Now they're adding a slew of SELinux policies which also enforce read-only access to /system partition. These are still applied if you remount it rw, which means that in the future users will have to modify SELinux policy to write while the OS is running.

Recovery (which is tasked with updates) will keep its write ability. Also all apps which don't write to /system partition (which includes most root apps like Titanium, etc.) will not be affected.

Buy an open device (for example, Nexus) that lets you flash whatever software you want through the bootloader and thus recovery. Nothing prevents you from removing this security policy, which makes complete sense: nothing in Android's userland needs write access to /system, so it may as well be blocked completely.

Here in EU pretty much most of the new Androids are fully unlockable including phones that ship with completely locked bootloaders on Verizon and AT&T.

Demanding that Google ships an OS with security vulnerabilities because US telcos demand bootloader locking is ludicrous.

http://www.droid-life.com/2014/04/29/report-google-ditching-...

If I personally created such an app, I would have issues trying to morally justify putting ads in it.

Then personally create those apps. Problem solved, no? If, however, you are installing advertiser supported apps and then trying to justify it by declaring its simplicity, you have absolutely no moral ground to stand on. You are just another thief making justifications.

> You are just another thief making justifications.

I posted an objection to the "hard work / starving developer" statement, and now I'm apparently a thief for even suggesting that I find advertisements in those apps to be morally objectionable.

I personally do not own an Android phone. Am I a thief for suggesting that I dislike people creating these 'simple' apps and slapping them full of ads?

You also seem to think that people are not allow to speak their mind, which is an attitude that I do have moral objections to:

> Then personally create those apps. Problem solved, no?

What about when the App is full of ads (e.g. "Your phone is full of virus! Download App to clean it here!") that are meant to trick the user into clicking them? Is that also morally defensible because someone "worked hard" on it?

Also - downvote if an answer is offensive or inappropriate, not because you disagree with an opposing point of view!

As for the downvote, you're right, but it wasn't me. I don't have that ability yet.

Downvote comment wasn't directed at you in particular!

It takes a lot of efforts to become and Android developer and create content in general. You should respect that.

Your best bet would be to contact the developer and try to see if they would offer such a thing. They may even be willing to make a one-off exception for you.

The rules revolving around /system are a huge security issue, as you can take any permission you wish without having to inform the user. Malware authors take advantage of this.

Unfortunately su binaries install to this location for the same reason. Devices with easy to unlock bootloaders (e.g. Nexus line) or an official program to unlock the bootloader (e.g. Morotola Bootloader Unlock program) won't have much of an issue, installing alternate recovery isn't terrible on those devices. The more troubling aspect is those vendors and carriers that offer no such thing. Those vendors/carriers view the phone as their property on loan to you and that they should retain control, for whatever reason. For 90% of users, this doesn't matter, they don't bother to do anything that requires root. But the other 10% are finding their options squeezed unless they buy from specific vendors and sources.

> Rest in peace Titanium Backup, ROM Toolbox, Root Explorer, SD Maid, Lucky Patcher, etc. etc.

I'm not sure what the author is trying to say here, because I don't think any of these apps write to /system.

We'll probably end up with versions of alternative ROMs using a custom kernel for this (e.g. either CyanogenMod will enable /system write access, or there will be two versions -- one with stock kernel, the other with /system write access).

I've found root without /system access is good enough for most things. Tibu works fine. ...but isn't it my phone?

The mindset of mobile developers is to treat the end user as an adversary. You're not meant to control your device beyond what the gatekeepers of the walled garden want you to do. They want to operate by the television model where there are a privileged few producers delivering content to the masses. It's the antithesis to the internet model of an information economy where anyone can communicate with anyone else and not need a middle-man regulating their conversation.

Only if you buy your device from a carrier that locks it, you will have trouble with getting root access. But you should be angry at them, not at Google. Google is making Android safer to use for the general public. This ease of use and hanhdolding is one of the reasons Android is actually popular with non tech-savy people instead of any Linux desktop distro.

You can argue that smartphones shouldn't be treated as simple appliances any more, argue about the pros and cons of each approach... but the fact remains that this particular change in Android is fairly minute and doesn't affect the vast majority of users in any negative way, even the type of user that likes to tinker. In fact, it increases security.

Although its not necessarily something you get for free, since we havent optimised for higher end devices you can get to a point where you have too many active apps open and chew battery, there are probably other places it can improve, but it does perform nicely on higher end devices.

In any case, an open OS is a necessity and I'm glad that I didn't have to choose between iOS, Android, and WP for my first smartphone. After some major bugs have been addressed, I look forward to being able to buy a high end device on which I can install Firefox OS. I sincerely hope Mozilla continues to give the project a lot of attention and doesn't relegate it to Thunderbird status.

In particular the early 'preview' launches havent gone as I personally would hoped, less than raw code there is a level of communication and collaboration with partner launches that dont exist with say, firefox, people have been working to address these and in particular I think the reference device / flame is going to be a release that fixes a lot of this.