This article highlights one of my frustrations with Android as a platform. As a longtime Linux user, I couldn't wait to get an Android smartphone. For some reason, I thought I would enjoy the same freedoms on a familiar and secure platform. But I shortly discovered that Google reinvented the wheel (poorly) for <i>everything</i>, manufacturers went to great lengths to lock down devices, and carriers blocked security and version updates <i>even when the manufacturer had released them in other markets</i>. The Android I had to endure for the last two years looked nothing like the Linux I used on my desktop and servers; it was more reminiscent of Windows 95. So, in an ironic twist, I replaced it with a Lumia 920 running Windows Phone 8 this past December. It isn't Linux either, but it excels as a smartphone and the UI is fantastic (I much prefer live tiles over icons littering a desktop). When I use it, I get the sense that Microsoft paid close attention to the things users hate about Android and iOS. If they can resist feature creep and retain their focus on simplicity and security, they might have a real contender. It's too bad Google didn't exert more control over the user experience in Android and allowed manufacturers and carriers to create such a mess that exists today.
I tend to agree with this. Samsung made a big event of declaring their support for developers of Exynos devices, but have stayed quiet and slow in showing that they meant it. The Mali GPU is one area where access is still locked down to a binary blob, and it doesn't look as if that will change.<p>The GPU is accessible under license to ARM partners according to ARM, though I've not seen it, and I think it's not Samsung's to give away unilaterally. There's competitive advantage issues involved no doubt, including the fact that Imagination GPU design, just down the M1 motorway from ARM, and used in the OMAP5, are locked down as well.<p>The Exynos 5 dual core is a great device, but as in so much to do with ARM licenses, the peripherals are the work of the licensee. Texas Instruments use dual Cortex-m4's along with A15's in the OMAP5 which is a very capable approach when combined with good peripherals.<p>I can see why Samsung would be cautious, but I do think they've been misleading in promising more than they could deliver. So far it just looks like a fork of Android Jellybean.
The title is a little misleading, it led me to believe that it was about Android app developers, not custom distro developers.<p>That being said, I'm a bit thorn on this. From the developer side, Samsung seem a bit too prickly, specially when Android is touted as an "open" platform. On Samsung's side, it has no obligation whatsoever to provide all the data and source when asked.
Here's the beginning of a detailed 10-part post on the topic:
<a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/101093310520661581786/posts/ZgBQuZNzMZL" rel="nofollow">https://plus.google.com/u/0/101093310520661581786/posts/ZgBQ...</a><p>Links to the other parts are contained in each post.
Before blaming OEMs, look to Google for leadership, or lack of it, in supporting Android as an open system by encouraging open drivers and documented peripherals.<p>Google has wielded the "Anti-fragmentation Agreement" as a whip to keep Android OEMs from straying into temptations like Aliyun. Surely a bit of love for AOSP-based Android distributions that grow the system integration talent pool are within the scope of not being evil.
I just hope that Motorola+Google will be a rolemodel in the future in this regard. The Google Nexus devices have been very good to go for modding. Now Motorola needs to do that as well. They could even make us of the modding scene to provide regular updates instead of what is currently the case with every manufacturer for non-Nexus devices.
I wonder if this might end up as a trend towards the 'leaders' on the Android scene moving away from the Samsung stable to another manufacturer, and if so will that lead to the community following? Samsung is doing fantastically well at the moment so it doesn't make sense for them to start picking up a bad reputation for not playing ball.
Is this a linkbait title or do I misundertand things? The article is about how Samsung does not <i>actively</i> support Cyanogenmod. Translating that to "screwing over Android developers" is like saying that Nintendo screws over Linux developers by not making it easy to install Linux on a Wii.
I understand his frustration. I can only imagine he spent many hours fighting to get his distro to work with his S3 and he now realized he has to give up. It's never a good feeling!
In this thread: everyone complains about carriers lock in and then proceed to play angry birds on their $0.99 phones locked into 2yr contract.<p>damn you all to hell.