LiveAndFight Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Why, just because it's open doesn't mean the manufacturer wants you to do anything you want with it. especially since rooting it and flashing firmware on it, can easily kill any phone, and there's very little they can do to prove you where flashing a third party firmware and not an official one. on top of that, whether you own it or not, they're selling yo a phone with certain features, and certain features you aren't allowed by the network whether you own it or not. You obviously like people telling you what you can and can not do with a device you bought with your own money, for those of us that don't have much we get ****ed when "some rich guy" tells us what we can and can not do with our phone/console w.e. As far as the warrenty part of it goes that I agree with it creates a problem for OEM's since they can't proove you installed a custom rom on the device, but if you didn't have to hack the bootloader in the first place there would be less chance of bricking your phone by installing a custom rom. The software is open source, we bought the hardware, so I don't understand why people can defend OEM's for stupid decisions. Brandon H 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 No, even without a hacked bootloader a CFW can easily break yoru phone, just the act of flashing can, hence why they don't release new firmware updates every second day. And then there are features like Tethering that isn't always allowed by the carrier, meaning they need to lock it down. you're buying a computer, you're buying a phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomjol Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Why, just because it's open doesn't mean the manufacturer wants you to do anything you want with it. especially since rooting it and flashing firmware on it, can easily kill any phone, and there's very little they can do to prove you where flashing a third party firmware and not an official one. on top of that, whether you own it or not, they're selling yo a phone with certain features, and certain features you aren't allowed by the network whether you own it or not. Then the network can deal with that. It's **** all to do with the manufacturer what I do with a device which I own, just as it's **** all to do with Fiat what I do with my car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shockz Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Then the network can deal with that. It's **** all to do with the manufacturer what I do with a device which I own, just as it's **** all to do with Fiat what I do with my car. ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomjol Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 ............. Yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Then the network can deal with that. It's **** all to do with the manufacturer what I do with a device which I own, just as it's **** all to do with Fiat what I do with my car. You do realize the carrier would be more like the owner of the roads, they tax you for driving on the roads, and tell you what cars you can drive on the road and what you can do with the car or it'll be illegal. just because the OS is open source doesn't mean you're allowed to do anything you want with the product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shockz Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Yes? It's really not that simple. You pay a monthly fee to use a networks services. You sign a contract or an agreement saying under penality of termination or fines that you will not attempt to "hack" or abuse services you are not privy to or shouldn't access. You don't own the service, you are paying a fee to access/rent it. It doesn't matter if your phone is capable, if the network says no, tough luck. Same goes with your Fiat... you get a new exhaust or make extensive modifications to the engine... you'll void your warranty. Sure, you can do what you want to it, but don't be surprised when the dealer (or carrier in the above case) gives you the shaft for breaking their rules/modifying the equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell-In-A-Handbasket Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 i hope Google Locks Down android, and puts a better leash on the carriers. And tighter on apps, to lower the risk of what happened earler when they had to remote kill some apps I was going to make a coment and comparison oh how goggle is doing the same thing apple is doing, yet people are behind google doing it and bash apple for doing same thing. For some people, of whom I am one, Apple's walled garden approach is no better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 But i hope Google Locks Down android, and puts a better leash on the carriers. And tighter on apps, to lower the risk of whqt hqppened heqrler when they had to remote kill some apps I was going to make a coment and comparison oh how goggle is doing the same thing apple is doing, yet people are behind google doing it and bash apple for doing same thing. I'm not in favour at all, I don't like the obnoxiously restrictive control that Apple and Microsoft place on their markets. Google should however add a mechanism into the Android market to report malicious apps (better than that "it's malicious" box you untick when you remove it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell-In-A-Handbasket Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Apple, microsoft, google, sony, anybody else that makes any computerized device, or software. But all in all, because of what carriers are doing to Android, personally im behind google *edit to your edit* i dont think there is a real way that could be done, because of the " anybody can put whatever on the store" it would all be based on feedback on something is malicious, otherwise they would have to reject/accept on the spot, something apple does. Also because what 1 person may find malicious another may not, making it up to the opinion of Google itself. Akin to the " walled garden " I'm not in favour at all, I don't like the obnoxiously restrictive control that Apple and Microsoft place on their markets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Apple, microsoft, google, sony, anybody else that makes any computerized device, or software. But all in all, because of what carriers are doing to Android, personally im behind google It's a hard choice for me. I wouldn't want them to have to close off the Android source because some fantastic stuff is being done with it, but I agree that the carriers are overly monopolising what is being done with the phones. Maybe they should cover it with being a bit more stringent with who they license the Google Experience apps to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomjol Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 It's really not that simple. You pay a monthly fee to use a networks services. You sign a contract or an agreement saying under penality of termination or fines that you will not attempt to "hack" or abuse services you are not privy to or shouldn't access. You don't own the service, you are paying a fee to access/rent it. It doesn't matter if your phone is capable, if the network says no, tough luck. Same goes with your Fiat... you get a new exhaust or make extensive modifications to the engine... you'll void your warranty. Sure, you can do what you want to it, but don't be surprised when the dealer (or carrier in the above case) gives you the shaft for breaking their rules/modifying the equipment. You do realize the carrier would be more like the owner of the roads, they tax you for driving on the roads, and tell you what cars you can drive on the road and what you can do with the car or it'll be illegal. just because the OS is open source doesn't mean you're allowed to do anything you want with the product. :blink: Read my earlier post again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 your earlier posts still sounds like a kid with entitlement issues, or a FOSS evangelist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadrack Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 The quickest way for Google to put a swift end to fragmentation is to demand that the OEMs provide generic versions of each update for their phones with the threat of revoking the OEM's license to Android if they don't, and then demand that carriers allow users to install the generic versions of Android instead of them requiring carrier-specific versions. That is something they should have done from the start anyway. That's one of the biggest things I despise about Android (even though I like it for the most part). Google gave carriers and OEMs far too much control over updates. Do OEMs license Android? I don't think that they do... I thought it was "Open Source" which basically allows anyone to bastardize the OS as much as they want before giving it to a customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomjol Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 your earlier posts still sounds like a kid with entitlement issues, or a FOSS evangelist. Patronise much? I still don't think you've understood what I actually said. Do OEMs license Android? I don't think that they do... I thought it was "Open Source" which basically allows anyone to bastardize the OS as much as they want before giving it to a customer. Sadly people never seem to get that one, despite the repetition of the fact in every Android thread... :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryster Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Unfortunately that's not how it works.. you purchase the hardware and rights to use the software, not the software itself. But those that root their devices and install custom roms are not modifying the software they purchased a license to use. They are wiping their device and putting their own software on. Brandon H 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardcore Til I Die Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 But those that root their devices and install custom roms are not modifying the software they purchased a license to use. They are wiping their device and putting their own software on. I'm pretty sure rooting isn't illegal so that is how it is now.. it's only frowned upon unless I'm mistaken. Just because it's legal doesn't mean the manufacturers are happy about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexalex Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Do OEMs license Android? I don't think that they do... I thought it was "Open Source" which basically allows anyone to bastardize the OS as much as they want before giving it to a customer. Android isn't fully open and parts of it are hidden and developed in-house. OEM don't license Android but they pay dearly in licenses for related sevices. The Google apps for Android, such as YouTube, Google Maps and Navigation, Gmail, and so on are Google properties that are not part of Android, and are licensed separately. The same goes for Android Market : Android Market is only licensed to handset manufacturers shipping devices. http://source.android.com/faqs.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Do OEMs license Android? I don't think that they do... I thought it was "Open Source" which basically allows anyone to bastardize the OS as much as they want before giving it to a customer. Android itself, no, but they do have to license many of the apps that Google provides (including the Market, if I'm not mistaken), and quite honestly, how often do you see an Android device from a major OEM that doesn't make use of them? edit: oops, I see that alexalex already answered this. The point is, of course, that few, if any, major OEMs would use Android if they didn't have access to Google's added software, and even fewer people would buy phones without them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Sadly people never seem to get that one, despite the repetition of the fact in every Android thread... :( No, I don't think you understand it, OEM's DO license android. They CAN just grab the source and build it themselves without licensing but 1: They won't be allowed to call it android 2: they won't get access to Android marketplace 3: a few other negatives, but not as much as with other licenensed OS's since Google doesn't protect the OEM's from patent suits unlike others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitalx Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 I think more suitable title would be bad news for people rooting in the US... for rest of world most carriers besides maybe 1 or 2 in the UK don't really give a crap if or how people tether their devices... it's merely a feature of the phone use it if you wish... but this does come with limited/capped bandwidth too so I guess trade some for other stuff. Also locked boot loaders don't stay locked forever... if there's demand it'll be broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Topham Hatt Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I don't understand though why people get a fresh new phone and root it within hours, sticking a custom ROM on it. What's the point? Why did you buy that phone? Because it physically looked good, as in design? That must be the reason, as surely if you liked the software, then you would want to keep it as it is? I have rooted my Desire (after saying I wouldn't want to) but only so I could install a different font to the system font (which adds nearly 30 seconds on to my boot!); and change the start up screen. That's it. Tried un-installing some of the stuff HTC put on it that I don't want, but it had problems with that. Then I read some people have menus that still have the options (like Flickr) which are still there but the app has been removed. So you have no choice, root your phone and have it a little strange working, or leave it be. Rooting for the most part does nothing really except allow you to see system folders. I suspect there are others who will use rooting do other things but for me, I have wasted an afternoon reading and rooting for next to no gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLegendOfMart Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 You just answered your own question. People root so they can get rid of all the branding and the crapware that carriers install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Topham Hatt Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Ahh, I was wise and bought mine carrier-free. Yes, it cost ?350 up front, but then I am in a 12 month contract (?15/mo) instead of the ?30/mo I would have had to pay for 24 months and a ?49.99 phone cost :p Woo hoo for brains! Get your phones carrier free people and then get a sim card only contract. OR get the best phone you can from the carrier, then sell it to off-set the cost of the new phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLegendOfMart Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Or they can get the phone for free, root it and have same phone as you but cost them nothing? Just did the sums you paid more than they did. You paid ?350 phone + 12 * ?15 = ?530 They will pay 12 * ?30 = ?360 Who has the brains? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts