Re:The limits of Google’s openness
by Anderkent on Thursday August 15, 2013 @05:42PM
(#6220786)
Actually, yes, it does. If you're giving preferential treatment to your apps that's not possible to replicate, you're not being open.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Proof by contradiction:
Google can close and shutter youtube, Microsoft cannot. Therefore, by your definition, there is no way for youtube to ever be open unless Google commits to irrevocably fund youtube forever and ever. Alternatively, they could give Microsoft the option to close YouTube at any point in time for any reason, just like Google can.
?!?!?
ergo, your definition of openness makes no sense.
Re:The limits of Google’s openness
by Dylan16807 on Friday August 16, 2013 @02:29AM
(#6222481)
We're talking about openness of an API, not open business ownership or whatever the hell you're describing there. An open API gives consumers an equal footing in terms of the API. It doesn't affect any other part of the business.
Don't be willfully dense.
> An open API gives consumers an equal footing in terms of the API. It doesn't affect any other part of the business.
When you get to define terms, that may be. Here on earth, you're just making no sense whatsoever.
Re:The limits of Google’s openness
by Dylan16807 on Friday August 16, 2013 @11:30AM
(#6224583)
I'm not trying to define anything. I'm trying to narrow the use of the term so it doesn't lead to ridiculous contradictions.
When people say talk about something being open, they mean in a specific context. They don't mean that literally the entire business is open and you could wander into their meetings, etc.