Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
On the Web: Google net neutrality stance gives Net’s future to corporations
superboyac:
Ugh...
Both instead were working furiously to get an Android powerhouse phone of their own in a few months (Sprint with the EVO 4G and Verizon with the Droid X HTC Incredible). Those were phones they could cripple — unlike the Nexus One — locking them down and adding lots of unremovable carrier bloatware.
Read More http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/08/why-google-became-a-carrier-humping-net-neutrality-surrender-monkey/all/1#ixzz0wQVA4brk
--- End quote ---
Makes me sick. Great link, by the way, Zaine. Thanks!
superboyac:
Wow, I had no idea all these discussions and issues were hot topics right now. if you guys have read my threads lately, you can hear me ranting about all of this in a somewhat newbie, uninformed manner. Now that I'm learning about it all, it's fascinating how intentional and deliberate all of this stuff is. There's a reason why it was so hard for me to decide whether I wanted a tablet, ipad, or nothing at all in that one thread. It's hard because I have no ability to pick a device that has all the features I'm looking for. The decision is a lose-lose situation...you have to pick what's not as bad as the rest, rather than what is the best.
So, back to my question of why is it such a big deal for phones to upgrade their Android OS from 1.6 to 2.1 to 2.2...well, now you know. It's not just some innocent thing they forgot to include. It was done deliberately so they can control the restrictions they want in place. They key word: deliberate.
zridling:
Too many people are getting way too rich these days by gimmicks instead of providing a service that people need. That's why these things are happening. The underlying intentions of all these companies is a gimmick rather than a service that people are demanding and need.-superboyac (August 12, 2010, 03:07 PM)
--- End quote ---
This is what makes me want to fight like a psycho and simultaneously just give up. We never get what we want. And forget about being rewarded for brand loyalty. You're made to feel like a freeloading idiot for even bringing that quaint subject up.
As others have noted, Google used their "open internet" mantra to their marketing advantage until they were in position to get the most guaranteed money. I fully understand the sole, heartless nature of a corporation is to make money, pure and simple. But as superboyac says, it's no longer about making a honest profit, it's about creating all kinds of tricks and traps to separate you from your money. "You want a phone? Here's a mini-computer, but we're going to restrict every single thing that comes with it, and we'll charge you by the minute if you want to do anything interesting with it (web, video, etc.)."
After Google, Apple, and Microsoft rape the web you once knew and loved, what's left? Shut it down and take up knitting, I suppose.
Renegade:
It all starts with bad legislation. The airwaves are a public/state resource, and they are being co-opted.
What is needed is legislation to correct the current cluster-****, as well as a truly open OS (like an embedded Linux) and open hardware that will run an OS that they consumer can choose.
Microsoft divorced itself from being tied to hardware early on, and look at all the hardware choices we have now for the desktop and laptop platforms. We have LOTS! The Apple model is more like the current mobile model where hardware and software are tied together.
But it's hopeless.
If there were any hope, it would lie with Microsoft making their mobile platform easy to develop hardware for. Only Microsoft has the potential clout to help usher in mobile hardware developers that offer choice. Somebody would have to help follow up there with a Linux OS for mobile hardware. Sound impossible? I think so.
Yep. It's hopeless.
Stoic Joker:
Too many people are getting way too rich these days by gimmicks instead of providing a service that people need. That's why these things are happening. The underlying intentions of all these companies is a gimmick rather than a service that people are demanding and need. So instead of trying to address the desires and needs of their customers, THEY tell the customers what they SHOULD want. I hate it.-superboyac (August 12, 2010, 03:07 PM)
--- End quote ---
Right on man!
While I do 100% agree with your entire diatribe, this is my favorite part. It's a rant I've gone off on IRL many times - How ever I generally fail to complete it without using the F word about 9 times. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version