Hacker News Reader

Comment by fidotron | Hacker News Reader

At this point it really looks like Google have zero interest in seeing Android improve, beyond ensuring it stays superficially in line with iOS or Windows Phone, and will use whatever means necessary to ensure no one else does it while desperately trying to shoe horn irrelevant features into Chrome in an effort to reach feature parity.

The clause about no forking with the SDK is probably going to rear its head in anger soon.

View on HN

This is complete bullshit, they've improved the runtime and performance in the most recent version among other things.

It's not at all surprising that this application was removed would you expect to see an install Ubuntu application in the Mac or Windows app stores?

The most recent version... that I cannot install in my Galaxy Nexus, which is barely two years old.

I've been an Apple hater all my life, but this, Google, this is epic bullshit.

>I've been an Apple hater all my life

Isn't that a sad thing to be?

And for most people mostly stemming out of reverse hipsterism, nonetheless...

That's not a sad thing to be, at least recently. Apple is one of the major enemies of personal computing freedom.

I don't know, I seen to have a free compiler on my Apple laptop.

And a handheld mobile OS with unprecedented capabilities people would be dreaming of just a decade ago -- that I can code for by spending like $100, including the ability to release my apps to half a billion with credit cards at the ready.

Perhaps if you're young enough to only remember the "everything must be FOSS" times, and not the times we paid $100-$300 for a proprietary compiler this seems very restrictive.

I guess you can download the LLVM source but that has nothing to do with Apple.

> that I can code for by spending like $100

Odd that you think that's freedom, because I can put my own apps on my own phone for actual free. I can put other people's apps on my own phone without signing up for an app store and without a third party's permission. I can send my apps to anyone I want and charge them via my own payment processor if I want.

I agree we now have a "handheld mobile OS with unprecedented capabilities" and that iOS and the App Store were incredibly innovative a few years ago. But the problem is not whether or not I am allowed to develop an app, the problem is whether or not I am allowed to use my device on my terms. I couldn't even add a caller blacklist on iOS.

Also let's say I without any argument accept the idea that the past was less free. That still doesn't make what Apple are doing now free in any shape or form, that's just a flat-out logical fallacy. If you have to appeal to a worse past to explain how you are relatively free you have basically conceded the argument.

It would be a sad thing to be if I did it with no reason. But I've been a huge open source supporter all my life, and I've always found Apple strategies to be undesirable, to say the least. Their products have always been overpriced and hard to use if you're not into their ecosystem (say, transfering a mp3 file from Linux to an iPod nano).

>Their products have always been overpriced

I found quite the opposite. Nothing quite beats their prices.

Here's an easy example: when the iPad came out at $499, the first competing touch tablets come out at $749 (and of course were crap compared to it too). It took competitors years to reach and go below iPad level prices.

You also have to know what you're getting and compare like for like. You cannot compare a machine on the medium or lower end of the market with one on the upper end. Hi-end offerings from Dell, Sony etc, are the same (or usually more) expensive as Apple's offering, when you match features. And you still don't get them all.

Was trying to get a PC laptop to match a Retina MPB the other day. I added the configuration options to match it and got it as far as $1700 for the PC laptop on the vendor website. It also had a VGA port as standard, that the MBP doesn't have. Seems like a bargain compared to the MBP I targeted that's $2599, right?

Only the PC didn't have hidpi screen, had half the memory (8 vs 16GB), had a 750 HD and not a 512 SSD.

Those differences easily match or surpass the $900 difference.

What it also didn't have that isn't easily measured, but matters a lot?

-- it wasn't as light (I carry my laptop a lot). -- it wasn't as battery effiecient (I use my laptop outside a lot).

Heck, I'd pay the $900 even just for the twice as much battery life. When you add the with SSD vs HD, hidpi vs plain monitor and weight, it's a no-brainer.

And there's other, minor stuff that adds up: it didn't have as a solid construction, it didn't have a magsafe-like power connector (tripping on a wire means the laptop goes down -- and I've had that happen in the past), it didn't have a multitouch-glass trackpad, it didn't have an illuminated keyboard, it's thicker, etc etc.

Oh, and it didn't come with OS X (and for free!). I had to make do with the crappy Windows 8. Just that would be worth more than the $900 difference to me.

Your last paragraph really takes away all the impartiality your comment seemed to have.

Anyway, it would have been great to know which models you were exactly comparing, because I don't believe what you say about the PC being that bad.

Also, there are some features in the MBP that don't make sense in a PC. For instance, retina display. GOOD LUCK with that resolution in a 15" display using anything other than OSX. Or the battery life. Of course a MacBook is going to have a longer battery life. They have iron-fisted control over everything, from the software to the hardware. It would be hilarious if with such dictatorial control they didn't have good battery life.

As a Galaxy Nexus owner myself, it doesn't look like Google has a choice. The original vendor of the chipset is no longer around to update drivers. You can't wring blood from a stone.

If Google wanted to, they'd figure out a way. It just isn't in their interest. They only care about the new shiny. We'll see what happens with the 2012 Nexus 7 and Nexus 4 this time next year. They'll probably be discontinued too, as none of the Nexus lines have had updates for more than 2 years.

Their top of the line Nexus 10 has issues which they are not able to fix. They are shipping a crippled version of KitKat on Nexus 10 because of a graphics driver issue!

It's not bullshit at all. The bulk of what development they're doing is now not in AOSP, but things like the Hangouts app or Play Services. The other changes are increasingly minor while stability on their own Nexus devices has gone down.

For example, were you to improve the Android stock messaging app they are completely within their rights to prevent you pushing it back into AOSP, and worse, if you make a breaking change and distribute as an "improved Android" you could be classed as a fork, which violates the T&C of the SDK. Google having this veto to artificially hold back Android prevents other players from producing interesting forks of it. Cyanogenmod will be perceived as a long term threat, and so they will progressively up the stakes in order to make life difficult, but they're starting with stuff which is easier to justify. Once they've started the fanboys will find it much harder to change their tune.

You can see what's been going on by their staff situation.

I don't think so, there's a lot of development in AOSP as well, Hangouts and Play Services are only getting major visibility because they can be deployed to all versions of Android without waiting for the manufacturers.

On the other end, I think that forks with breaking changes could lead to fragmentation, where some stuff works in a fork and doesn't in the other. Isn't that the definition of breaking change?

Wubi still does not support UEFI/GPT systems, but it would be very interesting thing to check.

no, but I wouldn't be surprised if I saw intall Windows or Mac app inside of a Ubuntu store :)

Made an account just to remind you that Cyanogenmod installer brickled many phones. It's totally normal for them to remove it.

Yep. They do not want the fact that a major weakness of Android as a platform (openness = the ability to fuck up your phone) is being highlighted.

Wait. I thought the ability to fuck up your phone (also known as replacing the shitty UI/crapware that your manufacture forced on you) is a major strength of Android phones?

I get it, you're both joking about how these 'flaws' allow us to do cool things with our phones - but the point being made (which you're both missing or ignoring) is that not everyone is tech-savvy like us and it's very possible for them to brick their devices.

It is a double edge sword. I think this is too early to tell, wait to see if Google will reinstate the app after big warnings in the description.

Did you actually read beyond the headline?! Google didn't remove the app they contacted CyanogenMod about the app being in violation of TOS because it ‘encourages users to void their warranty’ (a totally valid reason) so they voluntarily removed it to sort things out, probably will need to add a disclaimer or something.

I'm not quite sure what you find so objectionable, or how relevant is you comment here.

Did you actually read beyond the headline?

"They advised us to voluntarily remove the application, or they would be forced to remove it administratively."

Which is like saying "He wasn't fired, he was just forced to resign".

It's more like leaving when you're asked to instead of being kicked out by the bouncer. It seems pretty clear that it violates the TOS, but I'm sure they'll find another way in.

You're missing the point, the app is in violation of the TOS, the fact that Google is in contact with the CyanogenMod team about the issues means that it's just an adjustment that is required for it to comply. There have been reports about people bricking their deviced with the app, requiring a proper warning would not be out of line.

Yes, and that's because your point is made up. The article makes no mention of them being asked to remove it while sorting things out or "add a disclaimer or something". While it's possible that's actually what happened, it's certainly not mentioned in the article. That's just speculation on your part - which I only called out as you accused fidotron of not reading beyond the headline.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com