Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Thursday, 07 April 2011 08:48

Google Android not so open

Written by Fuad Abazovic


Opensource is when we tell you
We have learned quite disturbing things about Google Android policies and we can tell you that Android feels as open source as Apple's iPhone OS.

You can remember the big fuss about Motorola Xoom, the first Honeycomb Android 3.0 device, and many do remember that Nvidia Tegra 2 is inside. According to many industry sources, it turns out that Tegra 2 is the reference design for Android 3.0 and even some big names such as Samsung had to go after Nvidia chip to get the Honeycomb. Industry sources from TI and some independent ones close to Qualcomm have also told us that Google has picked Nvidia, and that this is the Google's way of doing things. They pick the smaller player give it a lot of love, in return for a lot of control over the terms of release.

Nvidia has patiently waited to make a big fuss about Tegra 2 only when Google said its ok to do so. Some big players including Intel still wait to get Honeycomb code so they cam make the final drivers for its Atom based Z670. We don’t get it how can you control 100 percent something and then call it open source, it gets a bit fuzzy here. Still the company who spies what websites you search and watch and serves you an ad based on that such data, is definitely a player that likes to keep things under its tight grip.

If you don’t use Tegra 2, Honeycomb becomes available to you roughly a quarter later, and this is most likely Google’s way of saying thanks. The boss of Android, Andy Rubin already had to defend its open source tactics and he did it in the part here.

 

Fuad Abazovic

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
-11 #1 thematrix606 2011-04-07 08:57
I don't understand the big fuss, it's THEIR code, it's THEIR product, it's THEIR work... how dare you tell them what to do or not to do with it?

This is just another story that belongs in a magazine for little girls to read about... how this celebrity cheated with that celebrity, naked pics of Android, bull crap!

Report on something useful like features or something, please.
 
 
+12 #2 Warhead 2011-04-07 09:03
Quote:
We have learned quite disturbing things about Google Android...


Disturbing??? Come on man...
 
 
0 #3 Wolfesteinabhi 2011-04-07 09:13
i totally agree with above 2 comments..
come on! ...they cant make Android for every single processor out there...ARM, x86 PPC .n blah blah blah ..and then release it to all of them ..by the time they do it...they will find a few developers were beyond their old age and would find there grandsons developing the code instead!! { lol i said a bit exaggerated..but thats that :P )
 
 
+5 #4 123s 2011-04-07 09:39
Expected more with a title like that...at least gief Android nudes.
 
 
-1 #5 kartikkg 2011-04-07 11:44
well they are spoiling the reputation of what "open source" stands for! again and again it is showed by money hungry corporate companies that they dont understand the meaning of open source !
 
 
+2 #6 Bl0bb3r 2011-04-07 12:45
It's google's base code and they can do whatever the f@#$ they like with it!

3.0 is closed for now... that's how commercial outfits work.

Google is not the FSF (Free Software Foundation).

Older versions of Android are open.

PERIOD!
 
 
+4 #7 Deanjo 2011-04-07 13:31
Quoting Bl0bb3r:
It's google's base code and they can do whatever the f@#$ they like with it!


Actually the "base code" is linux and many other open source projects. Android is a derivative of these projects.
 
 
+4 #8 trae32566 2011-04-07 14:41
@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...).
 
 
+5 #9 trae32566 2011-04-07 14:43
@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.
 
 
+3 #10 Bl0bb3r 2011-04-07 16:11
Quoting Deanjo:
Actually the "base code" is linux and many other open source projects. Android is a derivative of these projects.





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?
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments