Google implemented remote kill switch in Android, those rascals
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Oct 16th 2008 7:33AM
posted Oct 16th 2008 7:33AM
"Google may discover a product that violates the developer distribution agreement ... in such an instance, Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your device at its sole discretion"Google then claims that it will make "reasonable efforts to recover the purchase price of the product ... from the original developer on your behalf." This on top of the Android Market's policy which allows you to "return" (er, how, it's electronic?) any application within 24 hours for a full refund. Aw shucks Google, come over here and give us a hug.
iPhone.
Don't like this crap. Stay outta my stuff, every company.
This is an Apple vs oranges argument. Google will allow non-Market applications to be installed with the tick of a box, whereas with the iPhone you need to jailbreak or you are restricted to the App store. Google is only reserving the right to protect its less-savvy users within the Market but it also allows enthusiasts to do whatever they want. Not evil.
Tick here: http://content.zdnet.com/2346-17932_22-240708-184.html
You're absolutely right. And I'm getting tired of this misinformation.
The kill switch is only for apps downloaded directly through the App Store- er, "Android Marketplace". You absolutely have the right and ability to download and install apps outside of this service, and Google and your carrier can't do a damn thing about it.
More importantly, this kill switch has several guidelines. If people bothered to read the article, they'd notice that the kill switch will only be used if the app violates the developer guidelines. This means that the app will be killed if it turns out to be malware. The kill switch is for nothing more than damage control and covering one's own ass.
The Apple app store has a vetting process where submitted apps undergo some sort of approval process, making the kill switch unnecessary for the iphone (yet they still have it in place for some reason). However, the Android marketplace has no such vetting process, and apps uploaded to the marketplace are instantly available. This creates the potential problem where some unscrupulous developers may use the massive distribution network to install evil software (malware, spyware, etc) onto many devices. The kill switch would allow Google to pull the plug on this before too many phones become infected.
Furthermore, Google has been open and forward about this kill switch- hell, they themselves announced it. Unlike Apple, they haven't tried to hide this functionality.
Nothing sinister here. Go back to work.
I almost forgot to mention...
Google has stated in its agreement that the kill switch will be only used if the developer distribution agreement was violated.
Apple can use their kill switch on a whim.
Big difference.
if cornelius is right, and google have been clear about what app behavior will make them use said kill switch, then its the direct opposite of apple, in that apple is not clear about what will make them ban a app or not.
sounds like a good set up to me. sure i would be a little worried with them being able to do stuff to my phone remotely, but i would appreciate it if they saved me from a program that would harm my phone.
its like SkyNet.
"Im from the Future"
Now, I may discover a product that has a built-in plans for violation of my ownership rights. In such an instance, I retain thee right to stay as remote as possible from said products at my sole discretion. I will then make a reasonable effort to purchase a competing product.
Honestly, if Google is to promote an "open" platform, they could do better then that. And no i'm far from iPhone fan, same crap. but you know, there are two other systems on the market (WinMo and Symbian) that while lackign somewhere at least threat me with some respect. I mean holy baby, if the application turns out to be malicious, I dont need Big Brother taking control, I need the darned "delete" button, what's in that is so hard to understand for'em, that I'm no brainless imbecile?
As for "nothing sinister", if I am to take your thing and do what I (not YOU) think is right with it, clearly doing it openly or covertly changes the definition of offence, but doesnt make it legit either way.
Feh, it's not in Google's nature to use it.