We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
people to it, as a result.
I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
could use a custom rom on it.
Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
work better.
Don't become Apple!
The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
you for it.
I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
their phone.
This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
~L!TH
On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> people to it, as a result.
> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> could use a custom rom on it.
> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> work better.
> Don't become Apple!
> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> you for it.
It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
those, the Android platform doesn't work.
The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> their phone.
> This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> ~L!TH
> On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Google,
> > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > people to it, as a result.
> > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > could use a custom rom on it.
> > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > work better.
> > Don't become Apple!
> > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > you for it.
Now that the Lawyers are involved, I doubt Cyanogen will be able to
release any additional ROMs at all. Even without those apps, I'm sure
the ROMs include little bits of proprietary files required to get the
OS to boot on existing hardware. I don't think there is a single piece
of released hardware that the AOSP runs on (not even the ADP1). So I
don't think the Lawyers will let up because the next custom ROM only
uses a couple of proprietary HTC files. I'm guessing it's done for
good.
On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> their phone.
> This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> ~L!TH
> On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Google,
> > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > people to it, as a result.
> > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > could use a custom rom on it.
> > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > work better.
> > Don't become Apple!
> > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > you for it.
I wonder how tough it would be to alter the installation process to
copy the non-distributable material off the end user's previous ROM.
Maybe some sort of utility for the user to run before updating that
makes a backup of the apps to SD card first or something. It's not
like they don't have these apps before installation anyway.
On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
> same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
> download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
> On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> > about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> > Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> > etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> > and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> > other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> > what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> > devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> > interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> > guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> > their phone.
> > This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> > they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> > understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> > keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> > ~L!TH
> > On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google,
> > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > people to it, as a result.
> > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > work better.
> > > Don't become Apple!
> > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > you for it.
"...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as
the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts..."
"...we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube,
Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other developer
can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make
some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device
via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source
code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us
just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best
of intentions..."
"...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
Android builds from developers who see a need..."
Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this in the
bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like them,
all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of activities.
At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> people to it, as a result.
> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> could use a custom rom on it.
> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> work better.
> Don't become Apple!
> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> you for it.
Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think its a
load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more than one
occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself its
not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something here?
On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as
> the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts..."
> "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube,
> Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
> benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other developer
> can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make
> some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device
> via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
> through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
> source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source
> code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us
> just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best
> of intentions..."
> "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
> Android builds from developers who see a need..."
> Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
> some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this in the
> bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
> But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like them,
> all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of activities.
> At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
> On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Google,
> > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > people to it, as a result.
> > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > could use a custom rom on it.
> > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > work better.
> > Don't become Apple!
> > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > you for it.
You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you want,
i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad intention,
i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple it.
If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up and
running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
(google) apps.
On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think its a
> load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more than one
> occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself its
> not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
> doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
> phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something here?
> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as
> > the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts..."
> > "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube,
> > Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
> > benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other developer
> > can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make
> > some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device
> > via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
> > through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
> > source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source
> > code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us
> > just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best
> > of intentions..."
> > "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
> > Android builds from developers who see a need..."
> > Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
> > some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this in the
> > bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
> > But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like them,
> > all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of activities.
> > At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
> > On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google,
> > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > people to it, as a result.
> > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > work better.
> > > Don't become Apple!
> > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > you for it.
> > > Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point.
But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time
making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well is
it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the
marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to
install more than 20 apps?
On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
> But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you want,
> i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
> But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
> or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad intention,
> i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
> I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
> part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple it.
> If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up and
> running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
> (google) apps.
> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think its a
> > load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more than one
> > occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself its
> > not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
> > doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
> > phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something here?
> > On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as
> > > the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts..."
> > > "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube,
> > > Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
> > > benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other developer
> > > can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make
> > > some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device
> > > via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
> > > through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
> > > source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source
> > > code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us
> > > just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best
> > > of intentions..."
> > > "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
> > > Android builds from developers who see a need..."
> > > Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
> > > some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this in the
> > > bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
> > > But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like them,
> > > all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of activities.
> > > At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
> > > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > > people to it, as a result.
> > > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > > work better.
> > > > Don't become Apple!
> > > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > > you for it.
> > > > Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
I hope Google won't just send this C&D and then go 'you figure it out
and if you can't, screw you'.
I hope that Google is cooperative in getting around this issue.
If not, the backlash will be big (it is already getting a little out-
of-hand).
On Sep 25, 10:56 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point.
> But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time
> making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well is
> it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the
> marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to
> install more than 20 apps?
> On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > don't think it's a load of crap.
> > You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
> > But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you want,
> > i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
> > But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
> > or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad intention,
> > i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
> > I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
> > part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple it.
> > If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up and
> > running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
> > (google) apps.
> > On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think its a
> > > load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more than one
> > > occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself its
> > > not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
> > > doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
> > > phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something here?
> > > On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, such as
> > > > the custom Android builds that are popular with many enthusiasts..."
> > > > "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like YouTube,
> > > > Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
> > > > benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other developer
> > > > can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. We make
> > > > some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered device
> > > > via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
> > > > through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
> > > > source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android source
> > > > code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software harms us
> > > > just like it would any other business, even if it's done with the best
> > > > of intentions..."
> > > > "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
> > > > Android builds from developers who see a need..."
> > > > Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
> > > > some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this in the
> > > > bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
> > > > But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like them,
> > > > all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of activities.
> > > > At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
> > > > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > > > people to it, as a result.
> > > > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > > > work better.
> > > > > Don't become Apple!
> > > > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > > > you for it.
> > > > > Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
Is everyone forgetting there are OEMs who are already shipping devices
without the Google software (e.g. vobis.ru, Archos)?
If their Googles work then Google has the right to say who can
redistribute them, that's the basics of the laws of copyright as has
been established for a century or two.
You may not agree with it, you may not like how it stands, but that is
a rule thats' part of the society we live in.
======
Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
subsidiaries.
On 26 Sep 2009, at 04:05, Streets Of Boston wrote:
> I hope Google won't just send this C&D and then go 'you figure it out
> and if you can't, screw you'.
> I hope that Google is cooperative in getting around this issue.
> If not, the backlash will be big (it is already getting a little out-
> of-hand).
> On Sep 25, 10:56 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point.
>> But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time
>> making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well
>> is
>> it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the
>> marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to
>> install more than 20 apps?
>> On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> don't think it's a load of crap.
>>> You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
>>> But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you
>>> want,
>>> i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
>>> But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
>>> or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad
>>> intention,
>>> i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
>>> I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
>>> part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple
>>> it.
>>> If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up
>>> and
>>> running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
>>> (google) apps.
>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think
>>>> its a
>>>> load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more
>>>> than one
>>>> occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself
>>>> its
>>>> not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
>>>> doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
>>>> phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something
>>>> here?
>>>> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Some more info here, from Google:http://android- >>>>> developers.blogspot.com/2009/09/note-on-google-apps-fo...
>>>>> "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things,
>>>>> such as
>>>>> the custom Android builds that are popular with many
>>>>> enthusiasts..."
>>>>> "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like
>>>>> YouTube,
>>>>> Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
>>>>> benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other
>>>>> developer
>>>>> can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself.
>>>>> We make
>>>>> some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered
>>>>> device
>>>>> via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
>>>>> through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
>>>>> source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android
>>>>> source
>>>>> code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software
>>>>> harms us
>>>>> just like it would any other business, even if it's done with
>>>>> the best
>>>>> of intentions..."
>>>>> "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
>>>>> Android builds from developers who see a need..."
>>>>> Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
>>>>> some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this
>>>>> in the
>>>>> bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
>>>>> But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like
>>>>> them,
>>>>> all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of
>>>>> activities.
>>>>> At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
>>>>> On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Google,
>>>>>> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is
>>>>>> only
>>>>>> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
>>>>>> people to it, as a result.
>>>>>> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not
>>>>>> for the
>>>>>> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and
>>>>>> that I
>>>>>> could use a custom rom on it.
>>>>>> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should
>>>>>> not be
>>>>>> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to
>>>>>> continue to
>>>>>> work better.
>>>>>> Don't become Apple!
>>>>>> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users
>>>>>> will thank
>>>>>> you for it.
>>>>>> Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
Everyone who is insisting that its just "oh no, don't distribute
gmail".. I challenge you to try AOSP. It'll take some time, but grab
the source and build it. Without proprietary bins. (No, seriously.
Don't copy a bunch of crap off the old image, don't include any of the
proprietary bins that -you are not allowed to redistribute-.)
It won't boot. If you manage to get past that, it won't make noise.
LED doesn't work. No way to talk to the cell modem (so no cell
services, at all.) Good news, the wifi will probably work. But even if
you include the (proprietary!) RIL, it won't make or break calls
(oops, setting the initial setup/provisioning flag is "proprietary".)
Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
If we are going to have to recreate all that, I -really- suggest doing
it with someone else's services. Why give them the added business?
(Alternately, release the OSS replacements under a more restrictive
license - GPL is perfectly android-compatible, except they can't take
it inside the wall and profit from it at the expense of the
community.)
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> Is everyone forgetting there are OEMs who are already shipping devices
> without the Google software (e.g. vobis.ru, Archos)?
> If their Googles work then Google has the right to say who can
> redistribute them, that's the basics of the laws of copyright as has
> been established for a century or two.
> You may not agree with it, you may not like how it stands, but that is
> a rule thats' part of the society we live in.
> ======
> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> subsidiaries.
> On 26 Sep 2009, at 04:05, Streets Of Boston wrote:
>> You're right.
>> I hope Google won't just send this C&D and then go 'you figure it out
>> and if you can't, screw you'.
>> I hope that Google is cooperative in getting around this issue.
>> If not, the backlash will be big (it is already getting a little out-
>> of-hand).
>> On Sep 25, 10:56 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point.
>>> But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time
>>> making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well
>>> is
>>> it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the
>>> marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to
>>> install more than 20 apps?
>>> On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> don't think it's a load of crap.
>>>> You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
>>>> But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you
>>>> want,
>>>> i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
>>>> But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
>>>> or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad
>>>> intention,
>>>> i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
>>>> I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
>>>> part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple
>>>> it.
>>>> If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up
>>>> and
>>>> running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
>>>> (google) apps.
>>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think
>>>>> its a
>>>>> load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more
>>>>> than one
>>>>> occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself
>>>>> its
>>>>> not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
>>>>> doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
>>>>> phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something
>>>>> here?
>>>>> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Some more info here, from Google:http://android- >>>>>> developers.blogspot.com/2009/09/note-on-google-apps-fo...
>>>>>> "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things,
>>>>>> such as
>>>>>> the custom Android builds that are popular with many
>>>>>> enthusiasts..."
>>>>>> "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like
>>>>>> YouTube,
>>>>>> Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
>>>>>> benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other
>>>>>> developer
>>>>>> can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself.
>>>>>> We make
>>>>>> some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered
>>>>>> device
>>>>>> via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
>>>>>> through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
>>>>>> source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android
>>>>>> source
>>>>>> code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software
>>>>>> harms us
>>>>>> just like it would any other business, even if it's done with
>>>>>> the best
>>>>>> of intentions..."
>>>>>> "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
>>>>>> Android builds from developers who see a need..."
>>>>>> Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
>>>>>> some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
>>>>>> But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like
>>>>>> them,
>>>>>> all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of
>>>>>> activities.
>>>>>> At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
>>>>>> On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Google,
>>>>>>> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is
>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
>>>>>>> people to it, as a result.
>>>>>>> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not
>>>>>>> for the
>>>>>>> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and
>>>>>>> that I
>>>>>>> could use a custom rom on it.
>>>>>>> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should
>>>>>>> not be
>>>>>>> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to
>>>>>>> continue to
>>>>>>> work better.
>>>>>>> Don't become Apple!
>>>>>>> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users
>>>>>>> will thank
>>>>>>> you for it.
>>>>>>> Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
> Everyone who is insisting that its just "oh no, don't distribute
> gmail".. I challenge you to try AOSP. It'll take some time, but grab
> the source and build it. Without proprietary bins. (No, seriously.
> Don't copy a bunch of crap off the old image, don't include any of the
> proprietary bins that -you are not allowed to redistribute-.)
> It won't boot. If you manage to get past that, it won't make noise.
> LED doesn't work. No way to talk to the cell modem (so no cell
> services, at all.) Good news, the wifi will probably work. But even if
> you include the (proprietary!) RIL, it won't make or break calls
> (oops, setting the initial setup/provisioning flag is "proprietary".)
> Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
> This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
> work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
> If we are going to have to recreate all that, I -really- suggest doing
> it with someone else's services. Why give them the added business?
> (Alternately, release the OSS replacements under a more restrictive
> license - GPL is perfectly android-compatible, except they can't take
> it inside the wall and profit from it at the expense of the
> community.)
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote:
> > Is everyone forgetting there are OEMs who are already shipping devices
> > without the Google software (e.g. vobis.ru, Archos)?
> > If their Googles work then Google has the right to say who can
> > redistribute them, that's the basics of the laws of copyright as has
> > been established for a century or two.
> > You may not agree with it, you may not like how it stands, but that is
> > a rule thats' part of the society we live in.
> > ======
> > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK.
> > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> > subsidiaries.
> > On 26 Sep 2009, at 04:05, Streets Of Boston wrote:
> >> You're right.
> >> I hope Google won't just send this C&D and then go 'you figure it out
> >> and if you can't, screw you'.
> >> I hope that Google is cooperative in getting around this issue.
> >> If not, the backlash will be big (it is already getting a little out-
> >> of-hand).
> >> On Sep 25, 10:56 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point.
> >>> But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time
> >>> making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well
> >>> is
> >>> it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the
> >>> marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to
> >>> install more than 20 apps?
> >>> On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> don't think it's a load of crap.
> >>>> You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard.
> >>>> But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you
> >>>> want,
> >>>> i.e. download apks to the sdcard.
> >>>> But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours
> >>>> or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad
> >>>> intention,
> >>>> i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google.
> >>>> I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral
> >>>> part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple
> >>>> it.
> >>>> If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up
> >>>> and
> >>>> running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary
> >>>> (google) apps.
> >>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think
> >>>>> its a
> >>>>> load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more
> >>>>> than one
> >>>>> occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself
> >>>>> its
> >>>>> not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that
> >>>>> doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your
> >>>>> phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something
> >>>>> here?
> >>>>> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Some more info here, from Google:http://android- > >>>>>> developers.blogspot.com/2009/09/note-on-google-apps-fo...
> >>>>>> "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things,
> >>>>>> such as
> >>>>>> the custom Android builds that are popular with many
> >>>>>> enthusiasts..."
> >>>>>> "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like
> >>>>>> YouTube,
> >>>>>> Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of
> >>>>>> benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other
> >>>>>> developer
> >>>>>> can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself.
> >>>>>> We make
> >>>>>> some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered
> >>>>>> device
> >>>>>> via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones
> >>>>>> through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open
> >>>>>> source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android
> >>>>>> source
> >>>>>> code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software
> >>>>>> harms us
> >>>>>> just like it would any other business, even if it's done with
> >>>>>> the best
> >>>>>> of intentions..."
> >>>>>> "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom
> >>>>>> Android builds from developers who see a need..."
> >>>>>> Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate
> >>>>>> some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this
> >>>>>> in the
> >>>>>> bud (as soon as possible) is understandable.
> >>>>>> But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like
> >>>>>> them,
> >>>>>> all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of
> >>>>>> activities.
> >>>>>> At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post.
> >>>>>> On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Google,
> >>>>>>> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is
> >>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> >>>>>>> people to it, as a result.
> >>>>>>> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not
> >>>>>>> for the
> >>>>>>> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and
> >>>>>>> that I
> >>>>>>> could use a custom rom on it.
> >>>>>>> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should
> >>>>>>> not be
> >>>>>>> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to
> >>>>>>> continue to
> >>>>>>> work better.
> >>>>>>> Don't become Apple!
> >>>>>>> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users
> >>>>>>> will thank
> >>>>>>> you for it.
> >>>>>>> Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> those, the Android platform doesn't work.
Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my
Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See
http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/ for more info.
> The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
> same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
> download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
I don't understand what your saying here. The Google apps in question
are closed source. Cyanogen presumably had to extract the apks from a
phone in order to include them in his distribution.
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps > > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without > > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my > Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See > http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/ for more info.
> Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps (ie Maps API). Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
And what Disconnect wrote " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail". This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap". " is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
Ohter problems - you can't make or break calls (oops, "setup" is
proprietary). Calendar has such dependencies on sync that it just flat
doesn't work. (I heard rumours that contacts may be the same way.)
The really sick thing is, HTC has already made non-google versions of
these apps. But - thanks to the android licensing - they're closed
source too..
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
>> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
>> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
>> Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my
>> Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See
>> http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/ for more info.
> Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
> But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of
> interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps
> (ie Maps API).
> Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to
> freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
> And what Disconnect wrote
> " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
> This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
> work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
> "
> is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
> Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all
> drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
Riddle me this, does anyone know if other ROM cooks have received C&D
letters? i realize cyanogen's ROM is the most popular right now, but
I have not heard of any other modders receiving a C&D letter. If not,
then don't throw in the towel just yet. Then again, maybe it is
because Cyanogen was the first to use the donut in his ROM and
included the new Market app. Either way, i seriously doubt this will
stop the modding community.
On Sep 27, 6:56 am, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ohter problems - you can't make or break calls (oops, "setup" is
> proprietary). Calendar has such dependencies on sync that it just flat
> doesn't work. (I heard rumours that contacts may be the same way.)
> The really sick thing is, HTC has already made non-google versions of
> these apps. But - thanks to the android licensing - they're closed
> source too..
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
> >> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> >> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> >> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> >> Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my
> >> Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See
> >>http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/for more info.
> > Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
> > But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of
> > interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps
> > (ie Maps API).
> > Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to
> > freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
> > And what Disconnect wrote
> > " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
> > This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
> > work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
> > "
> > is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
> > Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all
> > drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
I got a quiet "heads up, you can't do that and we might have to
notice" from a googler back when I was making AOSP adp1 images - I
only integrated gmail and such on one or two, but the HTC binaries
were evidently an issue. It isn't why I stopped, but it certainly
contributed.
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:48 PM, L!TH!UM <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Riddle me this, does anyone know if other ROM cooks have received C&D
> letters? i realize cyanogen's ROM is the most popular right now, but
> I have not heard of any other modders receiving a C&D letter. If not,
> then don't throw in the towel just yet. Then again, maybe it is
> because Cyanogen was the first to use the donut in his ROM and
> included the new Market app. Either way, i seriously doubt this will
> stop the modding community.
> On Sep 27, 6:56 am, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ohter problems - you can't make or break calls (oops, "setup" is
>> proprietary). Calendar has such dependencies on sync that it just flat
>> doesn't work. (I heard rumours that contacts may be the same way.)
>> The really sick thing is, HTC has already made non-google versions of
>> these apps. But - thanks to the android licensing - they're closed
>> source too..
>> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
>> >> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
>> >> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
>> >> Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my
>> >> Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See
>> >>http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/for more info.
>> > Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
>> > But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of
>> > interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps
>> > (ie Maps API).
>> > Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to
>> > freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
>> > And what Disconnect wrote
>> > " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
>> > This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
>> > work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
>> > "
>> > is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
>> > Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all
>> > drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
Here's the silly thing: It would be ok if Cyanogen made Nandroid first
copied the propriatary .apk files from the original ROM, weaved it
into the custom ROM and flashed it back.
I hope Google won't do too much of this, because then I might as well
had bought an iPhone.
/Casper
On 27 Sep., 19:54, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I got a quiet "heads up, you can't do that and we might have to
> notice" from a googler back when I was making AOSP adp1 images - I
> only integrated gmail and such on one or two, but the HTC binaries
> were evidently an issue. It isn't why I stopped, but it certainly
> contributed.
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:48 PM, L!TH!UM <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Riddle me this, does anyone know if other ROM cooks have received C&D
> > letters? i realize cyanogen's ROM is the most popular right now, but
> > I have not heard of any other modders receiving a C&D letter. If not,
> > then don't throw in the towel just yet. Then again, maybe it is
> > because Cyanogen was the first to use the donut in his ROM and
> > included the new Market app. Either way, i seriously doubt this will
> > stop the modding community.
> > On Sep 27, 6:56 am, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Ohter problems - you can't make or break calls (oops, "setup" is
> >> proprietary). Calendar has such dependencies on sync that it just flat
> >> doesn't work. (I heard rumours that contacts may be the same way.)
> >> The really sick thing is, HTC has already made non-google versions of
> >> these apps. But - thanks to the android licensing - they're closed
> >> source too..
> >> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> >> >> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> >> >> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> >> >> Not true. I'm running Android, built from the open source tree, on my
> >> >> Openmoko Freerunner without any of the proprietary Google apps. See
> >> >>http://code.google.com/p/android-on-freerunner/formore info.
> >> > Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
> >> > But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of
> >> > interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps
> >> > (ie Maps API).
> >> > Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to
> >> > freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
> >> > And what Disconnect wrote
> >> > " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
> >> > This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
> >> > work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
> >> > "
> >> > is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
> >> > Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all
> >> > drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
I think a lot of Android users are thinking along the same lines
(should have gone with phone X or Y).
Microsoft earlier had a problem with the XDA community as well, till
they realised what a boon the modders were and how the custom roms of
the totally closed source Windows Mobile OS were benefitting them more
than they could ever hurt them.
Now, MS just looks away. The users are happy and MS's market share
didn't take a hit.
The reason I decided to try an Android device and not go in for the
tried and tested WM platform, was its promise of openness, far beyond
WM could offer. The promise of customizability, of numerous custom
roms which could be run on it, etc.
If Google are serious about shutting down the custom roms area, then
Android will be still-born as an OS. I am still on the fence right
now. If custom rom development stops, I'll be the first to sell my
Magic and get a WM device.
And to the people who say make custom roms without google's apps. I
like the apps. And they have tried to do that, but you know what? It
breaks the contacts sync, the email sync, the calendar sync, the whole
marketplace, the maps API and numerous other things. Basically makes
it useless.
Cyanogen is finding a way to offer a clean rom with the ability to add
those closed source google apps back in to the user, but I am
sceptical that this will be a viable solution.
Anyhow, its not like Google can release a stable OS anyway. Maybe they
should just hire Cyanogen and make him work on the OS upgrades? :)
On Sep 28, 12:17 am, Casper Bang <casper.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's the silly thing: It would be ok if Cyanogen made Nandroid first
> copied the propriatary .apk files from the original ROM, weaved it
> into the custom ROM and flashed it back.
> I hope Google won't do too much of this, because then I might as well
> had bought an iPhone.
> /Casper
> On 27 Sep., 19:54, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I got a quiet "heads up, you can't do that and we might have to
> > notice" from a googler back when I was making AOSP adp1 images - I
> > only integrated gmail and such on one or two, but the HTC binaries
> > were evidently an issue. It isn't why I stopped, but it certainly
> > contributed.
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:48 PM, L!TH!UM <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Riddle me this, does anyone know if other ROM cooks have received C&D
> > > letters? i realize cyanogen's ROM is the most popular right now, but
> > > I have not heard of any other modders receiving a C&D letter. If not,
> > > then don't throw in the towel just yet. Then again, maybe it is
> > > because Cyanogen was the first to use the donut in his ROM and
> > > included the new Market app. Either way, i seriously doubt this will
> > > stop the modding community.
> > > On Sep 27, 6:56 am, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Ohter problems - you can't make or break calls (oops, "setup" is
> > >> proprietary). Calendar has such dependencies on sync that it just flat
> > >> doesn't work. (I heard rumours that contacts may be the same way.)
> > >> The really sick thing is, HTC has already made non-google versions of
> > >> these apps. But - thanks to the android licensing - they're closed
> > >> source too..
> > >> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 01:49, Jim Ancona <j...@anconafamily.com> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> > >> >> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> > >> >> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> > >> > Yes, Google apps are not completly necessary for Android.
> > >> > But it is also true that Android without Google apps looses a lot of
> > >> > interest. Also because a lot of third party applications rely on these apps
> > >> > (ie Maps API).
> > >> > Though of course I fully understand this is Google right to choose not to
> > >> > freely distribute these apps which are their added value...
> > >> > And what Disconnect wrote
> > >> > " Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail".
> > >> > This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't
> > >> > work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap".
> > >> > "
> > >> > is, as I understand, more true for a phone like the HTC ones.
> > >> > Freerunner was meant from the start to be as open as possible, so all
> > >> > drivers for example were available, with sources, for adaptation to android.
> It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
> same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
> download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
> On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> > about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> > Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> > etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> > and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> > other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> > what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> > devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> > interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> > guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> > their phone.
> > This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> > they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> > understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> > keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> > ~L!TH
> > On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google,
> > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > people to it, as a result.
> > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > work better.
> > > Don't become Apple!
> > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > you for it.
----- Original Message ----- From: "lbcoder" <lbco...@gmail.com>
To: "Android Discuss" <android-discuss@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 9:30 AM
Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Don't Stop CyanogenMod!
Authentication and sign in are only needed to support gmail, market,
etc.
On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
> same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
> download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
> On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> > about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> > Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> > etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> > and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> > other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> > what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> > devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> > interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> > guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> > their phone.
> > This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> > they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> > understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> > keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> > ~L!TH
> > On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google,
> > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > people to it, as a result.
> > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > work better.
> > > Don't become Apple!
> > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > you for it.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "lbcoder" <lbco...@gmail.com>
> To: "Android Discuss" <android-discuss@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 9:30 AM
> Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Don't Stop CyanogenMod!
> Authentication and sign in are only needed to support gmail, market,
> etc.
> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Zanshin <zanshin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It does, in fact, mean they can't make custom ROMs. The Google apps
> > are part of the core authentication and sign-in framework. Without
> > those, the Android platform doesn't work.
> > The protection from modification of the google apps' source is the
> > same it is for Google's repository: it's public. You simply don't
> > download from a source you don't trust. That's a bad argument.
> > On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> > > about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> > > Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> > > etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> > > and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> > > other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> > > what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> > > devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> > > interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> > > guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> > > their phone.
> > > This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> > > they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> > > understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> > > keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> > > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > > people to it, as a result.
> > > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > > work better.
> > > > Don't become Apple!
> > > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > > you for it.
> > > > Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text -
If you are going to play this card, then you need to supply a way for
the user to sync our information. THAT PART needs to be open source or
licensable. I understand that you may need to have protections on
those apps, but WE are taking the risk that Cyanogen is not malicious.
I paid for an OPEN SOURCE Android phone with Google. That means I paid
for the rights to use these closed source apps and services ALONG with
the open source OS. Explain to me how the ROM is "supposedly" open
source. Does that mean that I need to compile all of my own ROMs in
order to have a modified ROM? Your "closed source" google apps are WAY
too ingrained and integrated into the OS to allow a separation. This
makes all that "open source" talk no more than Symbian claiming to be
open source.
Because honestly, without Cyanogen's mods, the G1 is LAME. I am
constantly defending its abilities (or lack thereof) with the fact
that my phone is part of an open source alliance. Now, the Apple
fanboys are going to win. And unfortunately, I may have to join them.
Either hire Cyanogen or license him to distribute google apps. Its not
like he's changing them. He's optimizing the Linux Kernel that you
chose to use in the name of "open-source".
You need to stop these silly Apple-like games before Android becomes
an afterthought.
Sincerely,
The Truly Disappointed.
On Sep 25, 4:16 pm, Eric F <ericfrie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now that the Lawyers are involved, I doubt Cyanogen will be able to
> release any additional ROMs at all. Even without those apps, I'm sure
> the ROMs include little bits of proprietary files required to get the
> OS to boot on existing hardware. I don't think there is a single piece
> of released hardware that the AOSP runs on (not even the ADP1). So I
> don't think the Lawyers will let up because the next custom ROM only
> uses a couple of proprietary HTC files. I'm guessing it's done for
> good.
> On Sep 25, 11:37 am, "L!TH!UM" <clarkd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was initially disappointed to hear this news, but after thinking
> > about it a bit, it was a necessary one. The big issue is that
> > Cyanogen is including the google APKs like Google Mail, Google Maps,
> > etc. These are closed applications and not part of the Android OS,
> > and if Google lets this slide, they may not be able to defend against
> > other ROMs including these APKs without permission. Also, consider
> > what would happen if any of those APKs were modified to do something
> > devious, like send contact info to some server out there on the
> > interwebs. Who do you think users would initially blame? I'm
> > guessing they'd blame Google regardless of the fact that they modded
> > their phone.
> > This C&D does not prevent Cyanogen from making custom ROMs, he/she/
> > they just cannot include those google applications anymore. I can
> > understand this move and hope the modding community takes note and
> > keeps up the modding, minus these apps (unfortunately).
> > ~L!TH
> > On Sep 25, 7:57 am, PhoenixAG <vse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google,
> > > We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is only
> > > made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use the
> > > open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more
> > > people to it, as a result.
> > > I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not for the
> > > official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and that I
> > > could use a custom rom on it.
> > > Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should not be
> > > told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to continue to
> > > work better.
> > > Don't become Apple!
> > > The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users will thank
> > > you for it.
I want to start by saying that I very recently purchased a T-Mobile G1
specifically because I was impressed with Cyanogen's mod work. I could
have easily gone with any phone I wanted, but I loved the ability to
experiment with and customize my phone. I can appreciate the fact that
Google has rights, of course. I hope that Google can appreciate why I
chose a phone running an open source OS. It was a deciding factor for
me.
It seems like there are options here, short of shutting Cyanogen down
completely. That will likely alienate him, those like him, and those
who appreciate their work. Google could choose to provide guidance to
him, or even actively help him with licensing compliance. There seem
to be potential workarounds for most of the grievances. The nature of
the resolution of this matter will color how I view owning an Android
device, as well as future buying decisions. Were work like Cyanogen's
not available at the time I purchased the G1, I can definitively say I
would have looked elsewhere. The limitations of the stock ROM powered
device were deal breakers.
As easy as it will likely be to discourage Cyanogen from doing things
Google doesn't like, I think it may be even easier to discourage many
potential customers from considering Android powered devices. If this
is the beginning of the end of zealous efforts to make my phone do
amazing things, I will have a different phone on the next go 'round.
