Related
I cant believe this. Cyanogen just twittered this:
Sorry everyone, CyanogenMod in it's current state is done. I am violating Google's license by redistributing their applications.
More at: http://twitter.com/cyanogen
(Mods I know it should belong in General but the developer thread should know about it then the other ones. Forgive me)
You are taking it all wrong. He hasn't been shut down, wont be shut down, etc. Read the original statement. As long as you any apps that arent part of the source code repository you are not violating anything as far as google is concerned.
With a high-quality open platform in hand, we then returned to our goal of making our services available on users' phones. That's why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google's way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren't open source, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best of intentions.
I hope that clears up some of the confusion around Google's apps for Android. We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom Android builds from developers who see a need. I look forward to seeing what comes next!
So lets please stop being chicken little and get on with the dev work. Not including certain apps is not going to make or break any rom as each user should be able to find the apps on their own.
The sky is not falling although my home did get flooded in atlanta last week.
Johnny Blaze said:
You are taking it all wrong. He hasn't been shut down, wont be shut down, etc. Read the original statement. As long as you any apps that arent part of the source code repository you are not violating anything as far as google is concerned.
With a high-quality open platform in hand, we then returned to our goal of making our services available on users' phones. That's why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google's way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren't open source, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best of intentions.
I hope that clears up some of the confusion around Google's apps for Android. We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom Android builds from developers who see a need. I look forward to seeing what comes next!
So lets please stop being chicken little and get on with the dev work. Not including certain apps is not going to make or break any rom as each user should be able to find the apps on their own.
The sky is not falling although my home did get flooded in atlanta last week.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are aware of that the phone relies on ALOT on framework and other files. Have you tried to delete any of the Google Apps? The phone doesnt work without them. Also, open source replacements arent going to be pulled out of the air magically. Its going to take ALOT of work.
Are you sad all your stuff was ruined?
Johnny Blaze said:
You are taking it all wrong. He hasn't been shut down, wont be shut down, etc. Read the original statement. As long as you any apps that arent part of the source code repository you are not violating anything as far as google is concerned.
With a high-quality open platform in hand, we then returned to our goal of making our services available on users' phones. That's why we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube, Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are Google's way of benefiting from Android in the same way that any other developer can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device via Android Market, and others are pre-installed on some phones through business deals. Either way, these apps aren't open source, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best of intentions.
I hope that clears up some of the confusion around Google's apps for Android. We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom Android builds from developers who see a need. I look forward to seeing what comes next!
So lets please stop being chicken little and get on with the dev work. Not including certain apps is not going to make or break any rom as each user should be able to find the apps on their own.
The sky is not falling although my home did get flooded in atlanta last week.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sure its not truly legal but i think its the way they have gone about it- and in the spirit of open source i fail to see how it affects them.....i thought their business plan was based on more people using the net, more people using their apps, and more people using google to search..... so surely he is creating more business for them?.....
I don't like where this is heading......
jealous
if i was google id be going mad too, seeing the new youtube and market on phones and its not supposed to be out yet.
maybe they will offer him a job
John Player said:
if i was google id be going mad too, seeing the new youtube and market on phones and its not supposed to be out yet.
maybe they will offer him a job
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree and I think those apps were the straw that broke the camels back...
Its all crap no one not even google can stop someone developing a rom with copyrighted
material on the internet.there are many ways to cover this up without being traced
Anyway what's stopping a simple script downloading google apps onto the device on boot? Nothing as android as source is open
spyz88 said:
You are aware of that the phone relies on ALOT on framework and other files. Have you tried to delete any of the Google Apps? The phone doesnt work without them. Also, open source replacements arent going to be pulled out of the air magically. Its going to take ALOT of work.
Are you sad all your stuff was ruined?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The frameworks, etc and files needed to run the os are part of what you can get from the repository. I set up my mac to cook my own roms so I do know whats there and what isnt.
I bootcamped back into vista, loaded adb explorer and removed market, gmail, youtube, and maps. My phone does work without them. If you need gmail then yes there would be an issue but only reason i have gmail is that it was required for me to get my G1 when it came out. Try it for yourself. You will be a lot less functional but your phone will still work.
Besides Google is kinda in a shaky spot. Win mo although not great is established along with RIM os, and Iphone so Android is still in the growing stage and to attract the business users it has to have no hiccups or possible easy exploits so I do believe they will do a lot of barking but very little bite. Probably if Cyanogen wouldnt have made it on engadget, yahoo, msn probably wouldve been left alone.
There are still better things to do with the os. The real dev work is what cyanogen and others do with the kernel, memory management, etc not the apps included with the rom.
PROJECT:OpenAndroid
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=564263 We are attempting to as a community replace all of google's parts with opensourced programs developed and written ourselves. If you have any thoughts or suggestions please let us know.
The issue is that right now if you want to create a useful ROM you need to include the Market app at a minimum.
Sure Gmail is easy enough to replace, and Maps can be downloaded from the Market. But wait, you can't download it from the Market because you don't have a Market app.
So until there is an open source way to access the Market the ROM development community for Android pretty much hosed.
Hopefully this is not heading to where I think it is heading to... Or I might just jump on the next iPhone and say bye bye to Google.
Actually just a though. Just make a way to for the end user to back the google apps and then after a flash to reload them back on after install. That is not violating their stoopid terms then lol. And then for any updates just providing where you can get the updated stuff directly from google. Like where to get market 1.6 and so forth just right from google. Again no violating anything google. Defiantly a sad day for android. Since they don't let tethering , more then 3 home, not having file system access (like win mo), and no ads (adfree) lol, and many of the other great things with out root. If Google sees this thru I am going to go back to Apple iPhone and to hell with Android. Google will loose alot of users out of this I think.
Just write apps to tie you in with Hotmail / contacts / calendaring / outlook and leave GMail totally out of it.... Google will change their tune about the usage of 'their' apps. Because really they get the most from it by keeping you tied in to their online services.
Wow! I dont even know what to think. It must be a cold day in hell. I really hope that Cyanogen and the devs here @xda can come up with a way around this. And to think that Cyanogen was making some serious headway with the development of his Roms, website, and YouTube channel. I am more or less in shock right now. I have all the faith in the world that you guys will come through this still developing the best the Android community has to offer. Just be patient...
And seriously?...you would switch to Iphone? Who the #UCK wants one of those pieces of $H1T.
NOT ME!!
I highly doubt google would actually follow through and take legal action on something like this. It would be a bad business move all around. I would expect the C&D are more about pleasing manufactures and carriers more then google being worried about their own code, in which case who can blame them as they are at a point where they desperately need to attract these companies in order to ensure the future of android.
Just received a pretty interesting article via Twitter.
http://bit.ly/2NjYST
Not my article, and not necessarily my opinion, but it's a good read.
Arrgghh..google..
Bubye google apps..lets just forget them!
Modified android is much important then google apps itself!!
Google, you are very ridicoulous!! You make your app avaliable free for other system, but for your own system? Even now you make gmail support exchange..
I think i hate google as much as i hate apple..lol..
spyz88 said:
You are aware of that the phone relies on ALOT on framework and other files. Have you tried to delete any of the Google Apps? The phone doesnt work without them. Also, open source replacements arent going to be pulled out of the air magically. Its going to take ALOT of work.
Are you sad all your stuff was ruined?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I beg to differ. The phone works without the google apps. I know. Thats what I had when I first got my HTC Magic 32A. For some reason, HTC did not include ANY of Google's stuff in it.
So, no market, no gmail, no maps, no youtube. It was boring as hell. but i still can do pretty much all i needed to do on it (emails, txt and calls).
Just had to imap/pop3 sync gmail using the HTC email client. One thing I hated was the fact that I need to rely on SlideME for my apps. SlideMe(at the time) had very limited apps.
So is including the market breaking the rules, if it is can someone setup a webpage alternative to download apps then just not include google stuff. Open street maps has better maps anyway so i use rmaps, google mail well plenty of email clients about. If we wait i am syre there will be alternative apps for the other google stuff.
Or, oh, I dunno, how about adding a default bookmark android-leak or something and let users download pirated apps? "To bypass the Google Market"? LOL... Basically Google wants us to know that including their apps for free (as in Cyanogen roms) is just like pirating apps, so we are the bad guys already anyway.
I really hope Google will not follow up with the C&D and further spread fear all around.
We are all Google's pawns by using Google apps, let them see our email, see our location, store our search preferences etc to "return better result for your searches" or really, target marketing. When we stop using Google apps (, and move our business to, gasp, Hotmail), they will like it better?
RotoRooted said:
And seriously?...you would switch to Iphone? Who the #UCK wants one of those pieces of $H1T.
NOT ME!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just saying I'm not happy with the news and I'm going to vote with my money when the next device comes along. I thought Google was the "good guy", but now I think Apple and Google both seem like they think they are the gods of the world anyway.
I couldn't fit the concept completely in the title, but here it is:
Would it be a good idea for Google to redesign Android in such a way that it allows for OEMs as HTC and Samsung to more easily add their layers Sense and TouchWiz upon it - perhaps even in the form of a single apk?
Considering the fact updates take extremely long because the newly released Android versions, in this case Jelly Bean, need to be altered by HTC and Samsung and others before Jelly Bean can be even released onto the brand devices, not to mention an even longer delay for those who decide to purchase their phone by the major source of destruction of innovation, that is, the carrier. If Key Lime Pie, the next Android version, is designed in such way that the OEM skins and Android itself remain seperate, would it be possible to update to a newer revision of Android without having to be dependent on the OEM and carrier? It would then be the OEMs responsibility to update their skin as soon as possible to maintain a proper experience, as obviously a new Android revision has new elements that could possibly remain unskinned yet at release.
I personally think a strategy in this way forces OEMs more to bring out updates as soon as possible, thereby driving competition up - which is ALWAYS a good thing, while Android updates remain independent of OEM and carrier.
Of course, there will be issues with such strategy, such as required updates to drivers. Skin updates are non-essential, while it would still be nice to at least have a functioning device after an update. How would that work out for devices by HTC automatically receiving updates to Android? Remember, the whole point of this idea is to bypass the need for OEMs and carriers altogether. While I even doubt thát is possible, I'd like to hear a discussion trying to achieve this point as closely as possible.
I even believe this thread, if it does result in great ideas, could be forwarded to Google to look at - but I might just be completely wrong with such idea and as such, I'd also like to hear why.
Discuss away.
They're already working on it.
[Note: This information is ~18 months old, probably. I haven't kept up to date on the projects.]
T-Mobile built a theme engine, which is included in CyanogenMod. However, there are aspects of it that Google does not quite like. Sony-Ericson is also putting forth an alternative approach, which Google likes better. So, T-Mobile is working to merge the best of both worlds.
The "big difference" between the approaches is:
- T-Mobile's themes are user selectable at run-time.
- SE's themes are set by OEM (need to flash a new ROM to change)... but they are more deeply/cleanly/??? integrated with the Android core.
It's both a technical and political matter.
I don't own a smartphone yet, but I'm thinking about getting an Android phone soon. It will be my first smartphone. I’m also new to XDA-Developers. Please help me, as I have questions about Android security and though I’ve posted this message to several other web sites--android.stackexchange.com, Quora.com, and Reddit--no one has answered all of my questions completely and thoroughly. I’ve only gotten short responses that are a few sentences long and only talk about one or two things. I really need more help than that, and I’m hoping that I can get it here!
I know that this message is long, but please, if anyone can read through it and then try to answer all of my questions, I would REALLY appreciate it!
Here are my questions.
1. Is Android’s stock browser updated directly by Google, or do updates to it have to go through phone manufacturers (Samsung, HTC, etc)?
2. If I buy a phone that runs a manufacturer-customized version of Android, such as the TouchWiz version of the S4 or the Note II, will keeping Android’s stock web browser--as well as any other browser I choose to use--up to date keep me safe from web-based exploits, even if that phone’s manufacturer is slow to deliver updates? (Edit: I want to add that I'm interested in technical details.) By “updates” I mean updates to everything provided by or customized by the phone’s OEM: the customized version of Android, the manufacturer’s pre-installed apps, etc. (Edit: what I'm asking here is whether the OS needs to be kept up to date to protect against web-based exploits, or is that accomplished solely by keeping the web browser up-to-date, whatever web browser it is).
3. I have read that OEMs are often slow to update their devices, and because of that I have limited myself to only looking at Nexus devices and Google Play Edition devices. But I really need to know if I SHOULD limit myself to Nexus and GPE devices for the sake of web security. (Again, I'm interested in technical details.) I don't want to buy a phone from a manufacturer that takes months to release security updates, leaving me vulnerable to web browser exploits and malware in the interim. But if I am wrong about ANY of this, please tell me so, because I would like to be able to consider devices that run manufacturer-customized versions of Android, such as the Touchwiz version of the S4 or the Note II (or maybe the future Note III).
(Edit: the answer to question #3 would depend on the answer to question #2; if the answer to #2 is ‘no, the underlying OS does not need to be kept up-to-date to protect you from web browser exploits’, then I guess the answer to #3 would be that I can consider buying a device that runs a manufacturer-customized version of Android that won’t receive OS updates as quickly as a Nexus does. If, on the other hand, the answer to #2 is ‘yes, to protect yourself from web browser exploits you need to keep both your browser AND your OS up-to-date’, then I guess for maximum web security I’d need to buy either a Nexus or a Google Play Edition device.)
4. I’ve read that in-app advertising can be a security risk. I’m really hoping that someone here will explain this to me. (Edit: again, I'm interested in the technical details, but keep in mind that I'm new when it comes to smartphones.)
I’d like to add a few comments:
1. I will only get my apps from the official app store--Google Play--or maybe Amazon.com’s Appstore for Android.
2. I'm concerned about web security and in-app advertising.
3. I don't plan on rooting my phone. I'm not saying I won't, I'm just saying that I don't plan on it.
1. Only nexus devices are updated directly by google. Even htc one Google edition will be updated by htc, so as the browser since it's a part of the software.
2. Manufacture updates are slower than Google. Most of the good apps available should receive updates and solve security issues.
3. If you want to disable advertising then use adaway, notice that you will need root.
1. The stock browser I believe does get updated when the OS is updated. I've read about people getting OS updates to find the stock browser is then faultering and assume this then gets updated. The update of the OS is usually done by the device manufacturer unless you are using a custom rom. Whomever creates the rom used on the device, is responsible for the internal updates for it, to whatever level they wish to support it. I have read that google don't mainstream care about the stock browser as they are pushing Chrome for the win and a separate team deals with the stock browser.
2. The world and his hedgehog are not safe from hack exploits. The quality of protection out there in any sense is mirrored by the quality of hacker. If you have a crap security level, any old hacker can exploit it. If you have the worlds most renowned secure, then the best hackers will break in at some stage while the wannabe hackers struggle to threaten their way out of a paper bag. However with some people, they need gold bullion and jail style security while others wonder why they need it. People can recommend you do this or do that, and some recs are excellent while others are not quite but almost hilarious but at the end of the day, if a child can hack into high security places, our devices are not so hard to get into. That said... we can run paranoid while there may be no threat at all. If you are concerned, just be careful of what you do with your device. Myself, I use it for every day communication and have not yet used a credit card on it with no real need to.
3. Even the greatest have not updated their OS. The Motorola Xoom promised one from purchase yet people were moaning long after the stock sold out that it never came. Granted it surely must be true that certain companies are quicker to advocate update releases than others. But the higher paying vs the cheap low end thing isn't something to run with either. I have a very cheap quad core tablet and that has just had a firmware update from last week and as far as I can see, it's an almost brand new device, market wise so it seems the update from them was fluid. Again, that said, the updates seem to be more about the OS running well, with the hardware and app capabilities than security although I dare say there are some inevitable security fixes in there too. My quad tablet was sluggish to some extent and a bit crashy but so far, it is fine after the update although I have only done it a few hours ago... everything me and the kids have tried, has either worked better of been flawless. No sign of lag yet anyway.
4. In-app advertising can be dangerous for a few reasons i guess. but the reality again, is I think any file can have dangerous code attached and configured in a way that the OS or security cannot smell it. Of course there is the ability of spam links to scam sites. There is also false flag things that are or maybe are possible too. For example, using x file with y file and requesting a cup of tea from z file can make a security team think your couch is about to disappear and your granny is about land bump on the floor, when indeed an app just wanted to execute a command using an ancient method of pressing Q. This is something I learned in windows based operating systems where using certain dll files with certain other files can trigger an alarm, as innocent as the intentions were. I built a website not so long ago and called some iFrames in that had no < head > or < body > tags. the pages worked perfectly but some chinese company employed to protect a british isp flagged the site as a security risk and blocked any visitors from viewing it. Thankfully, long gone are the days that visiting a website would fry your motherboard.
On your remaining comments.. seems like wise advice as of course there are scammers out there who will give your granny that bumpy ride off the disappearing couch onto the floor or steal your account and all those types of greed based madness which is a shame because it ruins the experience of say if a friend is trying to build an app and they ask you to give it a go, you are somewhat rightfully not willing to play ball.
FYI I have been around computers for a long time but am by no stretch of the imagination an android expert at all. I hope what I have wrote above is helpful and not by any means, wrong. I have not long posed the question about rooting and security as I do not qualify understanding the realm at all. I dare say it is a huge question, to some extent.
Also, security risk aside as no smartphone tablet or computer escapes that realm, Android for me is the best device, then IPhone, then Windows Phones, then Crapberry. I would never purchase the latter three.
Hi codQuore,
Thank you for your responses to my questions. I need to clarify two of my questions in my original post. (I have edited my original post to include these clarifications.) In question #2, I was attempting to ask whether the OS needs to be kept up to date to protect against web-based exploits, or is that accomplished solely by keeping the web browser up-to-date (whatever web browser it is). In question #3 I asked whether I should only look at Nexus and Google Play Edition devices for the sake of web security, and the answer to that would depend on the answer to question #2; if the answer to #2 is ‘no, the underlying OS does not need to be kept up-to-date to protect you from web browser exploits’, then I guess the answer to #3 would be that I can consider buying a device that runs a manufacturer-customized version of Android that won’t receive OS updates as quickly as a Nexus does. If, on the other hand, the answer to #2 is ‘yes, to protect yourself from web browser exploits you need to keep both your browser AND your OS up-to-date’, then I guess for maximum web security I’d need to buy either a Nexus or a Google Play Edition device.
What are your answers to those two questions?
Truth_Seeker1 said:
What are your answers to those two questions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At a guess I would say, for browsers that are built in to the OS, there will be two ways this can update, via the OS update and independently. The OS update would be a total OS replacement that is not automated and you would need to use a built in checking feature (if available) or manually check yourself periodically. Browsers that you add yourself will be offered updates from notification unless the ability to auto update is allowed then it should happen seamlessly of course letting you know. Google "android chrome update" to see something along the lines of what the update history shows.
Yes, you would want to update but I would recommend having a read first as on any computer device, an update can be flawed or give more problems than it's worth. Although more often than not, an update should be an improvement on performance and stability and of course for security.
If you are working blind, then do an update and assume security improvements are happening and go for it. If not, then you will know what is happening. I have never gone to the lengths of checking an update list before updating for android, but with pcs I do depending on what is updating, check what the update is worth and how people are getting on with the update. I did beta testing for years (hence the knowledge of flawed updates and reluctance to do the updates) so for me it's one of those do you risk it scenarios.
Sadly as I said above, we are never safe from hacks but with some hindsight and genuine attempt to protect, we are safe from the majority. For me it's 90% "what are you worried about?" and 10% "I don't blame you for being paranoid!"
As for the preference of buying google branded devices, the foundation of an android release is surely never set for these devices "out of the box" so to speak. I would assume that the team who look after these devices have the same process of having to streamline the OS thereafter before they can release it for their device update. This is somewhat proven by people wanting to put a custom rom on their Nexus and such. For some reason, people aren't happy with the normal rom and want or need to replace it. naturally, it is easy to think a nexus device for example, is closer to home and should by rights get updated a bit quicker than my Ampe tablet but in some respects I think this could be a bit of swings and roundabouts, again depending on the company and their apportioned team force to output the update. Yes you should be better off with a more directly linked device, to google but in my opinion, the concern is not a great one. You would be better off thinking about your budget, what you can save and ultimately do with the extra cash alongside the knowledge of which devices and companies actually do spend an effort on looking after them.
I'm in no position to afford these devices and if I were, I would rather throw my money in the bin (or spend it on my loved ones) than give it to the highest bidder.
So in the end, yes updates are 99/100 important and should be done. Be careful of what you browse and do all secure data passing before you go out on the internet highway and risk getting robbed. It is probably safer to "remember my password" to avoid future keysniffers than worry about indepth data mining. Of course, anyone can give you a sniffer but data mining is more clinical, I would say.
Finally, i wouldn't worry about these things too much but as concerned as you are, do some research. But do remember that in one hand, the UK government said "the internet isn't safe so we don't use it" yet on the other, the majority of secure usage is 'watched' by paid professionals for banking and such and is alot safer than you may think aswell as protection for credit card fraud and such.
Thanks again codQuore. I understand your point that there is no such thing as 100% bullet-proof security, but I still need to know whether both the OS and the browser need to be kept up-to-date to protect against web-based exploits, or is that accomplished solely by keeping the web browser up-to-date (whatever web browser it is).
You are most welcome, TS. I would say generally yes, to both, to be on the safe side. I'd like to guarantee the OS update will update the browser if it has been updated in the update and that the browser can be updated on it's own. However, I think I am right in saying you have to check for OS updates yourself and the same for certain apps whilst some apps will auto offer the update. You may be able to force this auto update for all apps, but how this is done per different version of android, escapes me. I do remember seeing the option come up after a factory reset or buying a new device and running the first time setup of playstore and such. There's an option for it somewhere. but I don't think the OS itself offers an auto update, it has to be checked for, in my experience. I have just done my tablet and it required installing some software on my pc from the tablet manufacturer and getting that to update the firmware/os. It was a 525MB download and everything was in chinese lol. I managed it with the help of google translate but it also helped that I had previously done the same thing on a t-mobile vivacity for my daughter after her OS died and got stuck at the rotating t-mobile logo on first boot.
It is essential to update but across the board it's not majorly important to check every minute, so to speak. You'll be fine. For the record though, my quad core tablet cost £70 from singapore and I knew I was taking a bit of a gamble but was protected by returns if all went wrong and get my money back. A similar tablet is something like £120. I plan on doing the same thing for my next phone upgrade too... but I don't have a contract phone running, I am on pay as you go and all I use is internet, no calls. Incidentally, I pay £20 for 6months net from t-mobile and the only limit is 1gb per month on video. when that expires, youtube and such stops working, some video sites carry on and everything else, FB mail, tethering, ftp via pc and stuff, all still works. I have even streamed radio from my android phone, flawlessly.
codQuore said:
I'd like to guarantee the OS update will update the browser if it has been updated in the update and that the browser can be updated on it's own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, I had to read that sentence several times in order to process it because you used the word "update" so many times :laugh:
If I remember what you said earlier, I think you said that the stock browser doesn't get updated on its own, but only as part of big OS updates? So it won't receive security patches as vulnerabilities are discovered, and won't be updated until the next version of Android arrives?
If this is true, then I'll use a different browser. But even if I use a different browser, is code from the stock browser used in other things, meaning that it is STILL a security risk if it isn't kept up-to-date?
It also occurred to me that if an OEM is slow to release OS updates for its phones, will it be just as bad at keeping its pre-installed apps up-to-date, and if so, does that pose a security risk.
Haha, looking back I can't believe I wrote that and am wondering if its a valid statement. I'll leave it for someone else to contradict lmao.
The core of the os and apps that run built are updated I guess separately and together. EG, say the browser gets an update to 1.1 the next update of the OS will most likely carry that updated version but if it doesn't it should still offer an update after you hit the playstore setup. naturally, these apps use core parts of the OS and i think some updates for apps will carry their own additional bypass of outdated os core, where applicable. That said, the bypass could be more secure in one sense and less secure in another. I'm guessing this is even possible. One thing I am yet to see, knowing how windows and linux works a little, is android have to update x- because something app wise has been installed that requires it. Alot of software on windows, requires things like framework to be added, linux is or can be the same.
The chances are you will be 99% secure in any event. The core defence for mobile phones is the phone companies themselves as that is in the realms of trillions of dollars at risk. They've been cracked before and they know it, so there is some possible reassurance for the devices, from that angle.
What Android needs to do in order to control/remove the fragmentation, is have it MANDATORY that all handsets run VANILLA ANDROID as the base, BUT allow system overlays (Samsung/Moto/HTC/LG etc.) to be installed as SYSTEM APPS or perhaps even user apps.
With this in place, the code would not have to be modified heavily by individual manufactures prior to reaching each handset, each update could in fact roll-out DIRECTLY from GOOGLE to the phone and THEN the manufactures can update their system apps via another route or perhaps have a "system app update section" available through the Play Store.
The major change currently being integrated into Android on KitKat+ to reduce fragmentation is the moving of as much of the Android content to Apps on the Play Store anyway, so that handsets running older versions of Android can still have access to the new UI with up-to-date apps.
Apply this SAME technique to the Overlays produced by each manufacture and almost every handset could be on a Vanilla Android Base, with system/user apps over top.
Is fragmentation all that bad?
Its really just another word to describe the diversity in the android ecosystem. This freedom of diversity leads to innovation.
Lack of updates and unfixed bugs? I wouldn't call that diversity. Many Android users never get to experience Android at its best because they choose a 3rd party handset and get stuck back in time. This is a major major flaw IMO.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
A few weeks ago, I posted a very unfortunate Google+ post of the creator of Focal and why it was removed from the CM codebase. It was a depressing story and it really started to make you wonder about where CM is going.
This time, after reading an extremely well-written article, I've come to a similarly depressing conclusion: Android by Google is slowly becoming as locked down as iOS, but not in the sense that you think; it's not about what apps let you do what, it's the developers.
We've finally arrived at a critical flaw with the way Android is developed and these days, I can no longer claim that Android (by Google) is "open" anymore.
Feel free to give this a read (Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Ars Technica in any way).
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...ntrolling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/
It's not just about Amazon's version of Android; CyanogenMod is for all intents and purposes a "fork" of Android. It is designed to work without Google Apps and as we all know, we flash those seperately. But that's the problem, the answer isn't just "Well, I'll just flash the Gapps and it will work like it should". What will happen if new Play Store apps start referring to features in the framework that don't exist in a form that we can flash? What if the license to flash the Gapps gets revoked?
How will CyanogenMod start adding features to apps that were originally AOSP but are now closed source? What will happen when the open source Messaging app is abandoned and turns into a Hangouts feature? How can CM stay on top of that?
It's not as simple as "take the source we currently have and work with it", because what will happen when Google adds a killer feature to an app that depends on some API that is no longer open source?
These are some rather frightening questions to deal with. I don't know where Android is going, but I'm certainly starting to wonder what's going to happen to it.
I'd appreciate any and all input on this.
Not very continuous, but here's my thoughts about the article:
The Gapps license is meant to lock the makers of Android phones into Google, so users get locked within Google and Google can gain revenue from the users. After going to that extent to make sure Google gets to keep the device's user, what's to gain if Google users of the device who flash CM to be locked out of the system instead of keeping them "trapped" with the Google ecosystem even with a non Google ROM? Doesn't make any sense does it?
I suppose we will still have to flash them like we flash the Play Store now. Unlike Amazon, CM (for now) actually still relies on Google and doesn't "divert" revenue to another company and therefore Google would be more than happy to let their apps be used. But if CM does start going the Amazon way, I believe Google may lock CM out.
Those APIs take time to develop, take the Maps API for example - you think they spent millions, if not billions mapping the entire world and even roaming every street just to make sure you can find your way around for free? They'll need to recoup their costs somehow.
While Android is open source and contributed by Google for free, don't forget Google is a company, not a charity. They have to make money or their shareholders won't be happy. Even if their shareholders are massive fans of open source they also have thousands of employees to pay, and all that costs money. And don't forget, when a company is providing free stuff for you to use, you are not their customer - you are their product. Android will change in ways that will keep Google profitable and keep competitiors unprofitable, while keeping the users as comfortable as possible so they will continue to be their product.
cccy said:
Not very continuous, but here's my thoughts about the article:
The Gapps license is meant to lock the makers of Android phones into Google, so users get locked within Google and Google can gain revenue from the users. After going to that extent to make sure Google gets to keep the device's user, what's to gain if Google users of the device who flash CM to be locked out of the system instead of keeping them "trapped" with the Google ecosystem even with a non Google ROM? Doesn't make any sense does it?
I suppose we will still have to flash them like we flash the Play Store now. Unlike Amazon, CM (for now) actually still relies on Google and doesn't "divert" revenue to another company and therefore Google would be more than happy to let their apps be used. But if CM does start going the Amazon way, I believe Google may lock CM out.
Those APIs take time to develop, take the Maps API for example - you think they spent millions, if not billions mapping the entire world and even roaming every street just to make sure you can find your way around for free? They'll need to recoup their costs somehow.
While Android is open source and contributed by Google for free, don't forget Google is a company, not a charity. They have to make money or their shareholders won't be happy. Even if their shareholders are massive fans of open source they also have thousands of employees to pay, and all that costs money. And don't forget, when a company is providing free stuff for you to use, you are not their customer - you are their product. Android will change in ways that will keep Google profitable and keep competitiors unprofitable, while keeping the users as comfortable as possible so they will continue to be their product.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First, I appreciate the input! I was looking forward to intelligent discussion and it's great that the first reply is just that.
I would like to clarify though; my concern is not so much about Google making money; they are a business and deserve to make money in whatever way they see fit. We have something they want (ad clicks and search history) and as long as they provide an experience worth using, I don't mind that transaction at all.
My worries start with what the custom development scene will look like one or two years from now if the base apps that make Android useful on its own (and by extension, useful to custom developers) have been molded into Google Play apps or frameworks or APIs.
In parallel, it's also starting to make sense why Cyanogen continues to put effort into alternate applications such as Apollo and Focal; they saw this coming way before we did.
LiquidSolstice said:
First, I appreciate the input! I was looking forward to intelligent discussion and it's great that the first reply is just that.
I would like to clarify though; my concern is not so much about Google making money; they are a business and deserve to make money in whatever way they see fit. We have something they want (ad clicks and search history) and as long as they provide an experience worth using, I don't mind that transaction at all.
My worries start with what the custom development scene will look like one or two years from now if the base apps that make Android useful on its own (and by extension, useful to custom developers) have been molded into Google Play apps or frameworks or APIs.
In parallel, it's also starting to make sense why Cyanogen continues to put effort into alternate applications such as Apollo and Focal; they saw this coming way before we did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the custom development scene wouldn't get affected much. After all, remember the old XDA-Developers? Windows was all locked down, but the cooks still managed to make customized ROMs. What's more, Google wouldn't want to lose their "products" - Google wants us to continue to use their services so they can earn money, they wouldn't lock us out.
What competitors lack is the capability to access Google's services (Frameworks, APIs, etc) as Google has ways to block them (Which is why we had circumvents like device spoofing). If you had a device designed for Google's version of Android, I am sure Google would still enable access if you use a custom ROM. The point of locking those competitors out is to force them to embrace Google's version of Android and not use their own forks which would keep Google out of certain aspects of the user's phone, decreasing revenue. Therefore, if you could roll your own custom ROM, it makes sense for Google to continue supporting you so you still completely rely on them instead of "outsourcing" to other competitors.
CM puts effort into alternate applications because as you can see right now, CM's starting to roll their own commercial forked devices - what happens after that? If you have seen the ways of other commercial versions of Android (Amazon, China brands, etc), they start replacing certain revenue generating aspects of the phone to use their own service instead of Google's. Certainly not what Google wants.
In short, I would say, if you are a small custom ROM user, Google isn't going to come after you, they want you to use their services! But if you are a competing company, expect your devices to be locked out from Google in the hopes that they eventually force you to bow to them and convert all your users completely to Google's "products".