Galaxy Nexus OS Variant Not Controlled By Google
techieinsider.com
techieinsider.com
It's been a mostly sharp move, but it wasn't done for reasons of user experience. And it shows with stuff like this. I wish they would take a harder line – enforce higher standards, fight the good fight on NFC. But that's not what they're after. Every phone that ships without Android, or a Google-free flavor of Android, is one more point where they can be left out in the cold when something like Siri comes along.
So as long as they can get most of what they want from these manufacturing partners, they'll take it.
If I understand correctly, the premiere Google handset is not going to ship with a premiere Google product. In fact, with Google's acquiescence it is going to be actively blocked. Google will bow down to carriers in an effort to maximize their ad dollars.
No matter how you slice it, marketing value will be lost if this story is true because this will cause the Nexus tag to mean nothing to those who it was originally created to court.
To me, the real question is whether or not anything has changed about the defining attributes of a Nexus phone:
(a) prompt updates (b) "fastboot oem unlock"
Note: I'd add "no bloatware" but given the controversy over the Verizon apps and having come across a developer who considered Gmail bloat (on an Android phone!), I've given up on having a meaningful discussion about it.
I don't understand why Wallet is a big deal. For users, it wouldn't be much of a difference from Isis. How is this selling users down t he river? What exactly is the good fight on NFC?
Every phone that ships without Android, or a Google-free flavor of Android, is one more point where they can be left out in the cold when something like Siri comes along.
What does this even mean? Google-free? Show me an Android phone on the market that's Google-free. And, at least as far as I can tell, Siri seems to have been a dud. I certainly don't know anyone that uses it regularly, and I don't know anyone who uses it at all for anything other than simple voice commands, which are not really Sir's value prop.
So as long as they can get most of what they want from these manufacturing partners, they'll take it.
Manufacturing partners? This is about Verizon, isn't it?
I also wish that Google would take a harder stance on stuff like the Nexus experience, and UI consistency, and update frequency. But I don't really see what Google is bargaining with here. What can they withhold from Verizon at this point?
EDIT: I know one person who uses Siri regularly. His name is Nicholas. He seems like a pretty nice guy. A bit snarky.
Hi, my name's Nicholas, I use Siri regularly. Nice to meet you, Joe.
Nook & Kindle Fire are examples of Google-Free android devices, though you specified 'Phones' so I guess that excludes them.
It seems to be possible to reflash the official Google build onto units that shipped with some of the variants (some xda-forum posters have reported success), but it might pay to wait a few days for this to settle out before ordering if you're really worried about this.
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/is-the-galaxy-nexus-st...
To get the build fignerprint, use adb to cat /system/build.prop, or getprop ro.build.fingerprint
We need this to happen to:
* All wireless carriers and their practice of locking phones
* Apple/Amazon with their "stores" tied to their devicesP.S. In my comment above I used wireless carriers but forgot Google. In reality they all try to do the same thing: google/apple/amazon are using the platform, while carriers are using the pipe, but in the end they all want to own the whole enchilada.
I don't like that iOS is as closed as it is, but I do have other choices. Apple is not a monopoly, they don't control the market, they didn't make it more closed, or less consumer-friendly. On the contrary, they're directly responsible for the smartphone market's rapid advance, and a renewed focus on the needs and wants of end-users.
In other words, your call for an antitrust case against Apple, besides being a serious perversion of antitrust law, is proposing to harm Apple for the good they've done for consumers. What kind of sense does that make?
Certain markets have long been dominated by a handful of large companies. That's always been the case with telecommunications and consumer electronics, and to some extent, it will probably always be the case.
On the other hand, technological advancements, some of which came out of these very companies you're vilifying, have made it more practical for smaller players to enter markets that have had prohibitive costs of entry. It is increasing competition -- the very goal of antitrust law.
Everybody sees the danger of a few large companies controlling a market, that's why the FCC and Department of Justice have been, shall we say, less than receptive to the idea of an AT&T/T-Mobile merger. That doesn't automatically mean that those companies should be torn to shreds because some of us don't like their business model.
Users should be able to freely exchange software/information (which they paid for) between their devices (which they paid for).
This is all about consumer protection, not about how evil/awesome/innovative these companies are. Nobody is going to be "torn to shreds" if the practice of companies locking and controlling access to devices that don't belong to them becomes illegal.
Look, Apple selling you the phone which only runs software they approve is no different from, say, Toshiba selling you a TV which only shows FOX News, but refuses to show you the video which you bought here: https://buy.louisck.net
This isn't fraud, and it's not a hidden problem hard for people to grasp. There's no apparent collusion to block new competitors. If the masses conclude it is intolerable, the companies will stop making money and that's the end of it. If not, it shouldn't be illegal in the first place.
If you're upset about it, well, this is a site targeted at people into startups...
> If the masses conclude it is intolerable, the companies will stop making money and that's the end of it.
so companies choose between not making money immediately, or waiting for "the masses" to get an act together and vote with their wallets? ha.
I guess it takes the selling power of the iPhone to ink a deal like that with Verizon.