> The original article complains that Android is not open enough. So apparently if you go closed source, nobody cares, but if you give away your stuff, people feel entitled to more.
The thing is, most companies (Apple, MS, Oracle) advertise their software as closed source but still give away portions of their code (Apple with BSD/WebKit, Oracle with Java, MS gives away smaller stuff) while Google advertises their code as open source and gives away portions of their code.
That's why people are complaining. It's not a war on semantics ("oh but it is still Open Source"), it's not a political war.
It's basically people complaining about how Open Source has been reduced to a buzzword because of Google.
The thing is, most companies (Apple, MS, Oracle) advertise their software as closed source but still give away portions of their code (Apple with BSD/WebKit, Oracle with Java, MS gives away smaller stuff) while Google advertises their code as open source and gives away portions of their code.
That's why people are complaining. It's not a war on semantics ("oh but it is still Open Source"), it's not a political war.
It's basically people complaining about how Open Source has been reduced to a buzzword because of Google.