nr0mx

By that metric, doesn't Rust have an even bleaker future? https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=...

I would prefer not to contribute to Chrome's increasing dominance, but I feel like I don't get much of a choice. I want to choose a browser on its merits. For me that is currently Vivaldi. Where is the Firefox-based Vivaldi equivalent?

Mozilla does not really seem to be addressing the fact that they provide one browser - Firefox - that is competing against an increasing array of Chrome-based browsers, all providing different user experiences. Why has no one built an interesting browser on top of Firefox?

It stands to reason that Chrome cannot be all things to all people. Neither can Firefox. The difference is that alternative browsers are increasingly Chrome-based, with the single exception of Firefox. Unless Mozilla (or someone else) can reverse this trend, I think this battle is lost.

They were, weren't they?

Are you being ironic? I guess it wouldn't overly bother the OP, considering he's switching from python, where "the designers of the language forced their mind-your-indentation religion on everyone blah blah blah".

In short, there's no performance requirement?

You mean anti-Google pro-Microsoft surely?

No, he means there has been loads of reports of such episodes with Steve Jobs, not not with Brin.

Why should the difference be to the user? The inner workings are important to the creators - it loosens their dependency on an external proprietary firm. The interface matters to the users.

It's no coincidence that six out of ten in this list run on Linux:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_mobile_operating_...

In a roundabout way it may actually matter to users in that it enables more competition and better choice.

Yes, but the average user is also not going around looking for a Truly Free Version of the OS powering their phones/tablets.

The point is, Android is currently the go-to mobile OS for anyone who wants to scratch their itch. like Linux has been on the desktop. And there have been plenty who have taken up this offer (e.g Amazon, Chinese & Indian manufacturers, Android console makers), except they aren't end-users.

I fail to understand how this is any different from a skinned Android tablet interface.

Puts this in an entirely different light, doesn't it:

Even when ostensibly not functioning, the Xbox One can run in a low-powered state, ready to be snapped on at a moment's notice. That's something Microsoft was showing off last week as an asset. The only on-switch Microsoft showed for waking the machine from its low-power state was a voice command... "Xbox On." The Xbox One could only hear that if the Kinect was already, always listening. The idea that the Kinect might always be listening got people reaching for their tin foil or vowing to not let an Xbox One into their home.

Microsoft is now seeking to calm concerns that the new Kinect might spy. "We are designing the new Kinect with simple, easy methods to customize privacy settings, provide clear notifications and meaningful privacy choices for how data will be used, stored and shared," the Microsoft rep told me.

"We know our customers want and expect strong privacy protections to be built into our products, devices and services, and for companies to be responsible stewards of their data. Microsoft has more than ten years of experience making privacy a top priority. Kinect for Xbox 360 was designed and built with strong privacy protections in place and the new Kinect will continue this commitment. We’ll share more details later."

http://kotaku.com/xbox-ones-kinect-can-turn-off-microsoft-sa...

Not sure I'd want the Xbox One in my house after this fiasco.

I get a download link on a Mac. Can't see the Windows or Linux link, presumably only shows the Download link for your OS.

http://www.opera.com/download/get/?partner=www&opsys=MacOS&p...

"Upon the launch of the iPhone 4, Jobs promised that Apple would immediately start working with standards bodies to make the FaceTime protocol an "open standard." As of November 2012, it is not yet known to have been ratified by any standards body, and the extent of work by Apple with regard to this promise is unclear as Apple has not released technical specifications for the service. FaceTime is not currently supported on any non-Apple devices."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FaceTime

This is the company currently running ads positioning itself as a company that holds privacy dear.

"At Microsoft, we take our responsibilities for protecting your privacy very seriously. It’s a priority across all our businesses, and an area where we continue to work closely with others throughout academia, government and industry."

http://blogs.windows.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2013/04/22/consumer...

"Your Privacy is Our Priority" "The lines between public and private may never be perfect, but at Microsoft we are going to keep on trying, because your privacy is our priority." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt51MWll1oY

> Everything Google does is about ad sales. Self driving cars? What are you going to do when your car does the driving for you? Consume media of course, with ads all over it!

Of course, you make perfect sense. I guess we know why if Google gets into private spaceflight.

Your recent comment on Apple pulling AppGratis from the App Store - "Go and innovate on Android, what's the problem. Or make your own platform and innovate there. Or use HTML5. What makes me sad is constant whining about stuff like this." - doesn't exactly reconcile with your disputing the OPs point regarding Apple and openness or taking objection to OPs stance on guys whining about Google. That is, unless your first retort had nothing at all to do with the OPs point about openness.

Reading the Dropbox help page, it seems like the situation might be worse if you were a paying customer: "If you convert your existing account to Teams, the balance you have remaining on your Pro subscription will be credited to the Teams subscription.". The language is pretty clear that an individual to Teams conversion is final, irrevocable.

That in itself is okay, but then the conversion mail should have come with big, red warning notices; not the bland email you seem to have received.

The OP says he did that: "I tried contacting Dropbox on twitter and using their site’s support contact form, and they have not yet gotten back to me."

I can't imagine Dropbox can punish the Teams account creator for what amounts to their failure to educate users on the implication of the action. The victim does have to accept the invitation for this to work, so any unintended consequence of their action is due to lack of knowledge.

Can you clarify that? I can view the content of the page without being logged in.

Well, they've penalized the Google Chrome page according to this update: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3421468

> However, they made the breakthrough now and it does not look like there is any "real" OSS competitor left.

That is precisely why it is so significant that Android is also open source.

The bestseller "Android" tablet of this year is probably the Kindle Fire, that is completely divorced of Google. There have been consistent rumors that Amazon will step in with a few more tablet variants and a phone in the coming year. Facebook - Google's direct rival - was rumoured to be trying out an "Android" phone of their own.

All this is possible only because Android is open source.

It is fine to wish that Android is less loosely coupled from Google. Personally I think this is the only pragmatic choice. Android is not pure software, it is tightly integrated with hardware. Linux's achilles' heel for a long old time was device drivers. Android has mostly sidestepped this issue due to Google "owning" the project and working with the hardware vendors.

It would be nice to allow community input (commits, patches etc) into Android, but that I can understand why they don't right now. The thing is, anyone can create a more open fork that does this - and it wouldn't matter due to lack of hardware support.

The next best thing is to work downstream of the hardware, which is what Cyanogenmod and other teams have done. And they have been mighty successful at it too. When you see community teams boot Android on iPhones, Playbooks, Kindle Fires and so on, you are witnessing the benefit of having a free open source mobile OS.

Android may be the Linux variant that has succeeded in the mobile world, but that doesn't mean Android variants can't exist.

Mozilla is still working on Boot to Gecko, which borrows from Android for some of the hardware interface: https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G

Needless to say, only possible because it is open source.

>> It is interesting, because really, what has Android being "Open Source" really done?

You mean, besides this (from the G+ post conversation): "Historians are, however, going to make note of how the open source Android platform (or its later forks and clones) played a role in facilitating everything from low-cost solar-powered devices in the remotest villages in India and Africa, to a hundred million tablets computers in the classroom each revolutionizing education for children all across Asia and the Middle East, to putting an Internet-connected smartphone in the hands of every man, woman, and child in America, even those from the perpetually overlooked majority that simply can't afford a shiny brand-new iPhone or Galaxy Nexus every Christmas."

This is already happening. Now. And it is happening because Android has successfully commoditized the mobile OS. I'm seeing it happen where I grew up. Where people cannot afford iPhones and Galaxy Nexuses. But they can now afford an Android smartphone.

From the G+ post, again: " That there's now an eminently capable open source mobile operating system, one that is free to use and free to fork, means that the knowledge advantage can be better and more evenly distributed across the planet than ever before."

Anyone, anywhere can build and distribute their own Android-based device. They are already doing this. Isn't that one of the cornerstones of an open source project?

>> " Are customers less beholden to telecoms for their devices? Have prices dropped or competition increased? What percent of Android device owners have compiled their own kernel? Have read the Android source?"

Do you ask this of Apache, Asterisk etc?

You say elsewhere that "The cost of a Windows license was never a material factor in the cost of a computer.". For you perhaps, but it definitely was a factor in my part of the world.

The analysis of the players in the mobile market and their motivations is spot on, but the rest of the article rests on shaky grounds.

First off, Windows Phone is not superior to Android. It may be ahead in some respects, but it certainly lags Android in others. And that is the current situation. Till the last update Windows Phone clearly lagged Android in features. It may be comparable now, but it is yet too early to expect this to make a big difference. The real question is if achieving feature parity with Android is enough to let it succeed?

When Android arrived on the scene it didn't have to contend with another Android. Windows Phone does. The carriers and device manufacturers that may invest in Windows Phone are the same ones that are already invested in Android (except Nokia). I can't see that Windows Phone provides them with something that Android does not. Sure, they will hedge their bets and make Windows Phone devices, but the success or failure of Windows Phone devices does not (yet) have the same impact on their balance sheet as that of Android devices on which they currently depend. When they adopted Android the mobile ecosystem was very different and it was their lifeline against a seemingly unstoppable Apple-dominated world, and they had every motivation to make these devices a success.

A final point - fragmentation - I don't see how Windows Phone can avoid fragmentation. The more successful it gets, the more fragmented it will get. Thanks to Android, users expect to be able to get hold of the exact big/small/cheap/expensive/with-without-keyboard smartphone variant they want. Windows Phone can only avoid this fragmentation at the expense of market share.

"will end-user dissatisfaction with Android’s inconsistencies and fragmentation be strong enough to allow the better product to succeed."

Most end users don't care about fragmentation. Developers do, and people who invest in their mobiles do, but a significant fraction of users - the ones who "don't know what they hate" - do not typically know or care about ICS, or know what additional features it provides, or if their phones will get upgraded to ICS.

Well of course you are right about that, but I don't think that's the gist of it. Not entirely. There's also the insistence that where Apple was first or on the cutting edge, it is a mortal sin for others to copy. That's the ugly part. That's the dissonance I see when reading these sites.