Honeycomb won't be open-sourced? Say it ain't so!

We're all waiting for Google to finally release the open-source code for Android 3.0.1 (Honeycomb), but if we're to believe Bloomberg (and usually you should), it's not going to happen in the "foreseeable future" -- and possibly never.  I'll pause and allow the nerd-rage to subside for a moment, because I'm feeling it too -- hard.  When we've all composed ourselves a bit, join me after the break. [Bloomberg Businessweek]

The normal release cycle dissected

Let's go over the usual process of Android development cycles, using the original SuperPhone (sorry Phil) --the Nexus One -- as an example. 

Sometime in the fall of 2009 (if not sooner), HTC and Google got together and engineered the hardware we call the Nexus One.  We don't know exactly when the Android developers started writing Android 2.1 (Eclair), but it was probably in an advanced testing stage when the hardware was decided upon and development begun.  Google provided this software to HTC for in-house testing, and HTC provided hardware to Google for the same.  As bugs were found, or enhancements were thought up, the Android developers made these changes and forwarded the software along to the testers.  Google and others call this "dogfooding," most companies call it R&D.

Once things reach a fairly stable state, this software is shared with other hardware vendors and partners.  Motorola, Samsung, and other lesser-known partners like Nuance all have access to the source code while it's still in development.  Unfortunately, you and I don't, but there's not much we can do about that.  In fact, I won't even complain (too much) about it because Google's release cycle is too rapid (and the user base too big) to be fooling with community-driven patches, no matter how well done and innovative they may be.  The important thing is that the people who are building phones all had access to Android 2.1 while they were building their products, and they should.  All is well so far.

Come that special day in January 2010, and Google announces the Nexus One as a product available for sale to consumers.  Once the first Nexus One is sold, the Linux kernel source must be made available as a condition of its software license -- the GPL. 

Android itself is covered under the Apache 2.0 license.  It's a more liberal license, and choosing it makes sense when you realize that companies like Motorola or Samsung can't just give away some of their code.  The reasons why and the "legality" of not releasing the full source code for Apache 2.0 projects is argued to death daily by neckbeards and hippies, so I'm not going to get into it. But let it be said that it happens.  People use Apache 2.0-licensed code to build software and do not release the source code.  For the Nexus One (and all other releases so far) Google hasn't done this -- they publish the code at release or shortly thereafter. 

So we have the phone, we have the new version of Android, and we have the source code.  CyanogenMod and other custom ROMs soon follow, everyone is happy, and work begins on the next version.

Now is where things take a turn for the worse.  Andy Rubin teased us with the Xoom, Vic Gundotra teased us with the Honeycomb OS, and we all wanted.  We badly wanted.  When the release day for the Xoom came around, Google released the patched Linux kernel source and development began.  We were happy for a while, because we had custom kernels to play with, but everyone with a Xoom wanted the Android 3.0 source so "real work" can begin.  We all started to complain a little, but when we heard that Android 3.0.1 was coming, we were fine because we knew that Google would wait and publish the 3.0.1 AOSP (Android Open Source Project) code along with the update.  No sense doing it twice, right?  Right?

The new Honeycomb way

Now fast forward back to today -- March 24, 2011.  If what Bloomberg is reporting is correct, and my money says it is, we're not getting our source code any time soon, and maybe never.  Google's reasoning behind this is that they don't want smaller development teams ruining the Honeycomb experience.  Here's a quote from the Bloomberg article:

It's the throngs of smaller hardware makers and software developers that will now have to wait for the software. The delay will probably be several months. "To make our schedule to ship the tablet, we made some design tradeoffs," says Andy Rubin, vice-president for engineering at Google and head of its Android group. "We didn't want to think about what it would take for the same software to run on phones. It would have required a lot of additional resources and extended our schedule beyond what we thought was reasonable. So we took a shortcut."Rubin says that if Google were to open-source the Honeycomb code now, as it has with other versions of Android at similar periods in their development, it couldn't prevent developers from putting the software on phones "and creating a really bad user experience. We have no idea if it will even work on phones."

While it's easy to blame the huge run of Android Christmas craplets for this one, I think it goes a bit deeper and also targets individual developers, who would (and could) put Honeycomb on our current crop of Android phones.  Google has decided that the biggest and best draw for many of us is a good reason to hold back on the code -- they don't want us to hack it onto devices it wasn't designed for.

That pisses me off, and the realization that I can't do anything about it only makes it worse. What good is the unlocked bootloader on the Xoom if you can't build custom ROMs for the damn thing?  Andy Rubin goes on to tell Bloomberg "Android is an open-source project. We have not changed our strategy."  You could have fooled me, Andy.

It gets worse.  Bloomberg says Google executives have told manufacturing partners that Google will not release the source code, and instead the next open-source version of Android will be the "I" version.  This in essence kills all third-party development for tablets running Honeycomb.  No easy way to add things that Google left out, unless you're Samsung or LG.  That sucks, because I like some of the work that comes from people like rodigezstyle or eViL D: much better than I like the work that comes from LG or Samsung, and I'm not alone.  And Google in its infinite wisdom has decided that I won't be getting it.

I love Android because of its openness, not because it offers me a bug-free experience that I can't get elsewhere.  With that in mind, I have decided I won't be getting any of the new Honeycomb tablets.  There are other well-designed, closed source tablets out there, made by companies who never claimed to be open, and I'll look to them if I find a need for a tablet. 

-- A heartbroken Android evangelist

Jerry Hildenbrand
Senior Editor — Google Ecosystem

Jerry is an amateur woodworker and struggling shade tree mechanic. There's nothing he can't take apart, but many things he can't reassemble. You'll find him writing and speaking his loud opinion on Android Central and occasionally on Twitter.

  • I find this disappointing, but fairly reasonable. To get traction as a tablet operating system Google had to make Android run really well on tablets. In doing so in a timely fashion they had to put the new phone interface on hold.
    Manufacturers would undoubtedly put Honeycomb on a phone if given the source code, and I think that we can agree that the tablet optimized OS on a phone is a bad combination, right? Except that as Android becomes more mainstream people are going to pick up this abomination of a device and see that it runs Android. They will associate Android with Google and misdirect the blame. These people probably don't know the definition of open source.
    So that is why this move is done in the benefit of Android as a platform, besides, the 'I' version of Android is probably only a few months down the road, and I'm pretty confident that almost all, if not all, Honeycomb tablets available will be upgradable to it.
  • The manufacturers have the source code. It's the hacking community that Google is intending to keep at bay until "Icecream" is released and both the tablet and smartphone Android development lines are merged.
  • Reading the article, it's inferred that it's the smaller OEMS that they're worried about. Any one of them could release a phone to the Market with Honeycomb, and "No Market or Google apps" won't do anything to deter them. Not to mention Rubin admits that they took shortcuts to get Honeycomb out in time. Maybe they're just not entirely happy with the effort? I'm not sure why the writer of this article/people are taking it personally. It's entirely reasonable.
  • perhaps they want to ensure a more successful year of android tablet sales by making honeycomb tablets only. Since it differentiates tablets more from all other android phones/devices, and creates more appeal. Already, Froyo does 95% of what Honeycomb does, but if all android devices had the latest and greatest OS, then all the tablet is, is just a bigger screen.
  • Which, when you remove the phone radio, is exactly what a tablet is... I still don't see the appeal. This development from Google is a bit disappointing though.
  • The problem isn't one about PHONES. It is about devs being able to put out "fully baked" (i.e. optimized, debugged, Market access for tablet apps, etc.) versions of Honeycomb on TABLETS! The Samsung Galaxy Tab and Nook Color are just two examples of tablets that may not get a fully baked version of Honeycomb, much less CyanogenMod, etc. ROMs. I personally, don't have any desire to put Honeycomb on my phone. It's interface just doesn't seem like it would work well there (size issues aside). The real fear is that, as has been noted, that Google is misinterpreting the reasons for the success of Android phones. Techies are the people who started promoting Android because of its openness to being "customized" vs. the locked down system in iOS (iPhone/iPad, no launchers, no live backgrounds, no widgets, no keyboards, etc. because they affect the "iOS experience"). We recommend products to our friends. I, personally, have been directly responsible for at least 10 Android phone/tablet purchases (vs. Blackberry or iPhone). And these people have told their friends, etc. IMO, THAT is what is driving Android's current success. Our family has 4 Android devices (DroidX, 2x Fascinate, Nook Color) and will add one more as soon as there is a choice of dual core phones on Verizon. I got them BECAUSE of their openness, NOT because of the "experience". BECAUSE of their openness, I can create/refine the experience *I* want through Launcher Pro and other apps. The same with my family. They can make it work the way that works best for THEM. Not be limited to what Steve Jobs and Co. think things should work (yes, their stuff does work well, but it isn't MINE). My read on what Google is saying is, "We're thinking of locking things down because the carriers want us to to better lock their customers into their services and view of how a phone should work AND because we're jonesing for some iPhone $'s. So we are doing this to see if there will be that much outrage (i.e. we can get away with it)." Already it is taking WAY too long for the manufacturers/carriers to put out updated versions of Android on phones/tablets that easily have the hardware to handle them (e.g. Verizon: Droid, DroidX, Droid 2, Droid Incredible, Fascinate, etc.). With this move, I can only see things getting worse. Frankly, at this point, if I can get an unlocked boot loader, I would happily pay $15 or so (preferably a one time fee or I MIGHT consider a lower annual fee) to get access to timely (within, say, 2 months of release AND fully baked) OS updates for the two years (OK, 20 mo. before I'm eligible for upgrade on Verizon, 2 yrs before I can leave) I'm contractually obligated to my current phone. With the kind of model I'm thinking of, even if there were some flaws in the OS updates, the devs would get those worked out in short order and fixed quickly. As Google has gotten bigger and more powerful, they are forgetting their roots AND the reason they have been successful. They are making a good bit of money and having a lot of success because of their openness. I hope they don't go down that path and let "absolute power corrupt absolutely". PLEASE Google, reconsider!
  • If you think that the millions of Android devices that have been sold around the world is the result of a small handfull of nerds on a website touting to the online world 'openness', 'ROMs', and 'customizable' you're sorely mistaken. The success of Android is because of a few key phrases outlined in commercials and other advertisements... "with Google", "Google experience", and "full Google integration". The world knows who/what Google is. The world knows about Gmail, Google Search, Google Maps, Google Calendar, and Google Docs. The world doesn't know (or care) about "ROMs", "Open-Source", "UI Customization", or "CyanogenMod". This decision on Google's Android OS is commendable and will have no ill-effect on the success of Android. If Android Central and other Android "geek-swarm" websites didn't exist - millions of people would still be using Android. Sucks for you guys, but the rest of the world will still 'get it'.
  • Yes, Android has it's momentum now. However, in the days of Android 1.x, primarily the techies were using Android. This was even so when Eclair was first released. Eclair was the first version that was good enough for non-techies to use and techies started letting their non-techy friends know about it. Regardless of how you want to attribute Android's growth, it is still the customizability and apps of Android that attracts users. This is primarily the difference between Android and the iPhone and why someone would choose Android. Most non-techies do not know anything about Google other than they search for stuff on it. "Google experience", etc. have no meaning for them (other than it means something related to Google, the huge search engine company. I disagree that places like Android Central are only of interest to techies. The fact is that, IMO, if someone is looking at a smartphone rather than a "dumbphone", then they are at least somewhat technically inclined (or Mac fans looking for a phone/ipod/ipad combo). Just take a look at the spread between high-end and low-end Android phone sales. There isn't a comparison, even though they nominally provide the same experience. Perhaps we will just have to agree to disagree?
  • The manufacturers already have access to the source code., It seems like Google wants to make Honeycomb their "baby". Mark my words, this is only the beginning. It seems they want to follow in the path of a certain crazily popular tablet that begins with an i. I believe this is how they think they can duplicate that success, by controlling the "experience". We have accepted the long over due updates on Android. We have endured the wild wild west feeling of the Android Marketplace. We deal with these things because we love Android and it's openness. So we are willing to live with the risks and inconsistencies that come with an open platform. So, if this is how it's gonna be, I don't want to have to wait 6 months for the latest version of the OS. I don't want to have to worry about an app store, where I have to worry about downloading a malicious app that shows up at the top of the list in a search in the marketplace. Google, you can not have it both ways. Okay, I will stop with my rant. I said in an earlier post, that these companies have no personal loyalty to us...But man, I hope Google does the right thing here and return some of the loyalty their faithful have shown them over the last few years, that is responsible for skyrocketing them to the throne...PEACE!!!!
  • Well there goes my dream of having Honeycomb on my wooted Gtab. LOL.
  • I agree, the whole goal of buying a G-Tablet was to establish ownership of a product that had a future through rooting. Its a shame but at least its part of Cyanogen(Mod) development.
  • I say that this could be a good test to see if it will be more successful closed source then maybe later release the code to see if it helps the platform or the reason developers don't make quality apps like they do the iPhone.
  • http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/
  • That excuse is BS!!!What manufacturer has ever been proactive and released an android version before it was ready and fully baked....that's right none. I agree that if google is going to change the change the ability to customize android and make it open to community and developers, why get it over ios?? I can just see it now..Samsung releases Honeycomb on the galaxy s 2 phones not sanctioned by google...Yea right
  • Uh, wasn't it Samsung that released a tablet with Android 2.2 when Google said that Froyo wasn't optimized for tablets and SHOULD NOT be used as such? And you don't think they'd try to shoe-horn Honeycomb into a phone? I say good for Google for finally putting its foot down on something instead of allowing all forms of bastardization. I don't think the open source community of developers will be left out in the cold forever.
  • They put Froyo on a tablet because they wanted to get into the tablet market and Windows on tablets was and is a total flop. No one in their right mind would try to put Honeycomb on a phone. It needs a big screen, and there are plenty of other versions of Android to put on phones. On the other hand, there are a lot of OEMs that would put it on crappy tablets. Maybe that's why Google is holding out. It sucks, though. I was thinking I might hack it on my Galaxy Tab, because that's probably the only way the Tab is getting tablet apps.
  • Preach it Jerry! This is utter crap. Makes AT&T's "4G" look good.
  • Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization. While we're excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones. Until then, we've decided not to release Honeycomb to open source. We're committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it's ready. To me that says it will happen, its just not ready yet.
  • If it's ready enough for a commercially available device, it's ready to be released.
  • A commercially available device with a lot of issues (hardware and software wise, which, some hardware is because of the software [ie, SD cards]) doesn't mean something is ready to be released - it means it was rushed and obviously had the bottom $$ in mind and not the user-experience.
  • Let them do what they have to do. I understand your side Jerry completely, but I understand where Google is coming from as well. I'm guessing we wont see the AOSP till 3.1 drops, which is fine if it's refined and supports smartphones. This is Google's attempt at keeping things under control. We all want the AOSP just to tweak; I want it too. But it's quite obvious that Google is thinking about the average consumer and wants to keep the experience better, not buggy. The Xoom was pretty much to get their foot in the door; even a developer's device. Everything after they probably want working much smoother and want to translate the experience to their smartphones.
  • I'm with you all the way. Wanted a Xoom, was probably going to get a Xoom. Now, I'm getting an iPad or Playbook.
  • good riddance. anyone who thinks that closed iOS is better then closed android should be ashamed of themselves. you won't buy an ipad, you're just whining because you didn't get your way. same with the author of this article - it's really really pathetic if you ask me. it'll be opened eventually, you'll just have to wait, sorry babies.
  • I like open source too, but they have a point. Huawai Ascend is a good example, that thing can't even run 2.2, but it was launched with it and it's a horrible user experience.
  • IMO, and to paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Crap is as crap does." I find it hard to believe that Google really is all that concerned that manufacturers of, frankly, pretty poor quality hardware that apparently only sells online because its user experience is, as you noted, poor. I can't imagine that they account for more than 1% of total sales and are probably much less. Reputable manufacturers aren't making that mistake. Sure, while Froyo (or Eclair, for that matter) wasn't optimized for tablets, that didn't stop the reputable manufacturers from producing tablets that, IMO, have provided a nice user experience (Galaxy Tab, Nook Color, etc.). At best, I think it is a specious argument. At worst, they are hiding their true intentions as this article (and others here) has pointed out.
  • I understand what you're saying but is the average consumer going to be flashing hacking community honeycomb ROMs on their unsupported phones? Let the advanced user community do what they want while the 95% of the population that makes up the "average consumer" not even know that the source has been released or what a custom ROM even is.
  • I still plan on buying some tablet. Sometime down the road. Disappointed to see this thought emerging in the mind of Android developers, but man.. those tablets look reaaallly nice.
  • engadget's coverage of the same article with another google exerpt: http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/24/google-keeping-honeycomb-source-code-... Damn you Catpcha! Everything I post is not SPAM!
  • Ya know, I was looking forward to picking up one of the Wi Fi Xoom tabs when they go on sale, but I think I'll have to pass after this. The whole incentive for buying it is gone. Same thing for any others than run Honeycomb-no longer want them.
  • Google's motto: Do No Evil
  • Blah, blah, blah, blah blah blah,blah (google). New source probably is not full java. Considering law suits. Time to let the Sun shine OUT... lol
  • I agree with Jerry, I love linux & I love open source. The day that Google decided to go closed source, I'm OUT! Open source has great value to me I am much happier with my CyanogenMod 7 HTC Hero that with the 2.1 Android that it got stuck at, which I understand. I don't expect HTC to update the phone forever, that's business. Android started out open sourced and it better stay that way otherwise my choice becomes; Closed source Android vs. Apple vs. WebOS. Also, I tried the Xoom at Best Buy and it was nice but with very little app support I am not running out to get one. So, as far as I am concerned Google can keep that. I will continue to love my CM7 Nook Color tethered to my CM7 Hero. Stay on em Jerry!
  • While I can understand Google's stance on this somewhat - there have been more than enough examples of badly implemented Android in the past - even from the "big" ones like Samsung or Motorola - this isn't really sitting well with me. Especially because it gives the big and powerful - Samsung, LG, Motorola a clear advantage over smaller upstarting companies like Notion Ink, who're screwed if they can't provide the new and shiny Honeycomb on their tablets as well.
  • :(
  • Its alright. Im getting a Flyer.
  • What about the small devs that make the user experience BETTER????????
  • I have a feeling a leak will bust this dam wide open soon enough- regardless of Google's desires.
  • Jerry Hildenbrand, Get the fuck off this site. Go back to Slashdot with the rest of the 15 year olds screaming about "possible GPL violation!!!" and "release teh source!!!". "A heartbroken Android evangelist" Oh god...what a fucking joke.
  • I think I'll stay. I can tell you're a fan, who should I make this 8x10 out to?
  • "I think I'll stay." I'll told you TO GET THE FUCK OFF THIS SITE you dimwitted little punk. Go post your idiotic crap on Slashdot.
  • Anybody that isn't upset by this should get off this site. There is something you can do Jerry. Don't buy a Honeycomb tablet. Looks like Ice Cream is where the fun is.
  • @Hooters: hey, here is a good idea asshole. dont talk shit. simple as that. -WINNNING WINNNNNINNNNG!
  • Jerry, In all seriousness, i loved your comeback. P.S...It's always a pleasure to read your posts and watch your videos. Much appreciation for all of your work and contributions on here. Thanks.
  • You know, the GPL is not a joke. Many thousands of people have contributed millions of hours of their time making GPL'ed code that Google gets to use for free and it is very much the authors' right to insist that the license is obeyed. So yes, there are legit issues with GPL compliance if Google does not release certain Android source code. There are, however, parts that they are entitled to not release- and that would make life difficult for those who want to "port" Android Linux releases to different devices. Personally, I think it would be a HUGE mistake for Google to go down the "let's start closing as much as we can" path. Google would not exist without Linux and other GPL'ed software (it runs most of their hundreds of thousands of servers, for free, and enabled them to be competitive and innovative). Android would not exist without Linux and other GPL'ed software.
  • Ummm...Apple exists, doesn't it?
  • if(apple != google)you=idiot;
  • While Apple might exist without open source software, OS-X and iOS would not exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) -Andy in indy
  • LOOK AT WHAT YOU DID, GOOGLE! You made Jerry cry...
  • I find Google's reasoning incoherent: 'no code because developers will try to put it on a phone and create a bad user experience'. What developer creates a ROM for a bad user experience? The only reasons developers tinker are for fun, and to try to IMPROVE the user experience. If Google loudly and clearly states that HC is for tablet only,why should they care if some bonehead ignores them and creates a Frakenphone?!? Are they really concerned about the dozen guys that may do this? No; there is clearly something else going on here IMO.
  • Agreed...the average Android user will not know how to put Honeycomb on their device. And those that do, know what to expect. Google made a bad decision here...o well...life...goes...on...
  • i'm an average user readin this article. if this move means apps on a par with the ipad then great. i have a tab and i am waiting for honeycomb to arrive. if this move kills the tab and stifles the possibilities of android tablets in general then as soon as apple release a smaller version of the ipad (which will happen sooner or later) then i'm defecting. hurry up honeycomb for the tab!
  • Normally I'd play the Devils advocate but on this one I gotta ride the band wagon. Given the amount of crap apps that flood android and ever constant change and fragmentation why in gods name would I choose Google over apple when it comes to my tablet purchase? If I can't root it and put on a custom ROM I would rather have a stable, proprietary platform that is hugely supported by quality developers with a larger market for accessories and applications. Google if you are reading these if you are gonna go closed source than make a GOOGLE TABLET and cut out these companies like moto or Samsung all together. At least that way I don't have to deal with the crap they add to the OS and not be able to remove/ change to get the OS's true potential.
  • I wouldn't mind seeing something like a 7" Chrome OS tab to be a portable tie in with the CR-48 Chrome Notebook
  • It probably makes sense that Google do this to keep other 'lesser' tablet manufacturers at bay but at the same time it kind of makes me wish that I hadn't actually purchased a Xoom.... That's the first time I've ever said that...
    I'm sure the AOSP will be released sometime in the future and in the mean time I'm still loving stock HC. We will just have to see how long that feeling lasts
  • Not a good move Google. All I can do is not buy the honeycomb tablet I was going to buy this summer. If I wanted to be treated like a stupid child that can't make an intelligent decision on the products I buy and needs to be spoon fed, I would buy Apple products. Let the crap products get made and the people that buy them deserve what they get.
  • So the flyer won't be getting honerycomb?
  • Meh. I wasn't planning to buy a tablet until Xmas anyway. By then we should have a decent selection of reasonably priced Android tablets to choose from, maybe even running IceCream. If not, there's always the iSad2.
  • I really could care less about tablets, but my fear is that this happens on the mobile phone platform too. I wonder what "I"ce-cream will be like on the EVO 3D?
  • Honestly, the opposition to this is ridiculous. To me it is perfectly logical. They rushed it out for the tablet but haven't updated the software or SDK to work well with phones yet. I mean, it's not like your tablet won't be updated to "I" which will have the source code released. The only reason that phones are on gingerbread and tablets on honeycomb is because they had to run separate development paths to maintain a deadline. Google does not want to have two separate operating systems long term, they will eventually make it so the os reformats itself depending on the screen size. At that point, it will be released as a good user experience is more likely when put on random devices.
  • Couldn't agree with you more. Lord, the android community is sooo freakin' quick to throw stomp-their-feet, storm-outta-the-room, slam-the-door, hissy fits. And they'll even do it without complete information or on mere rumors. Guys, I luv ya, but get a grip!
  • I think I understand: Manufacturers have taken an OS that's NOT meant for tablets and used them on phones with lack luster results. I used a Dell Streak 5 and a Galaxy Tab. Both units were laggy and painful to use. My friend who owned the Streak 5 (got it as a demo from Dell) is a huge iPhone supporter. His whole perception of Android was based on the Dell's performance (he was amazed at how fast my MT4G was, and see's Android in a better light). So Google has a valid concern about someone putting HC on a phone and destroying the image Android is building, and the reputation it's gaining in the market. Google has to be looking at the big picture here. No where did I read that they would NEVER release the source for future OS's.. they just took a short cut (not merging the phone and Tab OS's) and don't want to muddy the waters too much yet. I get it, but look forward to seeing the source released for the masses to tinker as Google intended.
  • Wow that's pretty terrible news if it's true. If Google doesn't want Android to be open then so be it but don't not release source and then say you're completely committed to keeping Android an open source project. I was really looking forward to see what the community of developers were going to put together for the Nook Color when they got their hands on the source. Considering what they've already done with the SDK preview it's pretty impressive. Looks like we're all going to have to stick with SDK hack/ports.
  • I was going to pick up a tab. but if Google is going to go down this road, then I'll just keep my money. Other companies thank you Google for my money!
  • I understand that they were upset when manufacturers put Froyo on Tablets, as it was optimized for phones. But since phones are sold through carriers, couldn't they just work something out with the carriers to not offer/support phones with Honeycomb? Its not like anyone is buying a phone w/out a network.
    I realize that the developer/mod community might still do it, but they hardly need protecting from Google.
  • if they really cared about the user experience, they wouldn't allow OEM skins...
  • What this likely means is t