×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

127 comments

and... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754249)

First hack?

Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754279)

i.e., to enable hackers to experiment and thereby improve the platform further.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754435)

Well sure, within the context of running applications in a Java sandbox and doing things in emulators.

Once you bring in carriers into the mix, "open" goes out the window because it gives people the ability to step around your nickel and diming.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (2, Insightful)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754819)

Yeah but regardless of the politics, it's still possible to make your phone open. All that means is that Google's phone isn't open out of the box like some people expected. Which means it's just another phone- it has to compete fairly based on features instead of hopping on the "Free" train towards moneyville. But you can still jailbreak it just like anything else. Also some people would argue that giving a reasonably powerful java sandbox is pretty much all you need. You can't really change the hardware anyway, or the network, so it's not like you have complete control even with a fully open phone. Of course a fully open phone is more desirable, but Android isn't really that terrible. And if you don't like the nickel-and-diming, then don't use the network, or at least those features of the network. Instead of using $10,000 per gigabyte [imapundit.com] SMS, use email. It's not terribly hard.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754983)

Yeah but regardless of the politics, it's still possible to make your phone open. All that means is that Google's phone isn't open out of the box like some people expected.

Yes, I was surprised that people had to jailbreak it. I thought that you could somehow grab apps from websites and install them.

Which means it's just another phone- it has to compete fairly based on features instead of hopping on the "Free" train towards moneyville.

Unfortunately true.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (1, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755041)

Yes, I was surprised that people had to jailbreak it. I thought that you could somehow grab apps from websites and install them.

Technically you can, so long as it's a Java app that runs in the Android VM. Native app, or some ruby/perl/python script that runs in the shell? Time to jailbreak.

Same thing as the iPhone. You're either in the sandbox or you jailbreak.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (4, Informative)

Nursie (632944) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759037)

"Same thing as the iPhone. You're either in the sandbox or you jailbreak."

No, not same as the iPhone at all. On the iPhone you have to jailbreak if you want to run non-approved apps, even in the sandbox.

OTOH, it is a bit crap, but at least with android we have the source. I have it running on my freerunner now

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (1)

Simon Brooke (45012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759467)

I have it running on my freerunner now.

Would you like to comment on how well that's working? I've been thinking of getting a FreeRunner and putting Android on it, but I need it to actually work as a phone.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (2, Funny)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755261)

Instead of using $10,000 per gigabyte SMS, use email

I understand your point, but my fingers still have sympathy blisters and my wrists ache thinking about actually sending a gigabyte's worth of SMS texting....

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (2, Interesting)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756149)

it's still possible to make your phone open... But you can still jailbreak it just like anything else.

Not anymore, at least not with such a simple root exploit. I guess we'll have to wait for another exploit to come along... wouldn't it be nice to be given root access to hardware that you own? And if a java sandbox were really all we needed, then why are so many people trying to get (and keep) root access on the G1?

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757175)

The math in that quote is wrong. A cost of 10p per message, which the author assumes is 200 bytes, is 50p per kilobyte, 50000p, or £500 per megabyte, and £500,000 (that's about 1 million USD) per gigabyte.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (1, Flamebait)

inKubus (199753) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758085)

Google releases a Beta phone on a carrier network, so they had to bait the carrier a little bit.. Once Google or a subsidiary gets the spectrum they are trying to get, this thing will be so open you'll not believe it. And Google's business is search, so you'd better believe they are going to dominate mobile search also. The ads thing is secondary, just an evolution. The marketplace demands ads on everything, and when they are ready to move into mobile, Google will already be there with a solid database of mobile searches, mobile pages and they'll be in the phone too.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755271)

Speaking of which, does Debian ARM have a A2DP driver for Bluetooth? I ask because that's the one thing I use on my Wing that the G1 is missing, stereo sound over Bluetooth.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (2, Insightful)

mikiN (75494) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756331)

Well I told people so, also here on Slashdot, when the media was all abuzz about Android and how it would revolutionize phone software hacking.

At great risk of sounding like a broken record and repeating myself over and over again:

  • Grab a fr.. (nah leave that word out already) GSM module.
  • Hook it up to your favorite SC/SoC evaluation module
  • Bootstrap your favorite OS
  • Start hacking already

Much better than carrying your carrier's ball-and-chain around your neck always, anxiously waiting for the next OTA provisioning download that CALEA-stricken providers stuff in your phone's guts at some ungodly hour in the middle of the night, to have them turn on your phone's mic or camera to big-brother you on a whim, or is it?

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (4, Informative)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757929)

Once you bring in carriers into the mix, "open" goes out the window because it gives people the ability to step around your nickel and diming.

Yes, but T-Mobile is better than most other US Carriers in this regard. They use GSM phones so just about any phone that takes GSM should work on their network. They don't play games like Verizon does with bluetooth connectivity and ringtones and they gave me the unlock code for my phone three (3) months into the contract. My only real complaints are that their coverage is not as good as Verizon and the prices on their data services are a bit higher, but with all of the restrictions that other US Carriers place on their "unlimited" data plans you have to wonder whether there really is a difference in price relative to what you get.

Re:Isn't that the whole idea of an open platform? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755039)

Yeah, I don't see the purpose in trying to lock it out. Trying to lock evil code out, sure, but well, whatever.

No, that's the idea of a free platform (2, Insightful)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759213)

The whole "it's your phone you can do what you want with it" paradigm comes from *free software, not an "open source" software.

As for "shut up and show them the code" this G1 is a great example.

"Look, we're an open platform! Look at the code, isn't it neat! Don't TOUCH it!!!"

Arms race? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754369)

They closed the hole because it was a pretty emberassing bug. But would there be an arms race?

Re:Arms race? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754409)

I hope it becomes a foot race instead. My feet are much better at running than my arms.

Guide To The Barack Obongo Presidency (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754401)

Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.

INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.
You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.

CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER
Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat

HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.

FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.
Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.

MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.
Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most prominent anatomical feature, after all, its oversized buttocks, which have evolved to make it more comfortable for your nigger to sit around all day doing nothing for its entire life. Niggers are often good runners, too, to enable them to sprint quickly in the opposite direction if they see work heading their way. The solution to this is to *dupe* your nigger into working. After installation, encourage it towards the cotton field with blows of a wooden club, fence post, baseball bat, etc., and then tell it that all that cotton belongs to a white man, who won't be back until tomorrow. Your nigger will then frantically compete with the other field niggers to steal as much of that cotton as it can before the white man returns. At the end of the day, return your nigger to its cage and laugh at its stupidity, then repeat the same trick every day indefinitely. Your nigger comes equipped with the standard nigger IQ of 75 and a memory to match, so it will forget this trick overnight. Niggers can start work at around 5am. You should then return to bed and come back at around 10am. Your niggers can then work through until around 10pm or whenever the light fades.

ENTERTAINING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger enjoys play, like most animals, so you should play with it regularly. A happy smiling nigger works best. Games niggers enjoy include: 1) A good thrashing: every few days, take your nigger's pants down, hang it up by its heels, and have some of your other niggers thrash it with a club or whip. Your nigger will signal its intense enjoyment by shrieking and sobbing. 2) Lynch the nigger: niggers are cheap and there are millions more where yours came from. So every now and then, push the boat out a bit and lynch a nigger.

Lynchings are best done with a rope over the branch of a tree, and niggers just love to be lynched. It makes them feel special. Make your other niggers watch. They'll be so grateful, they'll work harder for a day or two (and then you can lynch another one). 3) Nigger dragging: Tie your nigger by one wrist to the tow bar on the back of suitable vehicle, then drive away at approximately 50mph. Your nigger's shrieks of enjoyment will be heard for miles. It will shriek until it falls apart. To prolong the fun for the nigger, do *NOT* drag him by his feet, as his head comes off too soon. This is painless for the nigger, but spoils the fun. Always wear a seatbelt and never exceed the speed limit. 4) Playing on the PNL: a variation on (2), except you can lynch your nigger out in the fields, thus saving work time. Niggers enjoy this game best if the PNL is operated by a man in a tall white hood. 5) Hunt the nigger: a variation of Hunt the Slipper, but played outdoors, with Dobermans. WARNING: do not let your Dobermans bite a nigger, as they are highly toxic.

DISPOSAL OF DEAD NIGGERS.
Niggers die on average at around 40, which some might say is 40 years too late, but there you go. Most people prefer their niggers dead, in fact. When yours dies, report the license number of the car that did the drive-by shooting of your nigger. The police will collect the nigger and dispose of it for you.

COMMON PROBLEMS WITH NIGGERS - MY NIGGER IS VERY AGGRESIVE
Have it put down, for god's sake. Who needs an uppity nigger? What are we, short of niggers or something?

MY NIGGER KEEPS RAPING WHITE WOMEN
They all do this. Shorten your nigger's chain so it can't reach any white women, and arm heavily any white women who might go near it.

WILL MY NIGGER ATTACK ME?
Not unless it outnumbers you 20 to 1, and even then, it's not likely. If niggers successfully overthrew their owners, they'd have to sort out their own food. This is probably why nigger uprisings were nonexistent (until some fool gave them rights).
MY NIGGER bitches ABOUT ITS "RIGHTS" AND "RACISM".
Yeah, well, it would. Tell it to shut the fuck up.

MY NIGGER'S HIDE IS A FUNNY COLOR. - WHAT IS THE CORRECT SHADE FOR A NIGGER?
A nigger's skin is actually more or less transparent. That brown color you can see is the shit your nigger is full of. This is why some models of nigger are sold as "The Shitskin".

MY NIGGER ACTS LIKE A NIGGER, BUT IS WHITE.
What you have there is a "wigger". Rough crowd. WOW!

IS THAT LIKE AN ALBINO? ARE THEY RARE?
They're as common as dog shit and about as valuable. In fact, one of them was President between 1992 and 2000. Put your wigger in a cage with a few hundred genuine niggers and you'll soon find it stops acting like a nigger. However, leave it in the cage and let the niggers dispose of it. The best thing for any wigger is a dose of TNB.

MY NIGGER SMELLS REALLY BAD
And you were expecting what?

SHOULD I STORE MY DEAD NIGGER?
When you came in here, did you see a sign that said "Dead nigger storage"? That's because there ain't no goddamn sign.

Re:Guide To The Barack Obongo Presidency (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754727)

The funny thing about B. Hussein Obama is that
he will only be president for a few years, but
he'll be a nigger all his life.

I'm confused... (5, Interesting)

maestro371 (762740) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754419)

I thought the whole point of the G1 was that it was an open platform. Why on earth is there a "manufacturer-hacker arms race"?

Re:I'm confused... (5, Insightful)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754469)

Why on earth is there a "manufacturer-hacker arms race"?

There isn't, it's BS, and none of the blogs seem to get is. So far as we can tell, google only fixed the root exploit because it was a serious security concern, because of how it worked. I don't think they are going to make a real effort to stop people from hacking their device aside from fixing security flaws. Even if they do, this is so far not an indication of that, contrary to what most sites say.
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754527)

It's not Google's device. It's T-Mobile's device.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754589)

It's not Google's device. It's T-Mobile's device.

It's Google's OS though.
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (2, Insightful)

Toll_Free (1295136) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755965)

And that's the problem.

You pay for the "device".

Google OWNS the operating system.

Duetch Telecom OWNS the device.

You only pay for it to rent it while you use it, and then pay a monthly fee for network access on top of that.

And this is open, how?

--Toll_Free

Re:I'm confused... (5, Informative)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756145)

And that's the problem.

You pay for the "device".

Google OWNS the operating system.

Duetch Telecom OWNS the device.

You only pay for it to rent it while you use it, and then pay a monthly fee for network access on top of that.

And this is open, how?

--Toll_Free

Umm... it's open because the entire OS is released under the Apache or GLPv3 (depending on which part of the OS) licenses. I'm not well versed in which licenses are or are not "really" open, but i am under the impression that both of those are supposed to be. Android is based on version 2.6 of the linux kernel, and the framework on top of that was written by google, and the source code was released under Apache and heavily documented.

That's way more open than any other successful phone out there.

And I don't know if you're exaggerating or if it's different in your country, but in the U.S. you OWN your cell phone. And i fail to see how paying a monthly fee to access a network has anything to do with whether or not the phone is open - no one is going to let you use their multi-billion dollar network for free, and i'm fine with that.

Why is everyone so bent on hating android, even with no facts to back up what they say? Google fixes a security bug and everyone flips out, but the countless times google and the t-mobile CEO have said they will keep the device open? No one seems to remember or care.
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (2, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756295)

the countless times google and the t-mobile CEO have said they will keep the device open? No one seems to remember or care.

I guess it's like politicians: don't judge them by what they promise, but by their actions. One thing is not like the other.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756417)

It's not open if I can't modify the software and use it on MY device, that's less open than even MS's shared source stuff!

Re:I'm confused... (1)

mikiN (75494) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756445)

Firt off, I don't know much of the architecture of Android (flame me for that but I've karma to burn), but what's the point in calling a platform 'open' when you can't get root?

If your idea of having fun is playing in a (Java) sandbox while Big Brother is watching, then enjoy your kids' dreams. Grown-ups like to do some real hacking on a real open platform.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758739)

The device is NOT open.

Android IS.

and btw, i think with the G1 you get android modified by HTC.

Once you hack the device and put the original, open android built by yourself, you get an open phone.

Re:I'm confused... (4, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756267)

It's Google's OS though.

No, it was written by Linus Torvalds and thousands of other contributors, and released under the GPL. It's our OS. Google just borrowed it for a while.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756479)

I'll just wait for the chinese people to make a phone which uses the same OS. Done :)

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755131)

It's not Google's device. It's T-Mobile's device.

No. If I'm paying for it, then it's MY device.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Informative)

Toll_Free (1295136) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755997)

Really?

Every major phone company and vendor would argue with you.

The only way it's your device is if you pay FULL retail for it, and get the unlock code, or if you purchase it fully unlocked (legally) at the time of purchase.

Otherwise, you own the plastic. The actual bits of code (I HATE that MS buzzword) is owned by Google, and the network you operate it on is owned by the telco.

Shame, as I would LOVE to agree with you, but the fact of the matter is, I doubt very much most of us actually paid RETAIL cost for our phones, therefore, we DON'T own them at ALL until the phone contract is up.

If you don't like that fact, then just pay full retail. Then, don't accept any updates, etc.

And I think that if we DO pay full retail, or after the 2 years (typical) contract period, we SHOULD get unlocked phones that we can choose the updates (to the OS, not to the phone itself operating system (the electronics)) to install or not to install to.

The actual radio OS isn't anything to be played with, and should be locked.

--Toll_Free

Re:I'm confused... (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758459)

In the UK, you DO own the phone. Whether you pay full price and go pay-as-you-go, or get it subsidised when tied to a monthly contract (the more expensive the monthly package you pay per month the less the handset costs) - you own the phone. If you go the latter route, then you are tied in to a 12 or 18 month contract, most likely, but you own the handset outright. The network won't unlock it for free until your contract expires, but you aren't renting the handset - it is yours.

That's Android, not G1... (3, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754553)

There isn't, it's BS, and none of the blogs seem to get is. So far as we can tell, google only fixed the root exploit

The root exploit is unrelated to the ability to flash the ROM. The question then is, will there be attempts made to stop user flashing of updates to the device...

I do not think there will be, it's just that Android fixes should not be confused with openness of the device itself.

Re:That's Android, not G1... (4, Informative)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756061)

The root exploit is unrelated to the ability to flash the ROM.

From what I've heard, you need root access or the T-Mobile private key to flash the ROM.

The question then is, will there be attempts made to stop user flashing of updates to the device...

Err, yes, the head of the Android team at Google has actually confirmed that only the manufacturer or the cell network provider have the cryptographic keys required to flash the G1 (via OTA updates or otherwise).

I do not think there will be, it's just that Android fixes should not be confused with openness of the device itself.

When root access to the G1 is denied by default, and exploits that allow root access are quickly patched, how would you interpret this? The fact is that you do not get root access to the G1 by default, and as of this moment, there is no known way to get root access, or to flash your own kernel, on a RC30 G1.

Re:That's Android, not G1... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757229)

Thanks for the information, it seemed to me that flashing the device would be something outside the domain of the OS (much like you would not need a working OS to format a HD, or like cameras do firmware updates via a file built to update internal storage).

The root aspect still seems like more of a hack, so the real question still boils down to what the phone maker lets you do independent of the OS (which is more locked down than I thought).

So I guess it boils down to being similar to jailbreaking iPhones at this point, since you need to find a weakness in either system... I'm surprised root access alone would then be enough to re-flash the device though.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Interesting)

jelizondo (183861) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754571)

One needs to be aware of where the money is made. The actual phone manufacturer makes money by selling a locked version to a telecom, the telecom makes money by selling the phone and the phone service to retail clients.

If you get a free phone with a low monthly service charge and then you hack it, you could make expensive calls over IP and pay the telecom, nothing more than the monthly rent.

Thus the telecom needs the phone to be locked to make (more) money and the manufacturer has to lock the phone in order to please the telecom, who is, after all, its client.

Yes, there will be an arms race because its about controlling the money making process.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Insightful)

Timmmm (636430) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754747)

"you could make expensive calls over IP and pay the telecom, nothing more than the monthly rent."

Bullshit. At least in the UK the monthly line rental usually includes more than enough minutes/texts for most people. The vast majority of their income must come from the base line rental (which isn't cheap!).

They're just used to being able to control everything and don't want to give that up. Hopefully it will change eventually.

Re:I'm confused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754811)

The vast majority of their income must come from the base line rental (which isn't cheap!).

I think a lot of it comes from ringtones, wallpapers and other add-on crapware too.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Timmmm (636430) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755047)

Yeah maybe in the past, but these days it is trivial for the average person to download an MP3 ringtone & transfer it to their phone via USB or bluetooth. You can even share them over bluetooth easily.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Interesting)

jrumney (197329) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755601)

The phone companies themselves don't understand their own economics. I was turned down for a free upgrade a few years ago, because I was "not a good customer, you don't make enough calls". On asking how much I'd need to make to qualify, the level was still less than the number of bundled minutes that I was already paying for, so the phone company would be making no more money out of me, at an extra cost to them.

Re:I'm confused... (3, Interesting)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754797)

One needs to be aware of where the money is made. The actual phone manufacturer makes money by selling a locked version to a telecom, the telecom makes money by selling the phone and the phone service to retail clients.

If you get a free phone with a low monthly service charge and then you hack it, you could make expensive calls over IP and pay the telecom, nothing more than the monthly rent.

Thus the telecom needs the phone to be locked to make (more) money and the manufacturer has to lock the phone in order to please the telecom, who is, after all, its client.

Yes, there will be an arms race because its about controlling the money making process.

The CEO of T-Mobile straight up said they will allow VOIP apps, and will do nothing to stop them. That's the entire point of android being open, but everyone keeps assuming it will be more and more locked down.

In that same interview the CEO also said they won't stop unlockers. Why would they anyway? You agreed to a contract and they can charge you an ETF if you leave, so if you want to unlock it and use it on business, there is no reason not to let you.

The _ENTIRE_ point of android is that it is open, and i wholeheartedly believe that google will stick to that.
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (1)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755127)

The point of android is to provide a new platform to compete with winmo, that isn't hampered by unstable, limited capability closed code and poor interfaces.

They are concerned with users being able to use google services on mobile devices, not catering to hackers.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Interesting)

spisska (796395) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756605)

The point of android is to provide a new platform to compete with winmo,[...]

Windows mobile is not the target. That platform got an early start and is still at the back of the pack in terms of capability and adoption.

The competition is Symbian, RIM, and Apple.

And hopefully what Google is doing with Android will make the platform less and less relevant, and make the content and capabilities really shine.

All the same, I'm hanging on to my Nokia candy-bar at least until the second generation of Android, or until my venerable machine dies. Judging from its battle scars, that may be a while.

Re:I'm confused... (0, Troll)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756291)

The CEO of T-Mobile did not say how much he's going to charge Android users for data, or how certain data might just be given a low priority.

Now assume the position.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756671)

The CEO of T-Mobile did not say how much he's going to charge Android users for data, or how certain data might just be given a low priority.

Now assume the position.

WTF? They PUBLISH how much their data plans cost, what the hell are you talking about?

And no he didn't say if they'd throttle their data or not, but i also never heard YOU say you weren't a douchebag, so i'm going to assume that's the case. Google would flip out if T-Mobile started throttling certain Apps, if anyone is FOR net neutrality it's Google.

Where the hell is all this mistrust coming from! What is wrong with you people?

"Assume the position"? Yes, your random baseless suggestions about android really did show me...
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (1, Troll)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756823)

I'm sorry. I never would have replied to you if I knew you had such a profound emotional involvement.

Where is the distrust coming from? You're perfectly right... the poor telecom companies, most especially the mobile providers, have NEVER done anything that would justify anything but the utmost trust and dedication! Why, I'm sure they'll be delighted to surrender much of their revenue stream!

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756897)

I'm sorry. I never would have replied to you if I knew you had such a profound emotional involvement.

Where is the distrust coming from? You're perfectly right... the poor telecom companies, most especially the mobile providers, have NEVER done anything that would justify anything but the utmost trust and dedication! Why, I'm sure they'll be delighted to surrender much of their revenue stream!

I'm just getting irritated at all the people making all these BS statements when the facts show that the opposite of what they're saying is true.

From the beginning i've thought Android was an awesome idea, and maybe i'm just optimistic but i see no reason to think otherwise today, yet everyone else seems so pessimitic. Telecom companies have been shitty but Android belongs to google, not the telecom companies. All i need is a nice open handset and i can run Android on it all day long. The G1 is their first foray and they may have been a bit reserved, but if the operating system exists, eventually there should be totally open hardware to put it on.

Why do people not see this?
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (0, Troll)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 5 years ago | (#25757005)

I'm not disputing that it would be great to have a really open smart phone. Nor am I disputing that Android, in concept, is a great idea.

The problem is, no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.

All you need is (1) a nice open handset, (2) a nice open platform like Android and (3) someone to provide you connectivity.

When Google manages to finagle some open spectrum and builds out a network they control (or nobody controls), MAYBE you'll get something approximating the ideal. In the meantime, the only option for (3) is to go to a telecom company that already has such a network. If you think those guys are going to just roll over and let everyone run bittorrent, make unlimited VOIP calls and send free texts, you're in for a bitter, bitter disappointment.

I wish Android could deliver everything that has been attributed to it. I really do. But even if Google has the best of intentions, they currently only control one of the three required items. They might push that to two (hardware and software). Three will require some serious investment, in direct opposition to the interests of some seriously entrenched players.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759293)

Sorry, Taylor .. I've got some of the more cynical/paranoid posts in this thread, but I think I'm actually like you.

I loved the potential of Android when announced, and was very excited. But this G1 seems a halfhearted commitment to openness at best. My optimistic bit hopes that a couple phones later things will get better.

>"Why do people not see this?"

Instead of trying to analyze to death what Google/TMobile is actually doing, you might understand our frustration if you imagine what they *could have done but didn't.

If openness/hacking was an important part of this device's launch, I picture an article -- at Google, written by a Google dev in collaboration with a G1 firmware hacker -- about how to put Debian (or Ubuntu) on your G1 in six easy steps.

Instead we have saurik's 90-step scary-as-hell process, which btw will not work in a matter of hours prolly.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756699)

The CEO of T-Mobile did not say how much he's going to charge Android users for data...

And to be clear, he SPECIFICALLY said users could use any program on their unlimited data plans, as long as it wasn't malicious, so there is definetely NOT some clause or something that says the unlimited plan is only for "certain" programs or anything like that. After your unlimited plan is paid for, they charge NOTHING for data, period.

Check your damn facts.
-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (0, Troll)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756893)

As I recall, your major US ISPs sold you all "unlimited" Internet access and said you could use anything you wanted on them as well. It's not like they'd ever change their minds about that, would they? [slashdot.org] Nor would they actually have hidden limits in place all the time. [slashdot.org] And of COURSE they'd never fiddle with the connection to discourage some applications they didn't like! [slashdot.org]

Re:I'm confused... (1)

xant (99438) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755491)

With Android being an open platform, though, there's an extra wrinkle. Google isn't making (much, if any) money from HTC installing Android on their phone. So T-Mobile isn't really Google's client. Google has to sorta play ball so they can keep wireless vendors from blacklisting android, but they have a lot more leeway.

Also, there's another reason: regulatory. With a certain level of access to the phone hardware, you can change signal strength and frequency and do things that the FCC doesn't like. So everyone involved has to take reasonable steps to prevent that from happening.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

ryszard99 (1193131) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756311)

Google isn't making (much, if any) money from HTC installing Android on their phone. So T-Mobile isn't really Google's client.

since when do you have to be paying to be a client?

Re:I'm confused... (1)

mikiN (75494) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756681)

Also, there's another reason: regulatory. With a certain level of access to the phone hardware, you can change signal strength and frequency and do things that the FCC doesn't like. So everyone involved has to take reasonable steps to prevent that from happening.

Well, why not turn the GSM controller/radio part into a black box only accessible via a serial link using a standardized protocol not much unlike the ole' Hayes command set and a few GPIO/audio lines?

Huh, that's already here (GSM modules)? Well, what are we waiting for?

Re:I'm confused... (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758469)

I thought they did, for pretty much all current smartphones. The radio's a black box with an API to interact with it. This is a sensible solution - people can't mess about the regulated spectrum with homebrew software radios, and your calls are handled by a dedicated module so you won't find your calls getting dropped when you have too many apps open etc.

Tell someone who cares... (1)

js_sebastian (946118) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758799)

..about what the telcos need.

One needs to be aware of where the money is made. The actual phone manufacturer makes money by selling a locked version to a telecom, the telecom makes money by selling the phone and the phone service to retail clients.

If you get a free phone with a low monthly service charge and then you hack it, you could make expensive calls over IP and pay the telecom, nothing more than the monthly rent.

Thus the telecom needs the phone to be locked to make (more) money and the manufacturer has to lock the phone in order to please the telecom, who is, after all, its client.

I don't care what the telecom needs. God did not grant them the right to profit from any specific buisness-model. I never have, and never will, own a locked phone, it's as simple as that. All phones I have owned could be used on any GSM network with a prepaid card. And if some telco was dumb enough to subsidize me buying it, well, thanks for the freebies.

I know, what we are talking here is a different meaning for the word "locked". Most phones I have owned were primitive enough that running arbitrary software on them was not a big issue in practice.

Now it is starting to be one. It is sad if the linux-based android is less open than my win mobile smartphone (where I can currently install anything I want).

This is one reason why I fully support the GPLv3. If linux had been GPLv3, android would have to give you root access to your device (or let you modify it to get it), unless the device was actually owned by the telco (which not all users would accept).

Re:I'm confused... (1)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756253)

It's BS, and none of the blogs seem to get is. So far as we can tell, google only fixed the root exploit because it was a serious security concern, because of how it worked. I don't think they are going to make a real effort to stop people from hacking their device aside from fixing security flaws.

We'll see. The fact is that the only root exploit discovered thus far was closed within a few days. I really don't think Google has that much to do with it - let's look at what they actually do: provide an open source software stack to the telcos. T-Mobile control their network and the devices using it, they control the cryptographic keys for the G1, so if an OTA update is rolled out that fixes some issue, obviously T-Mobile didn't like that issue. What power does Google actually have in this arrangement? They're just an upstream provider of source code.

Bottom line: if Google wanted the G1 to ship with root access, and they had the power to do so, they it would've happened already.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Insightful)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756503)

It's BS, and none of the blogs seem to get is. So far as we can tell, google only fixed the root exploit because it was a serious security concern, because of how it worked. I don't think they are going to make a real effort to stop people from hacking their device aside from fixing security flaws.

We'll see. The fact is that the only root exploit discovered thus far was closed within a few days. I really don't think Google has that much to do with it - let's look at what they actually do: provide an open source software stack to the telcos. T-Mobile control their network and the devices using it, they control the cryptographic keys for the G1, so if an OTA update is rolled out that fixes some issue, obviously T-Mobile didn't like that issue. What power does Google actually have in this arrangement? They're just an upstream provider of source code.

Bottom line: if Google wanted the G1 to ship with root access, and they had the power to do so, they it would've happened already.

It was closed because it was a huge security hole! Did you never read the description of the issue? EVERYTHING that was EVER typed on the device also went to a command line as root. That is not good. Just because google closed that has nothing to do with whether or not they *want* you to have root. The point of being open is not to give you everything, but just to make it possible for you to do anything. They don't need to ship the device with root, but everything that runs Android has source code published for it, so anyone with sufficient knowledge of code should be able to make it happen.

Google and T-Mobile have said over and over that they won't stop people from doing non-malicious things, yet no one believes them. I have a feeling that if it hadn't been for Steve Jobs holding every iphone user by the balls for the last year and a half, people would be more inclined to believe them, but the point is Google is NOT Apple, and they said they will keep it open. Why is a security fix making everyone freak out?

Most articles fail to mention HOW the root exploit was a problem, and i think that is the real issue here - people read the article and don't realize it was an honest issue that needed to be fixed, they think google is fighting back against the hackers and they just arent.

-Taylor

Re:I'm confused... (1)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756591)

They don't need to ship the device with root, but everything that runs Android has source code published for it, so anyone with sufficient knowledge of code should be able to make it happen.

That's like saying that "everything that runs Debian has source code published for it, so anyone with sufficient knowledge of code should be able to make it happen." The fact is that root exploits don't just grow on trees - the only way to make it happen is by discovering a new root exploit. If Google/T-Mobile wanted to, they could've allowed the ROM to be flashed over USB without a special cryptographic key, or provided keys to individual developers upon request. But they don't - flash updates require a cryptographic key, and root access require a software exploit. Even if we find another exploit, we have no guarantee that the next root exploit won't be closed as quickly as this one was.

Re:I'm confused... (4, Interesting)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754547)

It depends on your definition of "platform," I believe.

Android is open software platform in that you can do whatever you want within Android. But that doesn't make the G1 an open hardware platform, where you could install a different operating system.

OpenMoko is an open hardware platform.

Now, personally, I see no reason why T-Mobile would care whether you're running Android or Debian. Google might care because they want you running those nice Android apps which interface with Google because that's how they're paying for Android development. But I'm not sure that they have any kind of agreement which would require the makers of the G1 to make sure that the phones are tamper-proof.

Re:I'm confused... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754919)

Show me where I can download schematics to generate gerber files to actually print the pcbs for openmoko. All the large scale "open hardware" projects are actually just open down to the point where people looking for information they need in the software stop being interested (generally a pdf of the schematic). A hardware engineer needs schematic and board layout files to actually replicate the device, they don't provide these. Even if they did, they require costly (>$1000) closed source programs to edit and generate the files you'd sent to a pcb manufacturer. Hardware won't truly be open until all these things are available.

Re:I'm confused... (5, Insightful)

dlevitan (132062) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755067)

Now, personally, I see no reason why T-Mobile would care whether you're running Android or Debian. Google might care because they want you running those nice Android apps which interface with Google because that's how they're paying for Android development. But I'm not sure that they have any kind of agreement which would require the makers of the G1 to make sure that the phones are tamper-proof.

I doubt even Google will care. How many people will actually install Debian on a G1? How many people will actually install it and keep it on there? I doubt even 0.1% of users will do either. But these are also the people who will praise Google for an open platform and for not locking it up like the iPhone. They're also the people who'll probably create apps for Android that bypass Google. Will Google notice the drop in revenue? Probably not, and certainly not enough to offset the bad PR.

Re:I'm confused... (2, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756099)

Now, personally, I see no reason why T-Mobile would care whether you're running Android or Debian.

They probably don't. What they do care about is support calls and returns because someone bricked their G1 whilst trying to flash some fancy new OS image. They may even think that installing a new OS allows users to use other networks, or VOIP applications, more easily. Basically, if you can imagine a revenue stream that might be possible on the G1, and imagine a way in which a completely open platform might remove that revenue stream, then that is a reason (in the view of T-Mobile) for T-Mobile to worry.

Re:I'm confused... (1)

djtachyon (975314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759203)

Google might care because they want you running those nice Android apps which interface with Google because that's how they're paying for Android development.

Which Android Apps are you talking about? The Marketplace Apps? The web browser/GMail apps? The YouTube app?

First, Google doesn't take a cut off of the Android Marketplace apps, and they are all actually free right now. Second, the only real ad revenue they are seeing is from people getting on the browser and using the google search engine (given that there is a google search widget on part of the screen, although it is easily removed).

The only real thing the G1 is doing for Google is brand awareness, getting more GMail accounts, and putting a web browser in more peoples' hands (which assumabley they will use google.com to search with and click on ads).

Again, there is no direct revenue for Google here, they are aiming for the horizon and trying to change the game with this device. It is this humble observer's opinion that they are well on their way.

So? (1)

Devil's BSD (562630) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754521)

Just because it runs Debian doesn't necessarily mean it can do much else. I don't think they can get on a cell network right now, for example. So if you decide to flash it with Debian you have yourself a really expensive handheld computer with a touchscreen and wifi. Woohoo. There' other options out there for that.

Re:So? (5, Informative)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754555)

Not quite so. FTFA: "This does not replace Android. This also gives you access to the full plethora of programs available in Debian and let's you continue using your phone as it was intended to be: as an Android device with all the capabilities thereof."

Damn Shame (1)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754583)

It's a damn shame and should probably even be a crime that manufacturers at the whim of the telcos (all of whom have bribed their way to gaining an unfair government enforced monopoly on communications) go around trying to make it hard for people to install what they like ON THEIR OWN DEVICE.

Re:Damn Shame (2, Interesting)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754681)

You shouldn't judge the world-wide telecom market by the US "standard". T-Mobile is a german company, and part of the old government-owned telecommunications monopoly, so no need for bribery there. However, the german telecom market is very different from the US one, and there are no local monopolies. T-Com is still the largest player, but they other telcos don't have monopolies and most likely didn't make bribes.

Re:Damn Shame (1, Interesting)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754931)

We go around this issue on a pretty regular basis on /. and it isn't changing.

If you buy a phone and a contract, and you know the terms and conditions, please don't think I'm interested in your 'it oughta be...' complaints. If you didn't read/grok the deal, sorry. This is why I do not consider Verizon when I look at carriers. And why I resist AT&T and Sprint. T-Mobile is the least offensive of the bunch IMHO. Heck, My BlackBerry will run Google Maps, even if it does leak memory worse than a sieve.

I'm ready to buy a G1, just for the sheer novely of it, and I'll deal with having to buy/download apps from the store unless/until it is jailbroken. I might, might run Debian on it for a lark, but I don't run Debian on my mail server... I might wait for Ubuntu...:-)

Then again, I could easily live with an OpenMoko, except it's uglier than a stump fence. And expensive^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H unsubsidized, and 850/900, or so the U.S. distributor websites say, which doesn't seem right. And there is no 850 T-Mobile in Arizona. Looks like it's G1 for me.

I bet the tri-mode Neo will work here fine...

Re:Damn Shame (1)

Yfrwlf (998822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755607)

If you buy a phone and a contract, and you know the terms and conditions, please don't think I'm interested in your 'it oughta be...' complaints. If you didn't read/grok the deal, sorry. This is why I do not consider Verizon when I look at carriers. And why I resist AT&T and Sprint. T-Mobile is the least offensive of the bunch IMHO.

U.S. users shouldn't complain about the lock-in that they face, yet you're facing the same challenges they are, you say your only option really is T-Mobile but even that isn't satisfactory for you? The fact is, users DO have a reason to complain, and you just proved it. Lack of choice. Monopolies are real, lack of competition is real, so please by all means, get out there and complain and support the devices which let you do what you want.

This market is anciently far behind all because of greedy monopolies. The U.S. could have had unlocked phones ages ago where you just pay for your connection time or amount of data and the hardware, and that's it. I blame all the typical causes of such, like patents and the government selling out to mama bell and refusing to help make teleco competition actually exist. Why is it that Japan often leads the world in IT advancements? I think it's because it doesn't follow the same fucked up system the U.S. does, at least not yet. If you think this is all more due to an attitude problem than an economic one, because you think U.S. consumers are stupider or expect less (which I'd also partially agree with), then all the more reason to promote complaining.

My next phone is going to be the most usable, most unlocked phone I can find that will let me do the things I absolutely have to have in a phone. By getting it I will be happily sending a message to the telecos of the kind of product I'm looking for, that I want the same freedom I get on my desktops and servers. Sure, OpenMoko may not be ready quite yet, but the next version may be and I'm certainly interested in it's feature list more than any other phone out there currently.

On one last note, I'd like the ability to easily install any of the open source GUIs for phones. Will be nicest if I can create an X session and select which one I want, just like choosing between Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment, etc. That way, no matter what hardware you're running, you can have the option between either lightweight or more intensive but possibly prettier interfaces. Total freedom.

Re:Damn Shame (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756809)

You're not quite right.

T-Mobile is ok by me. An entirely not offensive carrier would:

Charge me half as much as they do now.

Require no contract.

Price phones much less than currently.

In other words, an insustainable business model in the current US market.

How do European carriers compete for subscribers?

In the US, it seems to be hardware.

Re:Damn Shame (1)

xant (99438) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755851)

I'm ready to buy a G1, just for the sheer novely of it, and I'll deal with having to buy/download apps from the store unless/until it is jailbroken. I might, might run Debian on it for a lark, but I don't run Debian on my mail server... I might wait for Ubuntu...:-)

Well, good news for you: you don't have to jailbreak it (or wait for it to be jailbroken (again)). You can install apps from a plain old URL, you don't have to go through the (already mostly $0) Market.

On day 1, I installed an SVN build of ConnectBot onto my G1, from the connectbot website, and have been using it almost daily since then.

Re:Damn Shame (2, Insightful)

Free the Cowards (1280296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25756457)

It's whiny and pointless to complain about contract terms in an open market where you can negotiate.

Alas, the US cell phone market is not such a market. There are a grand total of four nationwide companies, and a small handful of smaller ones. They have largely identical policies and pricing in nearly every respect. If I want to buy my own unlocked phone separately so I can avoid paying the "phone subsidy" fee written into every carrier's subscription plans... nope! There is basically no choice in the market. It's an oligopoly which means that we, the customers, lose out.

Re:Damn Shame (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755247)

Well Tom, I admire your confidence.

But having worked with these guys, I'm not so sure.

other telcos don't have monopolies and most likely didn't make bribes.

If you're not a monopoly, all the more reason to use 'alternative' tactics to beat the incumbent.
There's bribes, then there's 'old boys networks' (traditionally the most powerful of all, especially in Germany), then there's lobbyists...
Brussels is thick with them.
Remind me, what job did the former German Chancellor get when he left office?

Re:Damn Shame (1)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755509)

But having worked with these guys, I'm not so sure.

I should've added a disclaimer. I do work with these guys, and I'm talking CEO level.

There's bribes, then there's 'old boys networks' (traditionally the most powerful of all, especially in Germany), then there's lobbyists...
Brussels is thick with them.

Berlin too (we were talking about Germany), and my company owns one of them. But last I checked, lobby work wasn't the same thing as bribes. I dislike the amount of influence lobbyists have as much as the next guy, but it isn't the same thing as bribery. But yes, there's lobbyists.

Remind me, what job did the former German Chancellor get when he left office?

Something in the energy industry. What's that got to do with the current argument?

Re:Damn Shame (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755681)

Something in the energy industry. What's that got to do with the current argument?

Something in the energy industry? C'mon. Let me refresh your memory. When in power, (well, just before losing it) Schroder massively subsidised the Gazprom 'Nord Stream' project. After leaving Government, he then took a major post with...Nord Stream! No corruption there, then...

What's that got to do with the current argument? Well, I was just suggesting that corruption has many faces, and 'bribes' come in many colours...
Is it OK for lobbyists to pay for prostitues for MEPs? By their twisted definition, not a bribe...

BTW, no personal attack from me against Germany - same thing everywhere I've worked...USA, Europe, Middle East, Africa, India, China...

Re:Damn Shame (1)

Tom (822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25758551)

Again, we are talking about the telecom industry right now. I never claimed that there isn't massive corruption going on in a different industry. So I still fail to see how Schröder is relevant.

And yes, corruption is largely the same everywhere. However, the markets differ. The US telecom market was never really opened, the global monopoly (AT&T) was simply replaced by a number of local monopolies. The german telecom market is different, as I pointed out in my first comment. There are no local monopolies. You have the choice of 3-4 players almost everywhere, and 5-6 in most large cities. The only local companies are small players (usually called "city carriers") who are far away from a monopoly. While the ex-government-monopoly still owns the largest share of the market, there's maybe three very remote places in the whole country where you don't have at least one other carrier who offers you service.

FWIW (1)

VValdo (10446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754705)

but with utilities and images already available to replace the flash image with your own signed code, it looks like the manufacturer-hacker arms race is on."

For what it may be worth, there's a page set up with succinct instructions [android-dls.com] for flashing the modded RC-30 that preserves root.

Also, for those who have RC19 or RC29 and simply want to delay/avoid an over-the-air (OTA) update, there are also instructions [android-dls.com] for a simple change that will keep the RC30 from installing in the first place. This will not address the root bug however, so typing CR-reboot-CR will for example still restart your phone.

If you don't at least take measures to prevent the OTA update, the firmware may be updated automatically [xda-developers.com], even if you manually reject it.

W

*BSD is Dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25754793)

It is now official. Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Re:*BSD is Dying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25757173)

Aaaahhhh, now I know I'm home.

google should ENCOURAGE hacking... (1)

biomechman (1406867) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754949)

I hope (but doubt) that google will get this message, but it's worth a try... emailing direcly is hopeless.
it must be understood that due to security issues, fully 'opening' the android system is probably impossible.
however, i'm sure that you geniuses at google can figure out that hackers will ALWAYS defeat hardware.
therefore, the android should be made completely open, but here's my idea:
open all access to the hardware and OS installation. BUT also create a series of PAID competitions for the 'best' hacks. this will push the hackers out of the closet, and at the same time provide an endless supply of innovation for the product. MOST hackers are concerned mainly with 'creds'... i.e. showing off.
what about security? well, IMHO there must be some way to enforce a non-bypassable 'MAC address' style signature for the unit. by opening all the hardware except for this 'mac address', you will focus all clandestine efforts on hacking this single function.
good idea huh :) if you want to pay me for this idea, feel free to email me at tcdoeNOSPAM@tcdoe.com (remove nospam)
.

Re:google should ENCOURAGE hacking... (1)

Fastolfe (1470) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755923)

I think you're misunderstanding something rather fundamental. Google is responsible for Android. Android is 100% open-source, and Google wants to do everything it can to make (keep) Android an open platform.

T-Mobile is responsible for the G1. The G1 has a proprietary hardware design, and is locked down just as well as any other T-Mobile phone. Google has nothing to do with that. Google isn't locking the phone down, or waging a war against those that want to unlock it. It's trivial to get a root shell on the Android platform. But it's up to T-Mobile to decide what features and applications it wants on their own phone, and if they don't want to make it easy to get root, that's their decision, not Google's.

Re:google should ENCOURAGE hacking... (1)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755957)

i think that's an interesting idea, but it seems to be different from what Google wants to accomplish with Android. it seems to me like they're just trying to make an iPhone competitor that isn't locked into the manufacturer's software distribution model. but that still means only working within the confines of a Java sandbox.

but perhaps they could develop an alternate version (or fork) of the Android platform tailored for the tech-savvy/hackers. this way the lock the standard Android distro down enough that the average consumer won't accidentally fubar their phones, but there's also a hacker-friendly distro for power users on which they can host the programming competitions you described. the unlocked Android distro could also be a test bed for new features (introduced by the community), which after some time can be integrated into the standard distro.

mod Up (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25755061)

have tnhe energy

Poor Goog (1)

heroine (1220) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755717)

Poor Goog, having all of it's painstakingly ported Java standards ignored in favor of a native operating system installation.

WTF? Open platform that you must sign code to use (0, Troll)

Toll_Free (1295136) | more than 5 years ago | (#25755947)

So let me get this straight?

Google G1 / Android / HTC / TMobile have been telling us this is going to be an open platform.

Someone already "broke" the phone (which isn't a problem on an open platform)

Someone is already working on getting unsigned code working? I thought it was an open platform?

Manu / Hacker arms race? Why? Isn't this an open platform?

Sounds to me like its just about as open as the IPhone, and a few early adoption idiots where taken for a ride.

Very much happy with my Windows Mobile HTC Wizard. And, I don't have to go to anyones "repository" or "app store" to purchase things, nor do I have to worry about MS telling me what I can and cant run on my phone (I know, the albatross IS the last part of that statement).

IOW, Good job, Google. You've turned into everything you detested.

NEXT!

--Toll_Free

Re:WTF? Open platform that you must sign code to u (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25758291)

Uhm, have you read the article at all? You can just reflash the firmware with your own build.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...