Related
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/24/google-hits-android-rom-modder-with-a-cease-and-desist-letter/
So this is interesting: apparently Google's hit the developer of the Cyanogen modded Android ROM with a cease-and-desist letter, asking him to stop distributing the closed-source Google apps like Gmail, Maps, and YouTube. What's a little strange is that Cyanogen is targeted at "Google Experience" devices like the G1 and myTouch, so it's not like Google is really protecting anything here -- leading us to wonder if they're just using the copyright argument to shut down a popular mod that's tempted over 30,000 users into rooting their phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sure am dissapointed in google right now.
Is Google turning into Microsoft? WTF! Cyanogen has done nothing but help make a lot of people into Android fanatics. What happened to the idea behind open source? I for one am behind Cyanogen 100%, in any way I can help.
donepate said:
What happened to the idea behind open source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the problem is that he is distributing closed source applications. ie. you tube, gmail etc.
if you read the story here... http://androidandme.com/2009/09/hacks/cyanogenmod-in-trouble/
it makes more sense.
[20:20] <cyanogen> no they are talking specifically about the closed-source google apps
[20:20] <cyanogen> and how i am not licensed to distribute them
[20:20] <cyanogen> my argument is that i only develop for google-experience devices which are already licensed for these apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is is just me or is http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ down?
And now his site is down
I hope he continues modding - he can always do it without the close source apps and leave it to us to acquire them on our own.
his site isn't down Ive been on it today. I think it's picking up publicity traffic now so its a bit slow. Hopes this gets sorted out.
Good for him. (the publicity traffic that is)
driskl said:
his site isn't down Ive been on it today. I think it's picking up publicity traffic now so its a bit slow. Hopes this gets sorted out.
Good for him. (the publicity traffic that is)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure enough, I can access it again.
All respect and support to Cyanogen.
If the issue is really about those proprietory apps, then I'd just remove them, and keep going!
Big props @Cyan
I was on his irc channel last night, and he was apparently already talking to people about substituting for open source apps....
Let`s hope so!!
I just downloaded Save Cyanogen from the market and signed a petition.
I'd just assume he replace the closed source apps with Open ones and drop Gmail all together, I don't have any much use or trust them anyway.
Go go gadget hotmail calendering, contacts
Stop knocking him and employe him!
Come on Google make use of the talents of some of these developers, personally I find his work more stable than my Vodafone rom
Official Google statement
Code:
http://bit.ly/1YFWlA
anyone know where I can download cyanogen?
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/downloads/stable-rom says not found.
never mind... found it with google
I just don't understand the main reason that google is going after cyanogen for. Currently right now there are the HTC devices and Google branded devices that can run this software. So while cyanogen himself don't have the license to distribute the software it is being installed on devices that would have the software on it anyway. I would also argue if this is the problem for Google they should provide a way for end users to download these needed applications directly without needing to go back to a main rom. Is the contacts sync which syncs to google proprietary? That would be something that really can't being taken out of the OS i don't think. I just believe that Google is being unreasonable and at the same time shooting themselves in the foot with this action.
ive read in a couple of places that this is the end of android. Thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. And ive read a lot of really dumb stuff
DMaverick50 said:
ive read in a couple of places that this is the end of android. Thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. And ive read a lot of really dumb stuff
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is dumb, its not great, but hardly the end. Just means its pushed underground, which doesn't help the devs, users or Google
Of course it's not the end of Android, but it surely will have a huge impact on the platform. Google just killed a great chunk of community and things will never be the same again.
It's probably Google's way of seeing what would happen if they pushed. Kind of a "test the waters" thing. Sad to see it go this way. I had high hopes for Android but all that glitters......
heres from the dream forum.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=4615831#post4615831
Few things about the Android as background;
1) Android is open source and is enough to run a device on its own.
1a) People will argue that it isn't, that proprietary binaries are required. This is a *hardware dependent* argument. Blame HTC for having proprietary closed source binaries. 'Droid works fine on an openmoko using all open source software. http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Android
2) Not all of what is on your phone is actually part of AOSP, i.e. *market*, *gmail*, etc.
3) Open and closed source components can exist in the same system without conflict.
4) Any particular organization can develop BOTH open AND closed source components, and these can, in fact, exist in the same system without conflict.
The situation:
Cyanogen has been issued a cease and desist order by Google related to inclusion of closed source Google apps in "CyanogenMod ROMs".
The legal situation: These closed source apps are not licensed to Cyanogen for redistribution. Google does have the legal right to restrict distribution of said apps.
Why now: The most obvious recent change that could have prompted this order to happen now is the inclusion of the as-of-yet unreleased MARKET app. This market app, being unreleased, is in an unknown state. This app may not be finished testing, i.e., it may be quite buggy, to the point where it could do all kinds of nasty things, like MULTIPLE-CHARGING of customer's when they buy paid apps, releasing payment and/or account information to unauthorized targets, failure to put secure apps into secure locations or other vulnerability allowing easy copying of protected apps, OR OTHER vulnerabilities. That being the case, Google may be *WORRIED ABOUT POTENTIAL PROBLEMS* in the new market app (rightly, as it may not have completed testing and/or may have KNOWN issues).
Why the order against *all* closed-source apps: This is simple. How can they order the removal of *just one*? If they order the removal of *just* the new market app, the legal implication is that the other closed source apps *can* be redistributed, i.e. precedence is 9/10ths of the law -- they would be closing the door on the enforcement of those apps in the future, i.e., for security reasons since regarding the closed source apps, Google is legally liable for their correct function.
So would the ignorant people talking about how evil Google is for doing this, PLEASE STOP spewing your mouths off regarding things that YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND? You're not helping anybody.
EVERYONE should read this.
I will admit, this post made me re-think what is really going on. He is just the first to get a finger shook at him, the rest will follow unless the developers and Google get stuff squared away.
i still think google is acting like asswholes though.
I do to but thank you for looking at things clearly unlike alot of other people inlcuding my self at first but once i started thinking about the new market i understood google
Just curious here but can an open source app be developed to access Market? Or are the codes for accessing Market closed?
Makes sense now, Google Just don't want to be responsible for something like customer's info being stolen.. and have the masses calling or infront of their door with pitch forks inhand,,
Then,
Why didn't Google say this?
Instead, they patronize and belittle the community.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=4609612&postcount=3
I don't mean to attack the OP with this post.
It's just a question.
Most likely because they are a dev or a lawyer. They just don't like speaking English. They have to say it all complicated and then have someone else translate it for them.
i think that this is from a stupid lawyer team, and google just sent it for legal reasons, i think the dev team has nothing to do with this.... isnt this why the created android, to have an open source platform.... i think Cyanogen and google just need to come to a compromise, either that or we just dont use googles apps even though half of them have better counterparts in the market
i do know this, the law is the law. Is the law always perfect, hell no. Cyanogen did no wrong. He helped out every single one of us running an android powered phone.
Could something wrong happen with an experimental build? Ofcourse. That is why he has his own disclaimer. If you are smart enough to root your phone, you should be smart enough to realize potential dangers in running leaked and/or experimental code.
Google is being a douchebag for their actions. Htc doesnt issue cease and desist orders for all of you running hero and that directly involves their sales in their phones. How many windows mobile roms are on this xda forum? How many have been ordered by microsoft to stop distributing their work?
To me it is ridiculous google is doing this. I know they are legally right but that doesnt mean they should screw us early adopters of their software with lame and slow updates and a product that is obviously inferior to the coding and development of one man with the help of a few others.
The reason i bought my g1 instead of an iphone or windows mobile phone was because of this community. Now all of us have had the benefits of cyanogen in one way or another. I dont want to be a douchebag as well and not speak up for a man who has helped me out when he had no reason to do so
honestly cyanogen would have probably been fine had he left the new market out. fact is our phones came with the old version and thats what we payed for when we got them. if say on the g1 t-mobile decides not to offer and upgrade to 1.6 then that means there not going to pay google to have the new app on our phones so if we hack it and throw it on anyway then google doesnt make there money and we are in every way STEELING IT. if you worked for and got payed by google i bet it would upset you if people were steeling your product that you worked hard to create.
so do i agree they should force him to rethink some of his newer roms? yes
but i think the older ones that just have software our phones already came with should be left alone
AND i think we should be aloud to purchase the new software from google if we want it.
but google search google maps and all that crap has nothing to do with this as you can get them all FREE online this is probably 99% the new app being on peoples phones that didnt pay for it. you bought the original market when you bought your phone thats why google hasnt had a problem untill now.
everything set aside i love cyanogens work i love my 4.0.4.... i HAVE 4.1.11.1 saved i will probably even install it just to check it out if he doesnt come out with a stable version which is what i was waiting for. but if he comes out with a non google stable version i have no problem installing my old market onto it, i already have it backed up and ready to go. i payed for it and im keeping it no matter what rom i run! and i hope he keeps doing his thing im all for him and love what he does and would even pay for it if i had to! i hope this doesnt stop him and i hope they work things out. if he wants money for all the work hes been doing im sure people wont blame him and as long as it gives him insintive to keep going im happy!
my two cents
cy has been perfecting their roms and now that they got the tools that they need they are going to plagerize his programming and impliment it into their next great g phone....and the only way to say its theirs is by getting rid of any shred of evid that is out there
i understand what Google is doing..its upsetting but they have a point, they gave us an OPEN SOURCE OS, thats good enough, the devs make it a better, more fun, experience...so just shrug it off, rid it of ALL closed source apps.
Google should than allow the All Google apps available to those with Google Experience phones(before customizing with a ROM), they could make you register with your phones EMEI (maybe? if possible).
Also so this obviously means his ROMs arent here on XDA...What is XDAs stand on the situation? Were they pulled by XDA or did Cyanogen pull them?
I don't know if this has been suggested before. I've seen dev-team on iphone doing something similar: why don't you make an "installer" script that takes all Google APKs from the device (which has stock image) then flash the rom and reinstall the APKs.. This way you don't have to distribute google apks. Not sure if that's possible if there is some kind of encryption protection on Google apps, just a suggestion .
No matter what it was a mountain made out of a mole hill.
id just like to see google allow open access to their market place.
then put all closed source google apps on there for download just like any other apps.
However from what I understand its not as simple as this as they arent just apps there is a whole framework that goes with it. bah.
MS never sent a takedown notice
MS never sent a takedown notice to xda-developers.
Ready.........Fight!
http://googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Google&word2=Cyanogen
wshwe said:
MS never sent a takedown notice to xda-developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard;
1) xda doesn't host any wimo roms.
2) xda doesn't develop any roms at all -- that is up to the individual who does so.
3) How the hell would you know? MS probably did some real *****y stuff like sending goons to the modder's home, harassing the modder's wives, and issuing threats like "stop doing this, don't tell anybody we threatened you, and pay up $10,000 or we're taking you to court over it".
Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!
Well, if you chose to implement in-app purchasing, then I suppose that might solve your problem.
taomorpheus said:
Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then
octobclrnts said:
Well, if you chose to implement in-app purchasing, then I suppose that might solve your problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't because a lot of people have already purchased the app in the classic way!
superkoal said:
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually this is a really cool idea, can I access to my google account using google api?
superkoal said:
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like this.
taomorpheus said:
Actually this is a really cool idea, can I access to my google account using google api?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have a look at this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2245545/accessing-google-account-id-username-via-android
superkoal said:
Have a look at this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2245545/accessing-google-account-id-username-via-android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Kaspersky Anti-Virus programm says that it is a fishing site.
However, it is STACKOVERFLOW!!!
nikwen said:
My Kaspersky Anti-Virus programm says that it is a fishing site.
However, it is STACKOVERFLOW!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kaspersky :silly:
taomorpheus said:
I can't because a lot of people have already purchased the app in the classic way!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent
In my opinion, create some sort of pop up that says "Attention pirated user, I'm glad you love my app as much as I loved making it, but I need to make money off of it. Please officially purchase this app "
Then have an In app purchase option in the pop up. This would make me want to purchase the app if I pirated it. I don't really believe that fighting piracy with DRM does anything but cause harm. You should just try and make the pirated users feel bad and encourage them to buy the app.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
v3nturetheworld said:
Sent
In my opinion, create some sort of pop up that says "Attention pirated user, I'm glad you love my app as much as I loved making it, but I need to make money off of it. Please officially purchase this app "
Then have an In app purchase option in the pop up. This would make me want to purchase the app if I pirated it. I don't really believe that fighting piracy with DRM does anything but cause harm. You should just try and make the pirated users feel bad and encourage them to buy the app.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahah yeah that's a good solution!
I've noticed that most of the pirated users come from Burma, where google play doesn't work. So I think that I will leave the app in this way and create another pro version for the nations that have google play issues!
But... how about implementing a solution like ROM Manager does? I mean, with a separate app and a pirate popup as suggested above? I'm clueless on what technology use to create a licensing APK, but it would be easier even for those people that haven't got Play Store, maybe
Tiwiz
I guess the main app checks if the Lisence app is installed and if installed it checks the key from a database of the license app and checks for the validity of Lisence on the cloud
Sent from my GT-S5302 using Tapatalk 2
Hit Thanx Button if i helped you!
taomorpheus said:
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Piracy is a "fact of life" for software. And most anti-piracy measures tend to hurt legitimate paid customers (and the dev) more than the pirates.
If you have a good, useful app, those guys in China can hack almost anything. (No offense to China; no Play there, lower income and an anti-IP culture.)
There are a FEW successful devs who have gone to extra-ordinary lengths at the JNI level. I tested, but never turned any JNI anti-hacking code on, because with thousands of paid users on many weird phones and ROMs, I felt it would break for enough people to not be worth it.
If you have an app that needs a server connection, or data updates, and you have some kind of independent registration system, you have a chance too. But that can be a lot of work.
I'd rather spend my time making my app better and supporting customers. My app price is higher than many would like (but I have virtually no paid competition). And because my app is support intensive, I've taken the view that I'm selling support and convenient updates, not an app, so much.
I mostly verify people are customers before supporting them, do as good a job as I can, get good reviews, and people see there is value there for their money. And yes, I get tons of support requests from pirates. Some of them I've converted to customers.
And... regular updates to an app provides value. If pirates want the latest, they keep having to go look for it. (Or do I recall some pirate update service ?) Updates via Play are easy and that ease has value.
All the above said, I do get angry from time to time, mostly at people stealing my time IE support. And the idea of finding a highly effective anti-piracy measure is fascinating.
But almost none of us is without some sin in our life regarding music, movies or software downloading... So I think it's good to consider the pirates' perspectives. Effective antipiracy definitely drastically reduces the user base and the Internet knowledge base and familiarity, and its' questionable as to how much revenue might increase, if at all.
IE, piracy can be seen as free advertising, and an opportunity to show some pirates there are valid reasons why going legitimate might benefit them, or even reduce their guilt level. I've had a few people buy my app and apologize...
mikereidis said:
Piracy is a "fact of life" for software. And most anti-piracy measures tend to hurt legitimate paid customers (and the dev) more than the pirates.
If you have a good, useful app, those guys in China can hack almost anything. (No offense to China; no Play there, lower income and an anti-IP culture.)
There are a FEW successful devs who have gone to extra-ordinary lengths at the JNI level. I tested, but never turned any JNI anti-hacking code on, because with thousands of paid users on many weird phones and ROMs, I felt it would break for enough people to not be worth it.
If you have an app that needs a server connection, or data updates, and you have some kind of independent registration system, you have a chance too. But that can be a lot of work.
I'd rather spend my time making my app better and supporting customers. My app price is higher than many would like (but I have virtually no paid competition). And because my app is support intensive, I've taken the view that I'm selling support and convenient updates, not an app, so much.
I mostly verify people are customers before supporting them, do as good a job as I can, get good reviews, and people see there is value there for their money. And yes, I get tons of support requests from pirates. Some of them I've converted to customers.
And... regular updates to an app provides value. If pirates want the latest, they keep having to go look for it. (Or do I recall some pirate update service ?) Updates via Play are easy and that ease has value.
All the above said, I do get angry from time to time, mostly at people stealing my time IE support. And the idea of finding a highly effective anti-piracy measure is fascinating.
But almost none of us is without some sin in our life regarding music, movies or software downloading... So I think it's good to consider the pirates' perspectives. Effective antipiracy definitely drastically reduces the user base and the Internet knowledge base and familiarity, and its' questionable as to how much revenue might increase, if at all.
IE, piracy can be seen as free advertising, and an opportunity to show some pirates there are valid reasons why going legitimate might benefit them, or even reduce their guilt level. I've had a few people buy my app and apologize...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, this is my philosophy. I usually reply to all emails, build the app around the feedback from the community and try to fix all the issues. This permits to create a loyal group of users, and it's the reason why apps like Facebook Home are hated so much: they talk about building apps around people, but for them people is the product, so it's a fail from the beginning
After some considerations I have abandoned the idea to build an antipiracy system, the reason is in part related to your thoughts but also because the 60-70% of pirated versions come from nations like Burma, indonesia, etc etc. So I don't feel that someone is stealing, google play can't provide a service, so people react. The good thing is that despite the lack of a service, they try to use my apps, so that's good, right?
So, at the conclusion, the best antipiracy system is to not use an antipiracy system. Clearly it will be hard to be supported only by paying customers, but the majority accepts some ads if the product is good ( the important thing is to not include spammy and intrusive services, one banner or a full screen on time a day is sufficient).
Thank you for this reply, it's really important to know that there are good developers around! :highfive:
Have you tried google licensing?
taomorpheus said:
Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
I am new to android development but I've read about google licensing services which checks for user account whether the app is actually purchased from that particular account associated with the user. If authentication fails then user gets a blocking dialog to either exit the app or purchase it from play store.
dbroid said:
Hi,
I am new to android development but I've read about google licensing services which checks for user account whether the app is actually purchased from that particular account associated with the user. If authentication fails then user gets a blocking dialog to either exit the app or purchase it from play store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cracker can easily remove IF and your won't ask to buy it.
There should be VMProtect or Themida like tool for android
GR0S said:
Cracker can easily remove IF and your won't ask to buy it.
There should be VMProtect or Themida like tool for android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was hacked not long after its launch.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/0...on-easily-circumvented-will-not-stop-pirates/
taomorpheus said:
After some considerations I have abandoned the idea to build an antipiracy system, the reason is in part related to your thoughts but also because the 60-70% of pirated versions come from nations like Burma, indonesia, etc etc. So I don't feel that someone is stealing, google play can't provide a service, so people react. The good thing is that despite the lack of a service, they try to use my apps, so that's good, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. Most pirates can't afford the app or wouldn't buy it anyway. I also think that many pirates and those who felt "forced" to buy a protected app are bad customers. They will spread their bad feelings about the app and the "greedy dev".
And many have a sense of entitlement, so they make demands, expect lots of support, complain and write bad reviews. They project their own faults on others, and always assume others are trying to rip THEM off. Some have told me they were "testing" my app, because they were worried about getting ripped off if it didn't work (despite my free version and anytime cancel policy).
Better not to have such customers. These are the same people who think they are more important than everybody else and cheat in traffic and lineups etc.
taomorpheus said:
So, at the conclusion, the best antipiracy system is to not use an antipiracy system. Clearly it will be hard to be supported only by paying customers, but the majority accepts some ads if the product is good ( the important thing is to not include spammy and intrusive services, one banner or a full screen on time a day is sufficient).
Thank you for this reply, it's really important to know that there are good developers around! :highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For most of us small devs, yes. Things may be different for certain apps, such as those that need a backend server, and for multi-person companies.
You can also promote that your app is "DRM free". That's definitely a plus, especially to custom ROM users who may avoid using Google Play.
I tried ads for a few months in 2011. The "CPM" rates started good, but quickly dropped to almost nothing. I think it's very hard to make money from ads, unless your app has a million users, and they are more "average" people who might click on the ads, accidentally or not.
I think it's usually better to raise app price as high as you can. I experimented a lot for many months between $1 and $10, usually keeping price constant for at least 2-3 weeks. I, and some others, have found that total income remains somewhat constant no matter what the price, LOL.
Now I've left price at the high end, so I can provide the best support possible, by limiting sales quantity. Some people think we should "make it up in volume", but that's a self-serving wish of the person who wants it cheaper. High volume might be viable if you provide zero technical support though.
What I'd say in terms of pirate stuff is to not try too hard on the software level (though I might write a guide on a few useful methods and pieces of code to prevent the usual circumvention methods) but on the upload level. When you release a new version, wait a couple of days and then search for a pirate version of your app. If you find one, report it, they're usually down in about 5 minutes. The more often you do this, the more likely people are to search, find all the links are "dead" and then just think "stuff it, I'll just buy it". However, this will only work on people who can buy it and are using pirate versions because they wish to, not because they have to
Quinny899 said:
What I'd say in terms of pirate stuff is to not try too hard on the software level (though I might write a guide on a few useful methods and pieces of code to prevent the usual circumvention methods) but on the upload level. When you release a new version, wait a couple of days and then search for a pirate version of your app. If you find one, report it, they're usually down in about 5 minutes. The more often you do this, the more likely people are to search, find all the links are "dead" and then just think "stuff it, I'll just buy it". However, this will only work on people who can buy it and are using pirate versions because they wish to, not because they have to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they'd PREFER not to spend money, if possible. In most areas of life, that's what most of us do.
Last I looked, this was the best Android cracking site: http://androidcracking.blogspot.ca/ . I read everything there twice before I started experimenting with protection code. If nothing else, it gives a glimpse of how hard it is to protect a popular app well.
I sent DMCA takedown requests to a few sites some time ago, but it's an endless task, and IMO not worth it, unless your app is VERY niche/has relatively few users. I've been "honored" to have my app included in several Torrents full of Android apps. Some of those Torrents are updated regularly.
I will still notify XDA admins if there's a link or offending ROM on XDA. XDA mods take it seriously.
Some companies will put out their own "pirate" fake or crippled versions of movies, and app devs could do the same. Perhaps have endless popups offering to buy the app legitimately. I personally wouldn't bother (at this time) but it could work. I agree that making piracy a hassle may improve sales a bit.
LOL, I just re-looked and see 3 on isohunt that are my app alone, but they are older. If I have time for "fun" later this year I should (1) start my own torrents, (2) collect IP addresses, and... I dunno; don't seriously want to be a copyright troll; rather design & develop.
Looks like Cyanogen moving towards their Google Services(less) future with Microsoft. Eugh.. will just mean a pile of microsoft app bloat that I dont use to be removed, hopefully we will still just be able to flash a gapps package though?
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/-2010445.htm
I'm actually happy with this. Microsoft apps are great in terms of quality and design. I wish they'd started earlier so I wouldn't have settled to Evernote back in the days.
Rosa Elefant said:
I'm actually happy with this. Microsoft apps are great in terms of quality and design. I wish they'd started earlier so I wouldn't have settled to Evernote back in the days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair it may make their OS a little bit more consistent/polished/professional, instead of integrated apps from here and there. But I just dont use any MS products anymore (aside from office programs) and so it wouldnt be of any benefit to me.
Cyanogen Inc. can do as they please. As long as they don't lock me down to anything.
This isn't terrible news. The Microsoft mobile suite is actually really nice. I loved my Windows Phone, the only reason I got rid of it was lack of dev support for apps that I needed.
meh, this just means I definitely won't be using Cyanogen ROMS
I'm all for the idea they have on stripping away Google's influence of Android. However, teaming up with Microsoft doesn't seem the way to do it. It's like trading a Mercedes for a Kia. (no offense to those that drive Kia's)
ciwrl @CyanogenMod said:
To highlight the one take away that matters to CyanogenMod users – We are not bundling or pre-installing Microsoft (or any Cyanogen OS exclusive partner apps) into CyanogenMod.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just like they don't bundle Google services and apps into CM11/12 now which is why you have to flash gapps with nightlies if you want them.
ciwrl @CyanogenMod said:
Your nightlies will not see a sudden influx of Microsoft applications – you can put the pitchforks down. CyanogenMod has historically stayed neutral on your services of choice, whether you use Google, Amazon or Fdroid; we leave that decision to you and we have no intention of changing that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How will it affect nightlies?
ciwrl @CyanogenMod said:
What you will see are new APIs available in the source code, using CM as a platform for other developers to do cool things with. Remember when CM 9 had support for Host Card Emulation well before that functionality was available in Android proper? How about adhoc WiFi support? Those kinds of pushing forward of the Android platform are something we have done for years, and will continue to support whenever we can – but do so in a non-’force you into it’ manner. We’re all about options here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source
itsamoreh said:
meh, this just means I definitely won't be using Cyanogen ROMS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 Microsoft products arent optimized, function only the way they dictate. Bugs, backdoors and battery eaters.
demographics: worst strategic move ever, there is a reason Cyanogen users dont own a windows phone.
Microsoft seems to be following Blackberry in this
I'm all for Microsoft. I don't use anything google related that's important enough for me. Email, calendar and contacts are all Microsoft for this guy.
Sent from my A0001 using XDA Free mobile app
Has anyone else seen this yet? It's a supposed secure OS for nexus devices. https://copperhead.co/android/downloads If anyone checks it out, let us know how it goes.
Wow I never seen this.:laugh:
Looks interesting, Im gonna check it further. Probably a AOSP based with some patches, fdroid, and some anti-gapps apps?
Most definitely curious as to how this runs....they want you to relock the bootloader though...????????????
Runs really nice. But there is no open source support for my android wear watch which I need.
No thank you. I would rather trust google and NSA, instead of some no name offshore company.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using XDA Labs
suhridkhan said:
No thank you. I would rather trust google and NSA, instead of some no name offshore company.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Toronto is off-shore?
Lol
Sent from my Nexus 6P using XDA-Developers mobile app
Locking the bootloader is good for your security.
Sent from a 128th Legion Stormtrooper 6P
toronto is offshore? do you think they live in igloos still aswell?
also this is just aosp with google signatures,
i tested for fun, boot animation is crap,
some lag going n settings,
no playstore access, no gapps at all from what i saw,
secure unsure, i dont know enough to rip apart the source and see if any holes from the company,
I was intrigued by Copperhead since reading about the Unaphone, another Google free operating system. Unlike Unaphone, whom's developers were providing it only for their proprietary hardware, when I saw CopperheadOS I knew I was going to try it for sure!
Previously running Resurrection, my phone already had an unlocked bootloader. Even if it hadn't, flashing Copperhead using the developer's instructions is very easy.
First impressions were good. The phone was noticeably more responsive, lacking google services normally running, and stable since the OS itself is based on stock which was considerably more stable than other roms I've tried. All the features you would expect from 6.0.1 are present and working. What is not preset however is the Google Play store or services! I didn't appreciate the implications of not having google services before actually trying to use a phone without them. Although it is possible to sideload gapps, one would rather negate the point of this ROM.
Poking around the settings the first thing I noticed were granular security settings with detailed descriptions. There is also a nice security versus performance slider for the layman. The idea of preventing exploits using the techniques in this rom is my main reason for using it.
After an evening of use, the vast majority of closed-source-paid apps I was able to replace with open-source alternatives. There are a few exceptions I am still trying to figure out, but overall, I think if you are willing to cut the google-cloud-services cord its worth a try. If you really must, most apk's for closed apps can be found and installed but these decisions should probably be weighed carefully.
I never realized my reliance on google and closed apps until I tried to use an OS that doesn't rely on them. Trying this rom is a good exercise in living off the google grid; or at the least driving the use of google services back into the browser.
At the end of the day this rom has its place for the privacy and security minded enthusiast, but for the average user, sticking to something with google services is probably more realistic.
longview41 said:
Toronto is off-shore?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pacman photog said:
toronto is offshore? do you think they live in igloos still aswell?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 'offshore' part was simply a figure of speech.
What I mean is that if you don't trust google with your data, you have more reason not to trust an unknown company.
At least google is transparent about my data, and gives me control of how much I want to share with them. https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity
Installed it yesterday on a Nexus 5x and so far it runs great. It indeed seems really security orientated with no default root or GApps. Didn't try to activate xposed (which I hope will work) or related stuff yet but so far I intend to keep it.
Copperhead is trusted. They will be working with Guardian Project and Fdroid to build a complete system. Read this post for more info: https://copperhead.co/blog/2016/03/29/crowdfunding-partnership-announced
mg.degroot said:
Installed it yesterday on a Nexus 5x and so far it runs great. It indeed seems really security orientated with no default root or GApps. Didn't try to activate xposed (which I hope will work) or related stuff yet but so far I intend to keep it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please let us know if you're able to root, install xposed and still relock the bootloader.
mg.degroot said:
Installed it yesterday on a Nexus 5x and so far it runs great. It indeed seems really security orientated with no default root or GApps. Didn't try to activate xposed (which I hope will work) or related stuff yet but so far I intend to keep it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you please share some screenshots... Would like to try the OS... But would like to see how it is ...
Also do you see the sRGB mode in developer options... Without it the colors on the Nexus 6P are inaccurate at best...
Stop asking about features or customisation options, this rom has none. Its about security, not features
kbBT4A5e said:
I was intrigued by Copperhead since reading about ...
After an evening of use, the vast majority of closed-source-paid apps I was able to replace with open-source alternatives. There are a few exceptions I am still trying to figure out, but overall, I think if you are willing to cut the google-cloud-services cord its worth a try. If you really must, most apk's for closed apps can be found and installed but these decisions should probably be weighed carefully.
I never realized my reliance on google and closed apps until I tried to use an OS that doesn't rely on them. Trying this rom is a good exercise in living off the google grid; or at the least driving the use of google services back into the browser.
At the end of the day this rom has its place for the privacy and security minded enthusiast, but for the average user, sticking to something with google services is probably more realistic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for sharing your experience. So we have decide if security is really more important than our investment and dependency in the Google ecosystem. I depend on G too much. My email is like my passport or online identification. I dont sideload unknown or unverified apps, dont visit links i dont know about, etc. Yes, i can still be remotely exploited, but i am not a gov official or some sort of millionaire with top secret info on my phone, as most of us. You saved me couple of hours of my day
A little update since I've been running this for about 2 weeks. I sideloaded gapps and the phone has been running fine, but found out today while trying to install the latest OTA update from copperhead it fails to install due to inconsistencies detected in the system partition since I installed gapps; from a security standpoint this feature is great. Unfortunately I can't function without gapps. In order to get the latest security updates, which is probably more important than the security features cooked into copperhead, I must: reflash the device with the latest full image, install twrp, sideload gapps, restore the copperhead recovery, then reinstall all my apps.
This being the case to get OTA updates, unless you can really commit to opensource with no gapps its not really worth the hassle.
Using it for an extended period I did notice the device was a bit slow even on medium security settings. Originally I had it maxed right out, but it wasn't usable. On medium it was a small price to pay for security but its hard to quantify the value.
I think its time to return to an AOSP rom for me.
I'm running it currently runs great but I can't figure out how to fix the dreaded APN issues :\ Tried almost every fix on XDA haven't gotten Any dev help either :\ other than the lack of data its a great ROM. Apparently I'm not alone judging by the other post on XDA about this. Apparently this is a known issue with no real fix. Sucks since its the only reason I got this phone
Hi guys add me also 09945673600