Two faces of Android | Hacker News Reader

Two faces of Android

epeus.blogspot.com

19 pointsjoshfraser14 comments

It really seems like someone ought to be doing more to try to use Android to publicize free software. I think the majority of Android users now probably have no understanding of the goals and ideals of free open source software, and there is an opportunity to create real public enthusiasm. From a free software perspective, Android is hardly an ideal platform, and carriers and phone manufacturers have a lot of ambivalence about welcoming openness, but I'm still excited by the fact that a lot of people are now walking around with a linux in their pocket.

    > and there is an opportunity to create real public enthusiasm [about FOSS software]

Sorry, there really isn't. And if there ever was, a mobile phone isn't going to do it.

Most folks don't know their phone is running Android, they just bought whatever interesting-looking smartphone was in their price range. They barely care about the software their phone is running, let alone the tenants and ideals of a bunch of software hackers regarding their craft.

I completely agree with you about the actual state of the world, but I don't think its a theoretical impossibility to communicate in way that will raise awareness. As an example, consider the amount of mindshare the ideals of the organic foods movement have attained in the mainstream. Producers of organic food have done a good job marketing themselves and trying to put out information they believe supports their values. The concepts of user control and freedom that motivate FOSS have an emotional appeal to many. Many people who aren't professional mechanics and engineers still enjoy taking things apart and fixing them, and can understand access to software source code in a similar way.

Virgin Mobile is running bus ads that say "You on Android for $25/month".

Obviously there is some marketing appeal in being able to offer a phone that runs Android, which means people are aware of the name (even if they may be confusing it with the Motorola Droid specifically).

absolutely - most people might not be aware what devices run Android, but they surely heard the name.

In my anecdotal experience, even my non-technical friends with Android phones know they have Android. I think you're right about them not caring about FLOSS ideals, but you may be underestimating Android's brand awareness.

The ability to search the Appbrain market and exclude proprietary software would be good. A "curated" FLOSS app store that let legitimate forks get ad revenue, but prevented shady cloning would be even better.

Can anyone cite an example of a situation so far where replacing any of the Google apps has been good for the user?

It seems to me that Google should work really hard on having its apps be must-haves for most users, then use them as a lever to discourage undesirable behavior like replacing built-in functionality such as tethering with paid services.

Being able to swap out the phone dialer with a SIP client means my Droid can make and receive calls when I'm on Wifi in Europe, where it's CDMA network doesn't exist.

I'll give this one partial credit: there's no doubt that it's useful. I don't think, however that it meets the parameters of my original question. I think the dialer is part of the open-source Android distribution, and it isn't one of "the Google apps" I had in mind.

More importantly, this is a replacement done by the user. Being able to customize your own OS is always (in principle) a benefit. I'm talking about things like AT&T hiding Google Navigation on some of its Android phones to encourage the use of its own paid navigation app.

Fair point; I think a lot of the US carrier customisations have been detrimental. What I was getting at in the original post was that we're going to see a lot of things running Android that we didn't expect, and that aren't on Google's roadmap. Avoiding the BizDev tax by replacing some of the Google proprietary apps will come too. For all I know, this is already going on in Asia.

It seems like the consensus view is that HTC's Sense (and equivalents to a lesser extent) was a definite improvement over stock 1.5/6 but has become less so over time as stock improves.

Even as of 2.3 though some stock apps, e.g. the media player are a bit basic, so it's only overall better, not a point-by-point victory.

There's also the fact that Samsung could create "tablet" versions of apps without waiting for Google, manufacturers having to replace Google apps on non-phone devices, and ROMs going their own open source way.

You could also argue, in a game theory kind of way, that the potential for replacement has aided Android in general (and therefore Android users) even if any particular replacement has been negative.

In support of that consensus view: I found that running Android 2.2 with HTC Sense on my Droid Incredible caused it to be noticeably less responsive than running a stock 2.2 rom (without HTC Sense), even though I wasn't using any of the Sense widgets/applications.

The android market is already used as a 'lever' to establish (relatively loose) requirements on phone specs. Your device must be certified before you may include the Market: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/03/android-devices-crave...

However, I doubt you'll find much help from Google when it comes to tethering, given their recent history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Market#Banned_applicati...

(The tethering apps were apparently later unbanned, but that at least gives you an idea of their current stance)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com