Jump to content


Photo

Time For Google To Pay For Android Updates?


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#21 SoLongSidekick

SoLongSidekick

    YOU WILL HAIL!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 687 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 09:41 AM

Sent from my Droid Razr using Tapatalk

Wow. The argument is for USERS to pay and the OPINION is for GOOGLE to pay. I ready YOUR words, did you?


-_-

No one cares where this was sent from

:-D :-D


#22 Turtle

Turtle

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts
  • LocationRichmond,IN

Posted 20 March 2012 - 11:07 AM

I would gladly pay the price if they would just leave the Bloakware out of the dang things!!!!!!!

#23 mopar57

mopar57

    Developer/MOD

  • Superuser
  • 375 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 11:33 AM

I've got to say, I love reading articles that people argue about things that don't make any difference either

Posted Image

Posted Image

Got an idea for a theme?

PM me!

I like mail! :D


#24 DarkestSpawn

DarkestSpawn

    Tester

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 211 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 12:24 PM

I've got to say, I love reading articles that people argue about things that don't make any difference either


They make a difference... to someone... OVER A RAINBOW!!! WHERE MY DREAMS ARE TRUE!?!?!?!!!!!
-Beta Mod-
-Grand Master of the Testing-

Posted Image

#25 Admin

Admin

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • 167 posts

Posted 20 March 2012 - 05:52 PM

10 bucks is cheap compared to what a leak actually costs..... But leaks are more fun!


I just feel that with Android in its current state of fragmentation that it is actually hurting more than it helps

#26 vash_h

vash_h

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Google+:chiayx
  • LocationMalaysia

Posted 20 March 2012 - 09:19 PM

Android is still open source.. Is it given free to phone manufacturers or so they license it from google?

From business stand point, google doesn't need too care if manufacturers update or not.. It serves google nothing good.. It is the manufacturers that receive good publicity and sales. However this will also hamper their new phone sales..

So the risk and decision to update or not
Is up to manufacturers.
Sent from my XT910
Running Rooted Motorola Droid XT910 on 65.1.21.XT910.PSHAsiaRetail.en.03

#27 Mazler420

Mazler420

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • LocationButler, PA

Posted 21 March 2012 - 09:49 AM

Doesn't this defeat the point of Linux. I mean the two best thing about the OS is its FREE and Open Source. Personally im waiting for them to start charging people to unlock there bootloaders.

#28 Z32CM

Z32CM

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 22 March 2012 - 07:13 AM

Doesn't this defeat the point of Linux. I mean the two best thing about the OS is its FREE and Open Source. Personally im waiting for them to start charging people to unlock there bootloaders.


Now an unlocked bootloader is something I would pay the $10 for. Kind of like a free app with some features, compared to the pro version, with ALL the features. Android and Linux are the same essentially, so there should never be a price tag on it, no matter where its coming from. However, if I'm not mistaken, Linux can be sold, but doing so is seriously frowned upon by the Linux community.

Below are two bits of info I found that should shed some light on this issue... From a free vs. paid standpoint that is.



Are "Open Source" and "Free Software" the same thing?


Yes and no.
Technically, the great majority of open source programs are free software and vice-versa.
In terms of philosophy, things are quite different. The term "open source" was coined to make "free software" more attractive, its supporters see open source software as a better way to make software.
Supporters of the "free software" term value the freedom, not merely the way software is made, and thus argue that the term "open source"

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

.
Which term you employ simply depends on your vision of software.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content



Why are some Linux distributions sold, not given away?

Some websites actually sell distributions of Linux. So, why do you write it is "free as speech and available at no charge"?


The concept of

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, refers to freedom, not price. You have the freedom to copy, study, modify, and give free software away.
Most companies developing free software make money by selling services around their software, rather than the software itself. This is sometimes done by selling everything as a package: the customer buys the CD, book, and support contract at once. The software can still guarantee your freedoms.




I would be surprised if Google made the customers pay, I think they're smarter than that. I also don't expect them to give the carriers incentive to do what they were supposed to do from the get go. That's like me asking for money because I took a shower or because I opened a door for a stranger. Carriers need to be taken out of the equation to let Google pump out the updates... I doubt that would take care of the bloatware, but at least we would see the updates.

#29 STiK

STiK

    STiK in the Mud

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • LocationEverett, WA
  • Current Device(s):LG Nexus 4

Posted 24 March 2012 - 09:47 AM

Since when does "Open Source" = "Entitlement"? The kernel is released under a fairly unrestricted GPLv2 license where as Android is distributed under a restrictive apache license. I will not get into the debate about releasing the kernel code as it is fairly clear that most don't understand how vague this license really is as to how or when the sources must be distributed. The Apache license on the other hand, can be modified and released for public consumption or it can be locked up tighter than a blanks blank and distributed for free or a fee. So to say that because Android is open source means you can reuse, fix, modify, or whatever else the OP said is misleading. Not all OSS licenses are equal :P

I understand that the article was about paying for upgrades but the "Open Source" part of it was a bit irritating as this seems to be the general attitude towards OSS.

#30 Ungo

Ungo

    n00b

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 02:02 AM

My question when I read the article is how would this effect app developers, if at all?


I remember reading when ICS launched it nerfed alot of apps that developers had to put out updates for due to OS changes. The article even states that the current "fragmentation causes lots of problems, especially for app developers". If you charged for an OS update, I'm pretty sure that would fragment the market even more, not less. Like people have stated, I don't think most people even know what OS they are running, so I doubt most people would even bother updating it if they have to pay.

And whats to stop the major carriers from restricting you from downloading apps or updates for apps until you pay for the newest OS system? I could see them pulling that BS.

#31 etrorteepe

etrorteepe

    Not a Belieber

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 221 posts
  • Current Device(s):Nexus 5

Posted 05 April 2012 - 12:11 PM

Fragmentation is the problem and we are talking about solutions. I think one of the biggest problems is how Google handles the Nexus program. They only work with one manufacturer for the next major OS release and then dump it on the rest of them right at the launch of the Nexus. Why can't Google work simultaneously with the other manufacturers on getting the hardware drivers built. The phone manufacturers are saying that the drivers are the biggest obstacle when jumping to the next major release. I haven't combed through the source code, but I'm also guessing that Google doesn't write the source in such a way to make it easy on the others to insert their drivers into the source.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users