Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Kindle Means for Android

blog.geekli.st

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#31

Post by fpgeek »

SCdF wrote: post #5

Maybe this is just me, but if they have their own app store, their own UI, their own idioms and their own devices.... from any useful user or branding perspective, how are they Android phones? And so more importantly, why does it matter for Android? It doesn't mean Android is more fragmented, because those phones aren't Android phones , it just means one more competitor in the smart phone market. If anything, it make…

And now ask yourself the key question: Is Google more a mobile OS vendor / mobile device manufacturer or more a mobile application developer?

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#32

Post by ajross »

Mythbusters wrote: post #18
zmmmmm wrote: post #10

It's kind of amusing to me how every now and then someone proclaims that Google has "lost control" of Android and how this must be some kind of crisis and portends a looming disaster. Then we will have a series of people proclaiming how Android is not really open and what a farce Google's pretense of openness is, and what fools we were to ever believe that Google intended to make an open source operating system. Freq…

Actually I think Google's openness is a quasi. Otherwise you wouldn't see them blocking the acer phone.

And yet they aren't blocking the Kindle. So how do you square that?

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#33

Post by Mythbusters »

ajross wrote: post #32
Mythbusters wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I think Google's openness is a quasi. Otherwise you wouldn't see them blocking the acer phone.

And yet they aren't blocking the Kindle. So how do you square that?

I'm sure they would if they could. Amazon is not a member of OHA so google has nothing to enforce that ban with.

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#35

Post by Mythbusters »

enjo wrote: post #27
Mythbusters wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a reason they haven't forked because there is a value in the ecosystem. What they have done is that the have starved Google of the revenue it makes out of android and that is where the opportunity is for major device makers which I don't get how they not see it.

I'm not following...why would major device manufacturers want to starve Google?

so that they can eat Google's lunch?

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#36

Post by swang »

bstar77 wrote: post #24
swang wrote: post #23

First, can we stop with the FUD about Google "banning" Acer from releasing a phone. This ArsTech article covers most of it but basically Alibaba was planning to release an OS that could run Android apps but was not certified by the OHA. And Acer as a member of OHA has to enforce Android compatibility on their devices to enforce consistency in Android. The same thing people complain about Android (fragmentation) is wh…

I think this is an extremely naive view... Devices that don't have gmail, maps, chrome and play is a huge loss for google. It's very much in google's interest to discourage these types of forks, but that's the nature of open source.

The article talks of "losing control" not "losing revenue" hence what my post was talking about.

There will obviously be some lost revenue, but not really enough for Google to care. At least for now. Mainly Kindle hasn't done much to scare Google.

I remember when the first Kindle Fire came out and people were hailing it the end of Google and Android. Silk was going to eat Chrome for breakfast. Amazon Appstore would be the defacto "Android Marketplace". etc etc. I've yet to see any of that come to fruition.

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#37

Post by flurpitude »

programminggeek wrote: post #30

The whole point of Android from Google's perspective was to give them the ability to control search on mobile without having to buy their way in like they did on the Windows desktop and they do on iOS. Every year Google spends hundreds of millions of dollars to Apple, Mozilla, Dell, HP, etc. to be the default search provider, have their toolbar installed, have Chrome be the default, or whatever way they want to be th…

"Fragmentation is not a problem because Google still is the primary Android services provider."

Doesn't the article point out that some of the bigger companies using Android, like Amazon and (in the linked article about TVs) Lenovo, are doing their own versions of Android that use none of Google's services? So Google is left high and dry - the other companies have taken the Android code but given Google nothing in return. This is how I understood the claim that Google has lost control of Android.

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#38

Post by cooldeal »

swang wrote: post #23

First, can we stop with the FUD about Google "banning" Acer from releasing a phone. This ArsTech article covers most of it but basically Alibaba was planning to release an OS that could run Android apps but was not certified by the OHA. And Acer as a member of OHA has to enforce Android compatibility on their devices to enforce consistency in Android. The same thing people complain about Android (fragmentation) is wh…

I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc. Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation. Google might be doing good for Android, but it seems to be going further away from being "open". AOSP is open, Android, not so much.

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#39

Post by ajross »

Mythbusters wrote: post #33
ajross wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet they aren't blocking the Kindle. So how do you square that?

I'm sure they would if they could. Amazon is not a member of OHA so google has nothing to enforce that ban with.

So you agree with the flip side argument that Google is just enforcing existing business agreements to which all parties are signatories, you just choose to interpret it as uncharitably as possible for Google.

Yawn. Business is business. Using open source software doesn't magically absolve you of responsibility to your contracted partners, nor give you the right to jerk your suppliers around. The simple truth is that Amazon handled this gracefully and produced a great product, and Acer screwed it up and wrecked things for their partner Alibaba. Making Google out to be the bad guy is just fanboism.

Re: What Kindle Means for Android

#40

Post by swang »

cooldeal wrote: post #38
swang wrote: post #23

First, can we stop with the FUD about Google "banning" Acer from releasing a phone. This ArsTech article covers most of it but basically Alibaba was planning to release an OS that could run Android apps but was not certified by the OHA. And Acer as a member of OHA has to enforce Android compatibility on their devices to enforce consistency in Android. The same thing people complain about Android (fragmentation) is wh…

I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc. Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation. Google might be doing good for Android, but it seems to be going further away from being "open". AOSP is ope…

> I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc.

What you're saying is misleading. Acer were the ones who broke the rules and Google enforced them, for good reason too.

If you sign up and agree to be in an organization in order to gain early access to firmware, then you should abide by the rules of the organization. Otherwise, don't join.

> Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation

Yup. If you don't want to play by Google's rules, do what Amazon did and make your own version. Or as a better example, do what Archos has been doing for near 3+ years.

Google provides timely improvements that they eventually send back upstream, but they have no obligation to instantly provide these updates to AOSP to everyone.

Post reply on HN