Google's Android and the Symbian Foundation recently traded jabs over who is more "open" and who is just talking the talk, but not walking the walk. Symbian Foundation director Lee Williams was quoted as saying:

Android is not open. It's a marketing label. It's controlled by Google. It's a pretty label but I don't think the use of Linux is synonymous with open and they may have made that mistake of assuming it is.

Rich Miner, co-founder of Android and Google's VP of mobile, responded that Google has been open with mobile technology, even with competitors. Miner jabs back at Symbian and their $1,500 annual membership fee required to join the Foundation, which also isn't open to individuals. He said:

If you're talking about a platform and the source code isn't completely available for that platform, I would say it's misleading to call that platform open.

Open platforms are a good thing, and if two competitors go the rounds about who is more open, then it should prove to be a good thing for all of us.

[androidcommunity]

 

Reader comments

Android and Symbian Trade Jabs Over Openness

1 Comment