Slashdot Mirror
Google Warns Android Might Not Remain Free Because of EU Decision (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The EU's decision to force Google to unbundle its Chrome and search apps from Android may have some implications for the future of Android's free business model. In a blog post defending Google's decision to bundle search and Chrome apps on Android, Google CEO Sundar Pichai outlines the company's response to the EU's $5 billion fine. Pichai highlights the fact a typical Android user will "install around 50 apps themselves" and can easily remove preinstalled apps. But if Google is prevented from bundling its own apps, that will upset the Android ecosystem.
"If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn't include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem," explains Pichai, carefully avoiding the fact that phone makers will no longer be forced to bundle these apps but can still choose to do so. Pichai then hints that the free Android business model has relied on this app bundling. "So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven't had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model," says Pichai. "But we are concerned that today's decision will upset the careful balance that we have struck with Android, and that it sends a troubling signal in favor of proprietary systems over open platforms." While it may be a bluff to court popular opinion, Google is threatening to license Android to phone makers. "[I]f phone makers can bundle their own browsers instead of Chrome and point search queries toward rivals, then that could have implications for Google's mobile ad revenue, which constitutes more than 50 percent of the company's net digital ad revenue," reports The Verge.
"If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn't include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem," explains Pichai, carefully avoiding the fact that phone makers will no longer be forced to bundle these apps but can still choose to do so. Pichai then hints that the free Android business model has relied on this app bundling. "So far, the Android business model has meant that we haven't had to charge phone makers for our technology, or depend on a tightly controlled distribution model," says Pichai. "But we are concerned that today's decision will upset the careful balance that we have struck with Android, and that it sends a troubling signal in favor of proprietary systems over open platforms." While it may be a bluff to court popular opinion, Google is threatening to license Android to phone makers. "[I]f phone makers can bundle their own browsers instead of Chrome and point search queries toward rivals, then that could have implications for Google's mobile ad revenue, which constitutes more than 50 percent of the company's net digital ad revenue," reports The Verge.
my carrier locks them to my phone by marking them as system applications. At one point I had an Android phone with a demo of a Puzzle Bobble clone that was marked as a critical system app. Pissed me off because I wanted the 127 mb of space back (which is a hell of a lot for a Puzzle Bobble Clone). To be fair I'm an American though.
Meanwhile I don't think Europeans are going to care if they have to pay $10 bucks for Android, and I don't think Google will be able to charge much more than that.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A free version, bundled with Google search and Chrome
A paid version, without them.
Next question, could the paid version be sold for $1000/device? What price would be considered reasonable? $50?
First, Android is not free. You pay for it with your personal information. If it's free as in "open", then Google should license it as such instead of fucking around.
Second, if Android is worth anything, people will pay for it with money.
Third (bonus), I do not want my operating system to be an "ecosystem". I want it to be an operating system and get the fuck out of my way.
You are welcome on my lawn.
From TFA: "can easily remove preinstalled apps"
Wait, what? I can easily remove *updates* to preinstalled apps, (which Google Play then nags me to update every time it runs) but barring rooting my phone and reinstalling the OS (assuming I can find a clean copy somewhere) how is this done? Or is this an unusual definition of "easily"?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
So is Google suggesting that Android is "Free" or "free"?
I think it is neither one. Google moved all the good stuff into the Google play services and out of plain jane open source Android.
Plus the arm twisting agreements where an OEM cannot make a Google Services Android phone and also make an open source or alternate firmware Android phone. Geee, that reminds me of Microsoft not allowing OEMs to sell their PCs with any other OS on them in the 1980's even if there was market demand at that time.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
"If phone makers and mobile network operators couldn't include our apps on their wide range of devices, it would upset the balance of the Android ecosystem," explains Pichai,
Utter fucking bullshit. No user WANTS this junk on their phone. The "ecosystem" he's talking about is the kickbacks they get for dumping a load of garbage onto people's phones. It's anti-competitive and removes power from the people. Fuck your business deals. Let people choose what they want to run.
is a load of bull. i've had and have a phone with twitter and a couple other apps that i cannot uninstall. it will not get ride of them.
They're just crying cause they have to play fair, and the exec bonus payments will be smaller this year.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
There is a better solution by using a PUBLIC standard for Android without the google's monopolistic control over it and with REAL competition driving REAL innovation at every level and in every part of the Android platform, not just the low-margin commodity hardware. The only problem is that it would reduce the google's profit.
Whoops. I forgot that would be a religious violation. "There is no gawd but profit, and the EVIL google must become gawd's #1 prophet!"
Actually, it isn't clear if the google is the most evil of the inhuman corporate cancers that are destroying our lives for the greater glory of profit maximization. However it is absolutely clear that the problem of profit maximization is a FAKE problem because there is NO possible solution. There is always a bigger number for a more maximum profit.
Here's my simpleminded solution: A progressive tax on corporate profits based on market share. The data is already there for public corporations that are required to open their books. As a company's taxes increase, it would eventually become MORE profitable to reproduce by fission.
ADSAuPR, atAJG.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Okay I think we should all be frank in that Google charging a fee for Android isn't some massive surprise here. The "open" nature of Android was sketch in rose color light and non-existent if you want to be honest. Google via Android has been pretty hostile to forks and fragmentation. Google has wanted to keep a firm thumb on their baby and they've done an incredibly good job at it.
When Google began moving a lot of the OS level functionality out of the OS and into the Google Play Services, that was a clear sign that Google was done being "open". Pretty much you have a Linux kernel and a Google supplied display environment and not much more when you remove Google Play Services and Play Services is closed sourced and kept under insanely strict "can and cannot" rules for its use. Of course that hasn't stopped anyone from freely pushing around the APK for it. But for legit or widely distributed variants of Android, if you don't agree to Google's demands, you can't use Play Services legally and this pretty much has ended every actual open-source implementation of Android and pretty much rendered AOSP dead in all but name. Play Services is the leash to which Google retains control over Android vendors.
I for one would just like it for Google to just stop pretending that it's OS is somehow different from closed source projects. Yes, it has a Linux kernel, but that's pretty much it and the kernel is really paired down for the hardware it runs on. Outside that, everything else in Android, pretty much the other 90% of the OS is closed sourced. I'm seriously shocked that they haven't put more steam behind Fuchsia and the replacement for the Linux Kernel. It's no surprise that no one in Google really likes working with the Kernel devs anymore. They're cantankerous and capricious on their best days and devs at Google would like to think that they've got better things to do than to argue why their patch should go mainline.
Google propped itself up on actual "open" but now that they are where they are, they're more than happy to spit liquor into the eyes of open source and move on. I'm just tired of them pretending to give a damn, I'd actually have a bit more respect for them if they'd just be frank about it and pull the plug on being "open" or "friendly" to developers. They are neither at this point and they have so much money they don't give a damn about it anymore.
Android is Free, but Google has woefully neglected it for years. Or rather, they meticulously worked on pulling all functionality into Play Services, while blinding the public into thinking that they are so great in doing open-source.
If they take Android non-free (what does this even mean?), it won't actually make much of a difference to the status quo. I'd hope for the EU to not take any of this, and simply double the fine if they do.
Fuck you, Google.
echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
Statement from Google pretty much confirms the EU is correct in that Google is forcing its services to lock out the market and make money. Personally I have no problems if Android doesn't remain free and it means a couple of dollars more on the cost of my devices, would happily trade that for a more open environment.
There is a better solution by using a PUBLIC standard for Android without the google's monopolistic control over it and with REAL competition driving REAL innovation at every level and in every part of the Android platform, not just the low-margin commodity hardware. The only problem is that it would reduce the google's profit.
And I even came up with a name for it! What about AOSP?
Android core without any Google tie-ins, free to use for manufacturers.
bickerdyke
Having a fine for every pre-installed App you can't un-install would be very popular.
What do I need an utterly dumb "AI" assistant for? Or has the younger generation become so infantile that they need this?
Incidentally, I use search engines all the time. They are not obsolete and will not be for a long, long time.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.