Android's Success a Threat To Free Software? 416
Glyn Moody writes "Two years after its launch, Google's Linux-based Android platform is finally making its presence felt in the world of smartphones. Around 20,000 apps have been written for it. Although well behind the iPhone's tally, that's significantly more than just a few months ago. But there's a problem: few of these Android apps are free software. Instead, we seem to be witnessing the birth of a new hybrid stack — open source underneath, and proprietary on top. If, as many believe, mobile phones will become the main computing platform for most of the world, that could be a big problem for the health of the free software ecosystem. So what, if anything, should the community be doing about it?"
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I'd rather see an open operating system used for all apps. This way people can improve and build upon it and write competing systems easier. That way, if you buy Photoshop/Game/Autocad for Linux, there's a better chance that it will run (or be quickly ported) on a competitor so you don't feel locked to a specific company because you spent thousands on a specific app for a specific job.
Re:What an Oddly Backwards Opinion Piece (Score:3, Interesting)
I thought one of the biggest barriers to Linux on the desktop was the fact that we couldn't entice proprietary manufacturers (from device drivers to bulky enterprise solutions) to also release and thoroughly support a Linux distribution of their software.
Having a manufacturer provide a driver is pretty cool, but having them provide the specs needed to produce a driver is far cooler. It leads to far better support, at least where people care about the hardware. Having them provide the specs and help with the driver is the best by far.
Gaming will work itself out if Wine continues apace.
I don't know about you but if you could replace Windows with Linux on the desktop even though 99% of the apps running on it were proprietary, I would be much more happy with the state of things.
You're not the only one; you may be in the minority of Linux users, though I doubt that too. Certainly the average computer user feels the same. I think it's clear that Free Software is the best future goal for users.
Re:The obvious answer (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not New: Apple's stack is hybrid too (Score:1, Interesting)
Seriously? (Score:1, Interesting)
Linux has always had proprietary aps as far as I know. My first experience with Linux (not very long ago) was, after compiling level 1 Gentoo (ug... not a good intro IMO, I really wish I could get those 2 days back), was putting MatLab on it, and getting the site license linked properly (as well as setting up a local copy of the license to work when the net was down and setting a cron job to sync the two when up, not sure if that was technically legal, but it sure worked better).
I developed software (at university) on linux, in MatLab. There is nothing wrong IMO with prop. software on a Free OS.
In a seriously ironic twist the software developed was GPL, so we made Free software that ran in a proprietary interpreter on a Free OS. /sigh at that.
My adviser also ran Cygwin in Windows running in a VM under Gentoo, I still have to
Re:What an Oddly Backwards Opinion Piece (Score:4, Interesting)
[quote]Gaming will work itself out if Wine continues apace.[/quote]
I really applaud the efforts of the Wine developers. I think their product is truly amazing.
It will always be playing catch up however. And last time I checked, The Sims is the best selling PC title of all time. It is also an old game that the Wine developers still haven't gotten to work. If they can't get the best selling game of all time to work, that seriously hurts your reputation as a true alternative to Windows for gaming.
I love me some Linux, but I rarely bother with Wine. Most of the games I got to work with Wine, I had to use a crack to remove DRM first. Most end users aren't capable of doing this, and technically it is illegal in the US. I keep a Windows partition exclusively for gaming because of this.
Re:Not New: Apple's stack is hybrid too (Score:2, Interesting)
Calling Apple's compiler work a contribution for GCC is a rather entertaining way of characterizing it (much of the genesis of LLVM was GNU ideological resistance to certain optimization strategies).
Re:Well, let's see (Score:3, Interesting)
The GPL doesn't have a "thou shall not make a profit" license. That being said, I think both GPL-style and BSD-style licenses have their uses.
If anything, in Chrome's very permissive licenses, they're inviting Microsoft, Mozilla, Apple and all other competitors to steal from Chrome without giving anything back.
Perhaps at times, the motive isn't profit, but rather advocating good code. One can argue perhaps that making the web a safer place leads to increasing consumer's trust, which helps Google's business model. But it is very nice to see a mamoth corporation just gives years of development away and tell people to do with it as they will.
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:4, Interesting)
I actually like the Hybrid Open Source Closed source code...
The Stallman GNU view of the world is way to restrictive and doesn't foster large support. Yes People are greedy, but except for fighting the greed, make an environment where greed can be used for good.
There are some things Open Source has always had trouble with. The most basic is making integrated User Interfaces, it is very hard to find a large base of developers who are willing to give a good UI for free as well working with non-programmers who don't care about open source to help create work (such as graphic designers) for free. I am not saying it can't be done for a particular project as I am sure Slashdot will give a me a slew of projects that have a great UI. But to have it don't for many projects gets much harder.
But there are things that Open Source does much better then commercial such as security and stability, and a lot of core functionality and features. These are things that good programers like to do and are willing to give it out just to help the community and/or make them selfs look good.
Hybrid really brings the best to both worlds. A UI and integration can be recoded and redone as the need exists and the backend that does the real work can open so compatibility and interportability can be established and prevent anyone from having a strangle hold on the systems knowledge.
Re:The obvious answer (Score:3, Interesting)
I always figured sarcasm was a form of humor, so I mod good sarcastic posts +1 Funny. If the post is not actually funny, then chances are it's a troll, or at least flamebait. Barring both of those, and if it makes a good point, then +1 Insightful or Interesting work well.
What we really need is a -1 Factually Incorrect. (and no, Flamebait/Troll don't cover it. Overrated is... well, an overrated mod)
Re:Maemo (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:4, Interesting)
The big difference is Linux is free. Android is not. It's open source and free to use, but you have to be kidding yourself if you don't think that Google makes money off of Android. It's tied into all of their services. It's pushing them more advertisement revenue. Linux is most definitely not developed around a business model to make money.
Even heard of Red Hat, Canonical or even Firefox that gets paid by Google to include them as the primary search engine?
Or how people are been telling for ages that "but you can make money with OSS by support and such things".
Advertising is the largest revenue model for OSS now. With proprietary software you pay the developer directly and you don't usually get fucked over by the developer by losing your privacy for advertisers. You get what you pay for.
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not true.
I am all for commercial and FOSS development because I see it as a win win. The truth is that FOSS can produce very good programs.
Firefox is a great browser.
Thunderbird is a very good email client.
Gimp is a very good graphics program. I will not argue that Photoshop is better but Gimp is much more powerful than Photoshop Elements.
I really like DeeVeeDee for making DVDs is super easy to use.
VLC
Audacity
Adium
7Zip
and on and on.
There is a lot of very good FOSS software out there. Now is there a lot of total crap? You bet but there is a ton of total crap closed source software as well.
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:3, Interesting)
I still don't see the problem, as it's still perfectly simple to install software by other means. If you mobile contract doesn't give you unrestricted access to the internet, that's a problem with your carrier, not with the ecosystem.
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:1, Interesting)
The drive is there because the "promise" of riches is there.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have no idea why some people keep pushing this lie. Either you're completely uninformed or are pushing a known lie. Simple fact is, no developer is chasing the iPhone or Android with "promises of riches." None. Most developers simply hope to make a modest living while being their own boss. In other words, such a statement is completely without merit. To suggest these developers are chasing riches implies people who actually work for a company are totally fucking nuts trying to make it rich. Of course, such a statement is even dumber.
And with so many well publicized stories of the fact NO ONE is making a living on Android - NO ONE - only a complete fucking idiot believes there are riches to be had there. So please stop pushing this well established lie. Its not true. Period. Because of this reason, many well established mobile device developers have walked away from Android - because piracy is killing it.
Furthermore, the entire article is complete horse shit. The entire purpose of free software is entirely to allow people to make a living off of it. So many nuts cases completely ignore this fact. From the start, the purpose is to create software which can be freely received as a shared development effort. In exchange, these developers are to making a living off of additional applications, customizations, and support services. In this case, as few applications are open for extended services, etc., proprietary applications are built on top of a free base. IMOHO, is the exact intention of open source licenses and software; in this case, Android. Everyone benefits and hopefully some can even scratch out a living by being their own boss and enjoying what they do.
And by me saying, "everyone benefits", I mean exactly that. Everyone can improve Android without a high barrier for entry. Everyone can develop applications without a high barrier for entry. Everyone can make money without a high barrier of entry, which in turn continues the commercial drive on everything I previously mentioned. Everyone wins. And if some developers are able to scratch out a living, or better, then free software has worked exactly as intended, allowing for developers, users, and companies to all benefit while continuing to directly benefit free software and all that use it. That's entirely the point of free software!!!!
Contrary to the idiots who believe software should be free and no one should making a living, always reviling themselves to be complete hypocrites, the reality is, free software exists precisely to generate revenues to allow continued development on free software. For Android, commercial applications are exactly the gateway to allow continued free development on Android.
Re:Uh...build your own free app? (Score:1, Interesting)
Not everyone was attracted to the US due to freedom of speech, right to privacy, and all that, yet they still benefit from them after becoming citizens.
The reason they are using Android is... (Score:2, Interesting)
There's no reason to use M$/WinXXX on a convergent mobile device.
Same 'reasons' an iphone does not run an M$ OS.
Same 'reasons' most media players do not run an M$ OS. ...
There's no installed base of .doc oriented apps.
There's no overwhelming majority of users to provide any sort of peer pressure.
There's no library of existing apps/games/utils with which the population of potential users is already familiar.
None of the 'reasons' people use M$ products on PCs apply to the new field of devices.
Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score:2, Interesting)
Gimp is a very good graphics program. I will not argue that Photoshop is better but Gimp is much more powerful than Photoshop Elements.
Don't forget the leaps and bounds the GIMP team has made towards making the app much, much easier for newbies. And everything short of MSPAINT.EXE is better than Photoshop Elements.
I really like DeeVeeDee for making DVDs is super easy to use.
You must mean DeVeDe [rastersoft.com]. I have to say that I have not found a better tool for mastering DVDs, whether commercial or open source. Xilisoft's DVD Creator is nice, for example, but, quite honestly, it does too much. It tries to be a video editor, a menu creator, etc., while DeVeDe sticks with to the basics and optionally generates simple menus for you. Most of the time, I just want to be able to put a full videos on a disc and a menu to select between them; I don't need a video editor or a menu creator, or special effects doodads, or anything like that. And if I do want those, I have those tools, too.
DeVeDe is probably one of the most innovative open source projects ever, IMHO.
Along with Audacity, of course. :)
Re:Uh...build your own free app? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, what innovation did government ever come up with other than minor ones like the computer, the space shuttle, the internet, and the atomic bomb?
Hero with Android (Score:3, Interesting)
I just played around with my Hero and found that underneath is no Linux distribution I would like to have. As soon as you get root access you have a security issue at your hands. In other words I'm still trying to find something like a passwd or shadow file since su lets me get straight to root.
Conversely I keep hearing that the n900 one of my colleagues just got has a debian running underneath -sounds much better to me.
Also the file system has been reorganized into something that doesn't follow the Linux file system standard. I wouldn't mind if they had put android+htc stuff on top of an existing distribution I can recognize, but no they had to do it all differently.
I do find the android stuff nice though. It works straight out of the box together with eclipse and you can use you phone as a target without much effort. I really find this kind of welcoming to new developers.
Now I heard that i can install debian and maybe use it through chroot or something similar, I still wonder whether somebody couldn't come up with a firmware that has android running on top of debian.