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 <luv-lists@studio442.com.au> wrote:
On 19/03/14 15:38, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> On 19/03/14 13:35, noah.odonoghue@gmail.com 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
luv-main@luv.asn.au
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main