of what is there. This would help AppleInsider a lot too because their "mix" could be the forward facing one on the website and it could be all innocuous and self-promoting just as they'd wish it to be, but others could still get at the "true" forum full of insults, back-biting, etc.
Isn't it interesting how many topics about competitors there are on AppleInsider? How many articles that are intended to draw so much negative reaction to the articles. Its almost like flame bait....everyone can can post about how much they dislike the subject of the article and feel good about themselves. AI gets all the clicks and page views for the advertisers. Everyone gets to post and vent their frustration and dislike for the subject of the articles. has anyone ever questioned why there are soooo many articles about Apple competitors here?
Because Apple screwed them by refreshing the entire lineup in one day. AI needs readers to pay the bills.
I find this laughable. Almost every major feature in iOS 4, 5 and 6 have essentially been copied from Android (and other OSes). Features that have been on Android from ver 1.0 in most cases.
Classic. Apple invents the car, Android does tail fins first.
Comments
On in
"The [Google] reportedly said it will terminate its Android-related partnership and technology licensing if "the partner" releases products running Aliyun OS."
Yikes! So much for Google having an open-source OS that anyone can freely use when they use their power and position to force vendors not to fork an "open" OS.
I'm guessing one is allowed to do whatever they want with it just not give it another name. Having a "open" OS doesn't mean that they have to bend over and "open" their butt cheeks.
They have the power and position as per the OHA agreement. Hence why they didn't say anything to Amazon because they couldn't because Amazon isn't part of the OHA.
It really isn't complex nor nefarious.
I don't think that's in any way accurate. They allow you to fork the OS,but when you do you can't say it's Android since it's no longer Android, it's just based on Android. Also note they canceled the entire event, which could have easily ben avoided if it was just needing a name change back to Android.
The most likely answer is Google is afraid Android forks killing Android and their revenue
schemesstreams (:))that they used their position to prevent Acer from using this Android fork. It may not have been dropping Acer altogether but could have been not allowing them access to the paid Google features for that fork, which Acer may have thought it could still use under their current license.In no way do I think Google had a problem with their name.
So Apple didn't have to allow Google to fork WebKit? Of course they did. That licensing allows such options. What is not allowed is Google stealing Apple's WebKit trademark after they fork the engine.
Eh. Doesn't really matter to me. The way I understood it had something to do with comparability and that Aliyun (sp?) Was stealing Google apps and putting them on their app store.
If it was something else then so be it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
That still is misleading because overall activations are also announced to court third party developers.
You're right, a better metric would be "activations by OS version that are active in the play store". However, there may be no reliable way to measure it. There is nothing useful to read from that activations number and developers are better off ignoring it.
Last I checked (a few seconds ago) Acer isn't part of the OHA either.
I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that's cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers, made over $9k her first month and she convinced me to try. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. Earning potential with this is endless! Here's what I do Rich4.com
Just checked. They are. On my mobile it says since 2008 but the columns may be misaligned. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Handset_Alliance
But this whole topic is super off topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Last I checked (a few seconds ago) Acer isn't part of the OHA either.
Acer joined the Open Handset Alliance in 2009, with the press release available here:
http://www.acer-group.com/public/News/2009/20090601.htm
There's also a fair article about the Acer/Aliyun issue here:
http://marketingland.com/google-acer-android-aliyun-21631
This will create more fragmentation, not less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42
The OS calculation is done this way to provide developers with better information on the target demographic. Activations are a bit different because even if the owner never access the play store, they're still likely to use Google's own services with the applications which are included.
The bolded part is not necessarily true and basically a bold assumption on your part. It seems far more likely to me that if a user never accesses the store, that they aren't using the phone as a "smartphone" at all and are thud not using Google's services either.
Isn't it interesting how many topics about competitors there are on AppleInsider? How many articles that are intended to draw so much negative reaction to the articles. Its almost like flame bait....everyone can can post about how much they dislike the subject of the article and feel good about themselves. AI gets all the clicks and page views for the advertisers. Everyone gets to post and vent their frustration and dislike for the subject of the articles. has anyone ever questioned why there are soooo many articles about Apple competitors here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Google told Acer not to release a phone running Aliyun, an Android fork.
Acer complied.
Hill60, you've often showed a lack of understanding about the Android OS, and probably for good reason. There's Android, and then there's "Google Android" and Google hasn't done a great job of making the distinction clear. Danny Sullivan at Marketing Land wrote one of the best explanations, and added some darn good suggestions too, in a piece from this past September. Have a read at your leisure. I think it might clear up some of your obvious confusion and perhaps help make your future comments about the "openness" of Android more informative.
http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-how-open-is-it-21664
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl
RC, why do you quote trolls? We need a list of
a) trolls,
b) those who quote trolls.
Then both could be blocked and real discussion could ensue.
But you can't block Tallest Skil because he's a moderator.
We actually need our own individual meta-forums where we can block or allow whomever we want. The "true" forum would be all the posts from everyone but we could all do our own sub-set, or "mix" of what is there. This would help AppleInsider a lot too because their "mix" could be the forward facing one on the website and it could be all innocuous and self-promoting just as they'd wish it to be, but others could still get at the "true" forum full of insults, back-biting, etc.
Geweldig! (can't find an English word for it, but it's positive)
Because Apple screwed them by refreshing the entire lineup in one day. AI needs readers to pay the bills.
Classic. Apple invents the car, Android does tail fins first.