> Try comparing them with software freedom in mind and tell me how again the devices running android lose vs apple devices.
OK. Every app worth getting for an Android device, I can get via the iOS App Store. Everything that requires a rooted or unlocked Android device, I can get via jailbreaking.
I'm not an OS developer so I'm not going to be contributing patches back to AOSP. The vast majority of Android devices are bootloader-locked so they aren't free or open at all, no more than a jailbroken iOS device.
In practice, it seems about the same. You need to root, unlock or jailbreak the device to install things that the manufacturer doesn't want you to. Before that, you're locked in. After that, you have total software freedom.
Unless you're actively contributing patches back to AOSP, I don't see how the difference in "software freedom" actually matters in practice.
Except that the vast majority of Android devices are not bootloader locked (Almost all samsung phones are sold unlocked, HTC provides an after-market unlock tool for most phones, Motorola recently started doing so). Besides, even if an Android phone is bootloader locked, you can actually do more on it than on an iphone.
And also, you dont have to contribute patches back to aosp to appreciate software freedom. How about building and running your own kernel on your phone. Is that something you would be interested in? Most Android phones can do that.
* How about building and running your own kernel on your phone. Is that something you would be interested in? Most Android phones can do that.*
No, I'm interested in browsing the web, reading and sometimes replying to my email, checking my calendar, doing online banking, finding restaurants via Yelp, reading my Instapaper queue, checking my RSS feeds, reading and replying on Twitter, listening to and downloading new podcasts I subscribe to, occasionally reading ebooks, listening to my own music and Internet radio, getting turn by turn navigation and sometimes walking or transit directions, and checking in on Foursquare.
In other words, I want a smartphone. Ideally, I want one that works without dorking around with a damn kernel recompile. Android phones can absolutely do all of those things (without damn kernel recompiles). And, darned if iPhones can't just as easily.
In practice, applications aren't lock-in. Data is lock-in. What Apple can do to piss me off is locking in my data, which is a potentially grave concern with iCloud. But just about everything I mentioned above is stuff that would take me about a day to migrate from iOS to Android or vice-versa, because nearly all of it involves open data formats.
Being able to put a new kernel on your phone? Sure, it could be fun. But when push comes to shove, the best thing a smartphone can do for me is to make its inner workings as invisible as possible. When I want to spend time cursing at a Unix shell prompt, that's why I have Arch Linux. Not on my phone.
> Except that the vast majority of Android devices are not bootloader locked (Almost all samsung phones are sold unlocked, HTC provides an after-market unlock tool for most phones, Motorola recently started doing so).
You named three companies, all listed only started doing it recently and only with high profile devices. The vast, VAST majority of Android devices are bootloader locked, because there are so many of them. Most of them aren't the high end Android phones that get all the attention.
> Besides, even if an Android phone is bootloader locked, you can actually do more on it than on an iphone.
Depending on the device you can enable installation of non-market APKs. Non-market APKs worth installing almost always require a root unless you're just pirating applications. That's about it.
> How about building and running your own kernel on your phone. Is that something you would be interested in? Most Android phones can do that.
I would personally throw that in the category of having an interest in OS development. Less of a niche than those who can contribute back to AOSP, still quite a small group. Also, not "most". Just those select high end devices with unlocked boot loaders.
I'm aware of the FSF. That happens to be one extremely narrow-minded definition software freedom. It's not everyone's. If your point is "I only buy devices that are open in the eyes of the FSF" then say that.
You didn't though, you said "software freedom" and in practice iOS provides plenty of software freedom. It just doesn't reach the unrealistic standard of the FSF.
Neither does Android frankly, but at least with AOSP it's closer.
I do not only buy devices that are open in the eyes of the FSF. But I really do prefer devices that go in the right direction rather than others. And while apple uses and even develops some open source software I still can get the complete android source code.
Would you not like the idea "it means that much wasteful duplication of system programming effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the state of the art"?
OK. Every app worth getting for an Android device, I can get via the iOS App Store. Everything that requires a rooted or unlocked Android device, I can get via jailbreaking.
I'm not an OS developer so I'm not going to be contributing patches back to AOSP. The vast majority of Android devices are bootloader-locked so they aren't free or open at all, no more than a jailbroken iOS device.
In practice, it seems about the same. You need to root, unlock or jailbreak the device to install things that the manufacturer doesn't want you to. Before that, you're locked in. After that, you have total software freedom.
Unless you're actively contributing patches back to AOSP, I don't see how the difference in "software freedom" actually matters in practice.