<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Google Android not so open</title>
		<description>Discuss Google Android not so open</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 22:52:02 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/22350/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Ollie says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20418</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hahaha funny... if Fudo bashes Android he's suddenly a Jobs lover, if he bashes Apple he's an Android lover. God bless the Fanbois, cos no one else will.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ollie</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 01:40:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20418</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deanjo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20405</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No I don't "confuse it with the kernel" that is why I said "and many other opensource projects". Those include items like webkit, sqlite, etc etc etc which make up androids code base. It is the same thing if you buy a router that has a customized firmware based of of open source projects. It may be a heavily modified but the base is still from the original projects.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deanjo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 19:57:47 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20405</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>trae32566 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20390</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually, the kernel is heavily modified to allow for most of the hardware, as well as optimizations. Also, although you may think that the rest of the OS was made by Google, this simply isn't true. A lot of the underlying code is most likely based on BSD (although I haven't gotten that far yet, so I'm not 100% sure). You guys really need to stop being impatient. The platform isn't finalized, hence why it's only working on one peice of hardware currently. Be nice to your developers; Don't bite the hand that feeds you.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>trae32566</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:27:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20390</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Regenweald says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20387</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I love the linux kernel and Ubuntu, but I wonder how all the Freetards that bought andriod phones yelling 'OPEN SOURCE' at the top of their lungs feel now.... lol Anyone that didn't see this coming deserves to be smacked.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Regenweald</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:00:55 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20387</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The_Wolf88 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20386</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Agreed ! It's not open soruce as Google says ! They are refusing to release Honeycomb code to developers !! WTF !]]></description>
			<dc:creator>The_Wolf88</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:51:20 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20386</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>STRESS says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20382</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Makes me wonder how desperate nVidia must have been they probably paid Google a back full of ca$h no wonder that analysts are downgrading them]]></description>
			<dc:creator>STRESS</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:14:24 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20382</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20380</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You confuse base code with kernel, and even that is not untouched. The kernel is Linux but the rest is Google's code. What do you think people at Google do all day? Google for code to copy and put it under a close source license?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:11:41 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20380</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>trae32566 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20371</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@TheMatrix606: Actually no, it isn't their 'product' completely. Hardly any developers write code from scratch anymore, and as you should know, Android is Linux based, meaning it is inherently at least partially open source (Most linux code is under open source licenses such as the BSD licensing, or GNU GPL / LGPL licensing). The issue with them supposedly not being open source, is that it doesn't offer a good field for improvement from the community (You don't think Google finds all the code bugs, do you? Usually XDA-devs have fixes before Google). Also, I'm pretty sure if they used an open source license, and didn't follow it, then whoever wrote it (especially if it was FSF) would be on their ass.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>trae32566</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:43:57 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20371</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>trae32566 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20369</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Wolfesteinabhi : Ok, so first off, Google doesn't support PPC, and as well, Tegra is an ARM based processor. The issue comes since most mobile devices use a SOC (System on a Chip), which means Google has to write firmware for the Tegra graphics chip to interface with the OS (a driver of sorts) specifically. Also, if you look at this from the standpoint of Google, it doesn't really mean the OS is not open source. The issue is that the other makers can't get the base code to write firmware for their chips, most likely because Google is still finalizing the Honeycomb platform (have you seen it? It has a shit ton of bugs...).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>trae32566</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:41:17 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20369</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Deanjo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20365</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually the "base code" is linux and many other open source projects. Android is a derivative of these projects.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Deanjo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 13:31:37 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22350-google-android-not-so-open#comment-20365</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
