= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Google vs Wikipedia, for-profit vs not-for-profit - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (42)
What are you talking about exactly? The latest deal with Samsung to put less of their own bloatware into android? I think it's still pretty straightforward to install CyanogenMod if you want to do so.
But to come back to the topic at hand, Google is a company who wants to make money. When releasing something as open source interferes with that mission they won't release something as open source. On the other hand there are plenty of cases where Google supports Open Source.
For the for-profit vs. non-profit discussion even RedHat is a for-profit company.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/neither-microsoft-nokia-nor-anyone-else-should-fork-android-its-unforkable/
One example that the second article makes is that features like in app purchases are bad to be behind closed source.
In-app purchases inherently need specific architecture and trust in an institution that facilitates payment. With Android you are free to switch over to another system that facillitates payment.
A company like Ripple is free to compete with Google's solution and provide developers an alternative. The same is not true with the iPhone where third party payment processors are outlawed.