Avoiding the mistakes of Android in Chrome

I've long been a fan of open-source technology.  I am often deeply frustrated by the proprietary approach taken by some manufacturers and I quickly become annoyed when confronted with situations where my freedom of choice is constrained.

Sure, I'm a Windows user but that doesn't mean that I'm happy about it.

I loathe the digital rights management (DRM) systems that prevent me

G-RRR-RRRR

from playing my music on any device of my choosing.  I detest the region locking that prevents me from playing optical media from other countries.  I avoid music distribution services that require me to install their database for storing digital copies of those tracks.  I simply refuse to patronise services or product ranges that impose these draconian constraints on my right to choose.  

"I am not a number, I am a free man" . . .

Now that I've got that out of the way, let me add that although I celebrate the free spirit of open source, I also appreciate that it is not without its own problems.

Android is bloated and slowing down

Take Android for instance.  Manfacturers, phone service providers can and do customise the hell out of this operating system.  The end result is a complete mess.  New releases of Android from Google are vanilla offerings but because the phone manufacturer or the service provider insists on adding a pile of custom fixes, it can take months before it's rolled out to the customer base.  When it does appear it's weighed down with bloat and in dire need of a diet.  For older devices where the providers are no longer interested in support, that next release may never become available.  

Chromium versus Chrome

Google seems keen to avoid this quagmire with their other faster, slicker, all-round more promising offering, the Chrome operating system.   With Chrome, Google will have control over source code and any changes made to it.  That all sounds rather proprietary, don't you think?  Well, yes it is but here's the difference.  Google will maintain control over the Chrome offering but they will provide an open-source version as Chromium.   Positive changes made by the community to Chromium may well be adopted officially into Chrome but some of the more hare-brained customisations will not be allowed to pollute the pure version.

That to me sounds like a great way to go.   So what will catch on, Chrome or Chromium?  Clearly Google will throw plenty of money at Chrome whereas some equally cash-rich manufacturers and providers may favour the flexibility that the Chromium alternative offers.

It will be very interesting to watch how the two stables co-exist in this fascinating technology space.

Chrome versus Chromium - what's the difference

Google Chrome likely to replace Android

African cell

Non-rigid airships (Blimps) to carry wireless signals in Africa 

Google is reported to be setting up a very exciting project in sub-Saharan Africa.  Rather than wear the huge cost of building cellular networks across vast (sometimes war-torn) land masses Google is using Blimps (non-rigid airships) to carry the wireless signals needed for a mobile network.

The devices will of course be Android, primarily low spec phones rather than the latest and greatest.  The radio frequencies will be harvested from so-called white space TV channels - frequencies normally reserved for TV but not actually in use in these countries.

Does Google want to compete with the likes of Vodafone in these emerging markets?  Hard to say but there are millions of potential new customers out there and it looks like their first encounter with mobile technology is going to be Android.

Blimps to carry wireless signals in Africa (Wired)

Google's Blimp network (theRegister)

Google at Rose Cottage

Give your old accounts closure

Great to see that Google is trying to be a good corporate citizen by providing the ability to choose what happens to your accounts after your death (or after any extended period of inactivity).  All configurable through the Google Inactive Account Manager. People are already dubbing it Google Death.

Obsolete accounts clutter up vast arrays of storage and the problem can only get worse as more people go online.

I'm sure this is not just about customer needs.  Look at it from the provider's perspective.  Google has introduced any number of tools over the years and some of those have now been killed off.  There's been a good deal of spring cleaning of late at Googleplex, California, with the likes of Google Reader and Google Wave either retired or put on noticed.  Once the tools are gone then the accounts that used them are redundant, too.

I wonder if other giants, like Facebook will also come to the party and remove accounts that are no longer active. I fear that they will be less enthusiastic where their business revolves around having the biggest user base in the social media community, even if some of those accounts belong to people who have long since shuffled of this mortal coil.

Spring clean evolution

Managing the digital afterlife (NZ Herald)

Setting up the Google Inactive Account Manager (Cnet)

Google introduces the Inactive Account Manager (eWeek)

Facebook doesn't deactivate inactive accounts

Cleaning up a Facebook account to remove inactive friends (eHow)

Euphemisms for the inevitable end

Stewed apple

Eye catching headline from Henry Cooke on Stuff.co.nz

When I see a headline like this I'm always going to read it.  In this instance I see a lot of merit in what Henry Cooke is saying in his article.

Google can do the things that Apple does best - but faster.

I love that he points out how the best search engine, the best map service and many other apps that we take for granted belong to Google, not Apple.

So, even if Apple build in some fab functionality, chances are that in no time at all Google will be doing it too, plus all the mainstay functions we need come from the same stable.

A merciless industry, for sure.