IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New If you want a Pixel, avoid Verizon
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/10/psa-if-you-like-updates-dont-buy-the-google-pixel-phone-from-verizon/

All sorts of fucked-up.

Snark in the comments:

The real Android experience is waiting for months after the new OS "release" before you get an update. Verizon is just providing that for Pixel customers.

New Verizon's always been evil.
Charging $5 for the privilege of installing a ringtone on your phone, etc., etc., back in the flip-phone days.

The locked bootloader stuff I can sorta understand these days. People are going to have their whole lives on these things soon - banking info, medical info, files, all kinds of account info. Who knows what sorts of things might get put on these little computers if anyone can hack the OS however they want. I think it's an overblown concern for most people, but it is a concern.

Everyone keeps assuming that Pixels direct from Google will have unlocked bootloaders, but I haven't seen anything official from them that that's the case (maybe I've missed it), or more importantly, that that will always be the case.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Worse than the ringtone
That was at least an example of adding something new. I had a BlackBerry with GPS. Google Maps already existed, and worked correctly. Verizon disabled GPS unless I paid $5/mo to leave it the fuck alone.
--

Drew
New Oooh. I'd forgotten about that.
New I couldn't care less about the bootloader
Hell, I've got an iPhone. The very definition of not giving a shit about an unlocked bootloader :)

However, the software update situation is very different. The whole point of going to a Google branded device (Nexus or Pixel) is that you're getting Android as Google envisioned it, and that you'll stay on top of OS updates until Google EOL the device. This is the secret sauce. The holy grail. The Pixel Difference, if you will.

Y'know, like every supported iPhone on the planet.

Ironically, it turns out that some Samsung Galaxy devices are getting software updates for longer than actual Nexus devices. That's just crazy.
New Yeahbut...
7.x is different because of the 2-copies-of-the-OS, update-the-other-in-the-background stuff. One (apparently) can't do that on older Nexuses without repartitioning.

I'm still using a Nexus 4. I know the value of getting updates directly from Google. :-) But I'm EOLed on 5.1.1. Such is life. Apparently one can put 7 on it, but there are some downsides of doing so. (E.g. there was a comment on AndroidPolice in the last day or so saying they had put 7 on the Nexus 4 but took it off because it broke their preferred adblocker, or something.)

J is on Verizon and generally likes them (she gets a discount through work so it's not horribly expensive). But she hates that they won't block abusive text spam (she has to pay for texts) and they refuse to even consider doing anything about it when she complains. She and her sister can call each other for free as they're both on Verizon. I don't know if they still have that plan available any more... Yeah, waiting for updates on V would be a huge annoyance, because you know the only reason for the delay is so that they can try to force some crap on you that you don't want.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Yeahbut what?
Seriously, who cares about the ability to transparently update your OS when your carrier doesn't deliver updates in a timely manner, and your OS vendor can't or won't force them to?

Love or hate Apple, they got it right - if your phone is supported, it will get updates, and the carrier - no matter who it is - can't do jack about it. Updates are increasingly important in a world where our whole digital lives are on our phones.

When the Pixel line was first announced, I thought that Google had finally understood that owning the whole widget was the only way to deliver the security people need. Google clearly felt unable to go toe-to-toe with Verizon, and so they folded, taking the sales (let's face it, most Pixels in the US will be bought through Verizon) because "don't be evil" and "the definition of open" are now just so much horseshit.
New "Don't be evil"
Would that be, "Don't hide billions of your profits offshore on an island to avoid paying your fair share of taxes?"

That's evil.
New You just did "ooh look a monkey"
Whatever Apple does or does not do has no bearing on Google's shitbaggery.
New All I'm saying is one is no better or worse than the other. The reasons may vary, but both are evil.
New So what?
I'm not talking about Apple.

It literally doesn't matter to my point whether Apple pays its (few) taxes in the souls of cute enslaved children and Tim Cook drinks blood from the skull of a failed underling.

The whole reason Google said "don't be evil" and "this is the definition of open" was to get moral traction. I'm simply pointing out that Google is being an arsehole in direct contradiction of its stated position; this arseholery stands on its own irrespective whether Apple is also being an arsehole. And Apple never said they weren't going to be an arsehole.

Look! A shiny, shiny monkey!

Whataboutery kills debate and discussion. Quit it.
New Exactly.
"So what?" Your point about Google back stepping it's stated goal of "doing no evil" is irrelevant in the market place precisely because Capitalism is part and parcel of doing evil. If you're going to have one of these gadgets, you're going to be doing business with companies engaged in evil. No sane person believed Google's initial claim of "doing no evil" and properly understood it to mean, "doing no evil until we get enough market share. Then, like all good Capitalists, we'll be as evil as the market allows." So, why are you complaining about Google?

But, you're not talking about Apple. I'm asking, "Why not?" Your position here misses the larger point. That's all. You may not want to address it and that's fine. But taking a gander at the entire forest instead of focusing on a tree doesn't limit anything. It enhances the vision.
New And I just told you why not.
You want to go and talk about Apple? Fine. Go make a thread.

But please stop with this seagull threadcrapping whataboutery bullshit, just because someone doesn't want to frame the debate in your schizophrenic communist-in-america way.

Y'know, capitalism is really bad. But what about socialism, eh? What about every other failed ideology? You haven't mentioned them! Why not?
New Eh? I don't like Verizon.
I don't especially like any of the cell vendors in the US. They charge too much and make it too difficult for people to own and use phones of their choice.

Verizon's big and has a lot of customers, so Google wants to work with them. Google doesn't sell enough phones to force anyone to do anything (and if they did, the EU would probably throw yet another antitrust suit at them). It's a temporary (and not actually) exclusive for V to have them in their stores.

In a few months, other cell companies will have the Pixels on their web pages and in their stores. The "exclusive" will be gone.

Apple having control of the ecosystem has its good and bad points. If one wants timely Android updates, one shouldn't be on Verizon (and quite often one shouldn't have a non-Google phone, either). It's not really that different with the Pixel.

FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Google doesn't need to sell phones, though.
They have something much more useful, in terms of coercing desired behaviour from carriers - Google Play Services.

If Google really wanted to put the hurt on Verizon (and every other carrier), they'd simply make it a condition of the Google Play Services licence that if you want to sell a phone with Google Play Services on it, you have to deliver updates and patches on Google's timetable, no arguments.

Verizon, faced with the choice of selling some iPhones and basically no Android phones, would buckle under and do what they're told.

Oh, they could sell a phone without GPS. Yeah. That's definitely a possibility. A really bad and stupid possibility. But it's there.
New But...
https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/03/google-gets-more-time-to-respond-to-eu-antitrust-charges/

Alphabet (née Google) has been given yet another extension to file its respond to charges in Europe that it has misused the dominance of its Android mobile platform to lock out competition by promoting its own services over and above others.

Reuters reported the extension today, which gives the company until the last day of this month to file its rebuttal, and follows another extension last month — at the time touted as Google’s last — which pushed the deadline from September 7 to September 20. The original EC deadline for Google’s response was in April so we’re heading for six months later already at this stage (meanwhile the EC’s initial probe of Android complaints dates back to April 2015).

That said, it is common for competition investigations to involve extensions, although — from the complainant point of view — the risk is of the issue being kicked so far into the long glass that any corrective measures come too late.

In the case of the Android antitrust probe, which has focused on complaints that Google uses the OS as a ‘trojan horse’ to embed its own apps and services into smartphone devices at the expense of rivals’, there’s a very real risk of a substantially negative outcome for Google’s business in Europe. Alphabet could face a fine of up to 10 per cent of its annual turnover — which is close to $75BN — if the EC antitrust charges are upheld against it.

[...]


I don't think what you're advocating Google do would make it past the antitrust folks (in the EU or the USA).

Things are different when you have market power in one area (you can't just use that power in other areas)...

Cheers,
Scott.
New Sure
But they're already doing it.

Everywhere except China.

Here's your experiment.

Take AOSP. Fork it. Make a phone with your fork.

Now try and get a GPS licence from Google for a regular Android phone.

You can't - at least while you're selling another phone with a forked version of Android on it.

If you want GPS, you have GPS and you have nothing else Android-y.
New +5, Interesting.
It looks like the US cellphone carriers have way too much power. I get updates for my Xperia from Sony - not Telstra (my carrier). I have no idea if Telstra's branding could disable Sony's updates at all or if Telstra decided they just didn't want to deal with updates and let the manufacturers do it.

Wade.
New Might be worth double-checking that
Although you get your updates from Sony, I'm pretty sure they will be approved/tested etc. by Telstra - assuming your handset is locked to Telstra.
New No, it's not locked to Telstra.
And the update app is a Sony app and it will update over Wifi rather than the mobile data (I actually make it do all updates on Wifi). But I take your point, as the bootloader image has remained the Telstra logo.

Wade.
     Pixel XL. Ouch. - (Another Scott) - (61)
         I want my e911 chip free flip phone back. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
             EVLeaks on Twitter mumbled something about flip phones coming back next year. - (Another Scott)
         Nice colors - (drook) - (2)
             Heh - (pwhysall) - (1)
                 Looks like these, too - (drook)
         So, it's not a loss leader. :) - (a6l6e6x)
         Re: Pixel XL. Ouch. - (pwhysall) - (12)
             They're offering a new ecosystem with very fast hardware. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                 Eh? No they're not - (pwhysall) - (10)
                     Disagree. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                         How to get assistant everywhere in 2 steps - (pwhysall) - (2)
                             Re: giving up in a couple of years - (drook) - (1)
                                 iPhone? 4 years for many - (pwhysall)
                     Google Fi FTW - (drook) - (3)
                         It does sound appealing. I use very little data most months. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                             Yeah, you pay for all your data - (drook) - (1)
                                 The unthrottled foreign data sounds great... - (Another Scott)
                     Mossberg thinks it's a big deal. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                         He's an outlier on this one - (pwhysall)
         If you want a Pixel, avoid Verizon - (pwhysall) - (19)
             Verizon's always been evil. - (Another Scott) - (18)
                 Worse than the ringtone - (drook) - (1)
                     Oooh. I'd forgotten about that. -NT - (Another Scott)
                 I couldn't care less about the bootloader - (pwhysall) - (15)
                     Yeahbut... - (Another Scott) - (14)
                         Yeahbut what? - (pwhysall) - (13)
                             "Don't be evil" - (mmoffitt) - (5)
                                 You just did "ooh look a monkey" - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                     All I'm saying is one is no better or worse than the other. The reasons may vary, but both are evil. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                         So what? - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                             Exactly. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                                 And I just told you why not. - (pwhysall)
                             Eh? I don't like Verizon. - (Another Scott) - (6)
                                 Google doesn't need to sell phones, though. - (pwhysall) - (5)
                                     But... - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                         Sure - (pwhysall)
                                     +5, Interesting. - (static) - (2)
                                         Might be worth double-checking that - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                             No, it's not locked to Telstra. - (static)
         Decided I just can't do it. New T-Mobile $330 LG V10 looks like a possible winner. - (Another Scott) - (21)
             New ones at eBay for $280. - (Another Scott)
             It arrived today. - (Another Scott) - (5)
                 when I get a new, the local tmobile store is happy to put a sim in for me free -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                     Good to know. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                         they are as competent with their products as the applestore folks with theirs -NT - (boxley)
                 Bah. The cutter, etc., won't arrive until Monday. Grr... -NT - (Another Scott) - (1)
                     Patience, Grasshopper! :) -NT - (a6l6e6x)
             Initial thoughts. - (Another Scott) - (12)
                 heh, just got a new t-mobile android phone - (boxley) - (11)
                     :-) Rub it in. ;-) - (Another Scott) - (10)
                         Any privacy concerns with Assistant on your part? - (mmoffitt) - (9)
                             Not yet. - (Another Scott) - (8)
                                 Voice recognition is vastly better in my new phone - (drook) - (4)
                                     Agreed (vastly better) for my G6 - (crazy) - (3)
                                         Did some looking - (drook) - (2)
                                             Thanks - (crazy) - (1)
                                                 Yeah, online is actually faster -NT - (drook)
                                 Privacy is the least of your worries on Android - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                     Re: Privacy is the least of your worries on Android - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                         Re: Privacy is the least of your worries on Android - (pwhysall)
             Down to $300 at B&H now. -NT - (Another Scott)

The Readers Digest of All and Everything cha cha.
103 ms