backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by Tony Swash.. on Mar 27 at 12:08 PM


Google is nixing Honeycomb on smart phones by refusing to release the source.

The decision to close the source will likely be undone when the smart phone and tablet branches are merged with Android 3.5 "Ice Cream Sandwich".  (Source: Laa Loosh)
Company says the OS isn't ready for modification

Google's Android operating system has been tremendously successful.  It's become the top selling phone platform in the world and its app store is stocked with close to 200,000 apps.  But for all that success, a perpetual criticism is a perception that Android's environment is too heterogeneous across various handsets -- part of this is due to carriers/hardware partners failing to roll out the latest versions, but part of it is due to customizations such as Motorola's Motoblur and HTC's Sense UI.

I. Bye Bye Open Source -- For Now

Perhaps that's part of why Google has decided why not to release the source code for Android 3.0 "Honeycomb", yet.

The company states that the code isn't ready yet for external modification, despite the fact that products are being sold with it installed, today.

Aside from preventing unwanted third-party user interfaces, the chief goal of the delay is ostensibly from preventing Honeycomb (Android 3.0) from being put on smartphones.  Google is pressuring smartphone makers to instead use Android 2.3 "Gingerbread".  Google is also less-than-enthusiastic about Honeycomb entering other devices, like set-top boxes and automobiles, without further modification.

Andy Rubin, vice-president for engineering at Google and head of its Android group essentially admits that the move is being made to prevent the platform from heading, in its current state, to places Google didn't intend.  In a BusinessWeek interview, he states, "To make our schedule to ship the tablet, we made some design tradeoffs. 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."

He adds, "Android is an open-source project. We have not changed our strategy."

Then he makes an even more surprising statement -- he says that if his company released Android's source, it couldn't prevent phone makers from putting it in a phone form-factor "and creating a really bad user experience. We have no idea if it will even work on phones."

That statement is intriguing because it sounds a lot like arguments against open source operating systems that one of Android's top competitors, Apple, made in recent years.  And while the delay doesn't mean Google has closed its project off from the public, it does indicate that the company is increasingly seeing eye to eye with Apple on this issue.

Dave Rosenberg, a longtime executive in the open-source software world, complains about the decision, but admits, "Everyone expects this level of complete trust from a company that's worth $185 billion. To me, that is ridiculous. You have to be realistic and see that Google will do what is in [its] best interests at all times.

II. What Will the Impact of Google's Newfound Selectiveness Be?

Ultimately this issue will supposedly be washed away with Android 3.5 "Ice Cream Sandwich", which will unify the smartphone (Gingerbread) and tablet (Honeycomb) trees into a single operating system.

In the meantime, it's possible Google could make stop-gap modifications to improve the Honeycomb experience on smart phones, and release a minor update.  Mr. Rubin states, "The team is hard at work looking at what it takes to get this running on other devices."

It's hard to say how the move will affect sales.  

Sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab were quite good, despite the interface (Android 2.2 Froyo)feeling clunky on a tablet.  By contrast the Motorola Xoom offers a vastly superior UI in Honeycomb, yet has struggled in sales.

Part of this may be due to price -- the Tab debuted at $399 USD on at least one network, while the Xoom debuted at $799 USD.  

The true test of whether the decision to close off the platform should be soon at hand, though.  The Xoom has dropped in price, with a Wi-Fi version launch on Sunday at $599 USD.  And Samsung will soon air a second generation Galaxy Tab 8.9-inch tablet for $469 USD and a a 10.1-inch variant for $499 USD, rumored to launch on June 8.  Dell also looks to soon air updated versions of its "Streak" Android tablets, at competitive prices.

Despite that the decision to temporarily close the source may benefit Google and its customers experience, not everyone is happy with it.

Eben Moglen, a professor of Law at Columbia Law School and the founding director of the Software Freedom Law Center, argues that Google is repeating the mistakes of industry giants like Apple.  He states, "[Closing your source is] usually a mistake. Long experience teaches people that exposing the code to the community helps more than it hurts you."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Not an issue
By themaster08 on 3/27/2011 4:23:17 AM , Rating: 2
C'mon, Tony. You know as well as I do it's not as black and white as answering just a few simple questions. These are valid questions, however, you know as well as I do that each scenario would need to be assessed individually, with the main focal point being what is the end impact to the user.

My point was that if evidence proves existence, does that which has not been evidenced not exist?

You're getting into a complicated and very controversial topic. However in this case, as you have already pointed out in one of your previous posts if I recall correctly, Google performed this act of judgement for the good of its consumers.

The only one I can answer is this one:
quote:
Should buyers of Android handsets been told that this was something that could happen?

Yes I do believe consumers should be informed.

There is no proof to suggest anything otherwise, and until there is, it's hard to answer any of your questions or even determine whether it's right or wong that any company should have the ability to perform these actions.


RE: Not an issue
By Tony Swash on 3/27/2011 12:08:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
C'mon, Tony. You know as well as I do it's not as black and white as answering just a few simple questions. These are valid questions, however, you know as well as I do that each scenario would need to be assessed individually, with the main focal point being what is the end impact to the user.

My point was that if evidence proves existence, does that which has not been evidenced not exist?

You're getting into a complicated and very controversial topic. However in this case, as you have already pointed out in one of your previous posts if I recall correctly, Google performed this act of judgement for the good of its consumers.

The only one I can answer is this one:
quote:
Should buyers of Android handsets been told that this was something that could happen?

Yes I do believe consumers should be informed.

There is no proof to suggest anything otherwise, and until there is, it's hard to answer any of your questions or even determine whether it's right or wong that any company should have the ability to perform these actions.


OK - I agree things are rarely black and white. I do however feel saying "My point was that if evidence proves existence, does that which has not been evidenced not exist?" means one wanders into the realm of valueless speculation. I could say 'although there is no evidence that Apple/Google/RIM has the power to make handsets explode via a remote command that doesn't mean they don't' but what value would such a statement have? Not much in my view.

I agree Google chose to use this power this time to do good - kill a Trojan infestation - but I for one one was shocked to learn they had such power and they had used it without any sort of end user consultation.

Generally I feel that too many people have bought into the notion that Google is 'open' and somehow generally good just because they give a lot of cool stuff away for free (although only stuff that helps and does not threaten their core advertising business) and also because Google chose to go to war with Apple with Android (and that plays well on this sort of forum). If Google finds it's core business seriously threatened (and they are potentially vulnerable in the sense that they only have one source of revenue) then I wonder how nice they will play.


“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki