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

Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 234 posts

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#211

Post by jjxavier »

r0h1n wrote: post #178
fooqux wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three points: 1) Newer custom ROMs can deny permissions on a per-app basis. I understand this isn't for everyone, but I enjoy having this option very much on my own device. (I also agree with you that it should be baked into the vanilla Android, but I can understand why they wouldn't want to confuse users with that option.) 2) Some apps will give you a choice in their own settings (if you trust that). 3) You always h…

I've been running CM since the Nexus One. I don't think it supports per-app system privileges. Unless it is hidden somewhere deep within (though I could swear I've recursively been through their entire settings tree). May I ask which ROMs you are referring to?

CM 10.2 introduced something called Privacy Guard. https://plus.google.com/+CyanogenMod/posts/gk7X3HjNvnH

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#212

Post by brian_cloutier »

makomk wrote: post #179
justincormack wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually location APIs do use core Google backend services (the wifi geolocation database). Even Keyboard does (spelling). In a way they are doing the opposite, building their services into everything, which is a natural googly thing to do to add features/improve them. At that point they close source them as they dont want other people using the services without signing up. The way to compete is either to make standa…

I think the location APIs may also use system-level facilities that aren't open to normal applications, such as the ability to detect nearby access points even when WiFi is off and the device is in standby. So it's not clear that apps can implement it themselves without relying on Google. Also, the APIs for newer stuff like geofencing are Google-proprietary and don't support alternative providers, so mobile phone mak…

It does not use system-level facilities that aren't open to normal applications. People love to hate on Google; if they ever embed features into the OS only they are allowed to use you will hear about it very quickly.

There is a class called WifiManager[1] which lets you ask the user to allow background scans. It also lets you see the results of the last scan.

It is unfortunate that the Geofencing APIs are not part of the android platform, but I suppose it's possible they use Google services.

1: http://developer.android.com/reference/android/net/wifi/Wifi...

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#213

Post by vetinari »

wes-exp wrote: post #171
vetinari wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but some of the things you wrote are about perception, not reality. What does "prone to security issues" mean? And compared to what? When we compare iOS and Android, iOS had 304 vulnerabilities in 2007-2013 (294 in 2009-2013), while Android had 29 in 2009-2013[1]. That's order of magnitude difference, yet Android is blamed to be prone to security holes. Also what does "clunky unless you run it on the latest ha…

Vulnerability numbers alone do not accurately convey the mobile security landscape. To start with, even if those mean something, we must consider that Android devices tend to lag behind in terms of receiving OS updates. By contrast, iOS devices tend to be quickly updated. It is widely known that iOS is far more secure in the practical sense for the average user. Report: http://www.f-secure.com/static/doc/labs_global/…

Few centuries ago, it was widely known, that the Earth is flat. Just because something is widely believed, does not mean, that it is true. I would prefer to believe hard, cold numbers, or analysis like this: http://qz.com/131436/contrary-to-what-youve-heard-android-is...

That F-Secure report describes legitimate applications that could be potentialy used as a malware (e.g. just like Wireshark on desktops) or trojans. What happens with trojans is described in the link above.

Also note, that it is in F-Secure's interest to cause scare, it is good for their business. They are not interested in people rationaly thinking about presented issues.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#214

Post by Brakenshire »

icebraining wrote: post #94
Brakenshire wrote: post #19

> While it might not be an official requirement, being granted a Google apps license will go a whole lot easier if you join the Open Handset Alliance. The OHA is a group of companies committed to Android—Google's Android—and members are contractually prohibited from building non-Google approved devices. That's right, joining the OHA requires a company to sign its life away and promise to not build a device that runs…

Are you serious? What other commercial OS can I do a competing fork of? Don't you see that the same restrictions apply to all other consumer OSs (iOS, WP, etc) by simply being closed-source?

That's a fair point, but Android is open source (and indeed was heavily marketed on that basis). They don't get to use any mechanism they like to make the situation comparable to their closed competitors. Their situation is also not comparable to iOS, WP, etc, because of their position of market dominance, just the same as the situation with Windows and Mac OS back in the day.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#215

Post by Brakenshire »

dirtyaura wrote: post #71
Brakenshire wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of its Maps data and many of its APIs already existed for Google Maps on the desktop. Within the mobile space, and relative to a mobile-only competitor, Google's access to that data is effectively free.

Map data for mobile isn't free even for Google. Google buys licenses to the data from a few map data providers, and as there was effectively a duopoly in global map data, those licenses have very strict terms of use. To use that data for e.g. real-time navigation assistance in mobile requires a different, much more expensive licenses.

Good point, thanks for the correction.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#216

Post by [deleted] »

dirtyaura wrote: post #71
Brakenshire wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of its Maps data and many of its APIs already existed for Google Maps on the desktop. Within the mobile space, and relative to a mobile-only competitor, Google's access to that data is effectively free.

Map data for mobile isn't free even for Google. Google buys licenses to the data from a few map data providers, and as there was effectively a duopoly in global map data, those licenses have very strict terms of use. To use that data for e.g. real-time navigation assistance in mobile requires a different, much more expensive licenses.

[deleted]

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#217

Post by x0054 »

x0054 wrote: post #92

I once read an article in 2010 that criticized people for saying that Apple and iOS of the 2000s is like the Microsoft and Windows of the 90s. The article pointed out that Apple IS the Apple of the 90s and Google with its Android platform will become the Windows of the 90s. I think it's happening. In a few years Android is going to be as closed sourced as Windows, probably as ubiquitous, and most likely, just as pron…

This is exactly why most malware out there targets iOS, and why so many botnets are comprised of iOS divides. Right?

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#218

Post by x0054 »

x0054 wrote: post #217
x0054 wrote: post #92

I once read an article in 2010 that criticized people for saying that Apple and iOS of the 2000s is like the Microsoft and Windows of the 90s. The article pointed out that Apple IS the Apple of the 90s and Google with its Android platform will become the Windows of the 90s. I think it's happening. In a few years Android is going to be as closed sourced as Windows, probably as ubiquitous, and most likely, just as pron…

This is exactly why most malware out there targets iOS, and why so many botnets are comprised of iOS divides. Right?

This was meant as a comment to vetinari.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#219

Post by technomancy »

fooqux wrote: post #166
bad_user wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because currently it isn't optional, which is a flaw in Android's permissions system that sucks.

Three points: 1) Newer custom ROMs can deny permissions on a per-app basis. I understand this isn't for everyone, but I enjoy having this option very much on my own device. (I also agree with you that it should be baked into the vanilla Android, but I can understand why they wouldn't want to confuse users with that option.) 2) Some apps will give you a choice in their own settings (if you trust that). 3) You always h…

> Some apps will give you a choice in their own settings (if you trust that)

I noticed recently that Google gives you the option of disabling "Google Location Services" which allows apps to read location when they're not running. However, disabling this causes Google Maps to refuse to read your location when it is running.

...And that's about when I started looking seriously at OpenStreetMaps. Sadly haven't found a good replacement yet.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#220

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

sbuk wrote: post #195
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Don't you think that Microsoft should have been reprimanded over their abuse of the OS market to gain control of the browser market? Absolutely not!

Why?

It's their OS, they can do as they please.

As history showed, there wasn't even an MS monopoly in existence. OSX became viable in the early oughts, Linux was always around, and now people write of the death of the PC.

Regardless, abuse of market dominance (note I don't use the overused 'M' word) increases incentives for competitors to enter the marketplace.

Post reply on HN