Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Android Cellphones Google Microsoft Open Source Operating Systems

Cyanogen Partners With Microsoft To Replace Google Apps 179

Unknown Lamer writes: Microsoft and Cyanogen Inc have announced a partnership to bring Microsoft applications to Cyanogen OS. "Under the partnership, Cyanogen will integrate and distribute Microsoft's consumer apps and services across core categories, including productivity, messaging, utilities, and cloud-based services. As part of this collaboration, Microsoft will create native integrations on Cyanogen OS, enabling a powerful new class of experiences." Ars Technica comments, "If Cyanogen really wants to ship a Googleless Android, it will need to provide alternatives to Google's services, and this Microsoft deal is a small start. Microsoft can provide alternatives for Search (Bing), Google Drive (OneDrive and Office), and Gmail (Outlook). The real missing pieces are alternatives to Google Play, Google Maps, and Google Play Services."

Rather than distribute more proprietary services, how about ownCloud for Drive, K-9 Mail for Gmail, OsmAnd for Maps, and F-Droid for an app store? Mozilla and DuckDuckGo provide Free Software search providers for Android, too. With Google neglecting the Android Open Source Project and Cyanogen partnering with Microsoft, the future for Free Software Android as anything but a shell for proprietary software looks bleak.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cyanogen Partners With Microsoft To Replace Google Apps

Comments Filter:
  • Well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by pushing-robot ( 1037830 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:03PM (#49488107)

    ...at least we're out of the frying pan!

  • Real fight (Score:2, Interesting)

    by __keronin ( 3601667 )
    seems Microsoft decide to have a real serious fight with Google ! who will win ? Apple
    • Judging by the market share of android vs ios, (yes, I have the flame suit on), I'm sorry to say that apple .... hmmmm.... does not matter. So is windows phone.
      • Re:Real fight (Score:5, Informative)

        by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:29PM (#49488357)

        Market share is not as important as "profit share". This is true for both device makers and App developers. Apple matters very much, with only 20% market share by unit but 89% by profit. [techcrunch.com] On the app front, Apple paid out $10 billion to developers last year while Google paid out $7 billion. [recode.net]

        So yes, they still are relevant.

        • Re:Real fight (Score:4, Insightful)

          by slaker ( 53818 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @03:06PM (#49488669)

          I respectfully submit that Android is substantially more functional with its core set of applications than iOS. Android device owners need fewer apps because the stuff that their devices come with do the things they need a mobile device to do. Android can share data freely among applications and is much less picky about data formats, so there's no need to resort to some of the weird fuckery or workarounds iOS users have to deal with to bend, fold or mutilate their needs into something that iOS can actually do.

          Android as a platform has an ad-supported revenue channel more available to developers and the tools for developing and deploying on Android are free, so it's easier to be modestly sustaining without having to charge $1 for every fart keyboard or flappy bird application you want to put in the app store. There are drawbacks to that approach, but I really do not care if some software dev is getting rich because I needed an RDP client or somesuch.

          • I respectfully submit that Android is substantially more functional with its core set of applications than iOS.

            A good case can be made that an OHA Android phone is a better value proposition for a vanilla end user than an iOS iPhone. If you're alright with your phone being a dumb terminal for Google services and $SOCIAL_NETWORK_X, you're better off.

            If you're a third party developer like Microsoft though, it's a much worse value proposition to target the platform, because Google aggressively crowds them out

            • Re:Real fight (Score:5, Insightful)

              by slaker ( 53818 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @05:35PM (#49489691)

              I think you may be working with old information.

              Can I store an arbitrary file on an iOS device yet? What if I want to download an MP3 using Safari or Chrome and play it with the native iOS music player? Can arbitrary apps share data without specific developer support yet? Can I do those things without rooting the device?

              As far as I can tell the workflow for every single non-intended use of an iOS starts with "Step 1. Get a Dropbox account" and that by itself represents both a clear inadequacy of the platform and a worthwhile acquisition for a company that already has more money than it knows how to spend.

    • by perpenso ( 1613749 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:17PM (#49488245)

      seems Microsoft decide to have a real serious fight with Google ! who will win ? Apple

      Not necessarily. Like Google, IBM once created an open platform and Microsoft got into a serious fight with them. Microsoft won. And IBM was a 500lb gorilla in those days like Google is today, a very different IBM than today.

      The PC vs Mac platform fight was separate from the fight within the PC platform over the operating system. Similarly the Android vs iOS platform fight may be separate for an operating system fight within Android.

      If Microsoft can do something to better integrate Cyanogen based devices into the corporate workflow they might have some leverage. Plus an operating system that gets bug fixes and security updates might warrant some attention.

      • Tots agree that this could work for corporations. Especially if a certain Canadian firm gets a licence.
        • BlackBerry is dead. Chen turned down the best deal he was likely ever going to get, and now it will fade away completely. Nobody cares about BB, heck they barely care about mobile Windows now. Microsoft's best hope is to hitch its wagon to an "open" Android variant with the hopes that it is a short hop to when the EU forces Google to open the branded version of Android on all those mid-range and high end mobile devices.

          Mark my words. In two to three years, BB will have folded up, probably after Chen and his

      • IBM once created an open platform

        They didn't create an open platform - the platform was "opened" for them by Compaq, and IBM saw a threat. Microsoft, on the other hand, saw an opportunity and happily licensed their code to all comers.

        • by perpenso ( 1613749 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @03:11PM (#49488725)

          IBM once created an open platform

          They didn't create an open platform - the platform was "opened" for them by Compaq, and IBM saw a threat. Microsoft, on the other hand, saw an opportunity and happily licensed their code to all comers.

          Compaq et al were able to create clones because the IBM PC was an open platform.

          "Lowe presented a detailed business plan that proposed that the new computer have an open architecture, use non-proprietary components and software, and be sold through retail stores, all contrary to IBM tradition"
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... [wikipedia.org]

          • From the same link:

            The success of the IBM computer led other companies to develop IBM Compatibles, which in turn led to branding like diskettes being advertised as "IBM format". An IBM PC clone could be built with off-the-shelf parts, but the BIOS required some reverse-engineering. Companies like Compaq, Phoenix Software Associates, American Megatrends, Award, and others achieved fully functional versions of the BIOS, allowing companies like DELL, Gateway and HP to manufacture PCs that worked like IBM's product. The IBM PC became the industry standard.

            Using off-the-shelf parts is not the same as being open.

          • When someone says "open platform" they're usually referring to the software. The hardware specs for the IBM PC were open - anyone could make PC hardware without getting a license from IBM. Whoop dee doo. The software was locked down with the IBM BIOS, so nobody could sell a PC-compatible because they needed the IBM BIOS to run any software developed for that open hardware platform. And the BIOS had a great big "Copyright IBM" at the beginning without which DOS (and thus any PC software) wouldn't work.
            • I don't think "clean room" was as you described. I believe one team had access to copyrighted materials including the commented source code. They created a specification that describes the required compatible behavior without any mention of any copyrighted. The "clean" part of the process is the next step. A separate team implements a compatible BIOS working *only* from this specification. The implementation team has no contact with the specification team other than this specification. I think the implement
          • Compaq et al were able to create clones because the IBM PC was an open platform.

            Wow, you know nothing about what happened, do you? Are we really already to the point where people don't have any idea how 'locked down' the PC was when it first came out? We've already forgot? Oh, you misread a Wikipedia article ...

            IBM fought tooth and nail to prevent Compaq from being able to sell generic 'PC's and they had to go to great lengths to emulate the IBM BIOS without actually using any code to avoid lawsuits.

            IBM saying its 'open' does not mean what you think it means. It doesn't mean you ca

            • Compaq et al were able to create clones because the IBM PC was an open platform.

              Wow, you know nothing about what happened, do you? Are we really already to the point where people don't have any idea how 'locked down' the PC was when it first came out? We've already forgot? Oh, you misread a Wikipedia article ...

              Wrong. Are you under the mistaken impression that "open" means the source code is also free to re-use and distribute? It does not, contrary to how the FSF would like to redefine "open". The fact remains that the IBM PC BIOS was open, PC developers had access to the source code. This source code was part of the documentation provided by IBM to PC programmers so that they could call the BIOS API. The comments in the source code were the API spec. We weren't using pirated copies, we were using official copies

              • by IAN ( 30 )

                Are you under the mistaken impression that "open" means the source code is also free to re-use and distribute? It does not, contrary to how the FSF would like to redefine "open".

                That's a misrepresentation of FSF's stance. They are the ones who grumble about using the term "open source" [gnu.org], because they feel it's too loose, for exactly the reasons you have described.

            • As an example of IBM being open with their BIOS source code see their PC Hardware reference manual:

              http://www.retroarchive.org/do... [retroarchive.org]

              Open listings like this were *the* documentation on how to use the BIOS API calls.
        • Microsoft, on the other hand, saw an opportunity and happily licensed their code to all comers.

          The MS-DOS PC was a commercially viable platform before the cloning of the IBM PC BIOS.

          Microsoft entered the 16 bit market with a full suite of programming languages that made the transition from the eight bit world of CP/M remarkably fast and painless. It's a part of a part of the story the geek tends to forget.

          • It was "commercially viable", but so were it's plethora of competitors. The clones took over the world (except for maybe education and the Mac's eventual niche markets).


      • Now that Gates is advising Nadella, I can imagine the conversations revolve around that fact that Microsoft never made the actual platform that ran Windows. Phones are a bit different, but logically is Android really so different from IBM, Phoenix, AMI, Award, etc., BIOS? Gates and Nadella probably think of Azure as Windows, sitting on top of Android or iOS instead of whatever BIOS, with Office 365 and every other cloud app being the equivalent of desktop apps in the PC era. I doubt they really care if Micr
        • I am somewhat surprised to say how much better I find the Windows Phone UI to be over Android and iOS. I am guessing individually downloaded apps will matter less and less and integrated services more and more in the future, so Microsoft may very well achieve the same thing in the mobile world as they did in the PC world.

          Yes, my thoughts too. I think the shift to W10 running on all devices with the UI kinda intelligently morphing to be appropriate for the size will help Microsoft long term as people get used to it, forget how bad W8 was and get on with their lives. (Try the previews). Despite being something of a Microsoft enthusiast I still find I use my favourite apps, Skype and OneNote, on my Nexus 7 far more than on the phone and hardly ever on the desktop. I think Microsoft are making a pragmatic and sensible move.

      • If Microsoft can do something to better integrate Cyanogen based devices into the corporate workflow they might have some leverage. Plus an operating system that gets bug fixes and security updates might warrant some attention.

        What leverage? For what purpose?

        The enterprise market doesn't really matter. Back in the IBM vs Microsoft days, the consumer market was tiny compared to the corporate market. Today, the enterprise market is a fraction of the consumer market. As long as the C-level executives want to u

        • The corporate market influences the consumer. Many consumers want personal gear compatible with work.
    • Re:Real fight (Score:4, Informative)

      by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:38PM (#49488425) Journal

      Microsoft has decided to have a serious fight with Google... on Google's platform. When the shoe was so often on the other foot in the 80s, 90s and 00s, and it was competitors trying to beat Microsoft whilst using Microsoft's platform, it usually didn't go so well.

      Cyanogen is great and all, but really, the overwhelming majority of Android devices are using some variant of Google's branded version, which means they will come with Google's apps installed. I think Google has absolutely nothing to fear from Microsoft, whose fortunes are quickly being reversed as far as platform dominance and the synergy of developing the dominant software on that platform.

      Google's real worries right now are the EU, which is not only going after the search business, but appears to be "analyzing" Android, which is going to mean what it did Microsoft; an unbundling of certain default applications, and a forced choice of which replacements to use. That is ultimately what I expect Microsoft is looking forward to, that the EU will do to Google what it did to Microsoft a decade ago, and that the guy who has just bought his Samsung Galaxy or Nexus-branded device is going to get a screen that asks "Do you want to use Google Docs or Microsoft Office?"

      • by Wheely ( 2500 )

        However, that all started out as "can windows run without explorer". It turned out that it probably couldn't and Microsoft was found guilty of using one Microsoft product to unfairly increase the use of another Microsoft product. This is different and rather interesting though because now, Microsoft and Cyanogen are going to prove that Android can run perfectly happily without Google apps. This should suit Google just fine when the EU comes knocking.

        • Re:Real fight (Score:5, Interesting)

          by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:59PM (#49488601) Journal

          But everyone already knew that Android could run without the base apps. Most of the people I know that run Cyanogen do so to free themselves from data sieves that are the Google Android app suite. You don't get very good apps to view common office-format files, to be sure, and Microsoft will certainly fill that void. But in the grand scheme of things, Cyanogen simply does not matter that much.

          What will matter in the medium term is that Microsoft works on a Google Apps replacement suite that it ready to go when (not if, when) the EU forces some degree of unbundling on Google.

          But the lesson of Microsoft's experience, of course, is that the EU's unbundling requirement ultimately meant very little, and it was Microsoft's own decade of stagnation with Internet Explorer 6 that gave competitors the edge. The unbundling did nothing to help the actual victim of Microsoft's predatory bundling; Netscape.

          Frankly if the OpenOffice/LibreOffice groups wanted to do something important right now, they'd put development of an Android version of the suite at the top of the priority list, because I think in the next couple of years a major opportunity will appear.

          • Re:Real fight (Score:4, Informative)

            by spasm ( 79260 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @04:06PM (#49489169) Homepage

            Development of libreoffice on android *is* on the top of the priority list. Betas are available now: https://wiki.documentfoundatio... [documentfoundation.org] and the open document foundation awarded a contract to two firms to speed up development in January (http://www.zdnet.com/article/libreoffice-for-android-coming-soon/). The android stable is supposed to be released at the same time as the next major libreoffice release.

    • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

      this is just ridiculous.

      BTW Microsoft already has android integrated maps, bing etc etc. In Asia you can still go to a shop and big a Nokia X - with microsoft services.

      they did shut down their own sw marketplace and replaced it with operas now though iirc.

      bottom line here is this: cyanogen mod guys can go fuck themselves and MS doesn't have a friggin clue what it wants to do(first shutting down their, bought from nokia, android development and then paying some other guys to do the exact same fucking thing).

  • This makes no sense (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:07PM (#49488145)

    I'm guessing this is just a matter of the cyanogen guys going from "open android" philosophy to "how can we make ourselves money?"

    • by CHK6 ( 583097 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:12PM (#49488199)
      I'm just saying, if you are going to make a real go at it, then more than likely someone has to pay the bills. And if the rich man offers you an infusion of cash, then philosophy be damned. Dude's gotta eat.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:19PM (#49488273)

      ...implying that it is remotely possible for them. This is like when Oracle tried to do stuff to OpenOffice. What happens when a free software product whose only reason for existing is as a free software product tries to stop being a free software product? Forking, or death.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:24PM (#49488307)

      I'm guessing this is just a matter of the cyanogen guys going from "open android" philosophy to "how can we make ourselves money?"

      Eventually one graduates from college and has to pay bills.

      "Open" projects generally need to be subsidized. Either by gov't (including much of academia) or corps. Linux is a prime example, long gone are the days of it being a hobbyist/enthusiast project. It is now primarily a corporate subsidize, corporate sponsored and corporate directed effort. Frankly such corporate involvement is largely responsible for its success.

      Perhaps corporations can get cyanogen out of the dorm and mom's basement and get it some serious usage.

      • Perhaps corporations can get cyanogen out of the dorm and mom's basement and get it some serious usage.

        Or Google could release an OS that doesn't require vendors' permission to install... like Microsoft does. Hah.

  • by wile_e8 ( 958263 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:17PM (#49488237)

    Rather than distribute more proprietary services, how about ownCloud for Drive, K-9 Mail for Gmail, OsmAnd for Maps, and F-Droid for an app store? Mozilla and DuckDuckGo provide Free Software search providers for Android, too. With Google neglecting the Android Open Source Project and Cyanogen partnering with Microsoft, the future for Free Software Android as anything but a shell for proprietary software looks bleak.

    How much money are those services going to offer Cyanogen to be included? I'm pretty sure at least 90% of the reason for this deal is that Cyanogen Inc needs revenue and Microsoft was willing to provide it in order to increase their toe hold in Android devices. Open is nice, but the Cyanogen people need to pay the bills.

    • by NotInHere ( 3654617 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @03:07PM (#49488681)

      They have a simple choice: either they develop the apps Microsoft provides themselves, or they let Microsoft do it, and focus on developing an OS. From their website [cyngn.com], you can see, that they do want to remain open. They don't drive an 100% OSS approach. Cyanogenmod never was about 100% open source, installing google apps always has been an extra step in the cyanogenmod installation guide. Also, they didn't replace the proprietary drivers with open ones.

      This is about Cyanogen OS, not CyanogenMod. Cyanogen OS is included into phones out of the box.

      What they do, is giving people a choice. I have installed cyanogenmod onto my phone because I wanted to get rid of bloatware and google services. If this is the way how Cyanogen can finance CyanogenMod development, and that is still open source modulo drivers, I'm ok with it.

  • by Junta ( 36770 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:17PM (#49488243)

    Owncloud is not a cloud *service*, but a platform for creating your own (I actually prefer Seafile incidentally).

    Ditto for K-9 mail, not a service, but an app.

    • I use Owncloud and it works very well. The one thing I don't like about it is that it takes a good 1/2 hour for a file to get from one end to the other. Sometimes I wish you could just go to the target machine and immediately pull down a certified newest copy of a file. Seafile doesn't happen to do that does it?
      • by kwalker ( 1383 )

        Schwa? I run my ownCloud on a 1.5Mbit DSL line and it takes virtually no time for anything to sync around my three desktop clients when I upload something (They're all remote to the server). Files even start coming down before the upload finishes if there are more than one. And I'm talking about everything from single-page PDFs (400K) to digital camera pictures (2-8MB) and music files (3-10MB). And downloads happen quickly when I am using the Android client (Limited by line speed). What are you syncing, ful

      • by iris-n ( 1276146 )

        Sounds strange, I use owncloud to collaborate on my papers between 4 authors and nobody reported this problem. I guess it depends on the server you're using (mine is the University itself), rather than the software owncloud.

  • Hasn't it always? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:20PM (#49488277) Journal
    Hasn't the future of 'open' android always looked bleak, more or less by design? At the bottom of the stack, we have SoC vendors who don't give a damn, handset OEMs who don't give a damn and/or actively prefer that older handsets remain as outdated as possible so you'll buy something new, and carriers who have largely the same incentives as handset vendors; but with their own crapware. This ensures that hardware support is spotty and typically weak for anything except whatever the device shipped with(and it's a moot point on the cryptographically locked devices). Markedly worse than the PC world in terms of vendor helpfullness or ability to do much of anything without a BSP or cobbling blobs together from vendors with slightly longer update support windows.

    From the top of the stack, the 'free' parts of android are basically Google's hardware abstraction layer for google play services, and getting steadily more so.
  • by staalmannen ( 1705340 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:26PM (#49488329)
    I am definitely moving away from CM as soon as this bundling gets in place. What would be the best alternative Omnirom? Something else?
  • by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:28PM (#49488349) Homepage

    But now you're stuck with Microsoft.

    Is this supposed to be some kind of improvement?

    "Oh noes, google is teh big evil corp'ration, let's go with teh Microsoft". I mean, what the hell are they thinking?

    This just sounds like the point at which the free software folks sell out and say fuck it, let's just follow the money.

    I have a hard time people are going to buy an Android device, so they can wipe it, kick out Google, and bring in Microsoft. If you want that, buy a Microsoft device and get on with it.

    • But now you're stuck with Microsoft.

      Is this supposed to be some kind of improvement?

      Google applications on virtually every stock (read:non-AOSP) ROM: not removable.
      Microsoft applications on an AOSP ROM that, almost by definition, requires root and an unlocked bootloader: Good question; the fine summary says "integration", which could mean anything.

      Still, I'd say the ultimate outcome is better with Microsoft than with Google. Not because of who Microsoft is, but because of who Cyanogen is.

      "Oh noes, google is teh big evil corp'ration, let's go with teh Microsoft". I mean, what the hell are they thinking?

      They're probably thinking, "Rent is due this month, and I need to put gas in my car, and I'd like to ea

      • I use Swype, which doesn't exist on Windows Phone

        I agree with everything in your post, including this, but the basic windows phone keyboard works at least as well as Swype, the autocomplete is almost telepathic.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:38PM (#49488419)

    From the CM site: To highlight the one take away that matters to CyanogenMod users â" We are not bundling or pre-installing Microsoft (or any Cyanogen OS exclusive partner apps) into CyanogenMod.

  • Meh (Score:4, Informative)

    by c ( 8461 ) <beauregardcp@gmail.com> on Thursday April 16, 2015 @02:43PM (#49488467)

    It maybe sucks for those who buy a phone with CM pre-installed, but they've already announced [cyanogenmod.org] that there's no plan to install any MS junk into CyanogenMod, and it's highly unlikely that the community would stand for it if they tried.

    So, not something to worry about terribly much. Yet.

    • Are these phones targeted at China or foreign markets? I've never seen one in the US.

      • by c ( 8461 )

        So far that seems to be the major target market. As long as the carriers are heavily involved in choosing and customizing phone for consumers as they are in the US and Canada, I doubt you'll see a CM-based phone get much traction over here.

    • it was a April fools joke that's still cycling around. there not putting ms garbage in cynogenmod.
      • by mcl630 ( 1839996 )

        Umm, no. There was an April fools joke about Cyanogen being "powered by Microsoft", but this is new news, not an April fools joke. They are including MS apps in Cyanogen OS, but not CyanogenMod.

  • Pretty please (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Nyall ( 646782 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @03:02PM (#49488635) Homepage

    Could the Cyanogen Mod group please file a trademark and sue Cyanogen inc for the brand confusion?

    I'd really appreciate it. Thanks

  • for any sort of Exchange email.

    Nine works great but costs something like $10 and doesn't do pop or imap.

    There was another app (IIRC it has a paper airplane icon) worked okay with exchange as well. The rest, if you setup folders, you don't get alerts if a new email lands in a folder outside of or a sub-folder of INBOX.

    • by higuita ( 129722 )

      Simple, don't use exchange!! don't try to fix the wrong problem!

      If you choose a closed email server full of closed protocols, you will have problems finding tools that work with it! All the tools that can work with it will cost money and usually require yet another closed tool or service.

      Use other things or pressure MS to support open protocols. if you don't do that, then you can't complain about application support.

      If you really want to follow that path, set up a davmail server [sourceforge.net] and use it (directly with SS

    • Touchdown was ok for Exchange.

      I am using Mailwise, currently. It does threading and works with Exchange, my two requirements.

  • by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Thursday April 16, 2015 @04:00PM (#49489103)

    Rather than distribute more proprietary services, how about ownCloud for Drive, K-9 Mail for Gmail, OsmAnd for Maps, and F-Droid for an app store? Mozilla and DuckDuckGo provide Free Software search providers for Android, too.

    It's like whoever wrote this doesn't understand how modern software/device manufacturers think.
    Half their business plan involves data mining and vendor lock-in.

  • is my friend. It's kind of interesting to watch all of this shake out. Apple and Google hate one another. Microsoft has traditionally been anti-open source. Google hates Microsoft. Apple embraces open source...as long as you play by their rules. Microsoft and Apple have an alliance, albeit an uneasy one. IBM hates Microsoft and now had teamed up with Apple.

    So Microsoft figures the best way to get Google is to team up with Apple and Cyanogen. We'll see how effective it is but it seems like a bit of a despera

  • Cyanogen isn't "replacing" Google apps with Microsoft, they are including Microsoft apps in addition to the Google apps. At least for now anyways...

  • F-Droid excludes all non-free software. And by default, it hides apps with antifeatures [f-droid.org] such as advertisements and reliance on non-free add-ons or services. So how are the developers of an app on F-Droid supposed to keep a roof over their heads? And would your suggestion also work for games?

  • But Cyanogen can't even seem to get bluetooth to work properly on my 3 year-old LG Optimus G. The BT MAC address is always an incorrect value, causing major connection and audio streaming issues. I have been a big fan of CM roms for 5-6 years now, but there are too many bugs they can't seem to rectify these days for me to take them completely seriously. This is especially true if they want to do Android without Google.

    Good luck to them, but dancing with the devil (and undisputed king of unresolved bugs) d
  • "Rather than distribute more proprietary services,"... Do not confuse CyanogenMod (CM) with Cyanogen Inc.. The later is a 1B$ valuated company, not an NPO. CM is to Inc. much what AOSP stands for Android: an open-source project backed by a for-profit organization that takes the helm.

    Android itself is nothing more than a Google certified AOSP+GApps package. Gapps (market, big data collection, and so on) and OEM support/certification is the way Google monetizes the free AOSP. If Cyanogen Inc. is to succeed a

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman

Working...