Google has the market power and resources to provide this option though.
Hopefully Canonical will be able to provide the equivalent too through the
'non-marginal' carriers.

Android has plenty of other issues, though I think its the best available
mobile option. Excepting the sailfish phone, which is way beyond my budget.
http://jolla.com/

Also relevant: Tizen, which is Linux Foundation backed, is also allowing
customisation by manufacturers and carriers. Hence why samsung is trying it
out for their smartwatch. Just pre-empting anyone who wants to beat on
Canonical for trying to navigate the commercial realities of the mobile
device market =)


On 19 March 2014 23:20, Julien Goodwin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 19/03/14 15:38, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> > On 19/03/14 13:35, [email protected] wrote:
> >> Namely that it would succeed because it wouldn't "marginalise" the
> >> poor carriers out of customising their device and that access to the
> >> filesystem would be "up to the individual manufacturer".
> >
> > Android sucks *precisely* because manufacturers customise the hell out
> of it. Poorly, at that.
>
> Exactly.
>
> I (unsurprisingly[1]) run straight upstream Android on a Nexus 5. Until
> I picked up a Samsung Galaxy Camera as a toy in late 2012 I hadn't
> really tried to use a non-official Android, and was surprised at how
> different it was.
>
> One thing that's also quite irritating is people installing
> Cyanogen/whatever and espousing their favourite new features, and
> inevitably at least one is something that is actually part of upstream
> Android, just blocked or hidden by the manufacturer or carrier.
>
> 1: For those who don't know I work for Google as a Network Engineer in
> Sydney these days
> _______________________________________________
> luv-main mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
>
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to