[Witmen]

I agree, I mean I know that. But what makes you so special that you should get that freedom while the carriers/manufacture don't get that same freedom?

Android is open source. So the manufacture takes it and does what they want with it. They get all of that freedom first. Whatever they leave for you is their decision. I'm not saying I think it's right, But at the same time you can't demand the right to do what you want with it, while at the same time excluding manufactures/carries that same stinking right.

You are right. You can't have open source and only let certain people have freedom.

If the people that sell the phones lock out the people that buy the phone, You no longer have open source. But that goes both ways. If the people making and selling the phones have restrictions then it's also not open source. That's why the Android being open source deal is kind of a half truth.

It's open source for them, that don't mean it will be when they give it to us. And due to the nature of open source that is their choice to make. We as end users have only the freedom they decide to leave for us.

[syb0rg]

It's open source for them, that don't mean it will be when they give it to us. And due to the nature of open source that is their choice to make. We as end users have only the freedom they decide to leave for us.

thus making it not true open source....

[Witmen]

thus making it not true open source....

Exactly, But what I think berryboba was trying to say is. If we force them to give us freedom and by doing so we take away theirs then it's also not true open source.

[Saiga]

Ditto 10char

[Accidental Post]

XDA Breaks it down well:

The Very Quick Summary of General Public License (GPL)

The text of the GPL Licence itself will be used to reach any final conclusion regarding any disputes over GPL Licenced materials. The above is a summary of what XDA expects of members using GPL code, and the complete text can be read at the GNU website.



The GPL states that anyone who modifies GPL licenced code is required to make available the sources used to compile it. This is to further improve and encourage collaborative work, as well as to ensure that the best code possible is produced, and to encourage peer-review of all work. This benefits both developers and end users in numerous ways, including:
Allowing anyone to verify the code they are trusting with their data, and its authenticity
Encouraging community collaboration to produce faster fixes and updates, and better code
Helping bring new developments from other devices and fields to your own, letting you benefit from new code that wouldn’t have been available without this sharing.
The GPL imparts great freedom for GPL end users. It ensures innovation is never stifled and no project is dependent upon any single developer.
It is in everyone’s interest for the GPL to be adhered to, as it gives us all better ROMs, better transparency, and a better atmosphere for developers to work together to make great code.

The carriers are modifying the code and should release the code to all. If they don't, technically they are breaking the GPL and therefore could be sued. Ask Linksys how that worked out for them. DD-WRT anyone?

[syb0rg]

Exactly, But what I think berryboba was trying to say is. If we force them to give us freedom and by doing so we take away theirs then it's also not true open source.

But the when it comes to open source it's up to the end user making the choices regarding their product.

[Semantics]

you think that only happens in the "cell phone world"???
People violating their TOS on a service product then claiming it's a warranty issue.

I wish i could count how many times that happens in the industry that i work in... more that you or i care to know about....

Anyway it DOES violates the ideas and principles set down by Google and Android when the first Android phone hit the market. Cell phone companies need to start a policy where you take the phone to the local store, turn it in. They will loan you a dummy phone, and send yours in. If they find it is truly defective... replace it... if it's a root problem. send it back and tell them sorry you are SOL.

I'm not so naive to think it only happens in the cellphone world. HTC is required to release their source code, and they do that. They are not required to unlock their phone for people to have admin status on. The source of their code is open, they release the kernels, etc. They are following the GPL.

[Johnly]

The point is, people are rooting their phones and bricking them, then lying to CS to get replacements. Root away, I'm rooted on my EVO, and I was on my Hero. But if I screw the pooch and mess something up on my phone, I'm not going to lie to Sprint, or call in a claim to Asurion saying my phone was lost/stolen, which is what the vast majority of people do when they do something stupid and brick their phones.

I can totally understand the carriers wanting to lock down their devices, and I'm sure that T-Mobile asked for HTC to make this happen.

Just read the forums at Xda. Pick any phone and you'll find several threads in every phone forum stating, OMG I BROX MY FONE. Then people asking for tips on what to tell their carrier so they can get another phone, and then you'll see all the jackholes in those threads who have successfully gotten over and scammed a new phone telling everyone how they did it.

It costs a lot of money to carriers when stupid people think they're smart.

horns.....