View Single Post
Old 05-02-2014, 01:47 PM   #27
ApK
Award-Winning Participant
ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.ApK ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,389
Karma: 68329346
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ, USA
Device: Kindle
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaufman View Post
I guess I don't see how these changes are greedy. Google is trying to get better press by locking down the OS more so that people will stop talking about how it is filled with malware. I don't agree with the way they are doing it, but you can hardly call it greedy.
Greedy was part of an and/or statement. In this case, this would be the 'or'
Taking a flexible open system and making it less flexible and open for no good reason is not in the best interest of the user community or the state of the art.

Of course, if it turns out the real reason for the change was to sell overpriced internal storage options or sell cloud space, and increase dependency on carrier's expensive data plans, then it's greedy, too.

And isn't locking down against malware a security issue? It is in my book.
We seem to agree that it's part of the reason, and we seem to agree that reason is illogical nonsense (since apps can still read all data freely, and can arbitrarily write like they always have to internal storage) so I'm not sure that we disagree about anything.

Last edited by ApK; 05-02-2014 at 01:50 PM.
ApK is offline   Reply With Quote