Read the links I posted. Google has no say in what Jolla does, but it potentially stop certifying or revoke access to OHA to any OEM that ships Jolla phones.
Thought it was going to get banned like Aliyun because of the stories below.
Anyone know if Jolla phones are banned from being made by the Android OEMs because they're using a third party jvm for compatibility?
The official blog post is almost entirely content free, except for "expanding the role in OIN", not sure why this is newsworthy exactly, except for Google to make PR noises about being open while locking out FOSS from the real things like Chat, Hangouts, Docs, Android forking, and forcing Google+ on everyone etc.
How many of the thousands of Google patents are they actually pledging to OIN? 50%? 80%? 1%?
If you want to read a more interesting take on patents and Google, there is this article. http://www.technologyreview.com/news/521946/googles-growing-patent-stockpile/
Today I learned, 100 million copies in ~6 months is DOA, according to Slashdot.
Huh? Just check recoiledsnake's comment history. You don't need my name for that.
Dissing anonymous comments just for the sake of dissing them is very hacker newsy. Welcome to slashdot where things work a little differently and people judge comments by their merit instead of whether they are made by anonymous perosnas . Also you have a handle. Not a name. So you are as anonymous as I am.
So why not apply that to my post as well instead of judging it by looking at my previous posts? If you think someone gets paid to post on this dying site, you are completely mistaken, at least in my case.
Anonymous users calling registered handles paid shills is exactly like pot calling the kettle black. I dared to put a handle on my post and I am taking the karma hit, while you're just taking potshots while being too cowardly to even register or use your real handle. How can you call into question my comment history while making sure yours is not visible? You're probably a paid Google or Apple shill trying to hide their many postiive comments about them !!!
My intent wasn't to post something anti-Google, it's to show that people move all the time, and it's not particularly newsworthy. For example here's an article from a few years ago which showed some people moving from Google to Microsoft.
Funnily, Slashdot doesn't usually report things when it's the other way around(guess why??!!)
This employee could see the Google+ disaster coming from a mile(which actually made some real people cry, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccxiwu4MaJs )
Google Exec Joins Microsoft, Trashes Google
Google's focus on social and advertising is killing entrepreneurship and innovation, insists former engineering director James Whittaker.
Slideshow: 10 Essential Google+ Tips
(click image for larger view and for slideshow)
James Whittaker resigned his engineering director position at Google last month and took a job at Microsoft, where he had worked previously. Then on Tuesday, in a Microsoft Developer Network blog post, he explained his reason for leaving Google: The company has lost its way by blindly trying to compete with Facebook.
"The Google I was passionate about was a technology company that empowered its employees to innovate," Whittaker wrote. "The Google I left was an advertising company with a single corporate-mandated focus."
Whittaker's lament recalls the so-called Peanut Butter Manifesto published in 2006 by then-Yahoo SVP Brad Garlinghouse. There's a difference however: Garlinghouse proposed reforms for Yahoo; Whittaker's criticism merely burns a bridge.
It also echoes a post made by Tim Bray, who upon joining Google in 2010 as an Android developer advocate, took the opportunity to slam Apple's lack of openness (though Bray did not work at Apple).
And then there's a website devoted to the problems with Windows 8, presented by Mike Bibik, a former Microsoft program manager now at Amazon.
"Why I Left" is also now playing outside the tech community. Departing Goldman Sachs executive Greg Smith offered a comparable condemnation of his former employer in a New York Times op-ed on Wednesday.
Perhaps this particular literary form should be known as a "Whine-I-Left" letter.
[ Not everyone believes Google has lost its way. Read DARPA Director Leaving For Google. ]
Whittaker draws a contrast between Google under former CEO Eric Schmidt and Google under current CEO Larry Page. The Schmidt regime, he asserts, "was run like an innovation factory, empowering employees to be entrepreneurial through founder's awards, peer bonuses and 20% time." Ads, the company's primary source of revenue remained in the background.
Whittaker appears to believe that ads, like a parent at a teen's party, should remain out of sight, to avoid the embarrassment of exposing who's really in charge.
Under Page, Whittaker says, Google has devoted itself to making its products social, at the expense of innovation and entrepreneurship. And to make matters worse, Whittaker believes Google's social focus is a failure.
Google was wrong to claim that sharing on the Web is broken, Whittaker argues. "As it turned out, sharing was not broken," he said. "Sharing was working fine and dandy, Google just wasn't part of it.
Whittaker's pique appears to be tailor made for Microsoft. He acknowledges that he doesn't enjoy the invasiveness of Google's social integration or the company's ads. Microsoft has been talking up Google's disinterest in privacy for years and many people nowadays, particularly legislators, are listening.
Current and former Google employees have been quick to question Whittaker's motives. In a Google+ post--there are still a few guests at the Google+ party--Andrew Kovacs, once part of Google's public relations team and now an employee of Sequoia Capital, responded with sarcasm: "Microsoftie joins Google for a few years, then leaves to work somewhere more innovative & less focused on competition... Microsoft!
Google software engineer Thomas Bushnell charged Whittaker with mouthing Microsoft talking points. "If [Whittaker] believed what he said, then he wouldn't have headed for Microsoft, which has the same problems he alleges, but in much grander style," he said in a Google+ comment. "He's rehearsing a set of standard-issue statements, with very little reason to think anything there is his real reason for the move."
The truth hurts, depending on what you think it is.
A good argument and post ruined by the last line. Sigh, Slashdot, you never change.
Shoddy software because they don't give free updates till the end of time? Maybe you should've tried buying Macs between 2001 and 2006.Maybe they have better software.
he questions for me are "WTF does it do?", "Why does it have to walk this tree, and what is so bloody CPU intensive about it?" followed by, "Why does an update have to care what patches are superseded? As long as you're up to the latest patch level, it should be all good".
I think the whole thing is fundamentally broken. You have your current version of $Thing, it depends on N other things which must be of a given version. When you upgrade $Thing you just check to make sure the things it depends on are there and if they aren't, then you get them. The old stuff? You just check to see what depends on it, and if there is no longer anything depending on it you can quarantine it. If anything tries to access a quarantined dependancy, then your dependencies are broken and you need to patch the app that tried to do that.
I know I'm glossing over some things, and package management is not trivial; but there's no excuse I can see for exponentially growing scan algorithms.
Tell that to the apt-get folks.
How exactly does someone on Slashdot think dependencies are trivial to calculate and resolve?
Oh, I know the answer, it's all about the MS bashing.
Why? People paid good money for working supported product. Just because Microsoft wants to bait and switch doesn't make it right. I hope some deep pockets corporation sues the bejesus out of them to force this issue.
I don't see a bait and switch. People knew(or could find out if they wanted) the EOL dates before they purchased it with their "good money", and MS has been extending them since many many years even though they didn't have to. That sounds exactly like the opposite of a bait and switch.
Want to check the EOL for Windows 8 before purchasing? Here it is http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle
Many of XP users are people in 3rd world countries who knowingly or unknowingly have a pirated OS, but they would pay for each fix, right?
>Devs can issue patches for free! (looking at you Microsoft)
You can stop looking. In typical Slashdot fashion, any bad news about MS gets blared and good news buried, and the posters and mods continue propagating ignorance.