Google Devs call out Android phone manufacturers

[Vermillion]

Very interesting read straight from an Google Android developer. Basically it says all companies should allow rooting and have unlocked bootloaders so we can do what we want with our phones. It goes on to say the act of rooting should not have to be by compromising our security since current methods of rooting for all phones but two (the Nexus phones) exploit a security hole in some way to gain root access.

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/12/its-not-rooting-its-openness.html

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...ndroid-users-freedom-to-unlock-bootloader.ars

 

[Zorachus]

Would love to hear Steve Jobs say something like this lol never gonna happen with his emperor iron fist ruling over Apple development.

Android FTW.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Mabrito]

Very interesting read straight from an Google Android developer. Basically it says all companies should allow rooting and have unlocked bootloaders so we can do what we want with our phones. It goes on to say the act of rooting should not have to be by compromising our security since current methods of rooting for all phones but two (the Nexus phones) exploit a security hole in some way to gain root access.

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/12/its-not-rooting-its-openness.html

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...ndroid-users-freedom-to-unlock-bootloader.ars

I agree, some of the Android roms are very nice. I support rooting or jailbreaking fully. I know the phone manufacturers are worried about dumb asses voiding warranties and my thought on the subject is simple: if they break there phone in any way in rooting or modifying it, then the warranty is not void. They are only reliable for the phone on how you brought it, if you mod it in any kind, then no they shouldn't have to honor the warranty. Just my two cents.

 

[Vermillion]

I agree, some of the Android roms are very nice. I support rooting or jailbreaking fully. I know the phone manufacturers are worried about dumb asses voiding warranties and my thought on the subject is simple: if they break there phone in any way in rooting or modifying it, then the warranty is not void. They are only reliable for the phone on how you brought it, if you mod it in any kind, then no they shouldn't have to honor the warranty. Just my two cents.

Yep. That's exactly what it should be. If you break it because you use a custom ROM on then it we won't honor any warranty. That's what's so nice though about Android. If everybody did it like Nexus One/S or Droid it would be damn near impossible to brick the phone.

 

[DirtyB]

Would be awesome the only ui I like is stock UI and HTC's sense UI.

 

[elm669]

Verizon ota 2.3.340 just hit on my phone, I had to jump through hoops including a little voodoo to get it to root again, I agree we should have full control of the devices we PAID for

Edit: I'll add the 2.3.340 app just made my phone super fast, all the problems I've been having with all three of these phones I've had.. disappeared! fail verizon for releasing such a buggy 2.2 in the first place!

 

[bastage]

heh.. Google talks big, Too bad only the enthusiasts will listen..

 

[Ocellaris]

Very interesting read straight from an Google Android developer. Basically it says all companies should allow rooting and have unlocked bootloaders so we can do what we want with our phones. It goes on to say the act of rooting should not have to be by compromising our security since current methods of rooting for all phones but two (the Nexus phones) exploit a security hole in some way to gain root access.

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/12/its-not-rooting-its-openness.html

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...ndroid-users-freedom-to-unlock-bootloader.ars

Google talks a lot of shit without backing it up. Google code was yanked from the linux kernel because they linked to files that were not public and both chrome os and android are developed behind closed doors. Plus they release shit like gingerbread as a retail product (exclusively from best buy) before releasing the source so they get a head start and more cash from their advantage of having the only 2.3 phone on the market.

 

[kllrnohj]

Google talks a lot of shit without backing it up. Google code was yanked from the linux kernel because they linked to files that were not public and both chrome os and android are developed behind closed doors. Plus they release shit like gingerbread as a retail product (exclusively from best buy) before releasing the source so they get a head start and more cash from their advantage of having the only 2.3 phone on the market.

The source was delayed for all of a couple of weeks, big whoop. The newest version being developed behind closed doors isn't necessarily a bad thing, and given that they develop on hardware that isn't out yet that restriction is most likely out of Google's control and is a limitation of NDAs with the hardware manufacturers.

 

[Ocellaris]

The source was delayed for all of a couple of weeks, big whoop. The newest version being developed behind closed doors isn't necessarily a bad thing, and given that they develop on hardware that isn't out yet that restriction is most likely out of Google's control and is a limitation of NDAs with the hardware manufacturers.

Google can't have it both ways. They should not be running around and trying to get good PR talking about how things should be open and rooted and then develop software behind closed doors, release new hardware/software when they have a competitive advantage, and ship Google notebooks locked down by default.

Gingerbread was not developed on unreleased hardware either.

 

[bastage]

Google can't have it both ways. They should not be running around and trying to get good PR talking about how things should be open and rooted and then develop software behind closed doors, release new hardware/software when they have a competitive advantage, and ship Google notebooks locked down by default.

Gingerbread was not developed on unreleased hardware either.

This made me lol... They can develop it anywhere they damn well please as long as they release it open.. Your right Gingerbread was not done behind close doors, But its also not a "major" change.. its a small revision change. Where as Next version (3.0 Honeycomb) is supposed to be a completely new interface with Major changes to the OS..

 

[kllrnohj]

Google can't have it both ways. They should not be running around and trying to get good PR talking about how things should be open and rooted and then develop software behind closed doors, release new hardware/software when they have a competitive advantage, and ship Google notebooks locked down by default.

lol @ "google notebooks locked down by default". No they aren't, they run Chrome OS by default as they are free notebooks given out for the sole purpose of running Chrome OS. And they include a switch if you want to install your own OS. They aren't locked down at all, they are wide open.

As for developing behind closed doors, again just going to point out that there are legal requirements. Which is why Android is developed behind closed doors, but the contributions to other open source projects (like webkit) are *not* behind closed doors. Go dig through Webkit's source tree and you'll find source contributions for honeycomb.

But again, why does it matter if the software is developed behind closed doors? That is really how all open source development works. Patches are developed behind closed doors and then released when they are ready. Android's patches just happen to be entire versions. It doesn't hurt the open source community at all that new versions are developed behind closed doors. You just want access to alpha and beta versions of Android and are butt-hurt that they won't let you. Developing in the open would also hurt Android as Android would lose a competitive edge. NFC, for example, is fairly unique to Android at the moment. Developing in the open would mean Android loses a lot of competitiveness.

Gingerbread was not developed on unreleased hardware either.

Yes it was, it was developed on the Nexus S, which was launched *AFTER* Gingerbread was announced.

 

[Greenstuffs]

At least is not going to happen in Verizon or AT&T

 

[elm669]

Verizon ota 2.3.340 just hit on my phone, I had to jump through hoops including a little voodoo to get it to root again, I agree we should have full control of the devices we PAID for

Edit: I'll add the 2.3.340 app just made my phone super fast, all the problems I've been having with all three of these phones I've had.. disappeared! fail verizon for releasing such a buggy 2.2 in the first place!

update: now with 2.3.340 its telling me my battery is not a valid Motorola one.. even though its the one that came with the phone.. fail verizon and motorola, this phone has been the most buggy piece of shit I've seen so far.

 

[Godmachine]

Very interesting read straight from an Google Android developer. Basically it says all companies should allow rooting and have unlocked bootloaders so we can do what we want with our phones. It goes on to say the act of rooting should not have to be by compromising our security since current methods of rooting for all phones but two (the Nexus phones) exploit a security hole in some way to gain root access.

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/12/its-not-rooting-its-openness.html

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news...ndroid-users-freedom-to-unlock-bootloader.ars

Right and Apple should allow users to buy there own hardware and assemble there own Mac's.

It won't ever happen. The manufacturers nor the Cell phone company's don't want anyone doing anything they can't monitor and hold strict control on ..and then charge for.

Its great this Dev thinks this way but his entire argument is merely the whole "If we lived in an ideal world ...everyone would wake up to there very own Scarlett Johansson giving them a blow job then making breakfast".

Pipe dream confirmed.

 

[DeathsDeath]

Why does google go so many things right? Why cant they just always be right.

 

[Vermillion]

Right and Apple should allow users to buy there own hardware and assemble there own Mac's.

It won't ever happen. The manufacturers nor the Cell phone company's don't want anyone doing anything they can't monitor and hold strict control on ..and then charge for.

Its great this Dev thinks this way but his entire argument is merely the whole "If we lived in an ideal world ...everyone would wake up to there very own Scarlett Johansson giving them a blow job then making breakfast".

Pipe dream confirmed.

The problem is Google is RIGHT. This can be done. I understand your argument though. However, what is the only thing custom ROM's give to a user over a stock ROM that companies lose money on?

Answer: Tethering

There isn't another single benefit to using a custom ROM that costs a company money. I can totally understand that too except one thing. How many people actually root, custom ROM and use tether? 1%? Less then 1%? Sorry, but I just don't think they should use that as an excuse.

Companies like Motorola could possibly be losing that 1% of business because people like me will go elsewhere to get an unlocked phone. If I had to replace my Droid right this second it would be a Droid Incredible. Motorola will not be getting another penny from me unless they stop locking their bootloaders.

My Droid runs so much better with Cyanogen then it ever did stock. My sister-in-law and mother-in-law both have stock Droids. Their battery life isn't anywhere close to mine and their phones are slow. Even rooting my wife's Droid Incredible and loading Skyraider more then doubled her battery life.

 

[Ocellaris]

The problem is Google is RIGHT. This can be done. I understand your argument though. However, what is the only thing custom ROM's give to a user over a stock ROM that companies lose money on?

Answer: Tethering

There isn't another single benefit to using a custom ROM that costs a company money. I can totally understand that too except one thing. How many people actually root, custom ROM and use tether? 1%? Less then 1%? Sorry, but I just don't think they should use that as an excuse.

Companies like Motorola could possibly be losing that 1% of business because people like me will go elsewhere to get an unlocked phone. If I had to replace my Droid right this second it would be a Droid Incredible. Motorola will not be getting another penny from me unless they stop locking their bootloaders.

My Droid runs so much better with Cyanogen then it ever did stock. My sister-in-law and mother-in-law both have stock Droids. Their battery life isn't anywhere close to mine and their phones are slow. Even rooting my wife's Droid Incredible and loading Skyraider more then doubled her battery life.

Google isn't "RIGHT" because they are hypocrites with how they handle everything.

With some Froyo 2.2 phones, you can enable tethering with free apps on the marketplace (without rooting the phone). Search for Hotspot Widget on the marketplace.

Also Motorola doesn't want an extra 1% business they would get selling wide open phones. Carriers control what goes on the phones, and going against that would hurt a lot more than an extra 1% would offset.

 

[quadnad]

With some Froyo 2.2 phones, you can enable tethering with free apps on the marketplace (without rooting the phone). Search for Hotspot Widget on the marketplace.

You don't need an app to wirelessly tether on 2.2 UNLESS your carrier removed it from the options menu of your rom (though I like hotspot widget anyway because of its handy one-touch on/off button). It's a stock feature available in the 2.2 rom, but a lot of carriers/manufacturers disabled it.

I do like what they're saying though, that instead of having to choose between security and openness, just give the option to the user. Hell, have it void the warranty or something if you're concerned with people bricking their phones that way and having to deal with it as a technical support problem.

In fact, it's openness that dictates my choice in Android phones - I don't want to rely on a security loophole to be able to run whatever rom I feel like.

 

[Ocellaris]

You don't need an app to wirelessly tether on 2.2 UNLESS your carrier removed it from the options menu of your rom (though I like hotspot widget anyway because of its handy one-touch on/off button). It's a stock feature available in the 2.2 rom, but a lot of carriers/manufacturers disabled it.

I do like what they're saying though, that instead of having to choose between security and openness, just give the option to the user. Hell, have it void the warranty or something if you're concerned with people bricking their phones that way and having to deal with it as a technical support problem.

In fact, it's openness that dictates my choice in Android phones - I don't want to rely on a security loophole to be able to run whatever rom I feel like.

Most carriers remove the Hotspot functionality...

Also for people to just give the option to the user, carriers would have to break out of the 2 year contracts and charge more for the phones. Then people would pitch a fit because the phones were all $400 to $650 out the door.

 

[guisar]

You don't need an app to wirelessly tether on 2.2 UNLESS your carrier removed it from the options menu of your rom (though I like hotspot widget anyway because of its handy one-touch on/off button). It's a stock feature available in the 2.2 rom, but a lot of carriers/manufacturers disabled it.

I do like what they're saying though, that instead of having to choose between security and openness, just give the option to the user. Hell, have it void the warranty or something if you're concerned with people bricking their phones that way and having to deal with it as a technical support problem.

In fact, it's openness that dictates my choice in Android phones - I don't want to rely on a security loophole to be able to run whatever rom I feel like.

I hope you're not buying into the "security versus openness" argument; I'd trust the custom kernels MORE than something stock from Motorola strictly because billions of eyes have looked it over and they are under way less release pressure than the carriers who, despite the long delays in releasing updates, are way more concerned with their proprietary interfaces than security

100% agree on openness- I bought an HTC this time around because I knew it could be rooted. If they change that policy; I'll change phones. Hopefully there will always be a featureful phone that's open for devs and users.

 

[quadnad]

Most carriers remove the Hotspot functionality...

Also for people to just give the option to the user, carriers would have to break out of the 2 year contracts and charge more for the phones. Then people would pitch a fit because the phones were all $400 to $650 out the door.

I guess that's why I'm using a Nexus phone, to avoid all the obnoxious carrier bloatware.

Not sure why voiding a warranty would mean they couldn't do 2 year contracts? I just mean if carriers really felt that it could produce a technical support nightmare for them, how about running custom software voids the warranty?

 

[quadnad]

I hope you're not buying into the "security versus openness" argument; I'd trust the custom kernels MORE than something stock from Motorola strictly because billions of eyes have looked it over and they are under way less release pressure than the carriers who, despite the long delays in releasing updates, are way more concerned with their proprietary interfaces than security

100% agree on openness- I bought an HTC this time around because I knew it could be rooted. If they change that policy; I'll change phones. Hopefully there will always be a featureful phone that's open for devs and users.

All I'm saying is I would really prefer it if all manufacturers offered an easy way to gain root access to your phone, and unlock the bootloader so we can load custom roms, as opposed to having people search for and exploit weaknesses in phone security to do so.

 

[Ocellaris]

I guess that's why I'm using a Nexus phone, to avoid all the obnoxious carrier bloatware.

Not sure why voiding a warranty would mean they couldn't do 2 year contracts? I just mean if carriers really felt that it could produce a technical support nightmare for them, how about running custom software voids the warranty?

Carriers would still need to support the people with rooted phones though, since they are paying for the service and those people expect support. Plus customers with rooted phones will call up support and lie about rooting their phones anyway

 

[quadnad]

Carriers would still need to support the people with rooted phones though, since they are paying for the service and those people expect support. Plus customers with rooted phones will call up support and lie about rooting their phones anyway

I hear you, but I'm referring to people sending their phones in after bricking them. I sincerely doubt "allowing" what we currently have on the Nexus phones will increase much in the way of telephone support issues - for the average user, even doing what we need to do on the Nexus phones looks bloody difficult.

 

[Vermillion]

Carriers would still need to support the people with rooted phones though, since they are paying for the service and those people expect support. Plus customers with rooted phones will call up support and lie about rooting their phones anyway

There's nothing wrong with supporting a rooted phone. Rooting won't kill a backlight or a hardware keyboard. The odds of custom ROM's hurting hardware is just about nil as well. Plus the amount of people actually rooting and customizing the phone will be relatively small since 99% of the population just doesn't give a shit.

I hear you, but I'm referring to people sending their phones in after bricking them. I sincerely doubt "allowing" what we currently have on the Nexus phones will increase much in the way of telephone support issues - for the average user, even doing what we need to do on the Nexus phones looks bloody difficult.

It's nearly impossible to brick a Droid because we have RSDlite and the SBF files which is also how Motorola fixes bricked phones. You literally have to WANT to brick the Droid to get it to happen.

The people bricking phones are the ones who are trying to screw with phones with locked bootloaders and shit because they want to use customized Android builds. They have no other choice other then trying to hack into them. So in the end the bricked phones are the manufacturer's own damn fault.

 

[quadnad]

It's nearly impossible to brick a Droid because we have RSDlite and the SBF files which is also how Motorola fixes bricked phones. You literally have to WANT to brick the Droid to get it to happen.

The people bricking phones are the ones who are trying to screw with phones with locked bootloaders and shit because they want to use customized Android builds. They have no other choice other then trying to hack into them. So in the end the bricked phones are the manufacturer's own damn fault.

I'm not saying that bricking will happen, or that it should, I'm just saying that it is presumably a fear from the carrier and manufacturer's perspective that people will fuck up and try to get the phone replaced.

 

[Vermillion]

I'm not saying that bricking will happen, or that it should, I'm just saying that it is presumably a fear from the carrier and manufacturer's perspective that people will fuck up and try to get the phone replaced.

And it happens everywhere. Xbox, PS, Wii, GPUs, CPUs, and more. Companies all account for this crap happening. How many OTA updates have we seen brick phones and game consoles? Plenty.

Fear of people returning bricked devices is an incredibly weak excuse for having an encrypted bootloader.