Two main points:

  • no one unified distro to keep things simple (thread OP)

VS

  • people don’t care. Someone else needs to advocate, sell, migrate, and support (medium term) Linux (whichever distro they want) for the intermediate term (few months at least) - thread response).

I think a lot of the 97% desktop market share is like this, instead of the hands on 2-3%.

  • @TheRedSpade
    link
    171 year ago

    Android was Open Source once until Google decided to mainstream it.

    Android is still open source. Proprietary stuff gets added by the time it gets to the consumer, but the base is open.

    • rayon
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      It’s open-source merely to comply with the GPL license of the kernel, but the fact is that an Android image built only from open source components will be extremely crippled or, depending on your point of view, basically useless. Such an image will not even boot on the majority of devices ; you’ll need those sweet proprietary driver blobs if you want your phone to do anything, and a bunch more closed source binaries in order to use Play services.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Don’t know why this is downvoted. Even distros like Debian, that are 100% FOSS otherwise, will (often) load some proprietary firmware because otherwise it would barely be functional on any modern computer.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      I was afraid someone was going to point out that AOSP exists, but it’s not very useful.

      The Android that everyone uses and talks about is very closed, because everything depends on the playstore.