Hi Rod, I have no reason to doubt what Andy Rubin said on that occasion -- in particular the "crappy experiences", but a platform cannot be both open and closed at the same time. Part of the so-called freedom of open software is that users and companies can take the software in whatever direction they choose. Google is not ready for that to happen so for the present at least the software is not open.
When you say Apple fanatics what do you mean exactly? Do mean that all users of Apple products are deluded in some fashion into believing that they are using quality software? It's strange that Apple's competitors seem to be fanatics as well as the phone and table offerings are mostly following behind Apple's lead as fast as their production teams can copy them. Have a look at smartphones before the iPhone and have a look at smartphones now. You can do the same for tablets -- which weren't even a popular category of product before the iPad. As for WebOS, when you say "over all the mobile platforms", I hope you mean over all your mobile platforms as I am quite happy with iOS. Cheers, Carlo On 2011-07-11, at 13:52, Rod Lavington wrote: > So this quote from the second article: > > "Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If Google > were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on smartphones and > users might end up with some crappy experiences." > > does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a reason, > other than not keeping it open? So, Apple fanatics believe everything that > comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the head of Google's > Android division..... > > Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not about > one particular platform's misgivings :) > > Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a heartbeat. > Alas, its not available in Australia (yet) > > Seeya > > Rod > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm <cm200...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Rod, > > I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform > fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android > supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is > keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when the > reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by > taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the closing > of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first article > is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that Google uses to > keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even aware of. > > Cheers, > Carlo > > On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote: > >> Hi Carlo, >> >> Have to take issue with the second article. Anyone that has followed >> Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to >> open up Honeycomb. Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on >> this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of >> Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb). I'd say Google let a handful of top >> manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will >> let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year. And >> considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I >> can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit! >> >> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code >> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only. >> No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the >> developers menu. Too bad nobody uses them ;) >> >> Cheers >> >> Rod! >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm <cm200...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Reg, >> >> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection >> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at >> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android >> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open. >> >> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/ >> >> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3 >> >> Cheers, >> Carlo >> >> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote: >> >>> Hi Paul >>> >>> Reg Whitely >>> >>> Home: 08 9921 7272 >>> Mob: 04 8899 7313 >>> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote: >>> >>>> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy >>>> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response: >>>> >>>> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and >>>> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in >>>> doing >>>> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk." >>>> >>>> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg >>>> sounds a bit spooked. >>> >>> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to >>> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use >>> android and linux! >>> >>> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion >>> only because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I >>> am on Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect >>> me and my family and friends as much as possible. >>> >>> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray >>> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make >>> my acquaintance - not!. >>> >>> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this >>> situation. >>> >>> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it >>> is current only to 2010: >>> >>> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/ >>> >>> Reg >>> >>> >>> >>>> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted. >>>> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against >>>> the risk then a good thing has happened. >>>> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-) >>>> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but >>>> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the >>>> potential risks. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Paul >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- >>>> Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> >>>> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> >>>> Unsubscribe - <mailto:wamug-unsubscr...@wamug.org.au> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- >>> Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> >>> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> >>> Unsubscribe - <mailto:wamug-unsubscr...@wamug.org.au> >> >> >> >> >> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- >> Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> >> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> >> Unsubscribe - <mailto:wamug-unsubscr...@wamug.org.au> >> > > > > > -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- > Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> > Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> > Unsubscribe - <mailto:wamug-unsubscr...@wamug.org.au> > -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List -- Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml> Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml> Unsubscribe - <mailto:wamug-unsubscr...@wamug.org.au>
