This article blows chunks. Here are some of my favourite moments;
"The reaction from the Android user and developer community has been significant — emotion is running high."
<rant>
Yes, emotions are flying across the Interwebs. Router and Firewall ACL's indicate a spike in android emoticons. :o(
</rant>
"Others are laying the case that Google should not sue this developer but rather hire him to work for Google."
<rant>
This is a new idea, or not. Maybe Cyanogen can be appointed the new Android Czar.
</rant>
"What you think of “MOD-ing” might vary depending on where you sit and from where you draw your income."
<rant>
I think the author struck a nerve here. I hope he does not mind if I use portions of his article in my next publication. I think ill just change a word, or two.
</rant>
"When code at this level is modified, you cannot simply download an
application to the device and casually install it — you must re-flash
your device with an “image” of the code because low-level drivers must
be installed. Doing this means getting low-level control over the
device — often called “rooting” the device."
<r00t>
31337
</r00t>
"If a release turns a device into a brick or a new feature is requested,
the open source programmer can fix the code, add the feature, and then
re-release the code."
<rant>
Sweet, I just bricked my phone. Dont they call it a brick for a reason? This sounds like an excellent SDLC. "Sorry I bricked your phone" says the developer, "Don't worry, someone else will fix it."
</rant>
"He even included the new Android Market application — before Google did."
<rant>
Whoops! This new feature must have not been in the test document.
</rant>
"Some will find the boundaries too much and they will go UNDERGROUND."
<rant>
Underground is just one of those words that sounds kewl when you say it.
</rant>
"I don’t even mind if Google generates an obscene (legal) profit."
<rant>
Are you telling me that Google is actually making money? Not only are they making money, but obscene profits. NICE....
</rant>
"Can Google succeed commercially by protecting their interests and at the same time keep Android open source?"
<rant>
Can the author please get over it? Open Source has its place.
</rant>