Google has already said they will not give the newest OS version to forked version of Android. How are they going to keep up with API's.
Google has stated that APIs are expressions of pure function and not copyrightable. Oracle disagrees and claims that API structures are not purely functional and are therefore expressions of creativity and copyrightable.
If forks can't duplicate Android APIs then Android is dead anyway.
Android is in no way entirely open source. There's plenty there that has been stolen that could be sued over.
Of course, that which has been stolen and that which hasn't was originally stolen by Google and can also be sued over.
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
And no way that Apple is going to sue them for any "Look And Feel" stuff or even touchscreen/multi-touch usage.
And no way that Apple is going to sue them for any "Look And Feel" stuff or even touchscreen/multi-touch usage.
Yeah, I don't see that flying either although Apple did get the government to bust the fake Apple Stores (although I think that had more to do with angry consumers).
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
They WOULDN'T SUE. What Baidu is doing is perfectly legal as far as Google is concerned. They may wish for a different outcome, but as long as Baidu doesn't include GApps or the Android Market, what they do with the source is Their business.
Really? Name a SINGLE product made in the last decade that has anything approaching success and HASN'T been sued?
EDIT:
Interesting Side Note: Most Android blogs, or android leaning blogs are reporting this fork as just another company leveraging android. It's only on sites like this that people are screaming about Fragmentation.
The reason is that most of those sites see that Baidu had three options:
1) Adopt Android as is, which they can't do since Google is a direct competitor.
2) Take an existing OS and customize it for their own purposes (what they chose)
3) Spend millions developing another mobile platform from scratch that wouldn't be compatible with anything.
If they did option 3, then "android fragmentation" wouldn't exist, with the platform, that's right. But instead of trying to coax developers into customizing apps to line up with their changes, they'd have to convince them to start from scratch to get the game running on a WHOLE new platform.
So while managing an app across android "forks" might be less than ideal, it's a heck of a lot easier than trying to manage it across yet another new programming language. A fact that a lot of people here seem to forget.
And this is why I think comparing Android to iOS is almost meaningless. Hardware keyboard and waterproofing are basically hardware features for people who just want a phone for a specific purpose. If it surfs the web, great. Runs apps? OK cool. None of those things would be necessary for that market which means having a viable ecosystem is not needed much less a fairly wholistic one. Basically Android can have 70% of the market, but if half of those people don't really care about apps, what real incentive is there for developers to bring the latest and greatest to all devices? It just leaves fragmented markets that they need to research and then target. Is the Droid used by "power users" who actually buy/download apps? OK, let's target that phone. Is the Samsung Galaxy used for people who like to play games? OK, we will target that phone. I really don't think that is the best strategy.
why would they target just a phone? that would be retarded. you can target specs so if your app requires phones with such and such minimum specs then it'll show only for phones that meet those requirements. API exists only in 2.3+? then boom. ultimately it seems you don't know as much about android as you think you do. logically you shouldn't make such sweeping assessments while being uninformed.
The fragmentation problem for Google is the obvious one...Baidu's fork will essentially kill Android growth in China while doing nothing to iOS and moderate to wp7. It doesn't MATTER to Google if the apps run on Baidu phones if Google is shut out of its Android monetization plans in China. Heaven help Google if this fork gains traction outside of China and into asia proper (unlikely in the extreme).
However, Korean Android or whatever also potentially locks out Google although less likely to. Unless, of course, MS writes someone an appropriately big check.
Amazon's fork, while still using the Google search engine as default, kills a lot of the tie in for other Google services and eyeball count.
So here you are as Google, out millions/billions for Android development and then another $12B for Moto and you STILL don't have your second revenue stream locked down. When is Android going in the black? And if it can't why dump more money down this particular pit as opposed to pulling another Google Wave and "gifting" the code to open source?
It's been estimated that nearly a quarter million patents are involved in building one of today's smartphones. That's why every smartphone manufacturer is sued, often multiple times, for patent infringement. I'd have to agree with the idea that you cannot build a smartphone or tablet without infringing, or at least being accused of it.
And that somehow implies that these products were infringing on existing patents? Try again.
Considering that EVERY company has lost at least SOME of these patents, not to mention settling out of court countless times does mean that they violated those patents.
Apple (famously) lost patent lawsuits to Creative over the iPod, to another company over Coverflow, and settled out of court with Nokia over other's still.
In fact, with the motorola and Samsung lawsuits, apple is NOT denying that they infringe on those patents. They're saying that those companies are trying to charge too high a fee for them, so they refused to pay and violated them anyway.
The fragmentation problem for Google is the obvious one...Baidu's fork will essentially kill Android growth in China while doing nothing to iOS and moderate to wp7. It doesn't MATTER to Google if the apps run on Baidu phones if Google is shut out of its Android monetization plans in China. Heaven help Google if this fork gains traction outside of China and into asia proper (unlikely in the extreme).
However, Korean Android or whatever also potentially locks out Google although less likely to. Unless, of course, MS writes someone an appropriately big check.
Amazon's fork, while still using the Google search engine as default, kills a lot of the tie in for other Google services and eyeball count.
So here you are as Google, out millions/billions for Android development and then another $12B for Moto and you STILL don't have your second revenue stream locked down. When is Android going in the black? And if it can't why dump more money down this particular pit as opposed to pulling another Google Wave and "gifting" the code to open source?
Because the code is ALREADY gifted as open source, which is why BAIDU can fork it. If the code wasn't available forking it would be IMPOSSIBLE.
This isn't rocket science here. It's not even particularly geeky.
Google pulled a lot OUT of china because of filtering restrictions. Baidu's Android fork will have little, if anything to do with impeding growth there since it's the Government (not user choice) that is restricting them.
Comments
Menno and Gatorguy aren't so much in denial as that they are paid to deny.
Yeah...
they gotta' Ac-CEN-tu-ATE the NEG-a-tive, E-LIM-in-ATE the POS-i-TIVE, SCRATCH OFF of the af-FIRM-a-TIVE ... (and don't mess with Mr. In-between)...
...Apologies to Johnny Mercer
Cough cough... lawsuit... cough cough...
It's an OPEN source system, how can they sue, it's not like say Java or something that you pay royalties on.
It's an OPEN source system, how can they sue, it's not like say Java or something that you pay royalties on.
Android is in no way open source.
Sorry, that's a little sweeping.
Android is in no way entirely open source. There's plenty there that has been stolen that could be sued over.
Of course, that which has been stolen and that which hasn't was originally stolen by Google and can also be sued over.
Google has already said they will not give the newest OS version to forked version of Android. How are they going to keep up with API's.
Google has stated that APIs are expressions of pure function and not copyrightable. Oracle disagrees and claims that API structures are not purely functional and are therefore expressions of creativity and copyrightable.
If forks can't duplicate Android APIs then Android is dead anyway.
Android is in no way open source.
Sorry, that's a little sweeping.
Android is in no way entirely open source. There's plenty there that has been stolen that could be sued over.
Of course, that which has been stolen and that which hasn't was originally stolen by Google and can also be sued over.
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
And no way that Apple is going to sue them for any "Look And Feel" stuff or even touchscreen/multi-touch usage.
And no way that Apple is going to sue them for any "Look And Feel" stuff or even touchscreen/multi-touch usage.
Yeah, I don't see that flying either although Apple did get the government to bust the fake Apple Stores (although I think that had more to do with angry consumers).
Android is in no way open source.
Sorry, that's a little sweeping.
Android is in no way entirely open source. There's plenty there that has been stolen that could be sued over.
Of course, that which has been stolen and that which hasn't was originally stolen by Google and can also be sued over.
People sue over everything, anything. Heck, Apple's been sued (and lost) over tech that they also acquired a patent for.
That's the problem. It's impossible to develop ANYTHING without infringing on patents somewhere.
The problem is where do they sue? If the phone (and possible tablet?) is sold and used in only China and Baidu is a Chinese government backed company, there is simply no way Google could win a case against them.
They WOULDN'T SUE. What Baidu is doing is perfectly legal as far as Google is concerned. They may wish for a different outcome, but as long as Baidu doesn't include GApps or the Android Market, what they do with the source is Their business.
That's the problem. It's impossible to develop ANYTHING without infringing on patents somewhere.
I don't buy that.
- Baidu
I don't buy that.
Really? Name a SINGLE product made in the last decade that has anything approaching success and HASN'T been sued?
EDIT:
Interesting Side Note: Most Android blogs, or android leaning blogs are reporting this fork as just another company leveraging android. It's only on sites like this that people are screaming about Fragmentation.
The reason is that most of those sites see that Baidu had three options:
1) Adopt Android as is, which they can't do since Google is a direct competitor.
2) Take an existing OS and customize it for their own purposes (what they chose)
3) Spend millions developing another mobile platform from scratch that wouldn't be compatible with anything.
If they did option 3, then "android fragmentation" wouldn't exist, with the platform, that's right. But instead of trying to coax developers into customizing apps to line up with their changes, they'd have to convince them to start from scratch to get the game running on a WHOLE new platform.
So while managing an app across android "forks" might be less than ideal, it's a heck of a lot easier than trying to manage it across yet another new programming language. A fact that a lot of people here seem to forget.
Really? Name a SINGLE product made in the last decade that has anything approaching success and HASN'T been sued?
And that somehow implies that these products were infringing on existing patents? Try again.
And this is why I think comparing Android to iOS is almost meaningless. Hardware keyboard and waterproofing are basically hardware features for people who just want a phone for a specific purpose. If it surfs the web, great. Runs apps? OK cool. None of those things would be necessary for that market which means having a viable ecosystem is not needed much less a fairly wholistic one. Basically Android can have 70% of the market, but if half of those people don't really care about apps, what real incentive is there for developers to bring the latest and greatest to all devices? It just leaves fragmented markets that they need to research and then target. Is the Droid used by "power users" who actually buy/download apps? OK, let's target that phone. Is the Samsung Galaxy used for people who like to play games? OK, we will target that phone. I really don't think that is the best strategy.
why would they target just a phone? that would be retarded. you can target specs so if your app requires phones with such and such minimum specs then it'll show only for phones that meet those requirements. API exists only in 2.3+? then boom. ultimately it seems you don't know as much about android as you think you do. logically you shouldn't make such sweeping assessments while being uninformed.
but that just makes sense.
And that somehow implies that these products were infringing on existing patents? Try again.
what else could they be sued for?
However, Korean Android or whatever also potentially locks out Google although less likely to. Unless, of course, MS writes someone an appropriately big check.
Amazon's fork, while still using the Google search engine as default, kills a lot of the tie in for other Google services and eyeball count.
So here you are as Google, out millions/billions for Android development and then another $12B for Moto and you STILL don't have your second revenue stream locked down. When is Android going in the black? And if it can't why dump more money down this particular pit as opposed to pulling another Google Wave and "gifting" the code to open source?
And that somehow implies that these products were infringing on existing patents? Try again.
http://www.againstmonopoly.org/index...58000000000599
It's been estimated that nearly a quarter million patents are involved in building one of today's smartphones. That's why every smartphone manufacturer is sued, often multiple times, for patent infringement. I'd have to agree with the idea that you cannot build a smartphone or tablet without infringing, or at least being accused of it.
And that somehow implies that these products were infringing on existing patents? Try again.
Considering that EVERY company has lost at least SOME of these patents, not to mention settling out of court countless times does mean that they violated those patents.
Apple (famously) lost patent lawsuits to Creative over the iPod, to another company over Coverflow, and settled out of court with Nokia over other's still.
In fact, with the motorola and Samsung lawsuits, apple is NOT denying that they infringe on those patents. They're saying that those companies are trying to charge too high a fee for them, so they refused to pay and violated them anyway.
The fragmentation problem for Google is the obvious one...Baidu's fork will essentially kill Android growth in China while doing nothing to iOS and moderate to wp7. It doesn't MATTER to Google if the apps run on Baidu phones if Google is shut out of its Android monetization plans in China. Heaven help Google if this fork gains traction outside of China and into asia proper (unlikely in the extreme).
However, Korean Android or whatever also potentially locks out Google although less likely to. Unless, of course, MS writes someone an appropriately big check.
Amazon's fork, while still using the Google search engine as default, kills a lot of the tie in for other Google services and eyeball count.
So here you are as Google, out millions/billions for Android development and then another $12B for Moto and you STILL don't have your second revenue stream locked down. When is Android going in the black? And if it can't why dump more money down this particular pit as opposed to pulling another Google Wave and "gifting" the code to open source?
Because the code is ALREADY gifted as open source, which is why BAIDU can fork it. If the code wasn't available forking it would be IMPOSSIBLE.
This isn't rocket science here. It's not even particularly geeky.
Google pulled a lot OUT of china because of filtering restrictions. Baidu's Android fork will have little, if anything to do with impeding growth there since it's the Government (not user choice) that is restricting them.