Mat, you are correct in saying that you have to jailbreak an iOS devices to get around restrictions. However, isn’t it also true that in most cases, you have to root an Android devices to get around carrier and manufacturer restrictions? Despite the supposedly divergent market strategies, you often end up with the same situation in the end. The restrictions just come from different places.

I would absolutely disagree with you that Apple is beholden to the carriers. I would actually say that it is the other way around, if anything. They went to AT&T originally, because AT&T let them have what they wanted. Apple was actually getting a cut of the data plan fees on the original iPhone. Who else has been able to pull that off Also, what other phone can you name other than the Nexus that you can get at a carrier store that has no carrier branding or apps pre-installed whatsoever? This is especially true on Verizon, but now we have an iPhone on Verizon, and there is no special branding or customization.

To me, Google’s recent actions represent a possible changing of their mindset on openness. I know they have given reasons for their withholding of the Honeycomb source code, saying it is unfinished. However, they are still giving it to some, so that they can get tablets to market. They are picking and choosing who gets what and when they get it. They are essentially, playing favorites. That is NOT openness. In fact, that is a pretty serious slap in the face to the hard core open source community, which many have commented on. However, this practice IS good and smart business, and I don’t blame Google one bit for doing it.

I think Google has realized that when manufacturers churn out throw away tablets and crap devices, consumers don’t care that it doesn’t have the Market or Google’s seal of approval. It is running Android, and that is associated with Google. It’s the same when carriers or manufacturers don’t deliver promised features (Xoom 4G delay), don’t provide updates (Moto Backflip, Samsung Captivate, SE X10), or cripple their devices (No side loading or HSUPA on AT&T). Google ends up sharing the ill will of the general consumer because they don’t know any better. This is a big reason why Apple wants complete control of the whole experience. A large part of their approach has to do with customer experience and service. You can’t fix what you can’t control. It seems to me like Google is wisely waking up to this, and is taking control of what they can.

Another shift in Google’s philosophy is in the Android Market, which comes back to the subject of Patrick’s post here. Someone at Google, it may have been Andy Rubin, recently said that they realized the shortcomings of the Android Market. He touched on the facts that developers weren’t making enough money selling there, and that the level of consumer trust found in Apple’s curated model wasn’t there there, either. He said that Google would be taking a much more active role in curating the Market after the fact. Rather than approving apps like Apple, they would be monitoring more closely after release and responding to complaints.

This recent move to block access to certain apps from the Market is in line with the comments from a few months ago. Again, Google has recognized that total free-for-all openness just doesn’t work easily and efficiently on the scale they are dealing with now. It wasn’t meant to. It isn’t a business model. To me, it looks like Google has learned a lot about what works and what doesn’t, and has made some necessary changes to their approach. I just hope they will figure out a way to publicly articulate their changing stance, rather than continuing to wear the emperor’s new clothes.

Like Apple, Android (and I’m sure WinMo7 and WebOS) have to succumb to the carriers wims – its just like the music industry, you don’t have a choice, you jsut have to go with the illogical requests from an antiquated system.

Android is open source, and does not stop end users from installing apps from anywhere. Just because the ‘official’ Android marketplace won’t have (for example) PDA Net, which allows bypassing of carrier tethering apps – it doesn’t mean PDANet couldn’t and won’t be available from other non-official app stores.

Android’s openness is allowing for alternatives to seemlessly work.

To get the same on my iPhone, I must jail break.

Its all semantics in the end, but the Daring Fireball article, and this assessment aren’t fully true – they just scratch the surface.