Hacker News Reader

Comment by da_n | Hacker News Reader

I've already decided looking at 4.4 that I will do as much as possible to avoid Android for my next phone. I am interested in Jolla, but not as convinced about them being truly open as Mozilla is etc, they need to convince me better of their real motives and philosophy. Google have become very clear, now that they have decided to close almost everything on Android, no more SMS app, Google Now baked into the launcher, everything is G+ now, gallery app is on deathwatch. I feel like a peasant to Google, while they battle with the OEMs, Samsung, carriers, social networks etc they simply force feed their services down users throats, there is little point having an Android phone if you do not want to live 100% Google. Google are acting as feudal lords, they command us the peasants to do their bidding. Well I am moving out, I left iOS for a reason, I want my freedom.

View on HN

I'm curious how Android's choice of default applications implies less "freedom". Don't like SMS being folded into Hangouts? Use Handcent--it's better anyway. Will the Gallery app disappear? Use QuickPic--it's better anyway. Don't like the new launcher? There's Nova and Apex and Smart and a dozen other really good choices. (They're better anyway, too!)

And if that's not enough for you, sure, go try something else, but the dramatics don't really help make your case.

You have a different idea of "freedom" than we do

The problem is not bundling in closed-source applications... the problem is removing (and thus stopping development) of the previously-default open source applications

Are Nova, Apex and Smart OSS? I looked at their web pages, but I don't see any link to the sources

basically: you still have freedom 0 (and possibly freedom 2, if you're willing to go against the EULA)... but, concerning freedom 1 and freedom 3, Android (as in AOSP) is stuck to something like version "4.*"

It sounds like you should move to CyanogenMod.

Yes, I do have a very different definition than you do, which is what makes your almost-begging-the-question rhetorical adoption of the implicit redefinition of freedom as Those Enumerated By Richard Stallman...well, kind of funny. On the other hand, I will enjoy my freedom to use software without concerns of ideological purity because I have alternatives if I don't like them.

Nothing stops you from writing your own to-your-specifications launcher or SMS client or email client atop the openly-licensed Android stack (and leverage having an actually useful, widely-supported phone). People might even use your GNU-gold-starred alternative if it's more than barely functional, though the track record of said gold-starred software with regards to UX doesn't fill me with optimism. But I do wish you luck.

Actually, I'm nowhere "ideologically pure" as you think I am.

I'm still using my google-sanctioned stock android, and I routinely use some sort of closed source software...

My point was more like: I'm using google-android now, out of convenience, but I stopped strictly seeing Android releases[1] as improvements (and thus I _might_ refrain to use KitKat... if I'll move to a google-less cyanogenmod or to Ubuntu or Jolla I still don't know)

Also, My intention was not to be rhetoric: I just found Stallman definitions of freedom useful in this context to understand what some people are complaining about

[1] as in "Android used on Nexus", compared to AOSP

I know there alternatives but my problem is with the direction Google are taking Android and the fact they are abandoning existing open apps and replacing them with closed-source ones. More and more apps will not function either because they rely on Google Play Services, so trying to go around the issue by using OSS apps (such as through F-Droid) will only be feasible for so long, eventually Google will have so much of the API tied into Google Play Services it just is pointless to make an app without it. Google made a decision that its openness on Android is a strategic weakness, damaging potential revenues and user data acquisition. That's fine, I'm not crying over it, I am just going to leave the platform as soon as I can and go to something which is more open, such as Firefox OS (or possibly Jolla OS).

That is a mighty slippery slope you're positing, sir, but good luck with your alternatives.

The non-optional-ness of Google Now if you expect Maps to actually function properly is the single most irritating thing Google have ever done. They're basically saying you have to consent to us slurping all of your info in order to use any of our services. The net result is I'm now always looking for alternatives.

If I was a Shuttleworth type character I would throw my money into creating a Google-free Android with full on replacements for Maps, Gmail, Calendar and the Play Store. Frankly, Microsoft should probably do this - throw away Windows Phone and produce a bundle of Android apps that give you top class maps and Exchange server integration.

Google seems to have really lost the plot lately, forcing their policies and updates down our throats.

That coincides with Jean Baptiste Queru leaving Android and subsequently leaving Google. The core of Android has a surprisingly small team, so one person can make a big difference. AOSP is low man on the totem pole, and seems to have gotten lower.

If I was running any open source Linux distro I would sell the hell out of being able to audit and build the source code, and modify it to include voice encryption on phone devices that enable access to the audio path.

There has to be a huge government market for secure phones. VoLTE will do a lot to enable secure voice by enabling implementation of more of the audio path in the smartphone CPU.

Secure phones, tablets, PCs, routers, etc. all seem like a market poised to take off, yet I don't see a move by the 1st tier Linux distros.

Very legitimate concern. Jolla is a company that strives for profit, unlike Mozilla. And as such we can't expect them to have the same motives to keep their platform free.

However, Mozilla also doesn't have the same influence, because of that, and makes pretty weak phones.

Jolla have said themselves that they might not attempt to grow quickly as a monolith, but more slowly, and be the centre of many smaller organizations. The original owners have maintained control in order to do that. Bear in mind that the company was born out of the chaos of high finance maneouvring at Nokia.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com