Related
so after posting an excerpt of my letter to Dan Morrill, the author of the absolutely idiotic statement regarding what they're doing, i received several PMs asking me to post the whole thing. It's so long it wont fit in a single post, so read it all. if you dont want to read a wall of text, stop here and go to a new thread.
Mr. Morrill,
First, I would like to bid you a good day, as I'm sure this letter is going to effect it. Yes, that is a bold statement to make at the onset, but writings such as these have a way of eating their way into your psyche and leaving a lasting impression that could very well sour your appetite at lunch time.
Perhaps I should introduce myself. My name is XXXXXXXXXXXXX, and I am an amateur developer on the Android platform. I am also a user of many of the custom Android builds that have come out since the release of the source development kit, including the build made by Steve "Cyanogen" Kondik. Ah, yes, now you see what this letter is going to be about.
So lets start with the basics. Google is a multi-billion dollar corporation that released a supposedly open-source platform onto the mobile device market. Now, I say mobile device as opposed to mobile phone, simply because there are products being released, such as the Zii EGG, which do not support telecommuniations, yet are still running on the Android platform. Now, in any reasonable programmers mind, the reason for making a platform open source, regardless of what the Public Relations people spin it as, is to alleviate some of the burden on the actual in-house development teams. The source code created by thousands of bright minds is doubtless going to yield a much stonger end result than that of a small development squad. Its simple mathematics. Well, that point alongside the fact that the original linux developers made no secret of their intentions by open-sourcing their operating system, which paved the way for Android many many years later.
In addition to that, all of the applications included in the "stock", or unmodified and officially released Android, builds are free. Any user with internet access can use any of these functions through the internet, with the blessings of your employer, free of charge. Yet, somehow, this has caused a sort of hiccup between your supposed idea of free development and that of the general public. Now, before you warp your mind into "this guy doesnt know what he's talking about" mode, think about the principles that your company was founded upon. You wanted to beat out the corporate giants and look out for the little guy. Oh yes, I've done my homework on Google over the years. The benevolent company trying to provide free services for the masses that the "evil-empire" corporations would deny free access to. Ironically enough, this letter is being written to you on Google Docs, another of your free services. Quite troublesome, it would seem.
And now, lest I digress further, I'll shift to the meat of the topic. In your statement regarding the cease and desist letter to Mr. Kondik, you claim that the sales of your free software to be used on mobile platforms being provided to the end user by custom developers for free would hurt the bottom line. Perhaps you should re-examine your own words. Free software being given to the masses by developers whom you claim to encourage is huring your profit share because you cannot sell the use of it to large corporations. Pardon me if I fail to understand the rationale behind such a contradictory and obviously ridiculous statement. But just so that you can understand my position on the matter, lets look at a related position. Google produces an internet browser, Chrome. Mozilla, a competing franchise, produces Firefox, their own browser. Developers for firefox have created applications which borrow on Google's proprietary code to access the functionality of the various features and programs. Are these developers charged for being able to include such features? No. Are these developers caused to halt their activities through threats of legal action for providing end users access to the capabilities that Google readily offers for free? No. So where is the disparity between allowing a competitor to do such things and tying the hands of developers of YOUR open source platform from doing the same?
Before I go further, let me give you a little background on myself to illuminate things. I used to work for XXXXXXXXXXXXXX. I worked in one of their call centers with well over a thousand people, almost a quarter of whom purchased the G1. More than 50% of those users had custom builds running on their phones. How would I know this? I personally installed it on over 300 and gave instructions to many more who wanted to do it themselves. This was one call center. But your apparent attitude on the situation makes it apparent that providing these people with custom software that includes the Google-based programs that were ORIGINALLY ON THE DEVICE AT PURCHASE, is illegal. I'm sorry sir, but that notion is preposterous. All of the Android-based mobile platforms on the market today include the software that caused you to send Mr. Kondik a cease and desist letter. This means that every single end user who purchased one of the devices paid that bottom line you spoke of. Any other rationale is impossible. Non-supporting devices will not run Android, and as such, the only way to use the device is to have purchased one. This brings us to the logical conclusion that those applications, such as GMail and Google Talk are PAID FOR. The situation is equitable to this situation: Joe purchases a computer from a major distributor, say Dell. Dell gives Joe a complimentary piece of free software (available on the Dell website) which updates his drivers on the Dell website, included with his purchase. Joe decides he doesnt particularly like the operating system on the computer, and installs an operating system more to his liking, that also happens to include the Dell software. But lo-and-behold, that free software shouldnt be free to Joe, even though he paid Dell's bottom line through his original computer purchase.
Your flaw is that you are obviously trying to "spin" the situation. Unfortunately, its a thin disguise and everyone can see through it, clear as crystal. These people that I speak of? Developers. The developers whom you claim to encourage. This brings me to my next point. Developers are essentially software hackers. They take the code from a program, rip it apart, improve on it, and then put it back out on the market for other developers to toy with. Perhaps, in your travels as a computer programmer, you have come across a copy of the much fabled "hacker's manifesto". Free access to data. That is what it was about at its core philosophy. You claimed to provide developers with that free access through Android, and then punish the people whom you claim to support.
Have you ever seen "The Devil's Advocate", Mr. Morrill? Al Pacino has an excellent line in which he is describing the way God imbued man with instinct, saying "Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow." Is this not what you've done here? You've given us, the developers, what you claim to be an open-source platform, written for mobile platforms that contain previously installed versions of the software, and also containing applications that each and every possible user would have purchased through buying the device on which they run. Then you tell us that it is illegal for us to modify any portion of that software which you see fit at any given point in time. Perhaps you should have just kept it closed-source, so that anything innovative wouldnt stir controvversy, as it would have truly been illegal. You give us a gift and then set the rules in opposition as it suits you.
Now, if I havent struck a nerve yet, perhaps I will in my own belief on the subject. You FEAR us. The android development team put out an initial platform. The developers, using the source code given to us, have turned out platforms on several different versions that utilize more functionality with greater performance, more flexibility and a wider range of features than ANYTHING that the official releases have even come close to. Mr. Kondik's releases are a prime example of this. He has created a version of the platform which utilizes every aspect of the platform infinitely better than the official releases. He has also included functionality from FUTURE releases, constantly and consistently improving on such, in a timeframe that should have your development team in absolute hysterics. That, sir, is what I believe this is about. Fear and shame. Never did you imagine that the Android development community would be able to surpass the Godly heights of the original development team, but we have and continually do so. It's his popularity that earned him the letter. He posed the biggest threat to your team by sharing a creative vision with anyone willing to install it that your team couldn't possibly compete with. But what about all of the other major developers? As of right now, I can count over a hundred different custom builds that include much of the same functionality and applications that Mr. Kondik's software includes. Are you going to attempt to stop them too?
(continued in post #2)
I assume you have been on the internet before. I assume you know that it spans the globe and has absolutely no limits or boundaries. It is freedom at its peak. Anyone, anywhere can express anything they want. The beautiful thing is that it enables people to communicate, and thereby collaborate in real-time. An internet community with thirty thousand people doesnt have to find a meeting room with enough chairs. This is the problem you're facing. You have attempted to cut the head off of a snake that you created. Unfortunately, on the internet, when you cut off the head of a snake, the body doesnt die. A thousand more heads spawn in its place, angrier, defiant and more intent on their purpose. Perhaps that should be a wake up call.
Mr. Morrill, I hope that in reading this letter, you have come to realize the gravity of your position. You have not only hurt yourselves, but angered an entire community, consisting of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people. These are the people who write the applications that are sold on the Android Market. These are the people who have the time to spare to ensure that you still have a job by creating works of digital art, using the code that you claim to be "open source". Are you so obtuse as to believe that these people are going to slip silently into the night when their creativity is stifled by the whims of a multibillion dollar corporation? I think not, sir.
You simply cannot give freedom to the masses and then attempt to bind their hands, as you are attempting to do in this case. This has ended in cataclysmic failure for every culture and every authority that has attempted to do so in history. We live in a global society of ingenuity. People WILL find a way. The creative power of the developers of the android community will inevitably break you. History has shown ample evidence that a creative mind cannot be beaten down. No army of lawyers, no amount of cease and desist letters will stop the tide of creativity.
It's like a bear. The choice you had was to embrace this creativity and nurture it or to poke at it with a stick. Mr. Morrill, are you aware of the consequences of poking a bear with a stick? Some thought on that will bring you to an obvious, and quite unpleasant, conclusion.
Had you simply left well enough alone, the damage might have been minimal, but at this point you could be looking at a 2009 reenactment of the Boston Tea Party, with the Android platform playing the part of the British tea. The damage to your "bottom line" was so infinitesimally small as to equate to a mouse burping on a rush hour subway car in New York City. As stated previously, it is simply my belief that your development team was offended by the fact that amateur developers would put them to shame. Does Android come with a complimentary set of swim trunks? Perhaps you might invest. I hear Boston Harbor gets cold in the winter.
In closing, perhaps you should let the immortal words of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto echo through your mind as you contemplate the statements made in this letter:
"I fear that all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve".
Mr. Morrill, the giant is awake now, and his resolve is beyond your wildest dreams. I truly hope you are prepared to reap the consequences of what you have put in motion.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
amazing. your right they do fear us and they have woken a sleeping giant. what i dont get is the fact that these roms are making this phone better. as you said you gave over 300 people instructions how to do this at the call center. if anything these devs are helping google make sales, and google doesnt even have to make a better product. they make they same thing tht has been out since 0ct.22.2008 and the devs make it better. you sir are a god among men.
Wow, great letter, really looking forward to hearing the response to this - If you'd post it that is ;-)
You misspelt "purchased" in the eighth paragraph btw
yeah, this was the pre-spell-checked rough draft. the copy that i sent him was clean as a whistle.
Interesting letter. Not to mock you or anything, but it reminds me a lot of Keith Olbermann.
I am a RSA for TMO, and one of the major selling points was that Android was (is?) Open Source. That was a big deal to many customers.
I don't think the folks over a Google realize how tech savvy even the dumbest tech user is.
Had probably a 60 year old man come in the other day and he had put Hero on his G1 by himself.
(No offense to any oldsters.)
The world is changing, and Google just jumped in front of that subway train you mentioned.
this was truly a great letter. i would love to see the response (if you even get one) to this. i feel inspired to go do something now...
Android users, this is your call to arms.
Before you go and write long winded threatening letters to someone, maybe you should look into what you are writing about first. The person you are writing the letter to is an employee of a company that tells him what to do. I doubt after all of the help he has given developers and "hackers" in the Android irc channel, that he was just planning on striking everything down. My guess, and that of many others who know of him (havent chatted a lot, but he is social with us) would be that he was told to write that post. I dont want cyanogen roms to go away either, but I think you are going at it the wrong way. Hate the company, not the developers.
And after re-reading the post, you mention installing this on devices that already have it. The exact same arguement I used but you must also realize that an HTC hero does not get these Google Apps. It is an HTC branded phone and instead gets HTC branded apps. The "With Google" phones are the only ones that come with these apps pre-installed. Even then, apparently (I just found this out today) that your license to these apps does not allow you to copy them OFF of the device they came on. So that cut down another idea we had: copy the apps from the rom to SD, flash image, copy apps back.
Once again, I do not disagree with you or your anger, I just disagree with who you are directing it at.
irrelevant. "i was just doing what i was told" is never an excuse. it doesnt work in the justice system, and it doesnt work here. i could elaborate more, but i really dont want to invoke Godwin's Law this early in the conversation. he opened his mouth. he made himself the target. everyone is a nice and helpful person until they show their true colors.
perhaps its just me, but i'm one of those people that actually hold to my ideals. if i'm fighting for something and my boss tells me to do otherwise, i'm going to tell him to pack sand. if I get fired, i can always find a new job, but I can do so with my integrity intact. he had a choice. everyone always has a choice.
also, to your second post, the HTC branded phones arent the subject of controversy. the apps are "free". i quote free because it isnt true in this case. how is distributing the official Gmail app for free any different than accessing the same capabilities through another means? if I were to delete the official GMail app off of my phone entirely and instead access my gmail account through a browser, wouldnt that have the same effect on Google's "bottom line"? I'm still using the same service and not paying for it. Similarly, with the hero, if you have access to GMail through any email application or browser, are you not violating the same concept? You're still using the core of google's intellectual property for free. Their only real solution is to make the Google apps paid applications that everyone has access to if they want to shell out the cash, or simply drop the whole thing.
Are they going to stop people from creating custom GMail apps too? Cause if so, they've got a big fish to fry, cause they'd have to go after everyone who wrote a gmail plugin for firefox as well. any way you look at it, they're not going to stop the development community from going on, its simply too big.
If Dell gives you a "free" copy of vista on your laptop, and then you buy a compaq with linux installed on it. Does that mean you have the right to install your "free" vista on the compaq also? It was free! How about you write a new windows shell and you bundle your free windows vista with it. And you also throw in your free copy of Office that came with it.
I understand their point and I realize these examples are not EXACT enough to matter, but the point does. They give you the apps for A SPECIFIC device and they give them to you with rules. Rules that we do not like.
I feel that they instead of C&D'ing him, should have had a little sit down with him. Said "hey, we realize you are doing a lot of good for us by promoting our product and giving those who want more what they ask for when we cannot, but we have some rules for you. A, you must make every attempt you can to make sure the roms you distribute go on authorized "With Google" devices. B, not release stuff you do not have permission to release." This would allow google to control what he releases enough to fit within the rules (keeps carriers from saying "hey, he can release your apps without paying, why cant we?"). They would also benefit from the many thousands of users who flock to these custom roms but realize they are unusable in their bare forms.
And so you do not have to, I will be the first to pull the term nazi out of my hat in this one
I agree completely. As i said in the letter, they could have nurtured creativity (i.e. having a sit down with him and saying "hey look, we know that this is going to non-google devices and we cant have that, so make an attempt to not let it happen") or poke it with a stick. They chose the stick, and now they get to reap the backlash.
I also understand your initial examples, and while they do hold true for the circumstance, windows isnt lauded as being an open-source platform. In addition, i havent heard of microsoft going after people who create custom shells that utilize windows information, so long as they put a disclaimer on it saying that you're only allowed to use them if you're running an authorized copy of the OS. The same should have been done here, as you suggested.
Also, microsoft has specific anti-piracy safeguards in place to keep you from installing that software on your compaq that didnt come with it. Can you get around it? sure. Piracy happens, but its also illegal. But google has no such safeguards on the apps. Is it because they lacked the foresight to see this coming? Absolutely. If they didnt want the apps installed on non-branded/non-approved devices, then perhaps they should have made it impossible to do so. Sure, people would eventually find a way around it, but then they'd have a legitimate piracy gripe. As it is now, they dont. You dont hand a kid a cookie, let him eat half and then snatch it away because he shared the chocolate chips. You keep him away from the cookies from the get-go.
It really is a sad state of affiars. If something is going to be free, such as GMail, then Google shouldnt care how the users access it. How big of a chunk of their profits do you think its really going to hurt if people with the hero get a free copy of the gmail app? I bet their legal team made for handling this "issue" than it would cost them in ten years. If the apps in question were paid apps, then I would completely understand. People shouldnt get something free that they should have to pay for, which is one of the reasons that XDA has such a strict "warez" policy. But thats not the case.
The simplest solution would have been to realize that "oops, we did tell them it was open source, maybe we should clarify a bit and see if we can come to a reasonable understanding". But alas...
Also, to your point that the apps came with a specific device, what about those that purchased a device with those apps? We have a right to be using them as we see fit. When I bought my phone, I never signed anything that said that I couldnt theme the application if I wanted to. Google never made me sign a contract. And they couldnt, it would be ridiculous. What about people that purchased them on ebay or craigslist without a contract? They still bought the device and are the owner, and they certainly didnt have to agree not to modify any content. Is google going to go after every developer and every themer now too? Are they going to go after every end user who modified their content? It's just as illegal as making a rom that allows it to happen in the eyes of the law. Apple is attempting to do the same sort of crap with people jailbreaking the iphone. They're saying that even though you bought it, apple technically still owns it, so anything you do to it is illegal. Theres a huge legal debate going on over it right now and apple looks like theyre probably going to lose.
The safeguard they have in place is lack of root access. If you have root access yo have exploited a bug and are acting out of the designed use of the phone. You would not be able to backup or otherwise access these app files. Also, you would not be able to flash the new rom without root, which you gained by exploiting a bug.
Absolutely. But at the same time, the whole "exploiting a bug" argument is similarly null. If the bug never existed, two things would be true:
1. There would be no custom roms for end users, which Mr. Morrill says he supports and looks forward to seeing more of. This would be true since the idea of creating custom software would be idiotic as nobody would be able to install it. The only people utilizing the open-source framework would be major development houses, such as what creative is doing with the plazma stem-cell android that they're putting on the EGG. Application development has nothing to do with open source. The iPhone is not open source, but you can still develop apps for it.
2. The claim that they have about the free distribution of their intellectual property would hold merit, as it would be legitimate software piracy, instead of an unintended side effect of faulty design.
The first point is what makes this a farce. We, as developers, found a way to get custom software onto our devices, something which we were never intended to do. One of two things should have happened at that point: they should have let us continue to do it, which they did (closing the loophole could have been done, they could have found a way to prevent downgrading, seeing as there are no other OS options for the device) or they could have stopped it there and said that exploiting the bug is illegal. Its been a year since the device came out. This has been going on for a YEAR. You mean to tell me that this is an issue NOW and wasnt a year ago when it first started? Its only an issue because they're not the only game in town anymore. Ridiculous. Someone got their feathers ruffled and wanted to take out the little guy.
Ok, I am not going to keep replying to your endless wandering rebuttals. I feel you are wrong in who you are aiming your hate mail at and that is the end of the story.
Thats fine, and I do apologize for being excessively adamant about it. But I still feel I'm right. You only paint a target on yourself if you're prepared for people to shoot at you. Thats all I can say about it.
Darkrift said:
If Dell gives you a "free" copy of vista on your laptop, and then you buy a compaq with linux installed on it. Does that mean you have the right to install your "free" vista on the compaq also? It was free! How about you write a new windows shell and you bundle your free windows vista with it. And you also throw in your free copy of Office that came with it.
I understand their point and I realize these examples are not EXACT enough to matter, but the point does. They give you the apps for A SPECIFIC device and they give them to you with rules. Rules that we do not like.
I feel that they instead of C&D'ing him, should have had a little sit down with him. Said "hey, we realize you are doing a lot of good for us by promoting our product and giving those who want more what they ask for when we cannot, but we have some rules for you. A, you must make every attempt you can to make sure the roms you distribute go on authorized "With Google" devices. B, not release stuff you do not have permission to release." This would allow google to control what he releases enough to fit within the rules (keeps carriers from saying "hey, he can release your apps without paying, why cant we?"). They would also benefit from the many thousands of users who flock to these custom roms but realize they are unusable in their bare forms.
And so you do not have to, I will be the first to pull the term nazi out of my hat in this one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
About your dell giving you a "free" copy of vista. As long as that CD key is only used on one computer, you can use that CD key on ANY computer. Read their TOS. Your are wrong about a lot, but right about some. Changing the integrity of the windows shell is illegal, because that is microsoft property and NOT open source, but anytime you purchase an OS, or computer, you OWN that cd key of the software, all apps that come included as well. Could you try another example?
nice letter.
not so sure about the whole HTC (not "with google") phone thing- my magic is a HTC magic (32A) and it came will every single google app preinstalled on it.... not sure about hero though...
MontAlbert said:
nice letter.
not so sure about the whole HTC (not "with google") phone thing- my magic is a HTC magic (32A) and it came will every single google app preinstalled on it.... not sure about hero though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hero did too.
Regards,
Dave
I had originally posted this in Development which was the wrong place and understandably it has been removed.
Considering Cyanogen's recent tweets that he has started working on a new rom that won't violate Google's licenses, I wasn't sure I would post the letter but I have received a request. So here it is:
Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043
U.S.A
26 September 2009
Attn: Android Development
To Whom it May Concern:
Re: Cease & Desist Letter against Steve Kondik aka Cyanogen
I've recently read with considerable chagrin about recent events concerning your actions against Steve Kondik, otherwise known as Cyanogen.
First off, I understand that legally Google has every right to take the actions it has thus far. However, as I am sure you are beginning to see, your actions are bound to have a very negative effect even for yourselves. No one denies that Mr. Kondik overstepped the line when he included applications in his customised ROM that he was not licensed to distribute. Could not your response though have been a little more constructive?
Perhaps a dialog with Mr. Kondik, explaining your concerns and perhaps coming to a settlement that saves face for both privately might have been better? Instead, this ham-handed move by your legal team has effectively stopped the Android mod community dead in its tracks and turned a fan base that was quickly beginning to grow like a yeast culture against you.
I hold some small hope that some compromise can be reached but in all truth I believe Pandora's box is now open and a trust has been broken on both sides.
Will I ride out my contract with my cell phone carrier? Yes, I hold Rogers Canada blameless in all this. Will I "protest" by buying a different phone? Unlikely since it proves nothing other than I have money to throw away. Will I ever buy another Android device? I really don't know at this stage. I feel hurt by this turn of events and can't honestly say I trust Google not to pull some other legal manoeuvre out of their bag of tricks that further cripples my "Google Experience".
You have likely lost someone who evangelised your product, perhaps a great many evangelists.
Sincerely,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guys Cyanogen just said in IRC that he is backing down and wont be any part of a fight with Google. This cant stop us. even if @Cyanogen is backing down we the community can still pressure Google to change the policy's that stopped cyanogen. We cant give up this soon. please work with me to pressure Google.
i think these threads need to stop being posted. it create a lot of clutter. who care if cyanogen or whoever may not include google exp apps...
cyanogen is developing an app to help reinstall these apps as long as the user has them backed up. this is technically legal.
ahronzombi said:
Guys Cyanogen just said in IRC that he is backing down and wont be any part of a fight with Google. This cant stop us. even if @Cyanogen is backing down we the community can still pressure Google to change the policy's that stopped cyanogen. We cant give up this soon. please work with me to pressure Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then give google your home address and a copy of a rom you made that contains their closed apps, especially the new market (that ticked them off so much), and see if they do not doing anything to you.
I wish i could quote exactly what steve told you, but here we go to paraphrase
"what movement? start writing code or shut the [email protected]#$ up."
some where in there is a word that means copulation
its fkd up wat google did n all....but come on...its not the end of the fkn world
id hate to be at google though gettin loads n loads of emails from geeks n nerds....and normal ppl too....hahaha..... ppl saying how their feelings are hurt n they feel betrayed hahahaha
leeeeeeeeaaaavvvvvveeeee gooooooggggglllllleeeeee alllllooooonnnneeee hahahaha
Kinds sucks google did that, but yeah, just another bump in the road. Give it time.
Letter looks like fun tho. Maybe I'll change a few things and send them a copy lol, if you dont mind me stealing your words lol.
david1171 said:
then give google your home address and a copy of a rom you made that contains their closed apps, especially the new market (that ticked them off so much), and see if they do not doing anything to you.
I have only had my phone rooted for the last 5 weeks i think,in fact david1171 helped me i think and its the best thing i did with it and have only had
Cyanogen's Roms on it and am delighted because of him and others i know alot more about what my G1 can do and i have also learnt alot more in general
so i am thankful to Cyanogen for his hard work,but as the quote above puts it best. For him it might have to be over for now
so instead of all the posts saying fight google how about a few just saying "Thanks" for what he did do eh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/06...kers-with-legal-action-for-distributing-roms/
Leaks happen — especially in the mobile world. There are just too many people involved in the process of creating a mobile device to keep things under wraps. Take any given new phone’s OS installation package (known as its “ROM”), for example; when something is as easily copied and distributed as any other piece of software, it’s bound to find its way out eventually.
When these ROMs pop up on developer/hacker forums, it’s generally no big deal — in most cases, the manufacturer doesn’t notice or, if they do, don’t bother to do anything about it. Once someone makes an effort to gather up all these ROMs and distribute them from one unified outlet, however, things get hairy. Such is the case for the popular HTC ROM distribution site Shipped-ROMs, who allegedly just received a Cease & Desist order straight from the desk of HTC’s Legal Counsel.
According to HTC, Shipped-ROMs is stepping out of line by “illegal copying … HTC¡¦s original art work.” Do they use “art work” literally (as in the visuals)? Or are they ambiguously using the term to classify all of their code and other work as art? Who knows. One way or another, HTC is pissed.
If nothing else, you’ve got to praise HTC for their speed: the site, operated by the increasingly well-known hardware hacker Conflipper, is only about a month old. More impressive than HTC’s speed, however, is the site’s: in that month, they’ve managed to accumulate ROMs for just about every HTC handset imaginable, from antiques like the MDA Compact to the just-friggin’-lanched HTC Aria.
So, who does one root for? On one hand, these ROMs allow the hacking community to “cook” up their own custom installs for the hardcore crowd, often unlocking or adding in features that the manufacturer didn’t — and rarely, if ever, do these leaks result in anything malicious trickling down to the end user. On the other, these ROMs are jam-packed with HTC’s intellectual property, which they’ve got some duty to protect.
In the end, I’ll always be rooting for the little guy. My time with a number of HTC devices has been vastly improved by the efforts of the faceless geniuses in the hacking community. If HTC decides to make a misguided effort to stop the hacking community that satiates their poweruser’s thirsts, so be it — but this is the wrong way to go about it. C&D’ing one site won’t do a damn thing; these ROMs will be up on another site (or a torrent tracker, or any one of a bajillion other distribution methods) in the blink of an eye. It’s the classic Napster problem; in making a fuss about these ROMs, you’ve just alerted a bunch of people to their existence. Oh well.
The full text of the C&D can be read at Shipped-Roms. Conflipper says he’ll “do what he can” to keep the site online, but things aren’t looking too good.
so its illegal to fix HTC's blunders. that is great news!
It makes sense. Those miscrient hackers are doing something illegal and harming HTC by re-distributing copyrighted material (htc sense). The hackers should be caught and brought to justice for what they have done.
Obv I am joking =P
Look at the bright side though maybe will see more AOSP only ROM's
Sent from my EVO via Tapatalk
HTC we have bigger issues on our hands right now! Once again you're late to the party. Maybe you should focus on getting out that firmware update to fix this 30fps cap! Or... at least go buy some more glue...
If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.
MrX8503 said:
If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Soo true ... instead of fixing their Issues they are busy sueing ppls who are making good things
HTCs not after those making modifications to rom - hackers , sites etc
They want to do away with those hosting official ROMs on unofficial servers.
You know what would be a good idea? Just issue licenses to various developers so that ROMs can be worked on and distributed legally. I mean, it's obvious that devs aren't charging for their work, no one is making money off of doing this, and I don't believe they ever have. The only reason ROMs exist is because the ones we're given stock are absolute garbage 98% of the time. So HTC doesn't have any ground to stand on in that sense. A minimal fee simply to acknowledge that, yes, this person has permission to work on this software, would be an easy fix.
Though I do want to point out that I'm extremely tired at the moment, so I might not be thinking clearly XD
Well, that's what happens when you try to fix other people's work :?
jigglywiggly said:
Well, that's what happens when you try to fix other people's work :?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hack away HTC doesn't care about that.
What they do care about is those hosting official ROMs on unofficial servers <--- Its a no go they will shut them down fast
If more sites are hosting their official roms wouldnt that make them happy? I mean, wouldnt it put less strain on HTC's servers? Im just say'in.
Response I got from my message. Seems to end nicely anyway:
=========================
I understand your enthusiasm for customizing your HTC phone. Any HTC phone branded to a carrier is shipped with such software and features as the carrier requests - this is our mandate as the manufacturer. It's always been my belief that, having purchased a consumer product, it is your prerogative to do with it what you wish. But in technical support, we're in the position of only being able to certify, support, and warranty the functionality of the hardware and software on the network which uses the provided, up-to-date ROM. We cannot even broach the subject of custom ROMs, flashing, rooting, registry edits, etc. for liability reasons. An HTC phone user who, unlike yourself, may be less comfortable in this area or is perhaps less cautious, may render their phone entirely inoperable, and we would be entirely powerless to assist. Without being familiar with the particulars of the cease & desist letter you're speaking of, I can tell you a C&D letter is most commonly an obligatory procedural step in pursuit of copyright protection, as a request to stop distribution of possibly copyright-protected material (for example the device firmware or licensed operating system code embedded in a custom ROM image) before any further actions are taken. This need not be interpreted as a threat to any well-meaning online community forum of HTC phone enthusiasts.
To send a reply to this message or let me know I have successfully answered your question log in to our ContactUs site using your email address and your ticket number XXXXXXXXXXXX.
Sincerely,
sablesurfer said:
Response I got from my message. Seems to end nicely anyway:
=========================
This need not be interpreted as a threat to any well-meaning online community forum of HTC phone enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
translation: "we wouldn't dare go after XDA-developers.org"
lol
I haven't been able to root yet but all I know is thank you DEVS, not HTC. Because of the devs people are able to use the phone to its full potential. Maybe HTC can actually learn something from the devs here. Thank you.
Sent from my PC36100 usingnr XDA Apps
Keep in mind that HTC likely receives pressure from carriers when things like "WiFi Tethering" become unbillable and available to rooted devices. The carrier-branded devices we receive are built-to-spec and neutered by the carriers.
EVOmaniac07 said:
Maybe HTC can actually learn something from the devs here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has been pretty obvious over the years that HTC does learn a lot from XDA.
I like that response. It confirms what we have all been thinking.
Why are people always so hard on Sprint and HTC? I mean, they are companies doing their jobs! They can't possibly cater everyone. They have to go by a standard. How else is Sprint going to become the best network if they don't charge people for their services...and they are still cheaper than others! HTC has to comply with Sprint standards so they can keep making Sprint phones. Now if HTC was a "custom" phone maker (there's an idea), then that's a different story. I truly love this community and understand some of the hate comments on here...but come on. We are all grown ups here and is common sense. Sorry for sounding harsh, I just get tired of all the childish hate comments.
sent from HTC Evo through Tapatalk
MrX8503 said:
If they used their efforts in trying to sue people towards fixing their phone, we wouldn't have the 30fps problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, they'll get their legal department right on those coding fixes for ya
Android is open. That's why I have my Samsung Galaxy S, my Nexus One and my Sapphire.
I have these phones because the open community can do better than the professionals, and I am proud to be a member of a community that has recently hacked Froyo onto the G1, Android2HD2 (and other Winmo devices), created great skins and themes, rooted almost every droid to date, hacked google navigation to work in other countries etc etc etc.
There is amazing work being done is this community.
Kingklick was able to put out a lot of ROMs which satisfied a lot of people. Contributors to Cyanogenmod (disclaimer. notably not Cyanogen himself) and others (fans and friends - disclaimer. note lack of word fanboys - of cyanogenmod, disclaimer. plus some others too) have flamed and flamed away about Kangklick (notably via twitter - I have stopped following any of those jerks that clogged up my feeds with what could've - screw that - should've been settled MUCH more privately..I followed you guys for dev news or the occasional interesting insight into your real life, not your petty bickering, but you have every right to post what you like...hence why I stopped following you all, I didn't flame you...note 'bigger man').
Rule 12 of XDArules clearly states that using the work of others must be done with permission, independent of whether it is open source or not. If this is not upheld then the post will be bought down, it does not say the user will be banned. I would understand the formality of taking the post down and requesting Kingklick reposts the ROM with due credit, but I believe - note believe...implies opinion - that moderators may have been influenced by pressure from other (high ranking, public eye) members and thus did not adhere to normal or just (I do not know if not giving creds is normally treated in this way, but you will discover I believe it shouldn't be) protacol. Kingklick broke the rules of XDA, but then again I see his banning as the least contentious issue here.
I believe that members of the XDA community in the public eye (ie with large Twitter follower base) due to their work via XDA (no matter what you say, cyanogenmod may be based at its own domain, but it still posts at XDA to maintain its public profile and feed of the massive XDA userbase, and is hence in part bound by this) have a responsibility to follow the rules of XDA on XDA rules and disputes. I do not think this is something which can be policed ('I'm banning you Wes for Trolling Kingklick...on Twitter'... not gonna work) but I think it is a moral obligation (anyone that thinks the internet is not bound by morality should take a reality check...the reason why we have open source is essentially ethics).
Do we give credit to Linus Torvalds every time we distribute linux kernels or work to do with linux? Do we give credit to those that helped him create this base? Do we give credit to Google for creating Android? HTC? Our carriers? Martin Cooper for inventing the mobile phone and cell networks? Time Berners-Lee for inventing the internet, giving rise to this forum, Google and thus the Phones/Devices we love and use? The fact is we don't give credit where due (although you may say its obscure to thank these people, they DO deserve our thanks). None of the ROM chefs/coders give all credit where due, but a lot do in part, with those directly involved. But who still thanks the original rooters?
Kingklick has been declared a copier by the jury...I haven't delved through the evidence to confirm this...but shouldn't we be much more relaxed about copying in general? All users should be open about their work with Android, but they are not. If kingklick based a build off Cyanongenmod, and gave due credit for that, he would be called unoriginal, despite his attempts to make improvements. I also believe that there should be transparency, a log of all complaints of interest and the community told in a statement from the mods why someone was banned...at least in part (keeping gory details to themselves thank you very much).
Donations are generally given by 'end-users'...noobs who can flash and maybe do some work on the builds but their contributions are limited. End users generally want user experience, and reward devs with commendation and donations. If kingklick does work on a build which satisfies more users and he hence gets donations, is that stealing donations? No. The original dev works on an open source project knowing that their work is open, but the end user can reward as he/she likes. Perhaps kingklick developed his following due to his branding...he did always use words like FAST and STABLE and SMOOTH, but Apple do the same and they're not banned from trading despite the hyperbole.
I do not doubt that a lot of devs thanks fellow devs with donations. Cyanogen is well known for donating, as is kingklick, however a lot of donations come from end users, and if kingklick replaces a few files using winrar (something which I generally contest, I believe kingklick does a lot of great work) and that satisfies more end users by being fast and stable and smooth (or perceived as being so thanks to branding) then he can get donations for that, they are a gesture of satisfaction and goodwill.
Kingklick was immoral by not giving true credit, however I believe that he could have been warned and asked to give credit once he got back from his night out (whether that excuse, or what ever his actual excuse was, was true).
I also laugh at the accusation that kingklick does not fill a niche within the 'open'/'free' community. This should not result in grudges and flame wars, whether it is true or not. Kingklick did fill a niche in my opinion: reviewers (and consumers) see vanilla android as being sterile. Hell it is sterile, and it's never going to be as successful as others if it doesn't sort this out. Cyanogenmod and other big names are based off this sterile form of Android, but they don't delve into Sense UI and other alternative skins, mainly due to preferences or copyright problems etc, not that that stops them with other things. Kingklick did work with these and he filled his niche by delivering great, fast, usable roms of these whilst others sneered at them for being inefficient coding or whatever...geeky snobbery.
Kingklick also delivered various fixes and things which other groups did not. I won't list all of these and I am sure representatives of Cyanogenmob et al will say 'we were gonna fix these issues anyways' or 'that's redundant' or 'that was patchy code', but kingklick has contributed. Obviously we have to hold ethics above output, we can not say that 'his holiness' (inteneded to mock those who believe cyanogen alone is a god, not cyanogen himself) Cyanogen's contributions to android exempt him from following conduct, but we do a great job of driving away good developers with flaming and telling tales. Perhaps you'll say kingklick was not a good developer, Drizzy, even Haykuro etc etc, but I only flashed Cyanogenmod on my Nexus once and I didn't like it for various reasons (personal preference yada yada) but I kept going back for more kingklick...whether that's perceived speed and branding etc or just satisfaction.
King's desire roms are great, but we never mobbed, trolled and banned the poor guy for not giving creds to HTC. Surely the morality of our community using software like Rosie on the Nexus is more ethically questionable than a fellow member of XDA's work, since HTC is a firm which employs people. I bought a Nexus over the Desire because I knew I could still have Sense and a bigger dev community, however the cost included in the Desire which goes to the developers of Sense is hence forgone (perhaps indeirectly, I don;t know HTC internal funding); therefore I have - and anyone who has ever flashed a Sense ROM or devved with Sense - indirectly caused loss of welfare for people who rely of developing as their source of income, tehir families, communities and economies. Surely that is less ethical than not saying thank you, but XDA has no problem with that. Perhaps it is too small to notice, but it will have an indirect impact nonetheless.
Yes kingklick should've said his please and thank you, but I think it's community hyped double standards, pretensical courtesy (not that I wouldn't give creds, it's just that pleases and thank yous are nice, but not actually useful). A wise man once said 'there is no threshold for immorality', just because kingklick did a larger 'crime' than the rest of the community in not giving his thanks out, that does not exempt the other rule breakers (ie everyone), it just means their punishment should be less severe...we choose to ignore it because it's less direct or forgotten about.
In conclusion, I think we should start a 'contributors to Android' part of XDA, added to by mods or specifically appointed members of the community (like the portal). This could be informative and could mean that forgotten about contributors could not be forgotten, but their contributions immortalised in the open community of Android. Even if the contributions become redundant, they are the foundations for the next chapter in the Android story.
Finally. www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html is a very good read..and think about what AOSP stands for (I'll give you a clue...Android Open Source Project!). Can you steal what is open? What right have others to dictate what can and cannot be distributed in the open aspects of Android code (ie the underlying OS and vanilla UI...I'm not confused with Apps). Perhaps kingklick was guilty of plagiarism? But so is anyone that claims they worked really hard in that kernel without crediting Linus and leaving a donation link to his family or favourite charitable causes. Anyone that says I've reworked the UI without giving credits to The Astonishing Tribe for the original Android concepts which all UIs are based off...
Android is closed, that's why I question this 'community'.
I am not proud to be a member of this 'community'...right now.
Ps. Cyanogenmob was originally a typo (using words like mobbed in my piece...Freudian slip on the keyboard rather than fat finger syndrome)...but I kept it in as I thought it was funny...the Cyogenmob should replace team douche IMHO!
Pps. Originally posted in Android Dev general but moved here as its Nexus dev themed!
im proud of myself for actually completing this reading haha. interesting read though.
cheddie said:
im proud of myself for actually completing this reading haha. interesting read though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im more proud of you for successfully quoting the entire thing...I might submit it for my dissertation next year
HazzBazz said:
Im more proud of you for successfully quoting the entire thing...I might submit it for my dissertation next year
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahah thanks for bringing that to my attention. had to edit it lol
To be fair I posted the god darn epic rant/essay/post...my bad !
HazzBazz said:
To be fair I posted the god darn epic rant/essay/post...my bad !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I posted it! I worked long and hard last week to write it out. I am accepting donations to cover my time spent though.
All this happens because altruism is evil in the sense that it is a lie. Altruists demand payment too, in the form of recognition, appreciation, respect, reputation, and all these similar thirst for prestige.
In NOT giving recognition to comrades In arms who share a common need for prestige, it is theft among kin, robbing prestige.
Prestige is indeed a rotten currency.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Touche...topical. Doesn't really do anything against my points, I am saying kingklick is guilty among many but they are appeased because they haven't got flames burning them. I do believe that kingklick should always give credit where due.
caysman said:
All this happens because altruism is evil in the sense that it is a lie. Altruists demand payment too, in the form of recognition, appreciation, respect, reputation, and all these similar thirst for prestige.
In NOT giving recognition to comrades In arms who share a common need for prestige, it is theft among kin, robbing prestige.
Prestige is indeed a rotten currency.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point...the fact is cyanogenmod wouldn't be as big with as many great ethusiastic devs without the praise it got...but is that a fair compromise for contributions...
I really think that the issue is the same as black droid. The Problem isn't that king copied the rom and redistributed it. The problem is that he did so claiming that it was his work based off of CM. When in reality he downloaded a a finished copy of CM, compiled by the CM team, and then changed a few lines the build.prop, renamed it and asked for donations. I personally can't see how that is helping the community at all. I really don't care about King one way or the other but I do think that the people who do the work should get credit for it. They spend countless hours writing code for us to have for FREE. Code you yourself says is better than what google puts out. They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
HazzBazz said:
Good point...the fact is cyanogenmod wouldn't be as big with as many great ethusiastic devs without the praise it got...but is that a fair compromise for contributions...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't misunderstand me. Payment is due, for sure, and payment makes our world go round, but I do wish it were not in the form of mousy prestige, rotten evil currency that it is. Money is a much better choice, but prestige seekers pretend to loathe $ probably because $ is less ambiguous.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But they do not explicitly ask for recognition do they? Even the great cyanogen does not do that, because once they impose recognition expressly as a mode of payment you would recognize that their asking for your adulation and love would seen a more demanding payment than asking for cash.
And also the inconvenience of the prestige seekers being more easily mistaken for all the money grabbing corporations which they demonize.
I'd make it clear that I have not wanted anything other than cyanogen's roms during my g1 days, and adulation I'd gladly pay, plus I have donated in money.
These guys made android exciting and formed PART of the inspiration for the paid android developers. It is unfortunate that the society's misconception of altruism as ' good' destroyed a lot of the language required to denounce it as the evil it actually is.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Gr8gorilla said:
I really think that the issue is the same as black droid. The Problem isn't that king copied the rom and redistributed it. The problem is that he did so claiming that it was his work based off of CM. When in reality he downloaded a a finished copy of CM, compiled by the CM team, and then changed a few lines the build.prop, renamed it and asked for donations. I personally can't see how that is helping the community at all. I really don't care about King one way or the other but I do think that the people who do the work should get credit for it. They spend countless hours writing code for us to have for FREE. Code you yourself says is better than what google puts out. They do this in their spare time and ask for nothing but recognition. You think that is wrong? I am amazed by this. Really I am.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it was actually jubehs rom he did that with.....
@OP, Omitting credit and stealing are completely different things. kk downloaded jubehs rom and changed 5-10 files and claimed it as his own. when confronted with this, kk said he compiled it himself even though the evidence overwhelmingly pointed at the other direction. He claimed to have built it from asop, when all he did was take someones rom and change a few files. if he said he "cooked" the rom from another (even without saying who) he would have been ok. But he continued to lie after he was caught which is probably why the ban hammer was dropped.
Most of this plus the damning evidence is located in the g1 section.
Also, android does not follow the GNU licensing, it follows apache, and by default, the devs who release their material here are also released under apache. Apache allows people to see the source so they can better understand it to develop, but people who use the source to develop something from it are not required to open source their works. they are also allow to put their own terms which would include giving proper credit.
AFAIK xda mods actually work together to decide on what to do with offenders. i know thats what they did for the wrecking crew (though some mods were less fair than others -_- )
PS: i havent used cyanogen mod since like 3.6.8 before the C&D lol
The sad fact is, it takes money to live in the world today. A lot of these programmers make good money 9-5 at their day jobs. The average computer engineer spends about 100,000 dollars going to college then makes about 60-70k per year after. This is working on a salary basis probably putting 40-60 hours per week. After that they spend another 20+ writing code for us because they like to. I can completely understand the devs wanting someone who copied and renamed their work to be banned.
That would be like you taking Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire, Calling it Circle of Fire and trying to sell it as your own. You would get sued, etc. Come on people how can you defend this guy, come on really?
Tl,dr the OP.
flybyme said:
Omitting credit and stealing are completely different things. kk downloaded jubehs rom and changed 5-10 files and claimed it as his own. when confronted with this, kk said he compiled it himself even though the evidence overwhelmingly pointed at the other direction. He claimed to have built it from asop, when all he did was take someones rom and change a few files. if he said he "cooked" the rom from another (even without saying who) he would have been ok. But he continued to lie after he was caught which is probably why the ban hammer was dropped.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this is true, he got what he deserved. I had a similar thing happen when I wrote a script for the iphone which gets about 75-100 downloads a day. Someone from a forum put their name on it, posted it saying they were up all night writing it and put a donation link at the bottom of their post.
When confronted, they lied and said it didn't work so they rewrote it, but a simple comparison showed the only changes made was to echo commands which displayed the author's name and some text about how to run it. They also had no clue how it worked and gave bad advice about how to use it, and there were a lot of people on that forum using it, having problems and asking questions.
I didn't really care, and I never got a penny for my work, but it forced me to think about it, and what I came up with was: what use is there in having that kind of thing around? They aren't contributing or advancing ideas, they're confusing them and possibly screwing things up.
The douche that stole my script went from "moderator" to "supermoderator" at that site. If that was your site, why would you even want to keep him around? I'm not a banhammer kinda guy, but there's no upside to allowing things like that to continue.
Im no developer, but i do see both sides of the story. But I mean this is no way to act.
[email protected] please tell your teamdouche to grow up. We all know it was someone in it that just made that name
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kingklick92
whoever made that account with MY name haha ur f****g retarded, Ill see you in court. You distribuuted MY name
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kingklick92
whether you were in the right or not.
I think credit should just be given when you use someones work just like you would want the same for your work.
Delete if not acceptable.
Oh for ****'s sake.
OP, you're being a white-knighting ninny. KK got what he deserved: "open-source" doesn't mean an eradication of common courtesy--and crediting is common courtesy. You're trying to weasel around "blah blah why don't we credit HTC and Google" which is sheer, utter, retarded straw man. We know who developed Android by implication unless you live under a rock. Not so with specific individual community contributions.
Besides, what did KK even do? All I saw in the N1 development section from him was ROMs based off other people's work slightly modified, or rubbish that never worked like his attempt to port Blur. I say good riddance. The fact that he managed to scam donations off people hardly helps his case. I'd sooner donate to the source/original contributors, not such a juvenile, plagiarizing, useless waste of oxygen.
Hey everyone, being as this is a webcast about Android Development I'm not sure if it belongs here or in "General" so Mods please move it if you think it doesn't belong.
Anyway, lets get on the AT&T webcast tomorrow and bug them about bootloader access, you do have to register to participate but it's easy enough. It begins at 11AM PST and says it is an hour long. You need Microsoft Office Live Meeting (or you could call in) but it's free to download.
http://developer.att.com/developer/forward.jsp?passedItemId=5300338
I fully realize that this may be a futile action but in my experience persistence pays off and I'm not done bothering them quite yet, maybe 6 months down the road if they still aren't doing anything for us I'll give, but not yet!
Aside: I'm assuming that since this uses full featured meeting software there will be an opportunity to ask questions.
Awesome! Yes, please do! It worked for HSUPA, it is worth a shot.
...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.
Ririal said:
...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Presenters:
Greg Wilson, Technology Evangelist, Motorola Mobility
Greg is a Technology Evangelist at Motorola Mobility, helping developers to create the best possible Android applications. Prior to joining Motorola, Greg was at Palm (and its various incarnations) doing similar work for the Palm OS developer community. Greg has been programming since the early days of the microcomputer, and has written software for programmable calculators, IBM mainframes, and an assortment of microprocessor architectures and microcomputer operating systems.
Peter van der Linden, Technology Evangelist, Motorola Mobility
Peter is the Android Technology Evangelist within the Developer Tools and Technical Services team at Motorola. He is not afraid of bugs, and has a collection of several prize bugs (software only).
They work for Motorola.
youareme7 said:
Hey everyone, being as this is a webcast about Android Development I'm not sure if it belongs here or in "General" so Mods please move it if you think it doesn't belong.
Anyway, lets get on the AT&T webcast tomorrow and bug them about bootloader access, you do have to register to participate but it's easy enough. It begins at 11AM PST and says it is an hour long. You need Microsoft Office Live Meeting (or you could call in) but it's free to download.
http://developer.att.com/developer/forward.jsp?passedItemId=5300338
I fully realize that this may be a futile action but in my experience persistence pays off and I'm not done bothering them quite yet, maybe 6 months down the road if they still aren't doing anything for us I'll give, but not yet!
Aside: I'm assuming that since this uses full featured meeting software there will be an opportunity to ask questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make sure to point out the number of people that want this.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/
I'm not going to be able to watch and partcipate for this. I would like if someone could record this conference.
Thanks.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
Ririal said:
...why would you bug AT&T about a Motorola device? Waste of effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because AT&T is behind 99pct of the problems with the Atrix:
- No Side Loading - AT&T
- Reduced Speeds - AT&T
- No Root Access - AT&T
Motorola made it pretty clear pre-release they wanted to open up the bootloader, AT&T obviously shut that down.
maybe they will give us the key for the bootloader, probably not, however its a good place to voice our concern
hate_Romania said:
maybe they will give us the key for the bootloader, probably not, however its a good place to voice our concern
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt it. I asked in their MotoDev forum.
http://community.developer.motorola...trix-App-summit-on-March-29th-2011/td-p/12350
I'm not sure if it would actually do us any good, but I mean i guess it would be worth a try. Who is all gunna be the conference tomorrow??
I think (When it comes to their "bootloader solution") what they meant to say was "We do what we think is right when it comes to working with devs and customers, and will continue to do so in the future". And, what everyone took that to mean was "THEY ARE GONNA UNLOCK THE BOOTLOADER FOR US". I'm not saying I agree AT ALL, I just sometimes try to look at it from both sides.
I definitely want this thing unlocked, but I'm not counting on Moto to do too much about it. Not to say opinions shouldn't be voiced!
No one should be blaming ATT for the locked bootloader. Motorola's Droids (except for OG Droid) all have been locked down and they are on Verizon's network. Feel free to blame ATT for upload speeds, fake 4G, no sideloading, global warming, etc...
The Motorola employee that's going to be there is an application developer. He's unlikely to know anything about, much less have an answer for, anything about the bootloader. Harassing employees makes the entire community look bad and childish. If you have a REAL problem with it, other than bandwagon hatred for something a lot of you clearly don't understand, follow the appropriate channels. Lawyer up and file a formal complaint. Harassing them over the internet won't get you anywhere. If you REALLY believe that it's changed anything so far, I'm sorry you're that ignorant.
All the whining and harassing got nowhere, but when a thought out, well written petition was put into place and formal requests were made, look what happened: Motorola released their source. They didn't do it to "appease the masses", or to "shut us up." They did it because the proper channels were followed and they honored that. You have to understand that the amount of people who want the bootloader unlocked is a very, VERY small portion of their total userbase. It's entirely ignorant to claim that everyone wants this. Motorola isn't some evil overlord who wants their users to hate them. They're a business. Do you honestly think they'll care if a few hundred users out of the hundreds of thousands they have leave over the bootloader being locked? Unlikely. They've recognized the issue, and have announced they will have a solution for developers soon, which is more than they're even obligated to do in the first place. They don't owe you anything, having such an entitled attitude is hurtful to the entire process. Be patient.
I mean no disrespect to anyone in particular, so please, be respectful and mature of the situation. If you don't like it, that's fine, voice your opinion respectfully.
I second Ririal. Those two that are going to be presenting tomorrow are evangelists, and are going to be pretty in the dark about the situation.
I think the chat will be very interesting. Devs being there should be good for a prediction on where Moto plans to take the Atrix... wonder if we can ask questions in a round about way to see if they slip on how they unlock the bootloader to develop on the phone... lol yea I know wishful thinking this isn't a cartoon or movie lol but one can dream... I'll try and make the chat and see if I can record it for you guys
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
I have school at that time but can someone do me a favour and bug them about his.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=980047
Its common with half the people that unlocked the Atrix.
I have a meeting tomorrow and can't participate in the webcast.
However, would somebody _please_ tell them that there are companies out there who really want to develop applications for the webtop.
I have the go-ahead at work to port our primary Linux/X Windows application to the webtop on the Atrix, but cannot move forward so long as hacking/rooting the device is necessary. We can only develop using officially authorized channels.
Thanks in advance for anyone who can bring this up to them.
Ririal said:
The Motorola employee that's going to be there is an application developer. He's unlikely to know anything about, much less have an answer for, anything about the bootloader. Harassing employees makes the entire community look bad and childish. If you have a REAL problem with it, other than bandwagon hatred for something a lot of you clearly don't understand, follow the appropriate channels. Lawyer up and file a formal complaint. Harassing them over the internet won't get you anywhere. If you REALLY believe that it's changed anything so far, I'm sorry you're that ignorant.
All the whining and harassing got nowhere, but when a thought out, well written petition was put into place and formal requests were made, look what happened: Motorola released their source. They didn't do it to "appease the masses", or to "shut us up." They did it because the proper channels were followed and they honored that. You have to understand that the amount of people who want the bootloader unlocked is a very, VERY small portion of their total userbase. It's entirely ignorant to claim that everyone wants this. Motorola isn't some evil overlord who wants their users to hate them. They're a business. Do you honestly think they'll care if a few hundred users out of the hundreds of thousands they have leave over the bootloader being locked? Unlikely. They've recognized the issue, and have announced they will have a solution for developers soon, which is more than they're even obligated to do in the first place. They don't owe you anything, having such an entitled attitude is hurtful to the entire process. Be patient.
I mean no disrespect to anyone in particular, so please, be respectful and mature of the situation. If you don't like it, that's fine, voice your opinion respectfully.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed Ririal.
The petition I've started doesn't actually complain about anything, it asks for an announcement at the very least. Just something for Developers to be hopeful for. It also just requests an option for Developers not for everyone.
We are working very hard to follow the right channels on the topic and generate positive support to show Motorola that there is an enthusiastic user-base out there.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/
ikenley said:
Agreed Ririal.
The petition I've started doesn't actually complain about anything, it asks for an announcement at the very least. Just something for Developers to be hopeful for. It also just requests an option for Developers not for everyone.
We are working very hard to follow the right channels on the topic and generate positive support to show Motorola that there is an enthusiastic user-base out there.
http://www.groubal.com/motorola-lockedencrypted-bootloader-policy/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely. I saw your petition and have signed it. I'd love to see them, at the very least, give us an answer. We may not like it, but at least we'd have one instead of empty promises right now. No need to get upset about it, though
electronaut said:
I have a meeting tomorrow and can't participate in the webcast.
However, would somebody _please_ tell them that there are companies out there who really want to develop applications for the webtop.
I have the go-ahead at work to port our primary Linux/X Windows application to the webtop on the Atrix, but cannot move forward so long as hacking/rooting the device is necessary. We can only develop using officially authorized channels.
Thanks in advance for anyone who can bring this up to them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THIS THIS
Being able to create/load webtop apps would be an awesome feature that would turn the webtop from an interesting sideshow to a must-have.
I am hesitant to spend anything on the lapdock because I don't think it would be much more useful than the phone itself. If I could throw OpenOffice down on there or something using apt-get then I would totally buy it.
I understand that Moto might want to control the user experience, as nobody is going to be doing any high-powered computation or gaming on it, but third-party apps would be really neat.