Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Keep Android Open

keepandroidopen.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 907 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#301

Post by ruszki »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #295
figmert wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that a new project and even a fork would need buy in buy companies like Samsung. Otherwise a project LineageOS would be much more popular. This is hard to do without serious money.

Why is popularity a concern? I'm writing this on a Librem 5 with PureOS that I've been daily driving for the last few years and which gives me a much better experience than Android could. Why would it matter to me as a user whether it's popular or not? The only thing I can think of is availability of native applications, but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next u…

For example because the wait time in the theme park which I visited can be find only in their app for iOS and Android. The same true for ordering food to your table in another theme park. Yeah, there are alternatives, but those cost you time, sometimes hours. And these companies won’t implement anything for an error margin.

Re: Keep Android Open

#302

Post by mrasong »

figmert wrote: post #288
liendolucas wrote: post #283

I'm going to say something that probably will get me down votes: Why do we have to beg Google to keep Android open? Seriously. So many open source projects have risen out of real and concrete needs and successfully made their way into our every day lives. A new platform needs to rise that breaks out completely from Google. I've given PostmarketOS a go (with a PinePhone) and while today I can't say it isn't a daily dr…

The problem is that a new project and even a fork would need buy in buy companies like Samsung. Otherwise a project LineageOS would be much more popular. This is hard to do without serious money.

True, if a new system ever wants to rise, it’s gonna need backing from a major player. But once it takes over the market, it might just become the next “Android.”

Re: Keep Android Open

#303

Post by seba_dos1 »

ruszki wrote: post #301
seba_dos1 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is popularity a concern? I'm writing this on a Librem 5 with PureOS that I've been daily driving for the last few years and which gives me a much better experience than Android could. Why would it matter to me as a user whether it's popular or not? The only thing I can think of is availability of native applications, but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next u…

For example because the wait time in the theme park which I visited can be find only in their app for iOS and Android. The same true for ordering food to your table in another theme park. Yeah, there are alternatives, but those cost you time, sometimes hours. And these companies won’t implement anything for an error margin.

Again:

> but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next underdog project to worry about.

Just consider how this wouldn't happen at all in an environment where no platform dominates in popularity (and it doesn't always happen today either, as lots of things like these are accessible via the Web from any platform regardless).

Re: Keep Android Open

#304

Post by Mindwipe »

safety1st wrote: post #96
maxloh wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most vendors (at some level) allow flashing custom distributions, as long as you didn't buy that device from carrier: https://github.com/zenfyrdev/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame... You will lose DRM-based apps (e.g. Netflix), Payment apps, and bank apps though.

This is the place where I think lawmakers needs to be involved. Bearing in mind that laws aren't engineering specs, being able to pay for things and use a bank are about as close to fundamental rights as anything is for participants in society. If you have to buy a second device to use Netflix, so be it, but we need laws that guarantee people can make digital payments without Apple or Google's permission. There are s…

> If you have to buy a second device to use Netflix, so be it, but we need laws that guarantee people can make digital payments without Apple or Google's permission.

The reality is however that if you look at active current projects being able to use digital IDs to access fundamental freedoms like communication without child safety rails in Europe is going to require Apple or Google's permission because politicians like it that way.

You can think things should happen in a way all you like, but they are not going to, because governments have vested interests in the opposite direction.

Re: Keep Android Open

#305

Post by clijsters »

It is a story I heard way too often. Big Tech creates something which is so convenient, you don't want to miss it. Then Big Tech breaks that something, makes it more expensive or uses any other means of rent-seeking just pissing of its customers. We as consumers are by far the biggest lobbying-group, but nobody really gives an f. I'm trying my way with /e/OS but thats not for everybody. It also shows me how deeply dependencies on google services are woven into the whole ecosystem - even on open source apps.

Re: Keep Android Open

#306

Post by ruszki »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #303
ruszki wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example because the wait time in the theme park which I visited can be find only in their app for iOS and Android. The same true for ordering food to your table in another theme park. Yeah, there are alternatives, but those cost you time, sometimes hours. And these companies won’t implement anything for an error margin.

Again: > but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next underdog project to worry about. Just consider how this wouldn't happen at all in an environment where no platform dominates in popularity (and it doesn't always happen today either, as lots of things like these are accessible via the Web from any platform regardless).

We have exactly that interoperability right now, and the market said that they don’t want use that.

Re: Keep Android Open

#307

Post by seba_dos1 »

ruszki wrote: post #306
seba_dos1 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again: > but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next underdog project to worry about. Just consider how this wouldn't happen at all in an environment where no platform dominates in popularity (and it doesn't always happen today either, as lots of things like these are accessible via the Web from any platform regardless).

We have exactly that interoperability right now, and the market said that they don’t want use that.

A market like that needs to be better regulated then.

Re: Keep Android Open

#308

Post by echelon_musk »

liendolucas wrote: post #283

I'm going to say something that probably will get me down votes: Why do we have to beg Google to keep Android open? Seriously. So many open source projects have risen out of real and concrete needs and successfully made their way into our every day lives. A new platform needs to rise that breaks out completely from Google. I've given PostmarketOS a go (with a PinePhone) and while today I can't say it isn't a daily dr…

Good luck funding the development of a competing mobile OS by FLOSS nerds that can compete with Google's trillion dollar market cap.

Even if you could get some traction, you're gonna have a bad time getting banks to support this OS, at which point it will be useless for most users, preventing you from ever becoming profitable.

Re: Keep Android Open

#309

Post by pjmlp »

preisschild wrote: post #251
pjmlp wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except many key features are nowadays delivered via APEX modules, distributed via PlayStore. https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/apex

https://grapheneos.org/features#anti-persistence GrapheneOS has apex modules disabled and never had the need for that.

ART updates are distributed via APEX since Android 12.

So is it stuck in Java 12?

Re: Keep Android Open

#310

Post by Zambyte »

sjamaan wrote: post #235
pyeri wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This situation would have been avoided if we, as community of engineers, had insisted on full and uncompromised open source (Stallmanist or GPL way) right from the start instead of going the ESR way of half-hearted open source where it's technically open but corporates get to have a free lunch and make abuses. Like most coders, I also prefer the permissive MIT/Apache/BSD licensing for most software projects but incid…

GPL doesn't help you one bit in this particular situation, because "regular users" would still be using the locked-down stock Android that came with their device. So they still can't install your app. Anyone who is already running a rooted Android or otherwise customized OS isn't affected by this, only developers who want to distribute their app to users.

I can't root or otherwise customize my OS on my device because Linux is not GPLv3.
Post reply on HN