That's not exactly what "open" means. In this context, it is open to phone manufacturers; the application platform is quite restricted (basically, JAVA).
Also, nowhere does "open" mean disallowing restrictions for 3rd party apps. A typical Linux system, for instance, has pretty strict restrictions on what specific applications can do (for instance, the BIND name service typically runs with privileges that are unique to it, but which prevents it from touching files/resources that is owned by the system).
There is nothing that says the "open" Android platform could not have a mandatory (rather than optional) restriction of network access.
“The general size and shape certainly calls forth memories of the Centro, but while the previous version was chunky and playful, the Pixi comes off more like its distant cousin... from the year 3000.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
That's not exactly what "open" means. In this context, it is open to phone manufacturers; the application platform is quite restricted (basically, JAVA).
Also, nowhere does "open" mean disallowing restrictions for 3rd party apps. A typical Linux system, for instance, has pretty strict restrictions on what specific applications can do (for instance, the BIND name service typically runs with privileges that are unique to it, but which prevents it from touching files/resources that is owned by the system).
There is nothing that says the "open" Android platform could not have a mandatory (rather than optional) restriction of network access.