Posted on 06/28/2010 9:51:07 AM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier
Android, on the other hand, is much like the conservative position: a hand up. Sure, you can get things spoon-fed to you if you need it, but ultimately the entire power of the phone is at your disposal, to customize, build, and use as you want, to your benefit. Android won't restrict you, doesn't fight you to open your phone for your uses.
Without consciously thinking of it in liberal vs. conservative terms, that's exactly why I'm buying an Android and not an iPhone. After I buy something from someone, they have no business trying to tell me what I can and can't do.
My Motorola Droid just frustrates the F out of me with all its hangups, stalls and force quits. Not a great OS for a smart phone I am afraid.
Henry Ford is also reported to have said that the "customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black"
Y'know, I just was looking at some customizable alarm clocks two months ago (This one is very interesting, but way too expensive for my taste...) and spent an hour in my TV settings last week (re) customizing it to my liking ("Different display and audio setting for different connectors? Su-weet!") I'm the guy you're talking about, I run Linux on my hand built PC, have custom firmwares on my router, DVD player and old Sony Erikson phone, spent two hours in my new (to me) car manual yesterday figuring out settings (do I really want the fob to unlock all the doors at once or just one...? Honk or no honk on lock?) Whether a music player needs special third party software to install music or can just be used as a removable drive anywhere I plug it is a major factor in whether its worth buying (which means no ipods) I had my Nexus One rooted within a week of getting it and would have a custom firmware on it right now if Googles stock 2.2 wasn't due to arrive imminently. Heck, I had the amount of memory on my Palm V customized, and was using LED flashlights over ten years ago.
I like choice in my products. I know my level of geek-i-tude isn't typical for the bulk of consumers out there so I happily accept that the device is going to be defaulted to the simplest levels when I get it. That's fine. But I definitely want the choice to customize it if I wish. Apple doesn't give me that choice. Indeed it is a violation of Federal Law (according to Apple) if I just install an app from anywhere but the Apple App store.
That's cool. Their product, their rules. But not its for me. Google unilaterally removing that app from users' phone was decidedly not cool That type of nonsense will push me quickly to a custom firmware.
“You’re the one that said Google colluded with “Red China”.
Sorry, your answer is non-responsive. Go back to my question, read it again, try to remember how Google conspired with the Chinese government to provide a highly censored search engine....
“They pulled out of China.”
until very recently. Did I mention that? Oh, yes, I believe I did.
I have consciously sought out products not made in Red China for years. With some products like the itouch, which they other posters have clearly shown to be hands down the superior product when compared to knockoffs like Droolaroid, I hold my nose and slap the plastic on the counter.
Protests were held worldwide when Google did an evil and censored their product to the whims of their Chinese masters. I applaud them for realizing their mistake but I’ve got a long memory.
Y'know, because otherwise there's no way you would know what I meant.
At least when you have an Android phone you can roll your own firmware legally...;)
Smart phones and IMHO digital music players didn’t really take off for years. Tablets have certainly been DOA for years. One of the reasons is that they were in a large way designed for geeks. They were not simple consumer electronics devices.
Apple started designing these things for the average user, and reinvented a few markets with that philosophy. You may enjoy tinkering, but you have to admit that Apple’s approach has clearly been a winning one with the consumers.
That's tricky. The Linux base of Android is open source, but you need more than that to run a phone. Many of those components and programs that most of us think of as part of the Android experience are not open source. Google has already threatened legal action to stop one such "roll your own" modder.
In practical terms, the "open source" of Android means phone companies are free to use and modify it for their phones. It's not meant for the end-user to be able to do anything useful.
Well, to be honest, you can roll your own OS, just don’t include closed-source applications on it. That seems obvious.
And yes, it’s well beyond the average person; however, in the Windows Mobile world, it’s a common-place occurrence. There are dozens of purpose-built ROMs out there and it’s quite simple - point and click simple - to install a new ROM.
I suspect this is the same thing with Android. The average user doesn’t need to roll their own OS build, they can select from dozens of different packages to use.
Just like your PC, you can buy the OS you want, insert the DVD and go.
If you read even your own review, those applications are considered to be part of the Android experience. A stripped-down shell isn't quite as useful.
are dozens of purpose-built ROMs out there and it’s quite simple - point and click simple - to install a new ROM.
At least two have been ordered to cease and desist so far. Android just isn't as free as people think it is. That's why there's an effort underway to create a 100% free version of Android, but it still has a long way to go.
Are considered "part of the Android experience" by whom? Is not the user the ultimate judge of that?
At least two have been ordered to cease and desist so far.
Copy non-open-source software and get asked to stop. What's so hard about that?
Android just isn't as free as people think it is. That's why there's an effort underway to create a 100% free version of Android, but it still has a long way to go.
The Android OS is open and free; it's the apps you run on top of it that may not be. It's no different than the Linux world. The OS is free, but the rest of the apps may not be.
You posted a source as authoritative of the Android experience, as opposed to the iPhone. Several closed-source parts of Android were central to what were claimed Android victories in that review. The Android commercials describe doing things using the closed-source software. The public views Android as that whole package, and you would get complaints selling an Android phone without, for example, the App Store or Maps.
The Android OS is open and free; it's the apps you run on top of it that may not be.
What makes for a great Linux distro is the ability to take a standard, well-liked version and add something that is missing. You can do this, as a Linux that is generally considered feature-complete can be made with open source software and freely distributed. However, these guys just wanted to add FLAC support to Android, but couldn't without either infringing on Google's copyright or offering a completely stripped Android that almost nobody would want. You have to back up your apps, install this, then restore your apps. What a PITA that only geeks would go through, useless to 99.9% of the population.
You know, iOS is part open source too, based on BSD and Mach. That's kind of an academic fact since it's wrapped up with all that proprietary software.
Oh no doubt. My preference is that approach be the default but that more advanced options at least be available to the user that desires to tinker, very preferably without legal liability. Apple successfully exercises their right not to do that, so there we go.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.