I don't know if there are so many facts behind your assertion that Google is going in a more and more closed direction.
Is it because they took more time than previously to open Android 3.0? It has been settled, right? And we know the reasons.
Did they slow down on releasing open-source softwares? Maybe, I don't follow it closely enough to decide.
Chromium is still open.
They did shut down some APIs, but this is a normal process of refactoring, removing stones you have on your way.
I see a recent strong trend in Google evolution, but it is not toward walled garden or closed formats or else. It is toward more and more design, ajaxy things, prettiness, and I think it is a bit unnecessary, and they may have to revert some of these changes.
Right - and the kind of thinking embodied on that slide doesn't inspire much confidence in their motives. i.e. they aren't being open because they believe it's good for everyone. They seem to intend it as a Trojan horse that will give them control over other people's products.
It's apparently part of the discovery documents from one of the ongoing lawsuits Google is involved in. You know as much as I do about it now; I have no idea whether the rest is available without looking in court records.
Is it because they took more time than previously to open Android 3.0? It has been settled, right? And we know the reasons.
Did they slow down on releasing open-source softwares? Maybe, I don't follow it closely enough to decide.
Chromium is still open.
They did shut down some APIs, but this is a normal process of refactoring, removing stones you have on your way.
I see a recent strong trend in Google evolution, but it is not toward walled garden or closed formats or else. It is toward more and more design, ajaxy things, prettiness, and I think it is a bit unnecessary, and they may have to revert some of these changes.