Ethan Grimes
Well-known member
I am not sure if your statement is entirely true. The word "Bloatware" carries strong negative connotation. You can claim it doesn't mean good or bad for you, but it means bad for most people who use the word.
Yes, Google is in it for money, there is nothing wrong with that, there is also nothing wrong with people pointing that out and voice their objection to this head-first diving in to everything google without careful examination, much like the cult of apple. Did you see that Google Nexus Poem in another thread?
The trend of development at Google as a company is to lock users into their rapid expanding services, and now begin to sell users' information for profit. I do not think its ever a good thing to let one company monopolize my life, and I am grateful there are quality alternatives out there.
I understand that bloatware carries a strong connotation, what I was pointing out was more that the negative connotation isn't necessary. The Op was interested in vanilla android and I wanted to put the idea in mind that despite many claiming "bloatware" is bad, to not simply fall in that mindset but to put it in mind that bloatware is just additional and different software. It's a minor point though.
The trend of development at Samsung, Apple, Google, Amazon, and any OEM is to get people to get people to embrace their services though. Where you got the information that Google is selling peoples' information though, not sure where that came from. I will say that I've followed Google as a company for years, and having been in the military with TS/SCI clearance I actively worked on alot of TS (Top Secret) projects, so this whole NSA debacle has been something I've watched with great interest.
That said, I've seen where companies including Google have been forced to hand over information, but thus far haven't seen where your data has been sold. Most recently Google has started using peoples' pictures in ads, but they're not selling your information, they're attaching your picture and review of a product to an advertisement for said product. I won't claim perfect research though, if you have a link to something that says Google is selling your information, I'd be very interested to read it for both professional and personal reasons.
Anyway, I always think alternatives are good, no one should have a monopoly. I don't really see Google "locking" people into their services, they make it pretty easy for you to use their services with other ones or simply take your data and leave (i.e. you can download all your G+ photos as .zip files or contact list for import to other services) all from your dashboard. I think we simply see things from different perspectives but agree that alternatives are good and should exist and no monopolies should be allowed. The Ars Technica article just seemed skewed towards the "Google is evil" mentality and I don't think it's quite that black and white.
FYI, not being combative, it's uncommon to find intelligent, civil conversations about things like this (referencing the TLDR above) and you bring up good points.
Last edited: