Post #414,331
10/7/16 2:29:17 PM
10/7/16 2:29:17 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,334
10/7/16 2:34:07 PM
10/7/16 2:34:07 PM
|
"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.
|
Post #414,344
10/7/16 6:05:54 PM
10/7/16 6:05:54 PM
|
You just did "ooh look a monkey"
Whatever Apple does or does not do has no bearing on Google's shitbaggery.
|
Post #414,384
10/9/16 11:02:25 AM
10/9/16 11:02:25 AM
|
All I'm saying is one is no better or worse than the other. The reasons may vary, but both are evil.
|
Post #414,408
10/9/16 11:54:13 PM
10/9/16 11:54:13 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,414
10/10/16 8:13:39 AM
10/10/16 8:13:39 AM
|
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.
|
Post #414,423
10/10/16 1:49:33 PM
10/10/16 1:49:33 PM
|
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?
|
Post #414,338
10/7/16 3:34:43 PM
10/7/16 3:34:43 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,343
10/7/16 6:05:20 PM
10/7/16 6:05:20 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,345
10/7/16 6:15:23 PM
10/7/16 6:15:23 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,347
10/7/16 6:44:49 PM
10/7/16 6:44:49 PM
|
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.
|
Post #414,356
10/7/16 10:30:13 PM
10/7/16 10:30:13 PM
|
+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.
|
Post #414,359
10/8/16 2:25:31 AM
10/8/16 2:25:31 AM
|
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.
|
Post #414,360
10/8/16 3:21:24 AM
10/8/16 3:21:24 AM
|
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.
|