Still, I’m intrigued as an analyst and potentially excited as a consumer. More on the why later, but as a hint it’s got very little to do with technology. Before I get there we have questions. We being the folks debating the news in #redmonk this afternoon.
The one I really can’t figure out is this: how did Google (and friends) manage to build a “complete mobile phone software stack” built on the GPL licensed “open Linux Kernel” that’s itself licensed under the “commercial-friendly” Apache v2 license that protects would-be adopters from the “from the ‘viral infection’ problem.” Before you ask, yes that’s a direct quote, and yes I think using it is an exceptionally poor decision. I expected more from you, Google.
Also, Java. Is Android built on Java, as this Times article and Jonathan’s blog claims? If so, why is that technology conspicuously absent from the Open Handset Alliance site? And if we assume the Times and Schwartz – fairly reputable sources both – have it correct, again, the licensing question. Last I checked Java was firmly committed to the GPL camp, and not on great terms with Apache licenses.
So inquiring minds want to know: how does all of this work?
Google’s got enough lawyers to populate a small country, so I’m quite sure there’s a logical and legal explanation, but a number of us are curious as to what – precisely – that is.
Any answers appreciated.