Android open-source is just 'marketing' claims Symbian Foundation

[Chris Davies]

If you thought open-source meant one big happy community, joining hands no matter the platform, think again.Â* Google's Rich Miner Read more

[aperepel]

Williams' statement was so outrageously off, that it even pushed me to register on this site and post this comment. Clearly, this top-exec has simply no clue about how open source model works, and everything he's got on the subject was probably from those 'marketing' guys during the board meeting.

FYI, having a commercial entity backing up an OSS project is very typical. In fact, this has proved to be a great model for many, putting a solid product in users hands for free, and bread-n-butter on OSS developer's table. I've been an active member of a quite visible OSS project team for 4 years now myself, so believe have some credibility on the matter Some projects simply need a benevolent dictator to lead the pack. This doesn't mean, however, that the community gives up the reigns, nor that it's not OSS anymore.

Of course, there are numerous successful OSS projects which are self-organized, without any company supporting them. And guess what - nothing wrong with that, just a slightly different model.

So, at the end of the day, folks, keep your BS filters on

[Michael Martin]

Symbian fighting to stay relevant - My feeling is that the OHA will buy out Symbian next year and get the European market from Nokia.

,Michael Martin
Google And Blog

[Synergy]

Google's response crushed Symbian's accusations. lol

[ogwilson]

This is outrageously stupid. Symbian is just looking to hold the bit of relevancy they have left. They have no clue what they're talking about. There are tons of open-source projects that are headed up by bigger entities: doesn't make the project any less open. When you have to pick and choose who can work on the software as opposed to accepting anyone with the technical prowess and drive, then you have no room to speak on what OSS is all about.

[storm14k]

Android isn't open? I just picked through the code last night. I thought that was the definition of open. If you don't like whats in there then change it compile it and load it onto a device.

I just love how these execs toss their companies into the open source arena for 10 seconds and then start trying to talk as if they have been with the cause all along.

[tallbruva]

Isn't it interesting that Symbian (a.k.a. Nokia) didn't decide to go open-source until Android was definitely going to be running on a major carrier on hardware built by a major manufacturer? And look at how the Symbian Foundation was started -- Nokia (who held a majority stake in Symbian) bought out everybody else to create the foundation. And while the foundation is supposed to eventually be a separate entity, one would have to be blind to think that Nokia wouldn't press heavily for things to be done their way seeing that they are the largest users of Symbian.

Williams must not have read all of the memo: Nokia is the major entity in the Symbian Foundation and Google the major one in the Open Handset Alliance. So is there really a difference? Oh wait, there are about 1500 differences that greet members every year

[hawtseks]

Many open source projects are controlled by a central organization that makes the final decision on what gets put in and left out. Android is released under the apache license which designates its usage along with the fact that you can get the source here makes it open source, end of story, good marketing or not. I would say that symbian busted their own strategy here, wouldn't you?

[hetaldp]

Q: People always says that if you compile the Android and load it on Device and if it dont work out of the box then how its opensource

A: Because So many Component and Drivers are HTC Propritory Codes even some Media Codecs are Propritory so you have to add that Precompiled codes into you Compiled Android Code then only you can run it on OS. Opensource Android does not means that it Ready to Compile and use. Just like Linux is Open Source but if you Motherboard Vendor dont have Driver and you say why Linux is not Working.

Q: About Symbian

A: I think William should get him self Admited to any Tech University and Learn the A B C again and then only sud open his Stupid Mouth. Symbian is Dead, low on Security and aging old man Compared to Android which is very Stable, Finest in security and Anti Piracy Technology. and Brand new Dalvik Virtual Machine and a Good SDK which can develop almost major things from Scratch. Just See What Nokia 5800 Express is doind with Symbian and What HTC G1 can do with Android. Now stop Claiming tall claim and Concentrate how can you make Syjmbian Back on Track only Sony Ericsson and Samsung Joining Symbian Foundation is not required they are also member at OHA (Open Handset Alliance) which make Android.

[montalbert]

excuse my ignorant comment cos i love android and will probably never go back to anything else-

Does being truly open source include the ability to have root available to the end user? Why not? If it's open source surely we could have the choice of getting root easily? A simple tick box in settings?