Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cyanogen Mod Raises $23 Million Funding All Set To Become Major Android Player

Comments Filter:
  • Cyanogenmod, (Score:1, Interesting)

    by lukemartinez (2468106)
    CyanogenMod, now with advertising.
    • Re:Cyanogenmod, (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DavidClarkeHR (2769805) <david.clarke@hrg ... a ['ner' in gap]> on Thursday December 19, 2013 @10:14PM (#45742641)

      CyanogenMod, now with advertising.

      Not every giant, successful tech company that displaces competition will immediately start advertising.

      Take ... uh ...

      • by cervesaebraciator (2352888) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @10:37PM (#45742765)

        It's in all facets of life now. You can't even find a guy with good karma on an online forum who won't leverage it for some cash on the side.

        --
        This message brought to you by the friendly people at Starbucks (TM). Starbucks (TM): Because Caffeine's the Only Addictive Psychoactive Stimulant You're Allowed at Work.

        • by ganjadude (952775)
          I see what you did there
          • by Anonymous Coward
            Of course you saw what he did there! You ALWAYS have adverts in your sig!
      • "Not every giant, successful tech company that displaces competition will immediately start advertising."

        I doubt they'll go the Google route, because their very reason for existence -- and why people use it at all -- is to bypass all that Google garbage.

        If they just copy Google's business model, why would anybody want CyanogenMod?

        • by bhcompy (1877290)
          Because now they're a name, and that's all that matters. Google "Do not be evil". Apple "You'll see why 1984 won't be like "1984"". etc
          • Meh. I think it takes more than a name.

            CyanogenMod is not Google. They're still young, and they built their whole company based on the idea that they're not like Google. It would be pretty unrealistic to just throw that all away, then expect to get anywhere.
            • by Anonymous Coward

              *Google* their whole company based on the idea that they're not like Google.

      • Re:Cyanogenmod, (Score:5, Interesting)

        by SpectreBlofeld (886224) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @10:39PM (#45742787)

        They don't necessarily have to make their revenue all from ads.

        They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.

        They could start and manage their own app store and take a cut if app purchases.

        By working directly with manufacturers, they can spend less time hacking/reverse engineering stuff in order to get it to work with the hardware and instead focus on making their flavor of Android better and therefore desirable on handsets. Cyanogenmod has always been about being cutting-edge - pioneering many features long before AOSP. And not just 'fun' features but really important stuff like fine-detailed app permissions management (which has been WAY overdue). If they can now have a say in hardware design, I say, hell yes, bring it on. I hope to see cutting-edge badass smartphones with easy root access, high customize-ability/theming, and bleeding edge features.

        Lately I've been keeping an eye on the Sailfish project, but this news has refreshed my interest in the future of Android in general. Let's not be too cynical and assume it's all going to be about advertising. And even if there are ads, does anyone really think the ads could be any worse or more intrusive than the current state of Android in general?

        Maybe Canonical has spoiled everyone's attitudes toward the idea of monetizing open source. There's certainly a comparison to be made here. I'm not well-versed enough in the behind-the-scenes stuff to compare, but I wonder what the degree of impact Cyanogen has had on the Android world is, compared to Ubuntu's contribution to Linux, and what lessons we can take from the latter and apply to the former?

        • The amazing thing would be if Cyanogen managed to wrest control of Android away from Google. Suddenly there is a fork, and they are running the AOSP2.
        • Re:Cyanogenmod, (Score:5, Interesting)

          by grcumb (781340) on Friday December 20, 2013 @01:43AM (#45743493) Homepage Journal

          They don't necessarily have to make their revenue all from ads.

          They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.

          That seems to be the obvious value in this company. Phone makers have demonstrated time and again how badly they manage their own Android distros, and how much they see them as a cost-centre rather than an opportunity to better position themselves in the market.

          Given the state of current MBAThink, why wouldn't they want to outsource the heavy lifting of distro management to a company that not only does it well, but does it better than their competitors? If CM play their cards right, they could start a bidding war, or at very least, make sure that their's is a seller's market.

          I especially like this idea because it upsets the playing field a little. Cyanogenmod can be ported at low cost to a number of generic platforms, allowing cheap(er) phone makers to gussy up their product without much effort. So to the consumer, there won't be much to choose between an SGS4 and a KungPaoDuk Delightra XXS Happy Screen. (Visually, at least.)

        • Re:Cyanogenmod, (Score:4, Interesting)

          by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Friday December 20, 2013 @02:01AM (#45743541) Homepage Journal

          They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.

          I've got an old Droid 3 that I like the hardware on but never did much like the software, which is now obsolete. One dev got 4.2 working except for the camera - if CM got the camera driver from Moto ($) and put out a KitKat build, I'd gladly pay $30-50 for that.

          That's not a terrible business model. I'd also pay that kind of money yearly for an audited and updated build on any phone I carry.

          • I heartily agree, I have a Galaxy Nexus that became almost useless with my car's handsfree when Google swapped the Bluez bluetooth stack for Broadcom's in 4.2, 4.3 didn't fix the problems and there's still a thread in code.google for the other Nexus phones using KitKat. CM10.1 and 10.2 work perfectly with my car making my phone useful again. I would also pay 30-50 bucks for that(not to mention there's an effort to port 4.4 to the GNex something Google refuses to do[Thanks, Texas Instruments]).
          • ...is that Cyanogenmod aggressively obsoletes older phones.

            I am on Page Plus Cellular. If you look at their phones for sale, everything is Gingerbread. They also don't allow 4G devices on their network without substantial neutering of the firmware. And while they accept most Verizon 3G devices on their network, they strongly suggest that you leave the Verizon firmware intact.

            So I run a DINC, which Cyanogenmod long ago put out to pasture, Gingerbread only. Evervolv took it to Android 4.1, and some guy took t

            • by Andy Dodd (701)

              While I'm unhappy with many aspects of CM - They have never forcefully EOLed a device that was technically capable of running newer versions of Android.

              Yes, prior to "inc" everything was volunteer based, and sometimes a volunteer would drop a device. Other devices (such as the original GalaxyS family) are going on forever.

              There are only two cases I know of where CM "aggressively" EOLed anything:
              1) The announcement that Snapdragon S1 series devices (such as the MSM7227 - NOT the 7227A) would be dropped. T

              • In April 2010, Engadget stated: "the DROID Incredible is the best Android device that you can purchase in America right now."

                Verizon is the largest network in the US.

                Cyanogenmod is avoiding Verizon's MVNOs because they are supposedly blocking the CM10.1 that I am currently running.

                This business model is doomed. You play the hand you're dealt with the people you have.

            • That's a great point. I'd like to see an open source group get a grant to keep CM (or its successor if they close up) updated for old devices, so less affluent people can have good access to technology.

              KitKat should make that even easier, with better memory requirements.

        • by jonwil (467024)

          The downside for Cyanogenmod is that there are now features they cant support in the mod without their new partners getting upset. And instances where they will have to include features in some part of the OS where they then cant publish the code for it or where they have to restrict it to specific hardware.

        • by wbr1 (2538558)
          Most of the free apps I use contain adds. I have devices running stock carrier versions and various ROMs including cyanogenmod. One of the absolute worst is the weather channel app.

          Oftentimes there are deceiving ads for pure shitware in that app. Ads that look like legitimate errors with messages such as "Critical Android Error" "Click to repair". This is a mainstream app, by a supposedly reputable company, and it is feeding me malware ads. Why there is not some sort of vetting service for ads across

          • Unfortunately, that is the state of many of those ad providers....they are scummy.

            I am a member of a forum that keeps struggling with this stuff. On the desktop version, you keep getting these ads that make noise or pop out from the space they are supposed to stay in. On the mobile version, you've got ads that are supposed to be constrained to the dedicated ad space, but instead sometimes decide that they should *always* float on the bottom of the screen (or worse, decide they should actually take up ha

          • The first time that I used it, a (very!) convincing ad banner indicated that I had new voicemail.

            It's hard to complain when I have unlimited free calls and texting, but I would really prefer more tasteful ads that were intelligently targetted.

            There should be a button for all adware: PRESS IF YOU'D NEVER BUY THIS. That would save everybody a lot of grief.

        • by BitZtream (692029)

          Hahahah. You think people will pay for android? Bwahahahaha.

          The people using android (both device makers and users) are too cheap to pay for a non-shitty ad ladened OS, thats why they use Android in the first place.

          You're an idiot if you think anyone is going to bye Cyanogen, device maker or individual. You might as well try to sell a million dollar house to the homeless man laying on the street, you'll have better luck.

          You Android fanboys live in a delusion about why Android is so prolific. Let me give

        • by the_B0fh (208483)

          And not just 'fun' features but really important stuff like fine-detailed app permissions management (which has been WAY overdue).

          No way! According to mlw4428 (1029576) at http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4553509&cid=45716831 [slashdot.org] it is very very very hard to use fine detailed, post install, app permissions management. At least for Android developers...

          [I still don't fucking understand why so many Android developers keep saying it's hard, waah, waaah, when iOS developers have no issues with it]

      • I remember when Google threatened Acer with losing the Play Store and all Google app to stop Aliyun, claiming that the secret rules of the "Open" Handset Alliance prevented Acer from shipping Android forks.

        http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/3 [arstechnica.com]

        Anyone know if the same rules prohibit all the major OEMs from shipping CM or Jolla(which has Android app support via a third party Dalvik implementation) phones?

        The major OEMs include Acer,

        • by Anonymous Coward

          So you couldn't spare the 2 minutes to do a Google search? You just decided to talk out of your ass instead? When you join the OHA you agree not to participate in creating an incompatible version of Android. It kind of contradicts what the OHA stands for so it was stupid of Acer to even attempt to do so. CM is fully Android CTS compliant otherwise they would never be granted the ability to install Google Apps and Services.

      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        Red Hat? They seem to make their money on support. I can see manufacturers paying Cyanogen to support their devices and keep them up to date.

        • by Desler (1608317)

          I can see manufacturers paying Cyanogen to support their devices and keep them up to date.

          That's a good joke. Keeping a phone up to date means being unable to upsell the newest model with the newest OS.

          • by S.O.B. (136083)

            Typical MBA-speak.

            If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.

            You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.

            • by Desler (1608317)

              Typical MBA-speak.

              Duh? That was sort of my entire point...

              If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.

              Because all of the major Android manufacturers are pretty much the same in this respect?

              You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.

              So outside of a few niche brands, which of the major Android manufacturers don't have the same issues of abandoning phone updates?

              • What niche brands might those be? I'm looking for a new phone to replace failing hardware (the touchscreen on my Evo 4G has started acting wonky with the on-screen keyboard)

              • by S.O.B. (136083)

                Typical MBA-speak.

                Duh? That was sort of my entire point...

                That may have been what you meant in your head but your post could have been taken either way. Sorry I'm not psychic.

                If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.

                Because all of the major Android manufacturers are pretty much the same in this respect?

                You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.

                So outside of a few niche brands, which of the major Android manufacturers don't have the same issues of abandoning phone updates?

                The market is already evolving. Consumers are already becoming aware of issues such as vendor lock in and lack of OS upgrades. The market may lean more towards the "fewer updates" end of the scale today but I don't think it will stay that way for long. A guaranteed x years of upgrades would be a great way for a smaller player to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack and contr

  • by CryptoJones (565561) <akclark@cryREDHA ... com minus distro> on Thursday December 19, 2013 @10:18PM (#45742657) Homepage
    What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
    • by jrumney (197329)

      They get a full time job contributing to the code base. That's usually how open source going to a "for-profit" (which is usually non-profit - maybe "funded" is a better word) model works.

    • by exomondo (1725132)

      What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

      Why not? Open source has nothing to do with software cost and they can't just create a closed source derivative. That said I'm not sure what their monetization plan is, but maybe that was your point.

      • by exomondo (1725132)
        hrm...actually it seems that's perhaps what they are planning to do, by re-licensing GPL components. Interesting Google+ post [google.com] from the developer of Focal about Cyanogen Inc.
        • hrm...actually it seems that's perhaps what they are planning to do, by re-licensing GPL components. Interesting Google+ post [google.com] from the developer of Focal about Cyanogen Inc.

          And to do so they need to get the permission of the contributors, because copyright still applies and that's how copyleft licenses work. Thus the answer to "what about the contributors?" is "whatever the contributors agreed to."

          If they contributed code under an open source license that allows relicensing like BSD, that was their choice and it means that either they implicitly approved from day one or didn't bother to understand the license they chose and screwed themselves.

          • by Andy Dodd (701)

            In this specific case - the CM team tried to use the project's Contributor Licensing Agreement (CLA) as an intimidation tactic. (Effectively, saying it allowed them to relicense Focal when, in reality, it didn't.)

            In the end, Focal was never relicensed BECAUSE Guillaume chose a license that protected him - BUT there is the fact that they tried to convince him that their CLA would allow them to relicense his code whether he liked it or not.

            (Note: Some CLAs, such as Canonical's Harmony CLA, explicitly grant

    • by gl4ss (559668)

      anyone who manages to get someone else to pay him is the one making money for it.

      if they contributed under the rules, they might not get anything. that's the rules they contributed under. of course they can make a demand to get money or else they'll stop contributing. if they're a good enough contributor they'll get money then.

      now.. open-source and for-profit are not mutually exclusive at all(heck, see linux kernel for a good example).

      basically you can still stay open source while being "for profit". of cou

    • "What do people that have contributed to the code base get?"

      Whatever they negotiated whenever they engaged their contracts.

    • by thisisauniqueid (825395) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @11:22PM (#45742973)

      What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

      They get nada. I implemented one of the features that caused CM to explode in popularity very early on, and cyanogen did very well out of donations from it, but I never saw a cent of it. I gently raised the issue one day, and he made it pretty clear that he had no intention of divvying up the wealth. Granted, he has put a heckofalot more time total into hacking on CM than I have, but actually, I would have spent a lot more time hacking on it if it weren't for that experience. That was the last code I wrote for CM.

      • by thisisauniqueid (825395) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @11:24PM (#45742983)
        PS granted, Steve is a very good hacker and a generally all-around good guy, the only thing I'm pointing out is that, at least at that point, he wasn't about the Utopian ideal of sharing around the wealth with the commoners that work in the fields. But maybe not being a communist is a good thing, or he may not have landed the most recent round of funding.
      • by Pigeon451 (958201)

        I thought people generally contributed to open source to help everyone out and get a better product, not to share potential revenue. Cyanogenmod is open source and must remain so. Now that the maintainers have raised funding to really get Cyanogenmod into the mainstream, you're backing off? Sounds a bit backwards to me. If you really want some cash, maybe see if you can get hired by them...

    • by citizenr (871508) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @11:24PM (#45742981) Homepage

      they get loved tenderly in the ass
      https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs [google.com]

    • by JanneM (7445)

      What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

      With open source you let people use your code, and they let others - including you - use their code in turn. That's the payment, if you will. If you contributed to CM, then the availability of the rest of the CM codebase under a compatible license is what you get.

      As for profits - nothing stops you from taking the rest of the CM code ba

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

        You, too, can download the sources and fork CM. Have at!

        • by JanneM (7445)

          You, too, can download the sources and fork CM. Have at!

          Why? I'm not the one who has a problem with people making money off of it. And I certainly wouldn't want to take on the enormous workload that a business takes. I have a day job, and don't need a second one.

    • by thegarbz (1787294)

      What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

      Open-Source and For-Profit are not mutually exclusive. See every commercial Linux project currently on the market. Plenty have contributors, and plenty have managers who make money from it.

      If you're contributing to open-source with the expectation of getting paid then you're in for a rude surprise.

    • CDDB

      Been there, seen that.

    • by Andy Dodd (701)

      They potentially get shafted - https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs [google.com]

      One of the new company's first actions as a corporate entity was to try and use the CyanogenMod Contributor License Agreement to relicense a major GPLv3 contribution (a total rewrite of the camera app) AFTER work was completed (even though work was started well after they had formed as a company).

      So they are promising that "everything you see now will remain open source" - but actions speak louder than words, and one o

    • Clearly this is one of the most intriguing aspects of the open source model...does anyone know of an accepted compensation schema that attempts to equitably distribute earnings to coding participants? ... or even have any ideas about such a solution? Resolving this conundrum could change OS appeal and dynamic...possibly turning "OS coder" into a viable career path would increase rates of innovation and foster community cooperation...I'm just saying...
  • Oh, great. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geminidomino (614729) on Thursday December 19, 2013 @10:20PM (#45742683) Journal

    So either CM goes to shit, full of advertising and scumware, like pretty much every other commercial OS, or they don't, founder, and fade away.

    Either way, it was nice while it lasted, I suppose.

    • by jbeaupre (752124)

      I'm hoping they become a third party software and support house for phone manufacturers. Obviously the manufactures don't want to be bothered keeping software updated, but might be willing to offload the work to CM. CM then gets a lump sum to provide OS and updates for x number of years and the manufacturers get to look like heroes to their customers.

      Alternately, they become the equivalent to after-market car parts source. For a low cost, you get the replacement parts/software you need soup up your stock

      • Unlikely, as that would mean sharing hardware specs and drivers, which isn't something hardware companies like to do, ever.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      This happened many months ago when the lead developer sold out, updates became slow, then stopped supporting major but older devices. This has been coming for a while, anyone could see it. Money is as money does. Affluenza indeed.

      It's so stupid. This is exactly what I said would happen when jackass sold out yet everyone said I was crazy... bunch of morons

    • by Pigeon451 (958201)

      Google has full control over android. ALL purchases and a lot of activity is "logged" by Google. You don't think a more transparent OS would be beneficial to the community? The OS would have to remain open source also. Look at what canonical has done for Linux in the past 10 years...

    • Er, my Nexus 5 doesn't have any advertising or "scumware" on it out of the box, as far as I can tell. What are you talking about?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I love their mods, but the one thing that held me back years ago was the lack of umm... credibility. But for my higher-ups, it's an issue of liability/ accountability/ warranty.

    But these days, I'd just get a Nexus - go straight to the Android source.

  • This is why a lot of us are buying the Faea F2S already - it's going native Cyanogenmod and fully open-source with factory assistance, now that Cyanogenmod and Faea have teamed up and released the F2S source code.

    Given that something like the F2S only costs around $250 and has pretty much every feature that the current bleeding-edge phones have, it's going to be interesting to see how this affects the other phones on the market.

    Mind you, emphasis on the bleeding there. It really is at the edge of technologi

    • by Anonymous Coward

      You had me. I looked at the specs and then............... blah.

      Basically quadband GSM. Ok I can place a call most everywhere for the next couple of years (if I'm lucky). Networks are dismantling 2G GSM in all but the most remote of areas, where it's long reach is a good tradeoff for its crap spectral efficiency...

      But the. 3G GSM (UMTS/WCDMA). 1 Band listed, 2100. Today, that's not even good enough for europe, nevermind the US where it means you have a 2G GSM phone that is going to stop working with TM

      • by GrpA (691294)

        LoL! I did say bleeding edge with emphasis on the bleeding. And the older models supported multi-band 3G as well. This is the result of moving to a modem chipset for that model that only supports 2100 and it's generally considered a poor move. ( Same circuit board as the cheaper F2 model but a different modem chip ). It also has problems in 3G, but for those who can use it, we're hopeful that moving to Cyanogenmod will get the problems out of it. In the mean time, check out their forum if you want details o

      • You had me. I looked at the specs and then............... blah.

        Yeah, I'd love to support the underdog manufacturer, but I live in the 50% of the country (geo. not pop.) where only Verizon has reasonable coverage.

        I know, Qualcomm is the evil, but being able to make calls is worth something.

  • In this day and age isn't that a drop in the ocean, especially when some competitors have up to 3 order of magnitude more cash?
  • to be a MAJOR player? Cano got $240M and the Yankees didn't want him.
  • Of late I've been thinking that Android is probably the biggest security nightmare around.

    Not because there's anything intrinsicly wrong with Android itself, but because (my guess) at least 50% of all Android phones will never see an update of any sort.

    Regardless of how secure your device may have been out of the box, the first time that there's a security weakness you have to trust that a) Google will fix it in Android or b) The manufacturer will fix it in their modified version of Android, or c) The
  • Someone with $23M just gave their money to some open source circle-jerk that has no chance of making any money.

  • by WaffleMonster (969671) on Friday December 20, 2013 @02:42AM (#45743675)

    Here is the deal as I see it yes I'm worried all of this money will erode the point of cynaogenmod (e.g. selling-out) yet when you look at it most of the value of cyanogen is bottled up in their amazing build platform which is open source and actively used by other competing mods. If cyanogen gets too far off the rails or is perceived as such it will be forked and that will be that.

  • by ThatsNotPudding (1045640) on Friday December 20, 2013 @08:45AM (#45744649)
    Now that they've decided to become 'kept women' by investor money, forget about them being a continued source of freedom, rapidity, or actual innovation. Selling out to the 'man' means they will end up being just another awful corporatized Android skin chock-full of shovelware that can never be removed. Yay, greed.
  • You don't get to become a major player in the computer industry with a 23m headstart. Especially not in the mobile industry.

    Ask HTC. And all the others who dropped out of Android because there was no money to be made. There are countless failed Motorolla, HTC, LG, Asus, Panasonic, Kyocera, Lenovo, HP, Sony, and then the asian brans we never hear of like ZTE and Huawei. Even Samsung has had a number of phenomenal failures until they managed to score a hit with the Galaxy.

    The list is stupendous: http://en.wik [wikipedia.org]

Their idea of an offer you can't refuse is an offer... and you'd better not refuse.

Working...