Android platform, what a mess

[eti]

You're not gonna like this... that is, you're not, if you're the kind of person who feels it's a "competition" which needs to be "won", or it's like a football team to bicker over and fall down rabbit holes of debate over, wasting years of your life. If you have the ability to detach yourself from emotions for a moment, and ponder objectively, you'll be fine. Okay.

No it's not that at all, it's just that Android always was, always has been and still is, an absolutely terrible technical and business compromise from Google, the reigning King supreme of ADHD-esque, ethically devoid, incompetent and bungling buffoons.

Who thought making a platform based on Java, merely because Java is easily understood by potential developers, as a prudent decision?

Who thought that "But it's open source guys!" was a good reason to add weight to the already weak reasoning for choosing Java/JVM based OS? It's NOT open source, only the kernel is. (the technically ignorant still magnify the "open source" tagline, whilst conveniently remaining silent about the rest.)?

Who thought that not enforcing strict guidelines such as who could build and vend the OS on their devices (which mean that failures of the platform are significantly lessened, ergo Google-centric blame would be lessened also, I think)?

Who thought that any of this was wise, or that allowing others to borrow the code, re-skin it, and spin it off in a trillion different OS', hoping that the gullible would believe that "SmoothSilkOS" or other silly ROM names, compiled in the bedroom of some Indian teenager, were a good idea? Lol++++


Who thought at all? Not many it seems .

There's an answer... but it's not Android, for if it HAD been a decent platform, then why would Google be quietly considering its replacement with "project fuchsia"? They wouldn't. Do you see Apple replacing iOS? Hah!

[MK14]

Red Alert Issued, as Android Phone Rant Storm ETI Hits EEVBLOG Forums, UK.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-60421388

[eti]

Red Alert Issued, as Android Phone Rant Storm ETI Hits EEVBLOG Forums, UK.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-60421388

Stone cold blue obvious response message broadcast, for this was not a rant, this an empassioned observation on a truly laughable platform.

It's a mess, and those who deny it, deny logic itself. Calling something a "rant" is called inciting a riot, and since I am not intent to rant, and didn't intend to, sorry, you'll be disappointed, and will have to revert to YouTube or TV for your cheap thrills

[MK14]

This is for when the OP's initial post, gets edited into a:

..

You're not gonna like this... that is, you're not, if you're the kind of person who feels it's a "competition" which needs to be "won", or it's like a football team to bicker over and fall down rabbit holes of debate over, wasting years of your life. If you have the ability to detach yourself from emotions for a moment, and ponder objectively, you'll be fine. Okay.

No it's not that at all, it's just that Android always was, always has been and still is, an absolutely terrible technical and business compromise from Google, the reigning King supreme of ADHD-esque, ethically devoid, incompetent and bungling buffoons.

Who thought making a platform based on Java, merely because Java is easily understood by potential developers, as a prudent decision?

Who thought that "But it's open source guys!" was a good reason to add weight to the already weak reasoning for choosing Java/JVM based OS? It's NOT open source, only the kernel is. (the technically ignorant still magnify the "open source" tagline, whilst conveniently remaining silent about the rest.)?

Who thought that not enforcing strict guidelines such as who could build and vend the OS on their devices (which mean that failures of the platform are significantly lessened, ergo Google-centric blame would be lessened also, I think)?

Who thought that any of this was wise, or that allowing others to borrow the code, re-skin it, and spin it off in a trillion different OS', hoping that the gullible would believe that "SmoothSilkOS" or other silly ROM names, compiled in the bedroom of some Indian teenager, were a good idea? Lol++++


Who thought at all? Not many it seems .

There's an answer... but it's not Android, for if it HAD been a decent platform, then why would Google be quietly considering its replacement with "project fuchsia"? They wouldn't. Do you see Apple replacing iOS? Hah!

[eti]

This is for when the OP's initial post, gets edited into a:

..

You're not gonna like this... that is, you're not, if you're the kind of person who feels it's a "competition" which needs to be "won", or it's like a football team to bicker over and fall down rabbit holes of debate over, wasting years of your life. If you have the ability to detach yourself from emotions for a moment, and ponder objectively, you'll be fine. Okay.

No it's not that at all, it's just that Android always was, always has been and still is, an absolutely terrible technical and business compromise from Google, the reigning King supreme of ADHD-esque, ethically devoid, incompetent and bungling buffoons.

Who thought making a platform based on Java, merely because Java is easily understood by potential developers, as a prudent decision?

Who thought that "But it's open source guys!" was a good reason to add weight to the already weak reasoning for choosing Java/JVM based OS? It's NOT open source, only the kernel is. (the technically ignorant still magnify the "open source" tagline, whilst conveniently remaining silent about the rest.)?

Who thought that not enforcing strict guidelines such as who could build and vend the OS on their devices (which mean that failures of the platform are significantly lessened, ergo Google-centric blame would be lessened also, I think)?

Who thought that any of this was wise, or that allowing others to borrow the code, re-skin it, and spin it off in a trillion different OS', hoping that the gullible would believe that "SmoothSilkOS" or other silly ROM names, compiled in the bedroom of some Indian teenager, were a good idea? Lol++++


Who thought at all? Not many it seems .

There's an answer... but it's not Android, for if it HAD been a decent platform, then why would Google be quietly considering its replacement with "project fuchsia"? They wouldn't. Do you see Apple replacing iOS? Hah!

I think it isn't. Have a nice weekend 

PS: I see no humourous correlation between a genuine BBC news article, and your trying to force it into a "joke" about my post. That's just contrived. I don't mean that in a snotty way, it just doesn't work - sorry!

[daqq]

Okay.

[MK14]

It's a mess, and those who deny it, deny logic itself. Calling something a "rant" is called inciting a riot, and since I am not intent to rant, and didn't intend to, sorry, you'll be disappointed, and will have to revert to YouTube or TV for your cheap thrills

Can you provide any sources of information (such as links), backing up your claims, against Android ?
Which may also, indirectly back up your claims, it is not a rant.

[eti]

It's a mess, and those who deny it, deny logic itself. Calling something a "rant" is called inciting a riot, and since I am not intent to rant, and didn't intend to, sorry, you'll be disappointed, and will have to revert to YouTube or TV for your cheap thrills

Can you provide any sources of information (such as links), backing up your claims, against Android ?
Which may also, indirectly back up your claims, it is not a rant.

You wish for me to "backup my claims"? That old chestnut. You do not have to agree, a gun isn't held to your throat. It's fine to not agree, or, maybe, even bow out. I won't be offended. Did you just read a "how to have a debate and win!" book? That sounds like a classic line, and one which is easily the most simplistic trap which SO MANY fall into.

I do not need to "backup" my "claims" - it's a viewpoint. Accept it, or laugh at me and walk away - I don't mind if you do either, I am not demanding agreement (a sign of insecurity) - you're free, as you know, to think as you wish to.

[JohanH]

We could always have something worse.

The fundamental issue that I care about, is that Android doesn't even use the standard linux kernel. Every phone is patched with tens of thousands, up to a million rows of hidden code that never ends up in the upstream Linux kernel, where it rightly belongs. Google has improved on this in later years, but it still isn't a good situation. The effects of this is phones that won't be patched (vulnerabilities in the kernel), vulnerabilities in the manufacturer's code (because it hasn't been tested and verified in the normal kernel development process) and landfills with old phones that could be perfectly usable if you could install a newer OS version on them, but you can't due to missing kernel drivers. 

Personally, the whole situation sucks so hard that I was using Jolla Sailfish phones for many years before finally giving up and switching to Android. Gave Purism Librem a try also. Good try, and I personally love the software platform (even though not ready for the masses), but it's hard to develop hardware from scratch and port a PC platform of software into a phone only in a few years. I think I see one possible future here (the software platform), though, due to the inertia of free and open source software.

[eti]

We could always have something worse.

The fundamental issue that I care about, is that Android doesn't even use the standard linux kernel. Every phone is patched with tens of thousands, up to a million rows of hidden code that never ends up in the upstream Linux kernel, where it rightly belongs. Google has improved on this in later years, but it still isn't a good situation. The effects of this is phones that won't be patched (vulnerabilities in the kernel), vulnerabilities in the manufacturer's code (because it hasn't been tested and verified in the normal kernel development process) and landfills with old phones that could be perfectly usable if you could install a newer OS version on them, but you can't due to missing kernel drivers. 

Personally, the whole situation sucks so hard that I was using Jolla Sailfish phones for many years before finally giving up and switching to Android. Gave Purism Librem a try also. Good try, and I personally love the software platform (even though not ready for the masses), but it's hard to develop hardware from scratch and port a PC platform of software into a phone only in a few years. I think I see one possible future here (the software platform), though, due to the inertia of free and open source software.

There's a much nicer, simpler, stress-free solution, called iOS.

[JohanH]

There's a much nicer, simpler, stress-free solution, called iOS.

That's again worse from my point of view. Where's the source code? Walled garden, totally lock-in. Not for me, thanks. I hopped on the Free and Open Source Software bandwagon twenty years ago and I'm convinced that's the future for humanity, in one form or another. iOS is a toy for the rich and doesn't contribute much to the overall technological improvements for humanity (but they of course make money for their shareholders  ).

[eti]

There's a much nicer, simpler, stress-free solution, called iOS.

That's again worse from my point of view. Where's the source code? Walled garden, totally lock-in. Not for me, thanks. I hopped on the Free and Open Source Software bandwagon twenty years ago and I'm convinced that's the future for humanity, in one form or another. iOS is a toy for the rich and doesn't contribute much to the overall technological improvements for humanity (but they of course make money for their shareholders  ).

You're going round in the same erroneous logical loop that many do; where's the source code for Android? Nowhere, except in their HQ. Even if you HAD the source code, what you gonna do, sit down for a couple of weekends and inspect ALL the code, and re-compile the OS? Please... 

"Rich"? "Shareholders"? Where are you finding this... lol. You think owning an iPhone is the preserve of the rich?  You can be as "convinced" as you wish to be, just as Richard Stallman is convinced that "Free Software" is "holy", whereas all else is evil - meanwhile, normal people and non-obsessives are out there getting on with their lives using phones that actually DO what they are intended to, and living happy lives knowing that things work (most of the time), and don't require an entry level comp. sci degree to operate (normal users VASTLY outnumber the MINISCULE, TINY, TEENY fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent that is the very loud, very passionate hardcore online obsessives - Apple's HUGE success speaks for itself!)

[daqq]

I do not need to "backup" my "claims" - it's a viewpoint.

Does this viewpoint not conflict with the viewpoint presented in one of your other threads claiming that an expensive TV is a BS expense?

The way Android works and exists allows the creation of phones that cost 50 USD all the way up to phones that cost 1500 USD with specs comparable to lesser desktops and cameras that allow you to count the hairs on someones head.

You mention Apple as the alternative. The cheapest iphone I can see (new, non second hand) is ~480 EUR (~550 USD). That's a lot of cash for the bottom of the range.

[eti]

I do not need to "backup" my "claims" - it's a viewpoint.

Does this viewpoint not conflict with the viewpoint presented in one of your other threads claiming that an expensive TV is a BS expense?

The way Android works and exists allows the creation of phones that cost 50 USD all the way up to phones that cost 1500 USD with specs comparable to lesser desktops and cameras that allow you to count the hairs on someones head.

You mention Apple as the alternative. The cheapest iphone I can see (new, non second hand) is ~480 EUR (~550 USD). That's a lot of cash for the bottom of the range.

We are talking about phones here, not cheap crappy TVs. If you'd owned an Apple product, you'd know you wouldn't even need to concern yourself, but since you are determined to disagree "just because", okay, choose as you wish. Fine - I don't mind

I do agree that new iPhone prices are slightly high - but guess what? PEOPLE STILL BUY THEM - Apple are VERY trustworthy, and doing the years of work and research in that industry that I've done, you'd know it too (and no, I am not going to "prove it to you" in case you ask, lol)

Have you considered that maybe what you can see is not all there is? Look more - unless that quick search is all you needed to "prove me wrong". 

[JohanH]

I thought this thread was started with nice intentions, to discuss some technical viewpoint or the other. Now I see I'm wrong.

You think owning an iPhone is the preserve of the rich? 

That's your conclusion. Now you are making up conclusions.

I don't care whatsoever. Thanks and goodbye.

[eti]

I thought this thread was started with nice intentions, to discuss some technical viewpoint or the other. Now I see I'm wrong.

You think owning an iPhone is the preserve of the rich? 

That's your conclusion. Now you are making up conclusions.

I don't care whatsoever. Thanks and goodbye.

You LITERALLY just said this very thing yourself. Comical. Wow.

People who say “I don’t care” and then “good bye”… usually care. This is primitive psychology.

Okay good bye, have a nice weekend. Don’t  be offended I’m not uptight about it, but in your shoes I’d maybe check back and see what I’d written, so as to not look a bit daft.

[MK14]

You wish for me to "backup my claims"? That old chestnut. You do not have to agree, a gun isn't held to your throat. It's fine to not agree, or, maybe, even bow out. I won't be offended. Did you just read a "how to have a debate and win!" book? That sounds like a classic line, and one which is easily the most simplistic trap which SO MANY fall into.

I do not need to "backup" my "claims" - it's a viewpoint. Accept it, or laugh at me and walk away - I don't mind if you do either, I am not demanding agreement (a sign of insecurity) - you're free, as you know, to think as you wish to.

Ok, so it's an opinion point, raised by you.

I'll give mine. I think Android is reasonably fine. Not perfect by any means. (EDIT: Was a long text answer, but decided to replace with quick summary).

[tooki]

…
No it's not that at all, it's just that Android always was, always has been and still is, an absolutely terrible technical and business compromise from Google, the reigning King supreme of ADHD-esque, ethically devoid, incompetent and bungling buffoons.
…
Who thought at all? Not many it seems .
…

While I actually agree with most of your rant, what exactly is your goal in posting it? Rants don’t tend to form a good foundation for reasonable debate, since it puts a lot of people on the defensive right from the start.

[SiliconWizard]

The OP sounds angry.

To be fair, apart from the kernel which is Linux, Android as an OS is a mess, and I wouldn't want to touch it with a stick as an OS for my own devices.

But for mobile phones, that works reasonably well.
If you want to have a look at something else: https://ubuntu-touch.io/

[dave j]

You're going round in the same erroneous logical loop that many do; where's the source code for Android?

Here you go.

There are lots of justifiable reasons to have a go at Google and Android but if you are going to you should at least get your central claims right.

[SiliconWizard]

I remember an older discussion about Android not being open source, and I admit I never really got why some consider it is not. There's possibly a good reason, but I just failed to understand it.

[eti]

I remember an older discussion about Android not being open source, and I admit I never really got why some consider it is not. There's possibly a good reason, but I just failed to understand it.

Ithat misses out the very parts that make it. Anywhere near usable, IE, Google play services etc.

Lol

[SiliconWizard]

You can perfectly use Android without any Google service.

[eti]

You can perfectly use Android without any Google service.

And you can use a car without wheels to keep chickens in.

This ridiculous obsession with source code is meaningless.

[janoc]

I remember an older discussion about Android not being open source, and I admit I never really got why some consider it is not. There's possibly a good reason, but I just failed to understand it.

Ithat misses out the very parts that make it. Anywhere near usable, IE, Google play services etc.

Lol

There are plenty of devices that are build on "ungooglified" Android, e.g. pretty much most of the cheap Chinese phones.

That you are picking on the lack of Google services - but that without device drivers which are mostly completely proprietary binary blobs on these embedded platforms you won't even get an OS (any OS, not just Android) to boot or do anything useful doesn't bother you?

At the same time you are talking about Apple products as an alternative - yet Apple devices are literally completely locked down, proprietary to literally the last screw and nobody except Apple can make one!

Your rant about Java - just yawn. Android isn't running a JVM but Google's own virtual machine since ages ago and development for it doesn't require you to write applications in Java either. Yes, you can even run native code on Android if you really wanted but given that Android isn't running only on ARM CPUs, it would be most likely more trouble than it is worth unless you were planning to only ever deploy on a single device.

Pretty pointless troll/rant, IMO.