Bill Weinberg - LinuxPundit.com 

The recent Google announcement of the soon-to-be-released Android mobile stack and SDK has spawned incredible industry and media frenzy.  In my roles at the LiPS Forum, at the Linux Foundation and in my consultancy , it is splitting my brain into more fragments than Carrie's (but not as many as Mobile Linux)

Linux Cheerleader Me 

The Android/gPhone and the new Open Handset Alliance are good for Linux and for Open Source.  If the OHA is even marginally successful, the .org will promote and actually supply Linux-based phone stacks to the broadest array of handset OEMs, operators and end-users.  The choice of the Apache license for Android was also a good move, enabling OEMs and operators to create commercial implementations with more comfort (and fewer reciprocity requirements) than doing so with other OSS licenses, especially GPL.

If the stars continue in a positive alignment, Android will bolster mobile Linux handset market share, enabling operators will roll out new services and deploy sexy new applications.

Standardization Me

The OHA model, like the one embodied by LiMo , is to create a de facto standard embodied in an actual stack of real software running on real handsets.  In theory, OEMs and operators will flock to and embrace this ubiquitous platform, making mobile Linux mainstream and crowding out Symbian and up-and-coming Microsoft WindowsMobile.  In theory.

In practice, OEMs and operators can freely fork and otherwise "add value" to the Android stack, quickly reaching the level of fragmentation seen today in mobile phone Java implementations.  Instead of reducing the horrendous SKU counts (200-400) faced by mobile ISVs, a successful Android stack could double that number.  Without a real standard for interoperability (e.g., LiPS specification 1.0, LSB, etc.), Android could create a rerun of the UNIX wars.  If you think mobile Linux is fragmented now, watch out!  Danger Danger!

Free Software Me

While I basically like the Apache license , it is too loose and non-reciprocal to guarantee freedom for developers and end-users who would target and purchase Android-based mobile devices.  Its use does nothing to promote free software within and above the OHA stack (applications, m/w, enablers, CODECs) and gives free reign to operators and OEMs to lock down my plan and constrain my mobile user experience.   

End User Me

If Android helps OEMs and operators deliver cooler and more functional handsets, based on Linux, in a reasonable timeframe, then I am happy.  But I also know that the origins and licensing of software on a device don't really determine how open it is - that is the domain of operators who use the device as a vehicle to deliver content and services.  So I am also prepared to face a future of Linux-based phones that offer little or no freedoms or advantages over their equivalents built from bits delivered by Redmond.

With a few more faces to my split personality, I would say "My jury is out"