Gruber is good at this kind of snark, but I think his point backfires in this case.

Sure, executing five command line operations and rooting your phone is more of a pain in the ass than doing nothing. But if I was stuck using a Cliq XT as my daily phone (certainly would never happen, but let's just suppose), then I really would be sitting there saying, in earnest and without irony, "Well, luckily Android is 'open' and I can fix this."

But I'm not actually sure if rooting and upgrading your Cliq XT is really that easy, or if Gruber is just taking Andy Rubin's tweet out of context to make today's snarky little if-technologically-handicapped-people-can't-understand-it-then-it-sucks point.

Translation: Android users are at the mercy of hardware manufacturers and carriers.

So are iPhone users. The difference being that Apple has shown a track record of updating their older phones, while Motorola is developing a track record of the opposite.

There's nothing stopping a manufacturer from developing a good track record with an Android phone, but so far most haven't. Developing such a reputation could be a strong competitive advantage for someone making Android phones.

Agree with you. Someone should step up their game when it comes to updating their older phones.

Apple can do that with the iPhone and Google can do it with their Nexus models probably because they don't release a bazillion different phone models in a year (like HTC/Motorola/etc...).

so, what would be the advantage of being "open"?

There are many advantages of being "open", but being "open" is not a good substitute for having the manufacturer keep the phone up to date.

I read it as the opposite: Android users can update their software regardless of what their manufacturer does.

I think you missed the irony. Such a small percentage of people will ever type something into a terminal that it's irrelevant.

Even more that command would not give you the ability to reflash your phone.

You would still have to root it and get a rom that works on that model.

All that really means is that most people don't really care that much about the number buried way deep in their phone's Settings menus.

Yeah, but they do care when the app they want to use won't work on their phone because their software is too old.

What does being open have to do with Motorola not updating one of their phones?

Being open means that someone technically proficient could then update it themselves. Gruber is arguing that most users aren't that proficient, so being open doesn't compensate well for a manufacturer, like Motorola, failing to update their phones themselves.

I get that. But Motorola being incompetent doesn't mean being open is not advantageous - which is what the article seems to imply. Would you blame C++ if someone uses C++ incorrectly?

Take for example CyanogenMod - the guys involved in the project don't get paid by any of the manufacturers, but they are able to build ROMs that can run on a host of devices while providing a consistent stock-Android user experience. How is that for being open.

List of devices with nightly CM7 (Gingerbread) builds: http://mirror.teamdouche.net/?type=nightly

I agree with you but I think you miss part of the argument. Yes there's a very small number of users who are that proficient but even those who are would have spend a monstrous amount of time to update the phone and make sure it works. Time built creating something that people will discard a year from now when they buy a new phone.

i.e. Don't trust Motorola to update their phones.

What do you mean? We should "trust" Apple instead?

Trust them to update the software on their own phones? Yes i trust them to do that, especially for the current model which is more than i can say for a lot of Android OEMs.

And trust them to take the software away as well...

Yet another straw man post. He's identified a poor update and then claimed that you need to check out the android sources in order for the advantages of openess to become apparent. In reality I know people who aren't programmers or IT people particularly install cyanogenmod on their phones.

This post comes across as a fairly passive-aggressive attack, or a snarky child. I don't know why people rate Gruber's posts. I haven't found his analysis to be particularly insightful. He is usually clear in communicating his feelings about an issue and for that I'd give him credit. But whats the point in reading a clearly communicated thought if its effectively, "I dislike Android, and I intend to bad mouth anything related to Android at any possible opportunity."

CyanogenMod to the rescue?

That comment came from Rubin in the context of Jobs completely botching up the definition of "open-ness". Yet another out of context reference just to be an utter douche. He's been that way ever since Google went after Apple during 2010 IO.

What's his point? it's just the usual passive-aggressive dickishness, I don't understand who keeps upvoting this drivel.

You don’t get jokes, do you? This is definitely not HN material but it is also not drivel.