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

81–90 of 234 posts

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

#81

Post by dannyr »

fpgeek wrote: post #29
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…

And, in fact, the same author made the exact same point about Google Play Services being a big tool Google is using to get past OS version fragmentation about a month-and-a-half ago: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-sl...

The author was all-praises on Google for its actions.

"Not having to package everything into a major OS update means Google can get features out to more users much faster and more frequently than before. ... This should all lead to a more unified, less fragmented, healthier Android ecosystem."

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

#82

Post by demallien »

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…

Anyone who wants to build a fork can do so

Not really. You will have your mainline Abdroid implementation shutdown if you do this. Google is clearly doing this to make forking a very risky proposition for device manufacturers. It's the antithesis to open.

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

#83

Post by bad_user »

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…

You're partly right, but in regards to the Gmail app, what I don't like about Android is that it doesn't come with a good email client that's not GMail. Android's GMail client is very polished and there's not much in it that's specific to Gmail, it could be a generic email client that works with POP3/IMAP/SMTP and other standards as well. The experience of users that aren't into Android's own services do suffer.

But I do not agree with people that claim Android is not open. Building an operating system is a big challenge and stock Android is enough for anyone to fork and do whatever they want. I actually play around with an old Galaxy S on top of which I installed Cyanogenmod without any of Google's Apps. The only problem is that developers only publish their apps on Google Play, which is a shame, given that Android does allow you to install apps from third party sources and you could have a good experience just with stock Android. I ended up installing Amazon's Appstore on it, which is not as good as Google Play, but at least they've got special offers :-)

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

#84

Post by ahomescu1 »

artsrc wrote: post #74
ahomescu1 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Kindle Fire doesn't have the Google Apps, and might never have them, but the Barnes&Noble Nook HD does (I have one), starting a few months ago. It originally didn't (I suspect for the same reason as the Kindle Fire), but Google later allowed B&N to run the apps (B&N even replaced their custom web browser with Chrome, a move which not everyone liked).

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

#85

Post by andrewflnr »

Brakenshire wrote: post #48
andrewflnr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Google's mapping data is a legitimate competitive advantage, and there is no reason anyone else forking android should be entitled to it.

The article in no way says this is illegitimate, it is listed as an extra barrier that a competitor would have to cross.

Maybe not explicitly, but it was stated in the context of a critical article about Google's betrayal of openness, so we could at least be forgiven for interpreting it in that light. It's not a stretch to assume it was meant as a criticism.

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

#86

Post by eYsYs »

bad_user wrote: post #83
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…

You're partly right, but in regards to the Gmail app, what I don't like about Android is that it doesn't come with a good email client that's not GMail. Android's GMail client is very polished and there's not much in it that's specific to Gmail, it could be a generic email client that works with POP3/IMAP/SMTP and other standards as well. The experience of users that aren't into Android's own services do suffer. But…

> What I don't like about Android is that it doesn't come with a good email client that's not GMail.

That would be like saying that the default camera app does not come with filters, shaders and other features that you like. What Google does is, gives a good enough app for generic use and leaves options open for developers to make better things and put them on the Play Store.

If Google starts incorporating all such features, it'll get much more difficult for developers to earn through the store.

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

#87

Post by zhte415 »

Elv13 wrote: post #42
cloudwalking wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I agree. Android is not about North America. Android is about India, Africa, and China.

It is banned from China (AFAIK, they use Alibaba fork). India and Africa are mostly untapped markets. The 80% market share come from America and Europe

Android is not banned from (or, in) China. It is hugely popular. See, for example, a popular website's offerings for Android telephones: http://mobile.139shop.com/commend/170__001_1.htm

Interestingly, in China, and this is personal experience not a market survey, the more one moves away from big brand manufacturers of Android telephones, the more pure / bare-bones / no manufacturer or telecom added applications the Android install is (again, China experience only).

I am sitting in mainland China with an Android phone in my pocket. 518 Yuan can easily buy a bright 5 inch screen, 4 days battery life (my average usage) with WiFi on most of the time, only one manufacturer installed app (Baidu input; being in China, this useful), 1.2GHz processor, 1GB RAM, 2 SIM card slots, SD Card slot (free card included, only 2GB, but free is free), 5MP camera (2MP reverse), user serviceable battery.

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

#88

Post by sriramyadavalli »

Nothing wrong with what Google is doing. Google is essentially a consumer (and enterprise) cloud services company that is looking to commoditize (read open source/sell at cost) all other parts of the stack. That includes open-sourcing Chrome/Android, selling Chromecast/Google Fiber at cost.

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

#89

Post by angryasian »

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…

I'm interested in how you think it works well for Google if they do nothing and allow Alibaba's Aliyun OS to market themselves as android. When issues do arise and incompatibilities in apps occur.. is this not the fragmentation that Google already is looked down upon ?

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

#90

Post by voltagex_ »

zobzu wrote: post #47
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…

AOSP is so open that the previous AOSP leader at Google quitted over the lack of openeness.

Blame mobile chipset vendors for that one.
Post reply on HN