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

Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 234 posts

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#71

Post by dirtyaura »

Brakenshire wrote: post #17
davyjones wrote: post #7

> Google does everything in-house. The company gets Maps and all of its cloud services basically for free. This statement is utterly false. In-house does not mean free.

All of its Maps data and many of its APIs already existed for Google Maps on the desktop. Within the mobile space, and relative to a mobile-only competitor, Google's access to that data is effectively free.

Map data for mobile isn't free even for Google. Google buys licenses to the data from a few map data providers, and as there was effectively a duopoly in global map data, those licenses have very strict terms of use. To use that data for e.g. real-time navigation assistance in mobile requires a different, much more expensive licenses.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#73

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

hackula1 wrote: post #60
cremnob wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Apple will be a good defense if Android's market share is 80%.

80% does not a monopoly make. Microsoft was in an entirely different position at the time.

How can anything other that 99% market share even be considered a monopoly? If it's 80% or 90% then there is obviously choice and thus no monopoly.

Anti trust is such bunk...

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#74

Post by artsrc »

ahomescu1 wrote: post #53
takluyver wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every open source project has someone (or some group) in control, and contributions can't land without their say so. But anyone who feels that the current leadership is doing it wrong can fork the code and try to persuade people to use their version. This is very important to the way open source software works. Google have a level of control beyond that: they undermine anyone trying to fork Android by not letting the…

I have a feeling that if an Android fork actually started to gain serious market share, Google would very quickly allow them to use GMail, Youtube and the other apps.

Amazon have a Kindle product that is an Android fork with serious market share. I don't know if Google has anything in the Kindle market place with GMail etc.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#75

Post by saiyan »

hackula1 wrote: post #61
millstone wrote: post #56

> Google was terrified that Apple would end up ruling the mobile space. So, to help in the fight against the iPhone at a time when Google had no mobile foothold whatsoever, it was decided that Google would buy Android. And Android would be open source. This is blatantly false. Google bought Android in 2005, two years before the iPhone was announced.

Android clearly went in a different direction post-iPhone.

Agreed.

All those videos of Android demo or prototype units clearly showed Android was a Blackberry clone (just look at that tiny touchpad for navigating around Android OS) and changed its design direction after iPhone made its appearance.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#76

Post by gibwell »

dmethvin wrote: post #34
cromwellian wrote: post #24

Most of the examples of Google closed apps that are not part of the AOSP release are in fact apps that are based off of Google data-center services. Would it really help Samsung if the source to the Gmail app was open? Since Google controls the server side, and the client-server protocol, it limits the amount of innovation they can do. The web equivalent would be like claiming that Chrome OS isn't open because the so…

> Google is stuck behind a rock and a hard place. If they don't try to create incentives for a unified experience, they get bashed for encouraging fragmentation, if they do assert a level of control, they get bashed for not being completely open. This is exactly the position Microsoft was in during the mid-1990s, even before they went after Netscape. The article is saying that Google is even applying some of the same…

Saying 'iOS is more closed' doesn't make Android meaningfully open.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#77

Post by gibwell »

parennoob wrote: post #22

When someone like Github does this (make some parts of their code open-source, but others closed-source), journalists don't write critical pieces about them, do they? I mean, Google leaves a bad taste in my mouth since they started shuttering services like it was Christmas at the Google Service Chopping Block, but I don't see them being actively evil here. It's all according to the previously openly aired plan. Googl…

Google used 'Android is open' as a dishonest slogan to convince developers that it wasn't just a power play.

That is why they are being criticized. It's not about who is more open. It's that Google misled everyone about their intentions.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#78

Post by gibwell »

Nerdfest wrote: post #9
cloudwalking wrote: post #6

> Android has arguably won the smartphone wars, but "Android winning" and "Google winning" are not necessarily the same thing. This is false. Google wins when more people use the Internet. Android is fulfilling its initial goal incredibly well: offer a free and open-source mobile OS to encourage mobile device proliferation. Android is doing exactly what it was designed to do.

The article's description of what we're to happen if Apple did not have competition is quite accurate and write frightening. Even with the north American market share that Apple has they abuse it where possible.

Apple hasn't abused anything.

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#79

Post by hayksaakian »

EGreg wrote: post #37

If AOSP is open source and Google updates let's say the location services, why can't anyone start a similar project for AOSP and have it funded (like by Apache or Mozilla)? It seems that the main problem is the gatekeepers who manufacture phones.

That, or someone to maintain a generic shim/interface so that the proprietary services are interchangeable

Re: Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

#80

Post by aidenn0 »

alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #73
hackula1 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% does not a monopoly make. Microsoft was in an entirely different position at the time.

How can anything other that 99% market share even be considered a monopoly? If it's 80% or 90% then there is obviously choice and thus no monopoly. Anti trust is such bunk...

Here's an example:

Let's imagine a hypothetical world where Company A owns 80% of the smartphone market and the rest is divided between the also-rans.

Now imagine that app developers can't profitably make a 1st rate app without getting the income from company A's app store (But can port the app to other OSes for extra income). If company A starts to use this situation to make it harder to port apps to other companies OSes via strongarm tactics, then company A is abusing its monopoly position of being the only profitable way to make an app.

Today's world is nothing like that, but it's an example of how near-total marketshare is not necessary for anti-trust to come into play. There is a certain point at which you have a large enough market share, that certain other players in the market must deal with you to get the volume needed to compete, particularly in high-volume, high-upfront cost industries (which many types of software qualify as).

Post reply on HN