Android allows for third-party sources when installing software.
There are developers out there that distribute their software through other channels than Google Play. E.g. one of the Humble Indie Bundle that I bought had 4 Android games in it and distribution was through download links sent by email. And when publishing on Google Play, at least for now, there is no approval process.
And no, Windows and OS X cannot do this today, as long as installation of software from third-parties is still possible and your OS is not remotely controlled by them. Microsoft can't do anything today to ban an app on Windows. But it's increasingly clear that they want this capability.
For those of us familiar with the gaming industry since the nineties, we've experienced this same fight between PCs and gaming consoles and even though the PC wasn't a common household appliance until the mid nineties at least and even though the likes of Sega, Nintendo and later Sony looked poised to take over the world, most games were built for PCs first, because that's were the innovation was and because nobody could pull the rug from under your feet. Even the arguments were exactly the same as today - for consumers it was ease of use, no viruses/mallware and a better return on investment, while for developers it was the lack of piracy, promotion and a piece of a large pie where the competition was controlled.
And it's a pretty sad fact that this is precisely what Apple and now Microsoft are trying - the consolification of the PC. Well I for one do not think that consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me and Windows Vista before it.
Just because android allows installing third-party softwares now doesn't mean it will remain like that forever. Remember when you could install chrome extensions the same way but now Google only allows you to install them from their store and the only other way is not so client friendly workaround?
You can actually still install things from outside the store, but it's not as easy as clicking on it. With people clicking everything in browsers in general, this measure was sadly probably necessary.
This is true ; although Google has the disadvantage that they made Android open-source. This means in case the Google stewardship goes awry, companies and individuals will have the ability to fork.
This has happened before with other projects and Amazon has already forked Android just because they can. Also my Galaxy S came with an alternative, albeit shitty app store - which goes to show that phone makers are aware that they need some control over the platform.
The ability to fork only exists in theory. In reality, Google already uses its dominant market position to prevent mobiles from being sold with non-blessed versions of android. The only ones who can realistically do anything to challenge this are the huge players like Amazon who can deliver their own hardware. That's not really 'open'.
I don't follow this. You say Google prevents the release of devices with non-blessed version of Android, but you then talk about Amazon who are in fact shipping a non-blessed version of Android right now. It's true that driver support for hardware doesn't make forking easy, but it is totally possible to fork Android and create a custom variant.
It's possible in the way that it's "possible" to compete with local ISPs - all you have to do is lay your own 50000 miles of cable! Well, Google, as a huge megacorp, actually has the resources to do this, but it hardly fosters a free and competitive environment.
Just because a company with a market cap in the hundreds of billions can do it doesn't mean it meets an average person's definition of "doable".
I agree but it is ingenious of Google to tie their premium products around open-source that it becomes an inseparable feature. An android fork without the Marketplace, Maps, Siri like features just seems crippled (Amazon Kindle is an exception). Remember Google sent C&D to Cynogenmod a few months back forbidding them from including any of the apps above? Now think about convincing a handset manufacture to accept the fork or trying to teach a technologically impaired about rooting the phone and installing a fork. It may seem possible but sadly its not practical.
Today I noticed my chrome changed its icon from the wrench to the 3 bars, which atleast for now I find it hideous. However there is no easy way for me to fix it despite chrome being an open-source application (chromium - which I believe is not being actively developed anymore).
You're totally wrong about Chromium; the vast majority of Chrome functionality continues to be implemented in Chromium. You could fix it if you cared enough.
In addition, it's perfectly legal (and easy) to install the Google apps on Cyanogenmod or any other Android ROM yourself, so you're not missing out on anything by running it.
You should probably find some more compelling examples for your argument.
In this specific case, however, that is a highly relevant argument, as none of the mobile-specific parts of Chrome are available: you can't build Chromium for Android. Your snippiness thereby seems somewhat out of place.
>Well I for one do not think that consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me and Windows Vista before it
Perhaps Windows 8 and 9 may fail due to a multitude of reasons, but I don't think the inclusion of the app store from where one can safely download applications will be even a small reason for it. If anything, consumers will love it for that reason.
I'm not talking about the inclusion of an app store. I'm talking about the trend to make that app store the only distribution channel available.
iOS may have been a success, but that's only because it's good at what it does and because people don't need it to do much. Prior to smartphones, a phone was only good for making calls. And with tablets it's all good as long as it has a browser and some freebies.
The elephant in the room that nobody is talking about when speaking about closed platforms is ... piracy. Take away the ability of people to pirate stuff on their PC, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
I agree. Piracy and porn and a long tail of other things. But I fear that 99% of the money to be made on software for consumers will be in the locked down part of the world. People who pay for stuff can be easily intimidated because they have something to lose.
" I'm talking about the trend to make that app store the only distribution channel available."
Indeed. I think Microsoft is retreating into an echo chamber. By making the app store the only practical way to distribute products, Microsoft is missing all the wild things that might catch on if they would only let them alone.
There are developers out there that distribute their software through other channels than Google Play. E.g. one of the Humble Indie Bundle that I bought had 4 Android games in it and distribution was through download links sent by email. And when publishing on Google Play, at least for now, there is no approval process.
And no, Windows and OS X cannot do this today, as long as installation of software from third-parties is still possible and your OS is not remotely controlled by them. Microsoft can't do anything today to ban an app on Windows. But it's increasingly clear that they want this capability.
For those of us familiar with the gaming industry since the nineties, we've experienced this same fight between PCs and gaming consoles and even though the PC wasn't a common household appliance until the mid nineties at least and even though the likes of Sega, Nintendo and later Sony looked poised to take over the world, most games were built for PCs first, because that's were the innovation was and because nobody could pull the rug from under your feet. Even the arguments were exactly the same as today - for consumers it was ease of use, no viruses/mallware and a better return on investment, while for developers it was the lack of piracy, promotion and a piece of a large pie where the competition was controlled.
And it's a pretty sad fact that this is precisely what Apple and now Microsoft are trying - the consolification of the PC. Well I for one do not think that consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me and Windows Vista before it.