Slashdot Mirror


Google's Definition of 'Open'

An anonymous reader writes "One of Android's biggest draws is its roots in open source. It enables a broad range of device manufacturers to work from the same code base, and provides app developers with more insight into the platform they're building on. But openness isn't a binary condition — there are many shades of gray. While Android is technically very open, from a practical standpoint it's much more difficult for device makers to distance themselves from Google, if that's their preference. 'Phone manufacturers and carriers that want to use Google's services must conform to Google's device standards, a stricter requirement than what basic AOSP requires. For some, this is a catch. For others, it's merely the cost of doing business. ... [Dianne Hackborn, one of Android's tech leads,] defends Google's right to include proprietary services, and to keep them proprietary, saying that its no different than any other proprietary app on Android. That's not entirely true, since Google does keep some API development to itself, but to its credit the company does open-source most of the new APIs introduced to Android.'"

33 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Excelent read on Ars tech. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google’s iron grip on Android

    Great story how Google gets it grip on Android.

    1. Re:Excelent read on Ars tech. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Great story how Google gets it grip on Android.

      However, as a counterpoint, here is a far less histrionic story which shows that AOSP is growing FASTER than Goog'es own Android, and has already easiy eclipsed iOS market share. Not to mention Nokia's Normandy phone, to be released later this month running a forked version of AOSP matched with Nokia serices rather than Google ones.

      ABI Research reports that Android once again dominated the Q4 2013 shipment numbers for smartphone advanced operating systems with 77% market share of over 280 million smartphones shipped in Q4 2013.Nearly one billion smartphones were shipped in 2013, Android accounting for 78% across the year.

      Android’s dominance is not quite as rosy as it seems though, with most of the growth coming from forked Android operating systems (137% year-on-year), mainly in China, India, and adjacent markets. Forked Android or AOSP accounted for 25% market share with 71 million unit shipments, as opposed to certified Android’s share of 52%, of a total of 77% market share.

      https://www.abiresearch.com/pr...

      For some reason, there's a concerted campaign happening to try to convince people that Google has locked up Android. It's an odd thing to pretend, and I'm wondering what their motive is?

    2. Re:Excelent read on Ars tech. by rudy_wayne · · Score: 3, Informative

      However, as a counterpoint, here is a far less histrionic story which shows that AOSP is growing FASTER than Goog'es own Android

      Except you left out the part that says AOSP is growing faster than Google Android only in China and India.

      As for the Ars Technica article, it's not histrionics to state facts:

      Google apps—mainly Gmail, Maps, Google Now, Hangouts, YouTube, and the Play Store -- are Android's killer apps, and manufacturers want these apps on their phones.

      While it might not be an official requirement, being granted a Google apps license will go a whole lot easier if you join the Open Handset Alliance. The OHA is a group of companies committed to Android—Google's Android—and members are contractually prohibited from building non-Google approved devices. Joining the OHA requires a company to promise to not build a device that runs a competing Android fork.

      Acer was bit by this requirement when it tried to build devices that ran Alibaba's Aliyun OS in China. Aliyun is an Android fork, and when Google got wind of it, Acer was told to shut the project down or lose its access to Google apps.

      This makes life extremely difficult for the only company brazen enough to sell an Android fork in the west: Amazon.

      Since the Kindle OS counts as an incompatible version of Android, no major OEM is allowed to produce the Kindle Fire for Amazon. So when Amazon goes shopping for a manufacturer for its next tablet, it has to immediately cross Acer, Asus, Dell, Foxconn, Fujitsu, HTC, Huawei, Kyocera, Lenovo, LG, Motorola, NEC, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Toshiba, and ZTE off the list. Currently, Amazon contracts Kindle manufacturing out to Quanta Computer, a company primarily known for making laptops. Amazon doesn't have many other choices.

    3. Re:Excelent read on Ars tech. by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except you left out the part that says AOSP is growing faster than Google Android only in China and India.

      So, only in the two (potentially) largest markets in the world, then?

    4. Re:Excelent read on Ars tech. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      The bold part looks like something that is almost certainly illegal, as it indicates that Google is controlling a cartel. If they put that in a public license agreement, then they need to fire their entire corporate legal team.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. So, don't use Google Apps by Virtucon · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can use other apps and app markets on your android device. You don't have to use Google Search, Maps or Mail because there are free or very low cost alternatives to them and they don't have the clingy, Google scam you out of your data smell. Getting rid of them is a snap in most cases and there's literally dozens of websites that can help you do it. Sure when you get an "update" from your phone maker you'll probably get them all back again but it's easy enough to remove them or you can go with something like Cyanogenmod and never worry about it again. There are alternative AOSP based distros out there that don't have that Google smell so look around, It's really not that hard. If you've never rooted your phone or sideloaded an app or changed the OS it can be somewhat intimidating but you can also find help out there online and via local phone store kiosks (forget the pimple crowd at the Sprint, Verizon or AT&T stores) who can set you up in no time.

    I do have to say that the nicest thing about Android based phones is that there are alternatives. For example, I don't have Google Apps and use Skobbler for the navigation. It uses OpenStreetMap and I recently downloaded a couple of countries and really like the fact that I could navigate, offline.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:So, don't use Google Apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bullshit article once again. It's almost as insane as the Ars article that I read on the subject (how could I avoid reading it when Ars' staff has been spamming its links all over the place)

      distance themselves from Google, ... that want to use Google's services

      Editors - are you so fucking blind as to not see the blatant contradiction here?

    2. Re:So, don't use Google Apps by elwinc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed. For me, the big draw of standard Android is maps/navigation/traffic. Decent speech recognition is the cherry on top. Being able to whip out my phone and say "navigate to airport" is worth a lot to me. The premise of the original article, "One of Android's biggest draws is its roots in open source" just doesn't ring true for me. In fact, I doubt it's true for the vast majority of Android users. I would suggest that Android's biggest draw is the price vs feature tradeoff. I'm aware that we aren't getting the main google apps for "free" but for many people they are getting them at an acceptable price.

      --
      --- Often in error; never in doubt!
    3. Re:So, don't use Google Apps by jader3rd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The premise of the original article, "One of Android's biggest draws is its roots in open source" just doesn't ring true for me. In fact, I doubt it's true for the vast majority of Android users.

      That's true, but it kind of hurts the original Android fans. That's exactly the thing that got a lot of the early Android fans (especially the ones on Slashdot) to excited about Android. They went around telling everyone they could have a chance to talk to, to switch to Android. Their motivation was that Android was an Open Source device operating system, but knowing that no one cares, they just said 'It's better'. Now that Google has made a lot of the Android experience not fit the classic Open Source model, these early fans are feeling a bit betrayed.

    4. Re:So, don't use Google Apps by msobkow · · Score: 2

      How does Google's implementation not fit the "classic" open source model?

      The source code is free. You can modify it. You can build your own installer pre-configured to use alternative services. You can roll your own services if you like. You can download and install apps from any app store you choose to point your phone at.

      The default is Google's implementation of those services and apps. But you're free to change it.

      I don't see the conflict with open source "traditions" at all -- the deployment of services and maintenance were always at the option of "for fee" in the Open Source World. Even the GPL never objected to the idea of charging for services and deployments, just not for the software itself.

      As far as I'm concerned, the whole article is just more Google-bashing and whinging from freetards who think that everything should be free. Well, it's not. Get over it, get off your ass, and roll your own distro and installer.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  3. Works for me by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Until Apple burst on the scene Carriers locked their platforms down, charged insane amounts of money for dev kits ($20k+) and were generally jerks to their customers. They had little or no desire to improve since they were making lots of money selling slightly better handsets and super high prices. Google does a good job reigning that in. The carriers aren't powerless in this equation either you know. I like that they're all at each other's throats :P.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Works for me by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 2

      That's not an Android issue, its a Verizon issue. It's the main reason that I ditched Verizon. GSM phones are the most open phones.

    2. Re: Works for me by Karlt1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's not an Android issue, its a Verizon issue. It's the main reason that I ditched Verizon. GSM phones are the most open phones.

      No it is an Android issue. I've had an iPhone on three of the four major carriers - AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile and none of them have ever had carrier installed crapware and I didn't have to wait for the carrier to decide to allow me to update to the latest OS.

  4. hey guys... by advocate_one · · Score: 2, Interesting

    try making an iOS device and taking on the Apple Empire...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  5. Didn't stop Amazon by AmericanBlarney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With the Kindle, I think the Amazon has been one of, if not the most, successful at embracing what Android provides as a core, but extending/customizing it to support their preferred business model. Sure, they did a lot of work on their fork of Android, but if other companies aren't willing to put the work in, don't complain about something you're getting for free.

    1. Re:Didn't stop Amazon by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Amazon is a success story here, but it's also a cautionary one. When most people envision an "open" Android, they envision a world where up-and-comers are capable of disrupting the old guard, yet the reality is anything but that. Instead, what we see from Amazon's example is that the cost of entry for launching your own fork is owning an established media delivery system, having an already-established app store with tens of thousands of apps available from day one, and having a world-class backend on which to build alternatives to Google's services.

      Who else has the resources to do something like that right now? By my count, no one. Microsoft would be the closest, since they have Azure and an established media content ecosystem, though they'd lack for Android apps. Sony? They lack for apps as well, though they're a possibility, since they have a media ecosystem and backend built up around their Playstation brand, which has tens of millions of users. Samsung? Probably not. They don't have the sort of ecosystem or services that could pull people away from Google.

      The point is, while Android itself may be open, it's not truly open to anyone but the biggest players in the game, so long as the most valuable parts are kept locked away by Google. The problem isn't that Amazon had to do "a lot of work on their fork of Android", the problem is that they had to do a lot of work establishing themselves in those other areas for years in advance before that fork of Android could even possibly be considered viable.

    2. Re:Didn't stop Amazon by Baloroth · · Score: 2

      There are dozens (at least, probably more like hundreds), of small-player Android devices out there which are based on Android's open source. Sure, you lose out on the largest Android store, but there are quite a few other stores out there (Amazon's being probably the biggest, but by no means the only one). You don't often hear about them (because they're made by small players), but they do exist. Heck, I own one (an MP3 player/mini-tablet). Anyone who has the resources to make a tablet can make their own Android device.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    3. Re:Didn't stop Amazon by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      Amazon launched their app store long before they launched the Kindle Fire.

      This was a key factor in what I said and was why I said it had tens of thousands of apps on day one.

      It's not tightly integrated with the Kindle line [...] There's nothing stopping other manufacturers from building their own custom Android version and shipping the Amazon store by default.

      That's a fair point, and something I completely overlooked. And for similar reasons, I suppose they could rely on Amazon's content ecosystem as well, in lieu of building their own, leaving only the need for a strong backend on which to provide their services.

      That definitely diminishes what I said quite a bit. It doesn't eliminate it, but it does mitigate it to a significant degree.

  6. Re:Just one problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    That's not the point of this article. This is about OEMs being able to sell devices with Android on them, but not include Google's standard apps.

    It's weird FUD. I wonder what Microsoft expects to gain from it?

  7. You say that like that's a good thing... by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    its no different than any other proprietary app on Android

    Except I don't like all the proprietary crud that my tablet came with, regardless of whether it's from Google or the manufacturer. It's doing god-knows-what in the background and its removal is well beyond the ability of the average user (which is the entire point, isn't it?).

    So ol' "Don't Be Evil" is now "Don't Be More Evil Than Our Business Partners?"

  8. The Plague by JimSadler · · Score: 2

    Business is like a wretched plague that insists on infecting every area of life. Computing and communications are more vulnerable to the infestation than most other aspects of life. The net started as a wonderful idea that was to be a super breakthrough and uplifting idea never before possible for humanity. And I don't mind porn one bit but almost overnight half of the traffic on the net was porn. Worse than porn every half witted scheme to defraud people attached itself to the net and became fixated as a permanent part of the net. Next the net became a battleground as soon as organizations and governments found out that people really would communicate on the net. I do realize that some economic incentives are needed to cause better hardware and communications abilities using computers. But somehow that gets disgustingly translated into some supposed right to sell phony Viagra tablets, made in some fools kitchen to the masses. We really need to crack down on fraud and beat some of these "businesses" back to the stone ages.

    1. Re:The Plague by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Without that 'plague' as you call it, you wouldn't be sitting here on slashdot complaining about it, as there would be no slashdot, no internet, no computers, no electricity...

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  9. Google Play Services by cseg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly, in my opinion the most offending point of Android is Google Play Services. Google making all its services depending on one another is something we've all been seeing for years now, one could argue that we're expecting and used to it. Now, a service at the center of it all, which can do anything it wants, whenever it wants, that's honestly going too far in my opinion.

    That's point #1, actually.

    #2 is the fact that for many people (myself included), the days of tinkering with devices is over. It can be a hobby sometimes/for some people, but I for one like to separate what I rely on from what I play with. So at best an Android device would be a toy, not something I rely on daily.

    Now, if anyone can point me to a simple/reliable way to use Google's Android without Google Play Services owning the device, and without being forced to nurse custom/specific distros/ROMs for it, I'd greatly appreciate it.

    1. Re:Google Play Services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On the contrary: this generation of phones are some of the most tinkerable devices that have existed. Just because you have lost interest and/or ability to tinker with your device doesn't discredit the millions who still do.

      That being said, the ROM you want is Cyanogenmod. Sure, you could replace all the google stuff yourself and put in your own features, but 99% of the time you will have a carbon copy of Cyanogenmod, it just took you weeks/months to make it instead of an hour to install it.

    2. Re:Google Play Services by QuasiSteve · · Score: 2

      but like I said, I'm looking for a solution that does not involve nursing custom ROMs.

      Could you explain a little further exactly what it is you're hoping for, then?

      Right now it seems like you're asking for Google's Android, which inherently means Google's Services and thus Google Play, etc. - but without exactly those things. At that point, it's not Google's Android anymore.

      So let's say you meant regular ol' Android. Okay, that's fine too, go grab AOSP. But then that's really no different from a custom ROM when seen from the viewpoint of 'Google's Android'. It's just that it's a rather barren one.

      So if you have to go with a ROM in the first place, Cyanogen is, once installed, fairly hands-off. Nobody's forcing you to delve into the nightly builds, say.

      But maybe you just don't want to deal with having to look up, download, install, custom roms at all. Well, you could get any number of phones that have it or, just as an example, MIUI pre-installed - with OTA updates so you don't have to 'nurse' it. But then you'd have to get a different phone.

      Seems to me that with your desires, you're going to either just have to live with the Google Play integration bits, or ignore the part where you wanted Android to begin with, and jump ship to iOS, Windows Phone, FireFox OS, Sailfish, etc.

  10. Re: Make it complete without Google apps by hawguy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Please, one of the big ones needs to be our knight in shining armor and make an Android phone without all the Google tie-ins. Make your own app-store that doesn't require a login or GUID from users, only from authors. Make a map and navigation app based on OSM. Include offline calendar and to-do lists, with optional syncing to a computer or an open source online service. Resist the urge to replace Google's apps with your own proprietary apps. Just make a phone worth buying.

    You mean a Kindle?

    Or you can just buy a phone that has good Cynogenmod support and stick with the F-Droid open source app repository.

  11. Kindle is Google-free by evilviper · · Score: 2

    While Android phones are almost always tied-in to Google, cheap tablets most commonly are NOT, and they do just fine. The success of the Kindle Fire should be a sign that you can sever those Google ties without too much trauma.

    You're not getting all that much from the fees paid to Google.

    You can find other free maps and navigation easily enough (MapQuest, OsmAnd~, etc.).
    You can find 3rd party YouTube apps, or you can just leave users to view YouTube in a web browser like desktop users do.
    You can set-up Gmail access without the official Gmail app.
    etc.

    The biggest stumbling block is the app store. Google has market effects on their side. There are several competitor app stores, but none as complete as Google's. Still, as long as you have the most-popular apps, your customers won't complain. GetJar and Amazon are passable.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  12. Lack of Understanding of Open Source by Luthair · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its almost like there is a concerted campaign this month against Android openness - or are journalists seeing buzz around earlier stories and creating more link bait? I think this article and the others all demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the open source world.

    There is more than one model, while there are entirely open projects like the Linux kernel, there are also a great many projects with both open and proprietary components. See MySQL, JBoss, Glassfish, Solaris, ExtJS, Nexus, etc., all of these projects are completely functional products but the companies provide additional functionality for profit.

    Android code is available under an OSI license, the code comprises a complete functional product (assuming device drivers, but that isn't Google's responsibility). The Open Source world is driven by contributing back, not by getting everything on a silver platter for free.

  13. I guess the "Android fragmentation" FUD failed by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Only a little time ago, there was lots of "OMG Android is becoming fragmented" stories. Now the stories are essentially the opposite: that device makers are closely tied into what Google does.

    Is there someone behind this? Or am I seeing consipiracies where there are none?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:I guess the "Android fragmentation" FUD failed by swillden · · Score: 3

      Only a little time ago, there was lots of "OMG Android is becoming fragmented" stories. Now the stories are essentially the opposite: that device makers are closely tied into what Google does.

      Is there someone behind this? Or am I seeing consipiracies where there are none?

      It really has changed, and the first thing caused the second.

      Android fragmentation was becoming a real problem, so Google decided they had to do something about it. Since AOSP is truly open source, Google can't use it to control what device manufacturers do. Google's solution was to tighten up the licensing requirements on the Google Apps, requiring licensees to agree not to do things that tend to fragment the ecosystem. Similarly, many new APIs have been added to the Google Play services, rather than the core OS, because that way Google can push the new APIs out, rather than having to wait for carriers and device makers to upgrade the core OS.

      (Disclaimer: I'm a Google engineer, but I don't work on Android and don't have any knowledge of Google Apps licensing beyond what I read in public articles. My information about the intent behind putting APIs into Google Play services came from a talk at Google I/O last year.)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  14. Re:Fan boys will be fan boys by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    Problem is, it's not an 'all-bad' or 'all-good' issue. It's bad, because Google is obviously not open here, and have been making moves to keep things less open. It's good though, because a lot of their code IS open source. So each side has something to argue.

    If you really want to troll the Android fanboys, point out that Apple is just as open, because their base OS is completely open.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  15. Re:Make it complete without Google apps by timmyf2371 · · Score: 2

    Ironically, Microsoft via the Nokia Normandy is likely to be the first of the big players to do this.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  16. Re:I don't care by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

    Is it the way Android spies on you that you like, or is it the way it advertises at you?