Android openness withering as Google withholds Honeycomb code

Google says that it will not be publishing the source code of Android 3.0, codenamed Honeycomb, in the foreseeable future. The troubling move further erodes Android's openness and will be detrimental to community-driven Android tablet modding efforts.

<a href='http://meincmagazine.com/open-source/news/2011/03/android-openness-withering-as-google-withhold-honeycomb-code.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[EssenMeinWurst]

Welcome to Apple 2.0 I guess.

 

[ewelch]

Whoop, the evil Apple is laughing with delight as Google admits that when Jobs and Schmidt had lunch together, and talked about eventually having to reveal something, it pointed to this kind of future for both iOS and Android.

 

[xtreme2k]

Last time I check. Google is a public company. A public company's only purpose is to generate shareholder value for its investors. For some reason idiots think just because they have 'open source' something means they have become a charity. Google is never a charity and never can be one. They are here to do business and earn revenue to please their investors. Simple as that. I am not sure why some idiots think they are a charity.

The sole reason they have open source something is to get market penetration and idiotic support from non-financial but technical people. Now this is not working for them financially and therefore have close it.

 

[Scyth3]

From Business Week: “To make our schedule to ship the tablet, we made some design tradeoffs,” says Andy Rubin, vice-president for engineering at Google and head of its Android group. “We didn’t want to think about what it would take for the same software to run on phones. It would have required a lot of additional resources and extended our schedule beyond what we thought was reasonable. So we took a shortcut.”

It makes sense that they wouldn't release it then. It's optimized for higher end tablets, and now they have to refactor it down to phone-size devices.

 

[backtomac]

Whoop, the evil Apple is laughing with delight as Google admits that lunch where Jobs and Schmidt had dinner together and talked about eventually having to reveal something it pointing to a similar future for iOS and Android.

Huh? Can you try again in English?

 

[Taracta]

GPL will take care of this. It is not "release (or make available) source code when you feel like" it is "release source code (or make available) when you release program"

 

[drhowarddrfine]

Delaying the release is not the same thing as withholding the release. Or can I no longer understand English?

 

[spookware]

Android is not under the GPL. Only the Android kernel is GPL. The rest is mainly apache.

 

[Shudder]

While I'm not happy about it, I can understand it. After the piles of shit that were released a few months ago from China, Android doesn't want its tablet presence to be marred more than it needs to be. If they released Honeycomb's source you'd have the market flooded with more of these Chinese turds.

On the other hand, I'd really like it for my Nook, but I'm sure their partnership with Motorola is more important to them than my needs.

As for the locking of bootloaders for phone, does anyone know why that even happens? Other than motorola wanting to rip you off, deny you an upgrade, and force you to buy a new phone to get the latest OS, it doesn't make sense.

In the end, if you're going to have a locked down platform it better be smooth. Otherwise, if you've gotta be locked down you might as well go Apple.

 

[DrBix]

First off, apparently Google hasn't had ANY issues generating revenue from their Android business, so releasing their code seems to have had little if any effect on their bottom line. In fact, I'd argue that it probably HELPS their bottom line because it encourages more people to develop for a device or set of devices.

Second, if they REALLY think that NOT releasing the source code is going to keep people from hacking their devices or any other 3rd party device, than their just being stupid. Time and time again, hackers have prevailed and there's "zero" chance that hackers won't hack the device regardless of what Google (or any other vendor) does.

In my opinion, this is a move to encourage more companies to produce Android device implementations because some companies (like Sony) shy away from doing implementations on open-source software (PS3 case in point). So it's probably more of a move to encourage more 3rd parties to jump on the Android bandwagon.

From what I'm reading, the statement doesn't imply that it will "never" be released, only for "the foreseeable future." That leaves quite a bit of leeway as to when, if ever, it will be released. And Google is not above changing their minds and have done it quite often; sometimes at the behest of their developers and users. Seeing as there are only a handful of devices available that even implement Honeycomb I really wouldn't be too worried "yet."

 

[xtreme2k]

Dr Bix

Google by not releasing the source (FOR NOW) means others cannot put it on underpowered/rubbish device or on an un-optimized manner. As this will lead to poor reviews and ultimately create a poor name for google. This eventually leads to hurting the bottom line...

Therefore its all about revenue generation.

That is why i am saying. Google made it open source as it suited them to create technical demand but when this is no longer consistent with what they want, they will close/delay it as they wish.

 

[Taracta]

Hold on! Is this story even accurate! What Google is withholding is the release of Andriod 3.0 on other devices other than tablets, e.g. smartphones! They are doing this because Andriod 3.0 was optimized for Tablets and it is not ready to be placed on smartphones. How did this end up being related to this FUD piece of a story?

 

[Desverger]

I think Rubin's explanation makes sense actually. Google has the extra burden that they are making a generic OS that needs to work on many form factors. If the current OS only works on certain form factors, then it is essentially unfinished. As a software developer I hate being rushed, so I think it's better for them to take the time to get it right and release it when it's done.

 

[mpat]

Hold on! Is this story even accurate! What Google is withholding is the release of Andriod 3.0 on other devices other than tablets, e.g. smartphones! They are doing this because Andriod 3.0 was optimized for Tablets and it is not ready to be placed on smartphones. How did this end up being related to this FUD piece of a story?

Did you read this piece, last link in the article above?

 

[Uncouth Youth]

Hold on! Is this story even accurate! What Google is withholding is the release of Andriod 3.0 on other devices other than tablets, e.g. smartphones! They are doing this because Andriod 3.0 was optimized for Tablets and it is not ready to be placed on smartphones. How did this end up being related to this FUD piece of a story?

Do you understand the difference between the "release" of an operating system and the release of its source code?

 

[nagha]

In the past year, any time anyone dared speak up and suggest that Google was anything less than a loving messiah-type company here to save the universe from Apple tyranny, sycophant Android fanbois would immediately attack, tar and feather the lunatic heretic. The fact is that Google is every bit as closed off, insulated and infected with the "non invented here" and "embrace, extend and extinguish" mentality that permeated the darker corners of Apple & Microsoft. "Don't be evil" is just shear bullshit.

 

[Swarley]

Hold on! Is this story even accurate! What Google is withholding is the release of Andriod 3.0 on other devices other than tablets, e.g. smartphones! They are doing this because Andriod 3.0 was optimized for Tablets and it is not ready to be placed on smartphones. How did this end up being related to this FUD piece of a story?

No, they are withholding the release of 3.0 on any device not made by Motorola. That's what it means when you don't release the source code. Right now, nobody can put 3.0 on ANY device, phone, tablet, or whatever, except for manufacturers selling tablets with it preinstalled, which right now means Motorola and nobody else. The story is not FUD. Your understanding of the mobile software ecosystem is just flawed.

 

[Ancalagon]

@Taracta

No, they are delaying the release of the source code at all, because hackers could attempt to get it to run on phones where it was not designed to run.

Normally I wouldnt care except for the fact that Google promised openness and availability. If they had never promised those things, this would not be news. However, now they have set a precedent, and have failed to meet it. To me, that is bad. I used to champion Android over iOS for precisely this reason, but now, what reason do I have? Only Apple's rules regarding the app store remain. And Apple in fact does upgrades a lot better because it tells carriers to implement them or f*ck off. Google gives carriers too much leeway, and it is this, not cheap knockoffs, that tarnish its image.

The worrying about cheap knock offs affecting its image is quite a line, I must say. Does Nintendo avoid releasing games because copies might surface in China? No, they dont, they release it because their consumers wont buy chinese knock offs given the chance. I wont buy an android knock off and neither will you guys, and if you did you would expect it to behave like a knock off.

 

[danimal4k]

I feel like these articles should be clearly marked as "OPINION" pieces.

 

[Slikkster]

Geez, I was so looking forward to modding my Nook Color with a Honeycomb release, too. What are my options there now, Froyo?

 

[jandrese]

The "it won't work well on phones, so we can't release it" excuse is weak sauce. It would be just as easy to put a note on the release stating as much and let people take their chances if they want. If they do try to install it on their phone and it performs poorly, then fine, the internet can laugh at them and they can go back to their previous firmware.

 

[fatimid08]

The whimsical notion that Android is an open platform is a tattered fabrication that has been stretched beyond the average open source software enthusiast's capacity to suspend disbelief.

This sentence just made my day. This sentence is made of pure awesomeness, regardless of whether or not I agree with it.

 

[brianjwd]

It's simple. They released an early version honeycomb to select hardware vendors they are working with to help develop honeycomb. When it's complete. They will clean it up, package it up and give it up. It's that simple. This happens in open-source projects all the time. Development is done internally, then released to public in stages. Even if you try to look at it from a negative way which is they are just holding it in, to make a profit or to have a strong hold of a tablet market (which is pretty much dominated by Apple). The fact is this, the source will be open.

 

[schwinn8]

I feel like these articles should be clearly marked as "OPINION" pieces.

Agreed. People need to understand that Open Source does not mean Open Development. Fact is, they hacked together something to make Honeycomb what it is today. They (and anyone who has read a review of the Xoom) are simply saying that it's not perfect. Likely, they took shortcuts to code directly for specific hardware on the Xoom... just to get it out in time.

Secondly, everyone has already been told that Ice Cream (Sandwich?) is supposed to be the next real release... Honeycomb simply seems to be an interstitial just to get a tablet out the door. So, I don't get what all this panic is about...

 

[dagamer34]

In this case, Google is even worse than Apple because it's pretending that everything is "open-source" while ignoring everything that actually makes it deserve that moniker.

Some examples:
1) Can you view the source code being worked on at any time?
2) Can you contribute fixes back to the source code?
3) Does everyone have equal access to the source code?
4) Any discussion boards for talking about new features to be implemented?

In fact, at this point, it just seems like Google releases these bits just because it has to eventually, otherwise it's acting as closed as they come. It's one-party rule with scraps for everyone else.

 

[geoken]

I don’t understand how you can criticize stuff like this;

“The vast majority of Android smartphones are encumbered by lockdown mechanisms that block installation of third-party firmware. Some mobile carriers even block installation of external software entirely, in stark contradiction of Google's early promises.”

while simultaneously desiring the platform to be more open?


Wouldn’t a more open platform only strengthen the OEM’s//Carrier’s ability to do stuff like that?

 

[darkpill]

Wow, Android fanboys are out in full force I see.

The reality is, Google can't keep up with the iOS, so to speed up development of honeycomb, they are cutting support for mobile phones. Secondly, the Android market is so fragmented and so full of shit devices, and nit a lot of revenue to be made, Google is only sharing Android with a select group of partners.

Oh, and lastly - this also proves Google are nothin but a bunch of pussies and are now the carriers' bitch: http://m.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/th ... droid/5855

 

[M Doiron]

What I read Google as saying (after reading several articles) is that they don't want to release a tablet-only OS. The software will be released when it's ready for all devices, including phones. IOW: The software was only half done and they chose to release early for certain, specific uses. The other option was no table release so that those of you who think you should have the code before it's fully developed could be happy to get it six months from now when it was fully done. I do not fault Google for this: It's just the way life is sometimes. I think that Google was caught off-guard by the success of the iPad and is now playing catch-up.

--mark d.

 

[Shudder]

"I wont buy an android knock off and neither will you guys, and if you did you would expect it to behave like a knock off."

This site has proven time and time again that we're not the majority of people. Someone who has done maybe 30 minutes of research is probably the primary buyer of tablets, not someone like us who knows everything inside and out. If they see a $150 tablet that looks like it has the same screen as the Xoom, they're going to buy it without ever understanding the problems it has.

Again, I still don't like it, I understand it, and I hope it's released sometime soon if cleaning it up is really what they're after.

 

[Mercutio879]

One of the pitfalls of open source is that anybody can use it. If you don't like cheap chinese manufacturers flooding the market with crappy products, don't use open source. Worse, Google continues it's Don Quixote like obsession with calling Android open, to the detriment of the open source community.

At this point, Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative is more open source than Google.

 

[10k]

If they see a $150 tablet that looks like it has the same screen as the Xoom, they're going to buy it without ever understanding the problems it has.

Maybe, but at least they will have only wasted $150 instead of $800

 

[petard]

In the past year, any time anyone dared speak up and suggest that Google was anything less than a loving messiah-type company here to save the universe from Apple tyranny, sycophant Android fanbois would immediately attack, tar and feather the lunatic heretic. The fact is that Google is every bit as closed off, insulated and infected with the "non invented here" and "embrace, extend and extinguish" mentality that permeated the darker corners of Apple & Microsoft. "Don't be evil" is just shear bullshit.

The fact that google is not 100% open does not make them "every bit as closed off" as "the darker corners of Apple & Microsoft." The fact that I can download free development tools, build and run my own apps on any google device I've owned is quite different than either of them, actually. In the "more open" direction.

And the phrase "shear bullshit" made me chuckle for some reason. Is that like a shear stress? What's the si unit for a "shear bullshit?" If there's not one, maybe there should be :devious:

 

[geoken]

The "it won't work well on phones, so we can't release it" excuse is weak sauce. It would be just as easy to put a note on the release stating as much and let people take their chances if they want. If they do try to install it on their phone and it performs poorly, then fine, the internet can laugh at them and they can go back to their previous firmware.

Except that’s not how it works.

Google put a big note on pre-Honeycomb versions of Android (in the form of public statements) saying that the OS was not suitable for tablets. Guess what happened. Samsung, who most assume Google’s statements were directly aimed at ignored ‘the note’ and made an Android tablet anyway. This tablet subsequently went on to be poorly reviewed, sully the image of Android on tablets, and steal a lot of thunder from the 3.0 honeycomb tablets (since by that time, an Android tablet was both old hat and considered mediocre).

Do you think if they release the 3.0 source no 2nd or 3rd tier manufacturer will try and put it on a phone. I can totally see someone like Huawei trying to gain notoriety with the first Honeycomb phone.

 

[ewelch]

Whoop, the evil Apple is laughing with delight as Google admits that when Jobs and Schmidt had lunch together, and talked about eventually having to reveal something, it pointed to this kind of future for both iOS and Android.

Huh? Can you try again in English?

There, edited. Dang, trying to multitask bit me in the butt as I was rushing to type before leaving for work.

Truthfully, I suspect Google is just admitting that open source is untenable for what they want to accomplish with Android.

 

[Swarley]

Wow, Android fanboys are out in full force I see.

The reality is, Google can't keep up with the iOS, so to speed up development of honeycomb, they are cutting support for mobile phones. Secondly, the Android market is so fragmented and so full of shit devices, and nit a lot of revenue to be made, Google is only sharing Android with a select group of partners.

Oh, and lastly - this also proves Google are nothin but a bunch of pussies and are now the carriers' bitch: http://m.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/th ... droid/5855

From the linked article: "Apple co-founder Steve Jobs said, “iPhone is the first phone where we separated the carrier from the hardware. They worry about the network, while we worry about the phone.”"

This is complete horse shit. If this was true then iPhones would have free tethering. Tethering has nothing to do with the network in much the same way that your wifi router at home has nothing to do with your ISP. Just because Apple controls software updates doesn't mean they "control the phone" and the carriers only "control the network".

 

[backtomac]

Whoop, the evil Apple is laughing with delight as Google admits that when Jobs and Schmidt had lunch together, and talked about eventually having to reveal something, it pointed to this kind of future for both iOS and Android.

Huh? Can you try again in English?

There, edited. Dang, trying to multitask bit me in the butt as I was rushing to type before leaving for work.

Truthfully, I suspect Google is just admitting that open source is untenable for what they want to accomplish with Android.

Gracias.

 

[ColinABQ]

The "it won't work well on phones, so we can't release it" excuse is weak sauce. It would be just as easy to put a note on the release stating as much and let people take their chances if they want. If they do try to install it on their phone and it performs poorly, then fine, the internet can laugh at them and they can go back to their previous firmware.

(emphasis mine)

Except that the "people" they would worry about are manufacturers, not consumers. There's a world of difference between a hobbyist or enthusiast borking their handset, and a mass market consumer buying a borked handset off the shelf (or web, whatever).

I do agree with Google's reasoning here, but not with the manner in which they handle these things. Their release cycles may be perfectly normal and natural as such things go, and even better for the entire community than what their detractors seem to demand. It's more an issue of transparency, imo.

 

[arcadium]

I feel like these articles should be clearly marked as "OPINION" pieces.

All arstechnica "news" articles are also opinion pieces. This is by design, and not hidden.

 

[Hast]

No, they are withholding the release of 3.0 on any device not made by Motorola.

I believe they have only restricted the source release "to everyone". Members of the OHA can have access to the code already. So it is possible for vendors other than Motorola to release devices on Honeycomb.

Furthermore I think it's a bit short-sighted to put all the blame on locked-down devices on Google. What it comes down to is that if you buy a subsidized device than there may be strings attached. If you don't like that buy a "clean" device for more money and feel free to do what you want with it.

I work in the mobile business, and it can be extremely frustrating that Google doesn't open up their timeline for everyone. But it is also quite understandable. The mobile market is extremely competitive and you really want every edge you can get. If you show your hand early it can be hard to keep that advantage until you have released products.

It is also sad that the Android team seem to have a strong "not invented here" syndrome with respect to code. Part of it may be because they are working on newer branches of the same code. But it does mean that it's hard for the community to help out.