Hahaha, it’s always fun to find rude people who are wrong. “Android is a trademark of Google LLC. It is used to refer to the operating system and related products developed by Google”. /e/OS is based on LineageOS, which is itself based on AOSP. The fact he differentiated /e/OS to Android does make sense, since Android refers to the stock version, which is cluttered with Google stuff.
If only your knew AOSP itself stands for Android open source Project. And since „Googles” Android is based on AOSP too, and dosent do much except adding modules to the root system, an Android system with Google Framework added is still just as much an android system as an AOSP system is if I added Seedvault to its root environment.
In other words, Googles Android is still based on AOSP, so something based on AOSP is still as much Android as something based on googles fork of ANDROID.
But let’s view it from a slang standpoint:
Since, as far as I can tell, your view of what is AOSP and what is android is based on if its Root environment was modified.
If we look at it that way, Samsung’s OneUI is not Android, too. Xiaomis whatever is not Android too. But still people are calling Samsung an android phone. Same as with everything else.
Also, your use of Patent Laws to determine what is and isn’t called what is completely unsolicited, since it is completely unable to catch many cases such as AOSP, WHICH BTW HAS EXISTED BEFORE GOOGLE BOUGHT IT.
So your „ummm, akschually” response doesn’t only make you a shill for the corrupt patent laws which are not only discouraging innovation, but oppressing indie teams making the said innovation, such as in the case Palworld, but your answer dosent even take the current social usage of what is and Isn’t android into consideration.
This thread is like the Simpsons gag blowing dust off the book title “How to cook [for(ty)] humans”, except everyone’s an asshole and I also learned several things. Upvotes all around!!
Super cool story bro. Doesn’t change the fact that everyone immediately knew what OP was talking about, where as you prefer to keep everything obscure.
I am well aware of what AOSP stands for, but what you say doesn’t really make sense. OneUI, MIUI, etc are all derivatives of Google’s Android i.e. all come with Google Play Services installed as a system app. So, however you might frame it, it is still in fact a sensible thing to use the term “Android” to refer to “Stock Android” with Google when talking about these topics. Moreover, this is also very useful to make it clear to people who are not aware of the intricacies of AOSP how some operating systems DO NOT depend on Google services. You can see this being used by companies like Tutanota on how to “Degoogle your life”. The simply put, as a replacement for Android, CalyxOS, /e/OS, LineageOS, etc.
Despite these being AOSP based ROMs, using Android to refer to google based systems and AOSP to refer to independent ROMs that do not come with Google Play Services by default is VERY useful to make the point come accross. If you don’t believe me, look at any popular news media source that talks about GrapheneOS, for example.
PD: I still believe the fact that Android is a patented trademark of Google gives validity to the expression, regardless of how one might feel about patent law.
Removed by mod
Didn’t know that. It’s always been marketed as its own separate OS. Thanks for being an asshole!
Thanks
/e/ is a degoogled fork of Android, just like Calyx or Graphene.
Thanks for educating and not berating
Hahaha, it’s always fun to find rude people who are wrong. “Android is a trademark of Google LLC. It is used to refer to the operating system and related products developed by Google”. /e/OS is based on LineageOS, which is itself based on AOSP. The fact he differentiated /e/OS to Android does make sense, since Android refers to the stock version, which is cluttered with Google stuff.
If only your knew AOSP itself stands for Android open source Project. And since „Googles” Android is based on AOSP too, and dosent do much except adding modules to the root system, an Android system with Google Framework added is still just as much an android system as an AOSP system is if I added Seedvault to its root environment.
In other words, Googles Android is still based on AOSP, so something based on AOSP is still as much Android as something based on googles fork of ANDROID.
But let’s view it from a slang standpoint:
Since, as far as I can tell, your view of what is AOSP and what is android is based on if its Root environment was modified.
If we look at it that way, Samsung’s OneUI is not Android, too. Xiaomis whatever is not Android too. But still people are calling Samsung an android phone. Same as with everything else.
Also, your use of Patent Laws to determine what is and isn’t called what is completely unsolicited, since it is completely unable to catch many cases such as AOSP, WHICH BTW HAS EXISTED BEFORE GOOGLE BOUGHT IT.
So your „ummm, akschually” response doesn’t only make you a shill for the corrupt patent laws which are not only discouraging innovation, but oppressing indie teams making the said innovation, such as in the case Palworld, but your answer dosent even take the current social usage of what is and Isn’t android into consideration.
Serious question, does being rude make you feel better?
This thread is like the Simpsons gag blowing dust off the book title “How to cook [for(ty)] humans”, except everyone’s an asshole and I also learned several things. Upvotes all around!!
To be honest, im kinda into torturing others, so that could be Kind of my other fetish to be honest
So you’re putting your fetish on others without their consent? Gross.
Its less of a fetisch, and more just an urge. Its just my Psychosis, I guess
Super cool story bro. Doesn’t change the fact that everyone immediately knew what OP was talking about, where as you prefer to keep everything obscure.
I am well aware of what AOSP stands for, but what you say doesn’t really make sense. OneUI, MIUI, etc are all derivatives of Google’s Android i.e. all come with Google Play Services installed as a system app. So, however you might frame it, it is still in fact a sensible thing to use the term “Android” to refer to “Stock Android” with Google when talking about these topics. Moreover, this is also very useful to make it clear to people who are not aware of the intricacies of AOSP how some operating systems DO NOT depend on Google services. You can see this being used by companies like Tutanota on how to “Degoogle your life”. The simply put, as a replacement for Android, CalyxOS, /e/OS, LineageOS, etc. Despite these being AOSP based ROMs, using Android to refer to google based systems and AOSP to refer to independent ROMs that do not come with Google Play Services by default is VERY useful to make the point come accross. If you don’t believe me, look at any popular news media source that talks about GrapheneOS, for example.
PD: I still believe the fact that Android is a patented trademark of Google gives validity to the expression, regardless of how one might feel about patent law.
How old are you? Should you be in class or something?