Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Google's Android platform: not so open after all
arstechnica.com — Third-party Android application developers are beginning to question Google's commitment to making Android an open platform following the revelation that a select few developers have been receiving special access to new versions of the Android SDK under non-disclosure agreements.
oboy- 732 diggs
- digg it
- Ducttape38, on 07/16/2008, -7/+54Cmon Google. If your going to make an open platform it should actually be, you know, open and equal to everybody.
- ToadLeg, on 07/16/2008, -2/+11I think that open source projects don't always reveal everything, especially in the heavy development phases (why release garbage?). Optimistically, I hope that Google has some legitimate reason for doing this, but if not, there's always Openmoko.
- mickstephenson, on 07/16/2008, -0/+8That's simply not true, most open source projects have open development repositories. They want people to get involved by submitting patches, and those patches should be for the most current code.
Personally I was always more intrigued by Openmoko, principally because it uses libraries already in place on most linux desktops, and has been developed in the open the whole time, why optimistically embrace Android when Openmoko is already everything you want Android to be. I'll tell you why, because everyone bums the ***** out of the Google brand. - CarzorStelatis, on 07/16/2008, -4/+2@mickstephenson;
Because Android actually has a snowball's chance in hell of finding its way on to proper, functional handsets? I mean come on, the FreeRunner doesn't even have a camera.
- mickstephenson, on 07/16/2008, -0/+8That's simply not true, most open source projects have open development repositories. They want people to get involved by submitting patches, and those patches should be for the most current code.
- GorfTron, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2I'm not that into open source yet, but can't it be possible to take what exists and go separate from Google? The whole idea is that some pushy dick can't dominate the system, right?
- mickstephenson, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1I'm not 100% sure but I doubt the SDK they released last year will have been licensed free and copyleft, and people will have relied on good faith that it would be when they eventually released it.
- robbiemuffin, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2under a typical GPL-style system, it is harder than with newer, freer licenses. But even in that case, it is possible to codevelop, or develop in tandem if you will, using the google codebase as a model, and diverge the free system away from a direction that company wants to follow. Eventually the free systems will catch up, but how important that early market presense is to the open source project might really be significant: misdirect all the passionate, early adopters, and you can doom the lifecycle of development to closed source as they all decide to spend their time on projects that are less political.
- ToadLeg, on 07/16/2008, -2/+11I think that open source projects don't always reveal everything, especially in the heavy development phases (why release garbage?). Optimistically, I hope that Google has some legitimate reason for doing this, but if not, there's always Openmoko.
- krystalo, on 07/16/2008, -16/+27Google just keeps screwing up recently, sad.
- Sarevok9, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1RTFA.
- jasonhdavis, on 07/16/2008, -9/+3"Just another company." I'm not a developer, but I feel betrayed.
- brainnovate, on 07/25/2008, -14/+36Sounds like Google is being evil again!
- Myztry, on 07/16/2008, -2/+4I would guess that it's a reflection of the necessity of Google dealing with evil people in order to get the platform on actual mobile phones. Without that, it is pointless.
The Mobile Telco industry is one of the most closed, corrupt, collusion powered business models around.
The Telco's are powerful entities with massive amounts of money and power.
As rich and powerful as Google is, it's playing on THEIR turf, and can't really avoid playing by their rules to some degree.
Only Governments could really change anything quickly, but hundreds of Billions of Spectrum Money (plus undoubtably other kind) line the pockets of Government and their officials.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Google's effort.
- Myztry, on 07/16/2008, -2/+4I would guess that it's a reflection of the necessity of Google dealing with evil people in order to get the platform on actual mobile phones. Without that, it is pointless.
- synack, on 07/16/2008, -9/+4Google, like all corporations before them, cow-tow to the powers that be. That being the other, bigger corporations (aka Big Telecom). Nothing to see here.
- Irco, on 07/16/2008, -3/+6it really seems like a rather odd movement...I might be missing something, but why wouldn't you want the vast majority of developers to be finding bugs and reporting them...it really seems very unlike google and really not very open source like.
I don't think this is gonna kill Android, I've only developed simple stuff with it, but it's a neat idea, but it certainly makes me wonder why would they do such a thing.- mickstephenson, on 07/16/2008, -3/+4Unlike Google? back that one up with fact. Nothing Google has ever done has been open source, they collaborate with projects on the tools they need, they even do summer of code, but name a project which they started which is open source.
Will people get the notion out of their heads that Google is the Grand High Master of open source and leading the movement. Red Hat, Sun, Novell these are the only companies which actually lead the open source movement, and even they deserve criticism.- Nanreik, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/f ...
- Irco, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2dude..I never said google doesn't deserve criticism, I never said google is any 'grand master' wtf? they are not even a OS based company....how do you even compare them with SUN or Red Hat? you people need to stop going all 'omg omg -big corporations- are so evil' yes they do look for their own interests. THEY ALL DO. Google just had an history of putting their software out for free and for anyone who wants to give it a try. They don't _have_ to do anything for the OS community, they have already done more than most companies their size
- mickstephenson, on 07/16/2008, -3/+4Unlike Google? back that one up with fact. Nothing Google has ever done has been open source, they collaborate with projects on the tools they need, they even do summer of code, but name a project which they started which is open source.
- Archer007, on 07/16/2008, -3/+6I don't get it. With an open ecosystem, more people make better apps, which in turn fuels demand for the platform. If Google does truly want to keep Android open, why the secrecy?
- nathanww, on 07/16/2008, -9/+1Maybe google wants to get some new software companies going.
Problem:open source projects provide benefits in terms of security, customizability, etc. but they are usually managed by independent developers who can provide lackluster support or even disappear entirely at some point.
Solution:Find a select few developers whose projects seem promising and give them a competitive advantage so that they can hopefully start investing in infrastructure, etc. eventually. - KirbyMorph, on 07/16/2008, -2/+5I don't know how the advancement of SDK's works (do unfinished products typically see regular SDK updates or could the updates be in a pseudo beta test with these finalist developers?), but the fact Google is being so secretive about it is a tough pill to swallow. With the proverbial cat out of the bag, Google should just step up and set things straight before this gets misconstrued.
- clak, on 07/16/2008, -10/+10Google is not freaking Greenpeace, despite people putting them on a pedestal. Yes, they are a big supporter of open source software, but it's not like they've released their algorithms for web search or ad relevance. In other words, they support open source when it's in their interest to support it. Nothing more, nothing less.
- rodrigo74, on 07/16/2008, -1/+6Thanks for stating the obvious, but the object of this article is specifically about Android, which was released as an open-source, equal-opportunity platform, hence the protests now.
- blackjack75, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3Yes they ARE indeed like greenpeace. Milking our goodwill.
- e2superman, on 07/16/2008, -7/+15Google-soft. It WILL happen one day people. MS had their honeymoon period too. Eventually the cool-ade will run out or wear off.
- ToadLeg, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Huh? If the kool-aid runs out, won't everyone be dead?
- whiteguysamurai, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1He means what every cult leader does, a show of authority.
- Myztry, on 07/16/2008, -2/+4Microsoft - Honey Period.... LOL
As soon as they gained some power, they started rubbing KY on every anus they could find...
- ToadLeg, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Huh? If the kool-aid runs out, won't everyone be dead?
- whiteguysamurai, on 07/16/2008, -4/+2Microsoft Jr?
- macwac, on 07/16/2008, -1/+7the answer is: OpenMoko :)
- blackjack75, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2... which will be wonderful, once a final version of the software is out. When?
- macwac, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2As far as the software, I got no clue.. hoping it comes out soon. The new Neo FreeRunner version is out.. but already sold out. Sent OpenMoko an email asking when they would get more in stock and they said that they would probably get 900 and 850 stock again sometime after July 25th, but recommended checking their distributors koolu and the ones in EU if they had some extras. I'm trying to design a better physical exterior as the FreeRunner looks a bit like a bar of soap...
- rodrigo74, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1So far it seems that OpenMoko is aiming at being no more than a niche-market phone. Very limited distribution and zero to none marketing, afaik. They gotta improve their mindshare and availability if they really wanna play this game.
- macwac, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I think its more to do with having limited funds in order to do the necessary mass production as well as the marketing. Give it some time until they make enough money. They don't want to risk anything by over producing and having a large stock and not being able to sell it. You have to compare them to Apple and Google.. look at the funds, name recognition and distribution channels. OpenMoko has none of the above and has to sign up with a bunch of distributors and probably go into joint ventures, whereas Apple and Google control majority - so OpenMoko can't compete (for now). Support them and maybe they will be able to compete in the near future. :)
- zip000, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1The OpenMoko looks pretty cool, but they seem to be always sold out, and they also seem to be way over the price that I am willing to pay for a phone.
- sliksta, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1Definately.
OpenMoko is TRULY OPEN unlike android which is a sham. Google just wants the code written for free but then still want to control it and lock down phones.
- blackjack75, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2... which will be wonderful, once a final version of the software is out. When?
- GorfTron, on 07/16/2008, -2/+4I don't think open source works well with corporations, at a DNA level. Business strives to dominate.
- maninalift, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3Buried for "at a DNA level".
- GorfTron, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2Dugg for burying me.
- maninalift, on 07/16/2008, -2/+3Buried for "at a DNA level".
- Dested, on 07/16/2008, -5/+24This is the stupidest thread of comments I've seen on digg in a while... Did anyone here read the article?
Google is beta testing the new revision of the api as to limit the amount of bugs in the release. Where is the evil in this? Where is the charging users for ***** content? What is google doing wrong here? Can someone explain?
Buried as lame- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -4/+4because doing so is against the priciples of an open platform.
- aladrin, on 07/16/2008, -1/+8No it's not. Every open source project has testing on a small scale before it is released to the general public. Sometimes this is just the developer doing it, sometimes it's a small group of hand-picked people. In Google's case, they picked a group of devs that they can trust to give them good feedback on software they KNOW has issues.
Google is being responsible here and will release it to the public when it's at a certain level of quality. If they didn't, they'd hear 'It's full of bugs! Can't you release good software!' over and over.
- aladrin, on 07/16/2008, -1/+8No it's not. Every open source project has testing on a small scale before it is released to the general public. Sometimes this is just the developer doing it, sometimes it's a small group of hand-picked people. In Google's case, they picked a group of devs that they can trust to give them good feedback on software they KNOW has issues.
- triggerfish45, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Ditto.
- RunnyBabbit, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Thank you aladrin.
- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -4/+4because doing so is against the priciples of an open platform.
- robert001, on 07/16/2008, -1/+4Itquay alkingtay aboutway ethay agreementway- its NDA for a reason!
- yurimxpxman, on 07/16/2008, -1/+15So...? The project is still under a free license. They chose to keep the nightly builds away from critics, but chose to allow key app developers to continue working on their projects while they're working out the kinks.
Did you know that RMS kept the source code to GNU Emacs secret before its public release? The only mistake Google made was using the Cathedral programming model. - YojimboJango, on 07/16/2008, -2/+35I'm going to make this very clear.
Open platform is not the same as open source.
Open beta is not the same as closed beta.
Google is performing closed beta testing on the newer unstable versions of Android. They don't release it as an open beta, because it's too unstable. If they released the versions as open beta idiots would use it like the next stable version, then try to get an article on Digg about how evil Google is for releasing a pre-beta product that wasn't perfect.
Look at the facts. The only people that got the updated version were people that were competing in competition sponsored by Google. Not some big mega-corp, just who ever signed up for the competition. Second, from what these developers were able to confirm the updates were "updated SDK builds". These are exactly like the Firefox nightly builds. Things ARE broken. You'll get it when it works correctly. Get over it.
All I see here is people bitching that Google hasn't been keeping the community updated on their progress. Google should get down on it's knees and apologize for not starting a blog about it or something.- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -8/+1The issue here isn't that they are not releasing a beta (or pre beta) version of their code, it is that they are releasing it to some developers but not others.
- aladrin, on 07/16/2008, -0/+7They aren't 'releasing' ANYTHING. They are TESTING.
- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -3/+1yes but only a select group of developers are getting to "test" it, why not let everyone "test" it
- PrometheusZero, on 07/16/2008, -0/+5Because it's a closed beta. When Android is finished up, then yes, everyone will have a go at it equally. So nothing to worry about.
- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -2/+1ye a closed beta on an open platform, thats the problem
- Phocion55, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4I AT LEAST want a freakin CHANGELOG of what they're working on! I'm currently hacking around some lower-level features on Android that MAY have very well been addressed in recent (but unreleased) revisions.
I don't want to waste my time doing these things if they've already been fixed.....but how the hell am I to know if everything is shrouded in secrecy?
- jamesdew, on 07/16/2008, -8/+1The issue here isn't that they are not releasing a beta (or pre beta) version of their code, it is that they are releasing it to some developers but not others.
- amire80, on 07/16/2008, -2/+10Quoting RMS ...
----
I heard that somebody at Carnegie Mellon University had a copy of that software. So I was visiting there later, so I went to his office and I said, "Hi, I'm from MIT. Could I have a copy of the printer source code?" And he said "No, I promised not to give you a copy."
See, he had promised to refuse to cooperate with us -- his colleagues at MIT. He had betrayed us. But he didn't just do it to us. Chances are he did it to you too. [Pointing at member of audience.] And I think, mostly likely, he did it to you too. [Pointing at another member of audience.] [Laughter] And he probably did it to you as well. [Pointing to third member of audience.] He probably did it to most of the people here in this room -- except a few, maybe, who weren't born yet in 1980. Because he had promised to refuse to cooperate with just about the entire population of the Planet Earth. He had signed a non-disclosure agreement.
(Richard M. Stallman, ``Free Software: Freedom and Cooperation'', http://www.gnu.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript. ... )
---- - Turbojugend27, on 07/16/2008, -3/+0Wow, there is a surprise! sarcasm
- bubba9999, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2This is disappointing. I hope Google has a decent answer for this.
- chadell, on 07/16/2008, -0/+3I think this is part of the The Google Trusted Tester program. The "Trusted Tester Program", is aimed at giving Google employees, friends, and family a chance to test early phase confidential betas, and give feedback on them. Only drawback, to become a Trusted Tester, you first must be invited by a friend or family member who currently works at Google.
You cannot tell others about the Trusted Tester Program or the Google betas? The Google Trusted Tester program is strictly confidential, like FightClub, and you shouldn't speak to anyone else about it. Read more http://www.google.com/tester/faq - pauliusuza, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1*****. You always define initial set of rules behind the closed doors and only then you make the code opensource and let people submit patches. If you would let opensource community to create product from scratch - it will be a real mess.
- CarzorStelatis, on 07/16/2008, -2/+5So Google are testing the new version of their software in private beta before releasing it to the world? I fail to see what's unusual or evil about that.
- Muler36, on 07/16/2008, -1/+0seems people will just never be happy with what there given recently.
If you wanted to have a constant feed of updates you should've signed up, I don't see the problem with google only allowing the people who signed up to test the updated SDK.
If they released unstable stuff people would complain, then when they try and make sure its remotely solid because get upset aswell.
stop complaining and wait.- DrivenMind, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Muler, I mean this in the nicest possible way... you have no idea what you're talking about.
The developers that competed in the Google competition, the sames ones that have worked diligently to help get Android where it is today have been cut off at the knees. Google as evangilized it's openess and intentions to be transparent, especially when compared to other platforms, such as Apple's iPhone SDK.
- DrivenMind, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Muler, I mean this in the nicest possible way... you have no idea what you're talking about.
- DrivenMind, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Muler, I mean this in the nicest possible way... you have no idea what you're talking about.
The developers that competed in the Google competition, the sames ones that have worked diligently to help get Android where it is today have been cut off at the knees. Google has evangelized its openness and intentions to be transparent, especially when compared to other platforms, such as Apple's iPhone SDK. - ATLien74, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2Would somebody please hurry the ***** up and release an Android phone! Us Anti-AT&T folks are dying over here.
- DrivenMind, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1The competition was merely designed to foster innovation. It was never advertised as "You have to be in the top 50 or else your left in the dust". Many developers have sunk their heart and soul into furthering the development of this platform. Without them the Android platform would not be where it is today.
Not only has the new SDK been reserved for "Google's pet applications (potential business partners), but it has also stopped providing valuable information and updates. The discussion groups are often void from the Google staff that once frequented them with suggestions and advice. It is truly deplorable that Google would not at least make an effort to communicate what is going on.
If being secretive is an underlying business strategy for Google, it goes directly in the face of what they said they intended to do. You really can't have a foot in both worlds and be popular. - sliksta, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2Screw android.
I ain't gonna bend over and get shafted by google with their pretending. android is Apache v2 license, not GPL so good luck having control of your own phone. If you want guarantees, go OpenMoko. - psychoselya, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1This is unfortunate... Does anyone know how LiMo is doing? Have they released an SDK yet?
- tbsomerset, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Here is the petition if you want to put your name on - http://www.anddev.org/petition/
,Michael Martin
http://www.googleandblog.com/
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by