[Discussion] - HTCLinkify and what it means to you!

Search This thread

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
I made this thread so people can discuss the addition to HCTLinkify and how it affects you and why it came into existance.

Background:
Apple has a patent on the way Sense (possibly Android 4.0) handles links on screen and how the user interacts with the touch input. Instead of trying to expalin the whole patent dispute I will let you read more HERE

The patent in question is HERE

This is also the reason the delayed Shipping of the HTC One X and the Evo 4G LTE.

Current situation:
HTC has circumvented the patent dispute with the use of HTCLiunkify which simply changes the way it handles the onscreen links. This has caused concern for some users because they feel functionality has been degraded. This is debateble.


My delimna:
Some, handfull of users, are asking me to remove this work around from my ROM and violate apples patended "link" technoilogy. I state that if HTC and Google, Sprint and ATT can be sued so cant I. Maybe this is an unreliatic fear but none the less quite possible.

My Answer: Im not removing at this time but may consider it in the future. ITs functioning the way HTC / ATT intended.



DISCUSS!

Talk about why Apple sucks or you feel this was a good ruling by the courts. Give me a valid reason to take this out of the ROM and risk Apple's wrath (Albiet prolly unrealistic).

More importantly tell me if it even affects you?
 

Turge

Inactive Recognized Developer
Sep 20, 2008
4,792
20,768
Hamilton
venomroms.com
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.

The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??

Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.

Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?

Anyways, discuss :D
 

mrjaydee82

Senior Member
Apr 5, 2010
6,754
12,548
Naples, FL
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.

The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??

Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.

Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?

Anyways, discuss :D

I like your way of thinking :)
 

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.

The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??

Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.

Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?

Anyways, discuss :D

Good pioint... BUT...

My ROM is (phisicyally) hosted in the US and would therefore need to comply with all US Copright and Patenet laws.


And no... Im not going to buy a server outside of the country to circumvent this, lol
 

KitF

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2010
413
79
Philadelphia
kit.im
Aren't you technically breaking copyright by modifying HTC's software anyway?

Unless somewhere they state that their Sense stuff is free to modify. They provide the source so that people can work use that for open-source AOSP. Sense, I believe (I could be wrong) is NOT open source.
 

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
Aren't you technically breaking copyright by modifying HTC's software anyway?

Unless somewhere they state that their Sense stuff is free to modify. They provide the source so that people can work use that for open-source AOSP. Sense, I believe (I could be wrong) is NOT open source.

Its not open source but HTC has differnt policies than Apple.

Ive never seen HTC Threaten to sue someoen.. Well once.. but that was because unreleased code was being released (IE LEaked ROMS for devices that were not even on the market yet). But other than that they given the "unofficial" greent light to making modifications to there product and distibute

We are called the "enthusiast community" and help sell there product. This is why HTC has created HTCDev.com. Specifically to unlock the pohones for the purpose of custom built ROMS / Mods, etc, no?

I am also part of HTC Elevate (elevate.htc.com <- Private boys club for HTC developers and vendors and HTC Staff to dicsuss HTC Products, give input, request changes to products) and will try to seek clarification. But HTC and Apple are two differnt animals all together.


If Apple opened up the bootloaders on iCrap devices I would agree with your point but honestly... Two differnt animals we are talking about.

Once the above issue occrued (releaseing unreleased code) HTC Made a statement at that time that it was ok to re-release the code as long as it was normally publicly available... IE Not Leaked code and definetlay not leaked for device that were not even on the market yet.

Search Google / XDA for this word "conflipper" You will understand then...
 
Last edited:

Turge

Inactive Recognized Developer
Sep 20, 2008
4,792
20,768
Hamilton
venomroms.com
Its not open source but HTC has differnt policies than Apple.

Ive never seen HTC Threaten to sue someoen.. Well once.. but that was because unreleased code was being modified and released. But other htan that they give the "unofficial" greent light to making modifications to there product.

We are called the "enthusiast community" and help sell ther eproduct. This is why HTC has created HTCDev.com. Specifically to unlock the pohones for the purpose of custom built ROMS, no?

I am also part of HTC Elevate (elevate.htc.com <- Private boys club for HTC developers and vendors and cool users!) and will try to seek clarification. But HTC and apple are two differnt animals all together.


If Apple opened up the bootloaders on iCrap devices I would agree with your point but honestly... Tow differnt animals we are talking about.

Once the above issue occrued (releaseing unreleased code) HTC Made a statement at that time that it was ok to re-release the code as long as it was normally publicly available...

Search Google / XDA for this word "conflipper" You will understand then...

It's a little different, but I remember HTC asking the developers of Launcher Pro to remove their "HTC-like" flip clock from their launcher. I don't think they're bothered with all of the other flip clock developers since though since it might just have been a momentary lapse of judgement, or a rogue power-tripping HTC employee. Just wanted to point out that there is a little bit of history between HTC and developers.
 

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
It's a little different, but I remember HTC asking the developers of Launcher Pro to remove their "HTC-like" flip clock from their launcher. I don't think they're bothered with all of the other flip clock developers since though since it might just have been a momentary lapse of judgement, or a rogue power-tripping HTC employee. Just wanted to point out that there is a little bit of history between HTC and developers.

That is a dieffernt case though... But once again... This is not about HTC suing anyone, its about Apple.

Lets keep the discussion on Apple being the douceh bags, not HTC.
 

Spankly

Member
Jun 19, 2011
49
14
in a house
Me and a friend were thinking. Say for example when you go buy your phone. You pay an extra 20 bucks for the apple tech. Just a thought. And yes I understand that it still is an imperfect plan but everybody wins. We as consumers get what we want and apple gets there money for there code.

Edit
Hey I don't like to support apple either. But this whole mess hurts everybody including apple. Apple looks like a big jackass for suing over something so stupid and all the rest of the cellphone makers have to scramble to fix this while all of their product sits in the ports.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
 
Last edited:

fitchpuckman

Senior Member
May 10, 2012
315
55
I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.

The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??

Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.

Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?

Anyways, discuss :D

Completely agree. I would prefer the links just opening directly w/in the apps, even if I dont get the luxury of a prompt. the apps are far better - and intended - for viewing the content that many of these links are referring to. I dont want XDA, YouTube, Facebook, Groupon, etc. all opening up my browser and viewing what is often a 'desktop' site as directed by the link. If I want that, I can just copy/paste the link into my browser, but I'd nearly always prefer that a link automatically went directly into the associated app. i'd support pretty much any method available for getting a damn link to open in an app that I already have on my phone and, therefore, presumably would rather use over the web version of the site. I mean, why else would the user have apps? To me, this is a prime example of where patent laws have just gone too far.
 

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
Me and a friend were thinking. Say for example when you go buy your phone. You pay an extra 20 bucks for the apple tech. Just a thought. And yes I understand that it still is an imperfect plan but everybody wins. We as consumers get what we want and apple gets there money for there code.

Edit
Hey I don't like to support apple either. But this whole mess hurts everybody including apple. Apple looks like a big jackass for suing over something so stupid and all the rest of the cellphone makers have to scramble to fix this while all of their product sits in the ports.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Actually this is a feasible busniess model! Did you know that Google has to pay Microsoft every time an Android phone is activcated due to patentes used by Google in the Android OS.

Microsoft was smart about it. Apple is just plain ****ing greedy. How many 12 year old Asian boys does it take to make an iPod.... Ask Apple they can tell you.



Google it... Goole everything I say. Its all true.
 

Scott

Retired Recognized Developer
Completely agree. I would prefer the links just opening directly w/in the apps, even if I dont get the luxury of a prompt. the apps are far better - and intended - for viewing the content that many of these links are referring to. I dont want XDA, YouTube, Facebook, Groupon, etc. all opening up my browser and viewing what is often a 'desktop' site as directed by the link. If I want that, I can just copy/paste the link into my browser, but I'd nearly always prefer that a link automatically went directly into the associated app. i'd support pretty much any method available for getting a damn link to open in an app that I already have on my phone and, therefore, presumably would rather use over the web version of the site. I mean, why else would the user have apps? To me, this is a prime example of where patent laws have just gone too far.

To be honest with you man. Can someone explain to me what it even does differntly? When I click phone number in a text message it goes right to the phone.

What doesnt even work? Or work as expected?
 

Turge

Inactive Recognized Developer
Sep 20, 2008
4,792
20,768
Hamilton
venomroms.com
Also, I want to point out...

This is about Apple, not HTC. If HTC opens a lawsuit with me for making Custom ROMS then I am pretty sure all of XDA woudl be shut down, etc etc etc...


So lets not derail the Apple issue with HTC...

Its an Apple to Oranges comparison (Get it, Apple, gett it?)

Well, the point was originally raised to ask "Where do we draw the line?".

I'm sure Cyanogenmod will never have to worry about Apple, so why should we/you?


Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
 

Top Liked Posts

  • There are no posts matching your filters.
  • 5
    I personally can't stand the half-ass change HTC implemented. When I was running your ROM, I spent a few hours trying to remove it.

    The way it's supposed to work is when you click a link to YouTube, Google Play, Google+, etc., it's supposed to prompt you to use the app. If they can no longer prompt because of the lawsuit, they should just redirect the link to the app instead of the browser. Why would anyone want otherwise??

    Here's a good example of how stupid it is. When I watch YouTube videos, it's usually from people emailing me a link, sharing it on Google+ or being embedded/linked in a web page. I seldom ever launch the YouTube app to view a video. With their implementation, the YouTube app is virtually useless.

    Now, why does your ROM have to have it, but mine doesn't? Mine's obviously based on the Rogers RUU which never implemented the workaround because they didn't have to. But if you successfully removed all AT&T references, we would be left with virtually identical ROMs with different bases. Since your ROM isn't specifically made for US residents, why would that not be ok?

    Anyways, discuss :D
    4
    There is difference between copyright and copyright trolls. Apple is nothing less but copyright troll.

    To be honest with you man. Can someone explain to me what it even does differntly? When I click phone number in a text message it goes right to the phone.

    What doesnt even work? Or work as expected?
    Every web link open in browser, instead of giving a choice if it's a youtube video open it in youtube app or a browser, if it's link to app on market website, open google play, if it's map link, open in maps app, not browser, there are plenty examples that are not only open links in browser.


    So here is a proposal. If you know how to fix it, make a mod and I'll publish it as anonymous with no leads going towards you...on a server located somewhere in Russia...
    3
    Is there a way to create a flashable mod to remove it so that the user takes responsibility and not the rom developer?

    Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
    3
    All's im saying... In the unlikely event any fruit related company comes to and gives me **** I hope you will all do what it is you can do to back me up!
    2
    I made this thread so people can discuss the addition to HCTLinkify and how it affects you and why it came into existance.

    Background:
    Apple has a patent on the way Sense (possibly Android 4.0) handles links on screen and how the user interacts with the touch input. Instead of trying to expalin the whole patent dispute I will let you read more HERE

    The patent in question is HERE

    This is also the reason the delayed Shipping of the HTC One X and the Evo 4G LTE.

    Current situation:
    HTC has circumvented the patent dispute with the use of HTCLiunkify which simply changes the way it handles the onscreen links. This has caused concern for some users because they feel functionality has been degraded. This is debateble.


    My delimna:
    Some, handfull of users, are asking me to remove this work around from my ROM and violate apples patended "link" technoilogy. I state that if HTC and Google, Sprint and ATT can be sued so cant I. Maybe this is an unreliatic fear but none the less quite possible.

    My Answer: Im not removing at this time but may consider it in the future. ITs functioning the way HTC / ATT intended.



    DISCUSS!

    Talk about why Apple sucks or you feel this was a good ruling by the courts. Give me a valid reason to take this out of the ROM and risk Apple's wrath (Albiet prolly unrealistic).

    More importantly tell me if it even affects you?
Our Apps
Get our official app!
The best way to access XDA on your phone
Nav Gestures
Add swipe gestures to any Android
One Handed Mode
Eases uses one hand with your phone