Related
Before we start, it may appear Motorola and Samsung will be the only ones who will have a Honeycomb product until at least May/June. The reasons being:-
1. Honeycomb supply to manufacturers have been delayed until May/June. I dont know exactly what this means except that the manufacturers I work with cannot get access to Honeycomb for their products (but it may be related to the next rumor).
2. Honeycomb wont be open sourced and a major manufacturer is working with Google on trying to secure licensing.
Sorry I cant be more specific than this. The second rumor contradicts everything Google has done so far, but if I mention the manufacturer involved, it lends weight to the rumor.
Does anyone else have any further information to collaborate/debunk these rumors?
EDIT: When I say Honeycomb wont be open sourced, I meant Google plans to close source it and Honeycomb will require a license.
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ couldn't put it better myself.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
There is a reason why this is a new account, if it isnt obvious to you.
I am not asking for speculative opinions, I am wondering if there is anyone else in the industry hearing either of these rumors.
Atleast give some sources?
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
Sorry, the market for real Honeycomb products is actually very small at the moment so any hints will reveal too much. Please, if anyone else has heard anything just PM me.
Small huh? There are plenty of devices coming out quite soon. Acer's Iconia Tab A500, for example, has just had its FCC approval granted and will be out mid-April. That's running Honeycomb, so kinda slaps your "rumours" in the chops about it not being available until June.
FloatingFatMan said:
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
foxmeister said:
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they've already released it under open license.
FloatingFatMan said:
Because they've already released it under open license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest release of Android released under the Apache Software Licence is Gingerbread - that can't be taken back.
However, anything built on top of that source can be closed source if the developer so wishes, and that includes Honeycomb!
I still expect Google to release Honeycomb under the ASL, but the point it - *they don't have to!*.
Regards,
Dave
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
tolis626 said:
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I absolutely agree with you - I cannot fathom any reason for Google to make Honeycomb close source. This rumor (#2) is from a bigger company than the company that provided the first rumor.
Interesting news ! Thanks for the share !
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
[...]
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as the troll who claimed Samsung were trying to charge networks for software updates yet everyone was willing to believe that...
I'm not arguing that this looks and smells like trolling, merely attempting to highlight that plenty of people round here seem to be quite happy to 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story'.
Sorry to double-post but Engadget has an article on the matter.
Here's a quote from Google:
Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization. While we're excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones. Until then, we've decided not to release Honeycomb to open source. We're committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it's ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Step666 said:
Sorry to double-post but
Here's a quote from Google:
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure whether my post occurred before the Engadget article or not, but this article certainly validates rumor #1. It would be interesting to see how this affects manufacturers who have announced Honeycomb products (one poster mentioned Acer earlier). I know some are launching Gingerbread instead, which isnt ideal.
While the link between the two rumors is subject to interpretation, the two rumors were taken from different sources. The second rumor is less believable (even to me) however, the source is from a significantly larger company.
No, it doesn't validate rumour number one.
You claimed that manufacturers are unable to get a copy of Honeycomb - there's a big difference between Google publicly releasing the source code and passing copies of it to manufacturers.
Do you really think that when Google released Froyo's or GIngerbread's source code that that was the first time HTC, Samsung etc had seen it?
I really don't.
Also, as has been pointed out already, the fact that there are Honeycomb devices coming from a range of manufacturers goes some way to disproving your point.
As for the believability of your rumours, unless you can back them up with any sort of proof, I don't see any reason to believe either of them.
Well the op might be on to something at least. I'm not buying that top tier manufacturers won't be able to get the code as LG and Acer among others are going to be releasing tablets with honeycomb in the coming weeks.
http://www.androidcentral.com/google-not-open-sourcing-honeycomb-says-bloomberg
Thank you so much for this article - this is another source verifying the difficulty of manufacturers getting honeycomb source code. There is no doubt the Tier 1 companies will get preferential access to the code - the question is, who is seen as Tier 1 by Google.
Perhaps in regards to licensing, this may be just a legal formality for companies to get access to Honeycomb at the moment, and it is unclear whether these licenses will cost anything.
Thank you again, this has been a great help. This is a third party source we can use to explain to our clients why we cannot launch honeycomb at the date we promised.
I am glad Google isn't releasing the code so cheap companies can't just stick Honeycomb on crap devices and make it look bad.
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2037393/google-delays-android-smartphone-makers
Bummer.
Your a bit late buddy
Maybe its not the same new, as this one seem to said that gg is DELAY it to refind the code for orther device, not like the 1st new as gg will not release the code to dev
g0t0 said:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2037393/google-delays-android-smartphone-makers
Bummer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not 100% true. I just read it from another Android forum (androidtablets.net)
Quote:
Google has decided to delay the release of the Honeycomb source-code to the general public for now. If you are a member of the Open Handset Alliance you can get access to 3.0. Also, other manufacturers are able to get access to the source-code upon request, but only for use on tablets. Ultimately, Google wants to avoid contaminating Android's marketing image because some low-end device makers forced out buggy "Honeycomb phones". Here's what Andy Rubin, CEO of Google had to say on the matter
Tablet makers can still request the source code but must be used for tablets only. it is making sense to me. The response does sound fair to me.. I hope that it is really what Google plans to do..
SO Viewsonic Could Get accses to 3.0 if they ask for it even if they are not apart of the OHA then?
Viewsonic PLEASE ASK!!!!!!!
I think this is good news:
Google's statement continued to say that it will publish the source "as soon as it's ready".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But i thought ice cream was the one to merge honeycomb and gingerbread; not honeycomb itself.
So do we need to take up a collection to get this thing started or do I need to call google and pretend I'm mr Viewsonic.
Just saw this on the net, and if true, pretty much kills any chance of seeing honeycomb from viewsonic
http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/0...-partners-with-lg-to-launch-new-nexus-tablet/
"Also included in Murtazin’s report was the suggestion that Google will not allow tablets running Android 2.x to receive a Honeycomb upgrade in the future. Apparently, if a hardware partner releases a tablet on an older version of Android, the Honeycomb licensing agreement will not allow them to be updated.
If the rumour is true, owners of the 7-inch Samsung Galaxy Tab, HTC Scribe and numerous other tablets will be locked to their current firmware, at best receiving an update to Froyo or Gingerbread."
lordgodgeneral said:
"Also included in Murtazin’s report was the suggestion that Google will not allow tablets running Android 2.x to receive a Honeycomb upgrade in the future. Apparently, if a hardware partner releases a tablet on an older version of Android, the Honeycomb licensing agreement will not allow them to be updated.
."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google is punishing vendors who didn't follow their orders.....just because they can. There is no other logical explaination....especially when 1. it's a tablet, 2. it has proper hardware to support honeycomb.
http://androidcommunity.com/google-blocking-android-2-x-to-3-0-updates-for-tablets-20110328/
Just read the above article, wanted to see what other people thought about it. It seems like kind of a kick-in-the-balls plan from google, but then again, I'm not really worried about the G-tab getting an official 3.0 release. Since were using most of the base hardware that 3.0 was designed around, I'm sure someone will get a port eventually, it would just be nice to get a bit more support from the big G.
Well there's always ice cream comb
Ok. Google taking the right steps to be a real threat for mac.
I thought we prefered android because of its differences from mac and not their similarities.
Et tu, Goggle?
And 10.000 Gtabs has been sold at a very big discount one day before this new is made public. Business is business
BR
well this news has a huge suck factor.
Keep in mind that this "news" is just an unsubstantiated rumor. Nothing to see here. Move along.
jsrF1 said:
Keep in mind that this "news" is just an unsubstantiated rumor. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope it stays unsubstantiated. Otherwise, ginormous suck factor.
As much as I love the honeycomb UI, there is really nothing wrong with 2.2 and 2.3. In fact, to make myself feel better, I just think of honeycomb as android with additional bloatware...which I'm sure is true to a point.
TheFlyingPig said:
As much as I love the honeycomb UI, there is really nothing wrong with 2.2 and 2.3. In fact, to make myself feel better, I just think of honeycomb as android with additional bloatware...which I'm sure is true to a point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care for the UI too but I do care about the Honeycomb optimized apps. This is really the only reason why I wanted Honeycomb.
This is not surprising.
On ZDNET (slash) blog (slash) google (slash) google-android-30-honeycomb-open-source-no-more (slash) 2845
They had to take a lot of shortcuts and strip things down for XOOM to meet the deadline. Just wait for 3.1 when they Open Source it again.
xmr405o said:
I don't care for the UI too but I do care about the Honeycomb optimized apps. This is really the only reason why I wanted Honeycomb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here -- it's a waste to not use that increased resolution and screen size on tablet-optimized apps.
beebop483 said:
http://androidcommunity.com/google-blocking-android-2-x-to-3-0-updates-for-tablets-20110328/
Just read the above article, wanted to see what other people thought about it. It seems like kind of a kick-in-the-balls plan from google, but then again, I'm not really worried about the G-tab getting an official 3.0 release. Since were using most of the base hardware that 3.0 was designed around, I'm sure someone will get a port eventually, it would just be nice to get a bit more support from the big G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are delaying because the source code isn't ready it will remain open source and available to all devices. Google made that statement 3 days ago. Would post the article but I am on gtab. Either it was on market watch, wall street journal, new York times, eweek, infoworld of another site I frequent.
It is however old news.
I put a post in the one of the threads about the release delay on honeycomb. Google partnered up with LG for doing a Nexus Tablet (supposed to out ~July) and Google will not release honeycomb source till after the release of the Nexus Tab, (~Aug)
Also it mentioned that something about the licensing agreement needed for using 3.x that it cannot be put on a device running 2.x.
lol, like many ppl here are actually waiting for an "official" version.
lordgodgeneral said:
I put a post in the one of the threads about the release delay on honeycomb. Google partnered up with LG for doing a Nexus Tablet (supposed to out ~July) and Google will not release honeycomb source till after the release of the Nexus Tab, (~Aug)
Also it mentioned that something about the licensing agreement needed for using 3.x that it cannot be put on a device running 2.x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And would you mind sharing the source of these stated facts, or are you merely speculating?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=12457747&postcount=8
Here's the link to my response in the other honeycomb thread.
Here's the link to the actual article
http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/0...-partners-with-lg-to-launch-new-nexus-tablet/
Also anyone should know that until there is an official announcement anything being discussed is speculation, so get off your high horse.
I read that as Google not allowing manufacturers to upgrade 2.x tablets, not they the would not release it to the community until after the Nexus tablet launch.
Also included in Murtazin’s report was the suggestion that Google will not allow tablets running Android 2.x to receive a Honeycomb upgrade in the future. Apparently, if a hardware partner releases a tablet on an older version of Android, the Honeycomb licensing agreement will not allow them to be updated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this seems to be the Google official position about HC:
Google has decided to delay the release of the Honeycomb source-code to the general public for now. If you are a member of the Open Handset Alliance you can get access to 3.0. Also, other manufacturers are able to get access to the source-code upon request, but only for use on tablets. Ultimately, Google wants to avoid contaminating Android's marketing image because some low-end device makers forced out buggy "Honeycomb phones". Here's what Andy Rubin, CEO of Google had to say on the matter,
Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization…We didn’t want to think about what it would take for the same software to run on phones. It would have required a lot of additional resources and extended our schedule beyond what we thought was reasonable. So we took a shortcut. While we’re excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones… Until then, we’ve decided not to release Honeycomb to open source.
Before anyone could cry foul and compare Google to Apple, Mr. Rubin added,
"[Google is] committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it’s ready."
It is probably a bit nerve racking for developers and enthusiasts that Google has taken this step. It's easy to jump to the conclusion that they intend to begin "locking down" the product, but one could also look at it from the standpoint that Google is serious about protecting 'Andy' from being "dumbed-down" too much. Also, this fine-tuning process will help them nail-down extra security measures to help reduce malware issues in the future. What do you guys think? Is this a signal of sad times for Android, or just smart business strategy?
Source: AndroidTablets.net via AndroidPolice
Its simple really- for any android tablet to compete with the ipad it needs to be semi bulletproof as far as stability goes and quality of UI etc. This is the only way google is going to be able achieve this. They will release it. When they choose is going to be carefully timed.
Check it out, launching soon. - http://www.htcdev.com/
First they say they will keep future phones bootloaders unlocked, and now this. HTC is truly listening to their customers
Looks very promising
I think they just realized the benefits of having a volunteer labor force aggressively developing custom Sense ROMs for their machines. If they follow through, their sales will get a big boost.
DInc with CyanogenMod 6.1 & Invisiblek #28 kernel.
Holy cow. Very impressive. Good on htc
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Definitely two thumbs up for HTC! Maybe they see how knowledgeable the people of the community are and seem to solve our own problems before they do. They are definitely going to the best route to the top though!
-Dubsky
Sent from my secret shoe phone.
Awesome
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Thumbs up!
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Sweet deal HTC!
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA Premium App
kinda like to hear what the devs have say on the subject,have any of them checked it out,are they gonna have free hand,i would say they will guidelines to follow,maybe in the future we get a certified bamf rom that screams and htc gets a whole lotta new customers
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA Premium App
It seems like everyone's excitement stems from the assumption that this means HTC is somehow making it easier to modify and/or remove the Sense overlay from their android releases.
Perhaps I'm interpreting incorrectly, but to me it instead reads like HTC is "opening up sense" to try and capture developers into coding something that would only run on their own devices.
IE, the net result being that sense will still be inextricably intertwined into their android forks AND will seep it's way into some apps programmed by independent devs, thus further fragmenting the android ecosystem.
What's everyone so happy about?
Edit: In other words, everyone seems to believe that HTC is inviting talented outside developers to help debug their official rom when what they're really doing is keeping that development to themselves and instead trying to get sense's bloated look & feel incorporated into third-party apps as well.
ehr1 said:
It seems like everyone's excitement stems from the assumption that this means HTC is somehow making it easier to modify and/or remove the Sense overlay from their android releases.
Perhaps I'm interpreting incorrectly, but to me it instead reads like HTC is "opening up sense" to try and capture developers into coding something that would only run on their own devices.
IE, the net result being that sense will still be inextricably intertwined into their android forks AND will seep it's way into some apps programmed by independent devs, thus further fragmenting the android ecosystem.
What's everyone so happy about?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking that could be the case as well. But I really don't think it will be the case.
HTC has no intentions of dumping sense and any development they encourage wont be directly towards AOSP development, just sense. Though perhaps some good will come out of it *if* they are nice enough to cough up the source to the sense modifications they made and to the android libraries they modified (since they currently give neither). Our luck, they'll just release some sort of development kit/api and keep things closed still. It's pretty clear though that after realizing how popular CM and Miui are (there was a big front page article on wired just the other week about it) they want to try to "catch the wave" as well. Whether they do it right or screw it up by listening to their corporate MBAs/marketing types instead of their in-house engineers (no dis on those that happen to be in those fields, but when i want advice on how to run a business, I'll ask [just stay away from telling me how to code ]). Tech companies that are successful are founded by and listen to their engineers (Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Facebook).
However, those that like sense, were most likely sense developers/hackers/modders to begin with. The divisions between those that like the third party frameworks/launchers on phones and thsoe that like vanilla are pretty clear lines. I don't foresee any significant brain drain happening from other non-sense projects really.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/03/...-and-htcdev-offers-paradise-inside-i/?m=false
Htc will never open source sense. They are, in fact, going the opposite direction.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Hmmm... At first I was happy, but after thinking about it. I'm not sure if it means that they are giving devs access to their sense code. Now that I read the article it just seems they are providing an SDK so devs can develop for sense. IMO it's kinda redundant... Can't they use the market somehow? I think it could be interesting, but a HTC Sense market and an Amazon market (even though I like their free apps lol) isn't really doing much to make the Android Market any better.
JonKyu said:
Hmmm... At first I was happy, but after thinking about it. I'm not sure if it means that they are giving devs access to their sense code. Now that I read the article it just seems they are providing an SDK so devs can develop for sense. IMO it's kinda redundant... Can't they use the market somehow? I think it could be interesting, but a HTC Sense market and an Amazon market (even though I like their free apps lol) isn't really doing much to make the Android Market any better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sdk would just replace most of the needed hacking people do for themes and other non kernel related modding on sense that you see in the forums (or at least provide an alternative).
Wow! This is pretty awesome. I just hope there isn't too much red tape and restrictions.
Why develop just for HTC phones when you can target all of android? I guess the access to 3D APIs etc could be nice but I see nothing good that can come from making HTC Sense 3.0 apps instead of Android apps.
Braggo said:
Why develop just for HTC phones when you can target all of android? I guess the access to 3D APIs etc could be nice but I see nothing good that can come from making HTC Sense 3.0 apps instead of Android apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because HTC is doing it, and Sense is their product, they want to further push their products. If they make it for all android devices then Motorola, Samsung, & others could use it too. Which means HTC would be putting money into developing apps and the such for competiting companies, not a smart business move.
g00s3y said:
Because HTC is doing it, and Sense is their product, they want to further push their products. If they make it for all android devices then Motorola, Samsung, & others could use it too. Which means HTC would be putting money into developing apps and the such for competiting companies, not a smart business move.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely understand why HTC is doing it. I'm just not sure why developers would want to restrict their applications to HTC phones.
Well I say whatever comes out of this is still fine. If it seems HTC is plotting something evil or their is too much red tape than developers can choose whether they're into that or not. Worse case scenario is that it is unproductive. Then we keep coming to xda for our fixes, updates, and leaks. I say good job HTC and I hope other manufacturers follow suit.
I made this thread so people can discuss the addition to HCTLinkify and how it affects you and why it came into existance.
Background:
Apple has a patent on the way Sense (possibly Android 4.0) handles links on screen and how the user interacts with the touch input. Instead of trying to expalin the whole patent dispute I will let you read more HERE
The patent in question is HERE
This is also the reason the delayed Shipping of the HTC One X and the Evo 4G LTE.
Current situation:
HTC has circumvented the patent dispute with the use of HTCLiunkify which simply changes the way it handles the onscreen links. This has caused concern for some users because they feel functionality has been degraded. This is debateble.
My delimna:
Some, handfull of users, are asking me to remove this work around from my ROM and violate apples patended "link" technoilogy. I state that if HTC and Google, Sprint and ATT can be sued so cant I. Maybe this is an unreliatic fear but none the less quite possible.
My Answer: Im not removing at this time but may consider it in the future. ITs functioning the way HTC / ATT intended.
DISCUSS!
Talk about why Apple sucks or you feel this was a good ruling by the courts. Give me a valid reason to take this out of the ROM and risk Apple's wrath (Albiet prolly unrealistic).
More importantly tell me if it even affects you?
Edit...hope this stop discussion in ur thread....see its open again...
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
mykeldrip said:
Edit...hope this stop discussion in ur thread....see its open again...
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I didint want my thread to get embattled with the apple hatred / why wont you change this debate.
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.
The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??
Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.
Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?
Anyways, discuss
Is there a way to create a flashable mod to remove it so that the user takes responsibility and not the rom developer?
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Turge said:
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.
The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??
Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.
Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?
Anyways, discuss
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like your way of thinking
I hate the idea of keeping the htclinkify so keep up this way sounds good
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Turge said:
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.
The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??
Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.
Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?
Anyways, discuss
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good pioint... BUT...
My ROM is (phisicyally) hosted in the US and would therefore need to comply with all US Copright and Patenet laws.
And no... Im not going to buy a server outside of the country to circumvent this, lol
mrjaydee82 said:
I like your way of thinking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL.. anyone who knows me knows that I like to challenge things. When I'm told to do something, I do the opposite. (Well, within reason )
Aren't you technically breaking copyright by modifying HTC's software anyway?
Unless somewhere they state that their Sense stuff is free to modify. They provide the source so that people can work use that for open-source AOSP. Sense, I believe (I could be wrong) is NOT open source.
KitF said:
Aren't you technically breaking copyright by modifying HTC's software anyway?
Unless somewhere they state that their Sense stuff is free to modify. They provide the source so that people can work use that for open-source AOSP. Sense, I believe (I could be wrong) is NOT open source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not open source but HTC has differnt policies than Apple.
Ive never seen HTC Threaten to sue someoen.. Well once.. but that was because unreleased code was being released (IE LEaked ROMS for devices that were not even on the market yet). But other than that they given the "unofficial" greent light to making modifications to there product and distibute
We are called the "enthusiast community" and help sell there product. This is why HTC has created HTCDev.com. Specifically to unlock the pohones for the purpose of custom built ROMS / Mods, etc, no?
I am also part of HTC Elevate (elevate.htc.com <- Private boys club for HTC developers and vendors and HTC Staff to dicsuss HTC Products, give input, request changes to products) and will try to seek clarification. But HTC and Apple are two differnt animals all together.
If Apple opened up the bootloaders on iCrap devices I would agree with your point but honestly... Two differnt animals we are talking about.
Once the above issue occrued (releaseing unreleased code) HTC Made a statement at that time that it was ok to re-release the code as long as it was normally publicly available... IE Not Leaked code and definetlay not leaked for device that were not even on the market yet.
Search Google / XDA for this word "conflipper" You will understand then...
Also, I want to point out...
This is about Apple, not HTC. If HTC opens a lawsuit with me for making Custom ROMS then I am pretty sure all of XDA woudl be shut down, etc etc etc...
So lets not derail the Apple issue with HTC...
Its an Apple to Oranges comparison (Get it, Apple, gett it?)
scrosler said:
Its not open source but HTC has differnt policies than Apple.
Ive never seen HTC Threaten to sue someoen.. Well once.. but that was because unreleased code was being modified and released. But other htan that they give the "unofficial" greent light to making modifications to there product.
We are called the "enthusiast community" and help sell ther eproduct. This is why HTC has created HTCDev.com. Specifically to unlock the pohones for the purpose of custom built ROMS, no?
I am also part of HTC Elevate (elevate.htc.com <- Private boys club for HTC developers and vendors and cool users!) and will try to seek clarification. But HTC and apple are two differnt animals all together.
If Apple opened up the bootloaders on iCrap devices I would agree with your point but honestly... Tow differnt animals we are talking about.
Once the above issue occrued (releaseing unreleased code) HTC Made a statement at that time that it was ok to re-release the code as long as it was normally publicly available...
Search Google / XDA for this word "conflipper" You will understand then...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a little different, but I remember HTC asking the developers of Launcher Pro to remove their "HTC-like" flip clock from their launcher. I don't think they're bothered with all of the other flip clock developers since though since it might just have been a momentary lapse of judgement, or a rogue power-tripping HTC employee. Just wanted to point out that there is a little bit of history between HTC and developers.
Turge said:
It's a little different, but I remember HTC asking the developers of Launcher Pro to remove their "HTC-like" flip clock from their launcher. I don't think they're bothered with all of the other flip clock developers since though since it might just have been a momentary lapse of judgement, or a rogue power-tripping HTC employee. Just wanted to point out that there is a little bit of history between HTC and developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is a dieffernt case though... But once again... This is not about HTC suing anyone, its about Apple.
Lets keep the discussion on Apple being the douceh bags, not HTC.
Me and a friend were thinking. Say for example when you go buy your phone. You pay an extra 20 bucks for the apple tech. Just a thought. And yes I understand that it still is an imperfect plan but everybody wins. We as consumers get what we want and apple gets there money for there code.
Edit
Hey I don't like to support apple either. But this whole mess hurts everybody including apple. Apple looks like a big jackass for suing over something so stupid and all the rest of the cellphone makers have to scramble to fix this while all of their product sits in the ports.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Never ever support Crapple products.
Turge said:
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.
The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??
Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.
Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?
Anyways, discuss
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Completely agree. I would prefer the links just opening directly w/in the apps, even if I dont get the luxury of a prompt. the apps are far better - and intended - for viewing the content that many of these links are referring to. I dont want XDA, YouTube, Facebook, Groupon, etc. all opening up my browser and viewing what is often a 'desktop' site as directed by the link. If I want that, I can just copy/paste the link into my browser, but I'd nearly always prefer that a link automatically went directly into the associated app. i'd support pretty much any method available for getting a damn link to open in an app that I already have on my phone and, therefore, presumably would rather use over the web version of the site. I mean, why else would the user have apps? To me, this is a prime example of where patent laws have just gone too far.
Spankly said:
Me and a friend were thinking. Say for example when you go buy your phone. You pay an extra 20 bucks for the apple tech. Just a thought. And yes I understand that it still is an imperfect plan but everybody wins. We as consumers get what we want and apple gets there money for there code.
Edit
Hey I don't like to support apple either. But this whole mess hurts everybody including apple. Apple looks like a big jackass for suing over something so stupid and all the rest of the cellphone makers have to scramble to fix this while all of their product sits in the ports.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually this is a feasible busniess model! Did you know that Google has to pay Microsoft every time an Android phone is activcated due to patentes used by Google in the Android OS.
Microsoft was smart about it. Apple is just plain ****ing greedy. How many 12 year old Asian boys does it take to make an iPod.... Ask Apple they can tell you.
Google it... Goole everything I say. Its all true.
fitchpuckman said:
Completely agree. I would prefer the links just opening directly w/in the apps, even if I dont get the luxury of a prompt. the apps are far better - and intended - for viewing the content that many of these links are referring to. I dont want XDA, YouTube, Facebook, Groupon, etc. all opening up my browser and viewing what is often a 'desktop' site as directed by the link. If I want that, I can just copy/paste the link into my browser, but I'd nearly always prefer that a link automatically went directly into the associated app. i'd support pretty much any method available for getting a damn link to open in an app that I already have on my phone and, therefore, presumably would rather use over the web version of the site. I mean, why else would the user have apps? To me, this is a prime example of where patent laws have just gone too far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest with you man. Can someone explain to me what it even does differntly? When I click phone number in a text message it goes right to the phone.
What doesnt even work? Or work as expected?
scrosler said:
Also, I want to point out...
This is about Apple, not HTC. If HTC opens a lawsuit with me for making Custom ROMS then I am pretty sure all of XDA woudl be shut down, etc etc etc...
So lets not derail the Apple issue with HTC...
Its an Apple to Oranges comparison (Get it, Apple, gett it?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, the point was originally raised to ask "Where do we draw the line?".
I'm sure Cyanogenmod will never have to worry about Apple, so why should we/you?
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium