It's not Rooting, its Openness says google

---

I found this article VERY interesting, and thought some of you may enjoy it.

Posted by Google themselves; http://android-developers.blogspot.c...-openness.html

If you don't understand that, the people at digimoe made it more clear...

http://digimoe.com/google-says-andro...xus-s-included

As a developer phone, that's certainly true. I don't know. I mean Samsung doesn't have a reputation for locking their phones down hard, even on the non-google line. A reputation for **** development and longterm support, perhaps. And maybe that was google's thinking in choosing them as the Nexus 1 follow up. Certainly google has plenty to gain by helping Samsung out on the Galaxy S line. We'll see what the future brings.

But it's also easy for Google to talk about openness while sitting in the comfy confines of Mountain View. Can anyone go find me Google's support number for the Nexus S?

Not exactly Google's number, but there is this:

http://www.google.com/nexus/#/help

Google provides the OS, but Samsung is the manufacturer and the one in charge of quality control is responsible for support. This is as it should be.

They do provide a direct support phone number, it is just for Samsung.

good read.

Originally Posted by T313C0mun1s7

Not exactly Google's number, but there is this:

http://www.google.com/nexus/#/help

Google provides the OS, but Samsung is the manufacturer and the one in charge of quality control is responsible for support. This is as it should be.

They do provide a direct support phone number, it is just for Samsung.

My point was that it's easy to call for openness when you don't care about the consequences. Would you rather Tmobile/Samsung provide a link to root your phone at the time of purchase that also immediately voids your warranty? I doubt most here would take that offer.

I like Google's talk about openness, as selective as it may be. But I suspect the manufacturers and carriers roll their eyes when they get these lectures, and I don't necessarily blame them.

Originally Posted by WoodDraw

My point was that it's easy to call for openness when you don't care about the consequences. Would you rather Tmobile/Samsung provide a link to root your phone at the time of purchase that also immediately voids your warranty? I doubt most here would take that offer.

I like Google's talk about openness, as selective as it may be. But I suspect the manufacturers and carriers roll their eyes when they get these lectures, and I don't necessarily blame them.

Except for 1 thing, they are choosing to of their own free will sell a device that is based on a free, open source operating system that has a license that states a requirement of openness, and even that their source modifications are required to be submitted back to the source tree.

The drivers are proprietary, and that is fine - even if it is the reason for the requirement for us to use leaked ROMs to get all the hardware to work. Rooting does not change the drivers, and this discussion ended at rooting. That said even after rooting the parts that get changed are just the open source parts that the devs have the source for because it is in the AOSP depository.

If they don't want to support your changes to the OS that is their prerogative, but they still have a responsibility to support the hardware for defects.

At some point I would like to see someone with the money, time, and conviction sue their carrier when they refuse to honor the warranty because it was rooted. See that clause breaks many of the original licenses that make up the various parts of the OS. In fact they are required to provide a copy to the GPL or at least a link to it AND the source itself. They know they can't win this, which is why I think they like to say it voids the warranty, but as long as the phone looks like it is stock (which is more about not supporting errors you introduced) then they don't really look too hard.

If they don't want to let people exercise their rights under the various open source licenses, then they should stick to devices with enforceable, proprietary operating systems like iOS, Windows Mobile, Symbian, and Web OS.

"Openness" is an excuse, obviously.

I like how Google is trying to save face, and that other site is trying hard to help them along.

People these days seem to just be less concerned about security.

Actively fixing security holes doesn't matter for an OS that cannot be esily pushed out to users as updates. Does it really matter if you fix security holes, but half o fyour users never recieve those fixes?

Well, yea, it does... Just not as much as they think it does.

Also the sandboxing thing is a joke, studies have been conducted and lots of Android apps are sharing data with each other foe the benefit of Advertisers, etc.