Google clamps down on handset makers to stem Android fragmentation - Page 2

...with finally, if not admitting to, dealing with the issues that their WOS (wide open source) created for them.

They never opened up their critical code of course, and they will leverage this for all their worth against competitors like Facebook, but at least my Android-using friends can see some relief as users of the Android OS. However, as I have mentioned before this may also be the first step in supplanting Android with the ChromeOS - especially for tablets. ChromeOS has much more versatility for a tablet framework than Android if they can nail down a proper touch interface to replace the keyboard/pointing device interface currently native to ChromeOS.

But we still haven't seen the ravening hords of Android apologists trooping in to proclaim this was the plan all along (well except for sprokkets, but since I have him ignored, I can't really use him as an example in good faith now can I?).

Perhaps we need to revisit the Android (Open) Rules:

Whatever is closed, curated or controlled is bad.
Whatever is open unfettered and free is good.
No app shall be fee'd.
No app shall be judged.
No app shall restricted.
No app shall be without ad.
All ads are good.

because they are changing or weren't really what you thought they were:

Android Real Rules:

Open is good in theory and in press, but must be...directed.
Closed curated or controlled is only good when it reinforces Google apps and prevents fragmentation.
No app shall compete with a Google app.
Some apps are bad.
Some apps need to be restricted
Google's needs trump user's needs, handset makers' needs and carriers' needs.


(credit to Animal Farm)

Palm slaps head - I wonder, how does Amazons App Market factor into this decision - after all, this sort of thing rarely happens in a vaccuum?

The reason vendors and carriers liked Android was because they cold make it their own. Thats the one thing it had going for it. Now, it does have an app ecosystem and will likely have even more apps running on it that are playable across more models due to the control, which is obviously Google reasoning for the bait-and-switch tactic at this point, but I wonder about previous comments about how WP& and other mobile OSes are cheaper for vendors than Android due to the licensing costs per unit being less than the in-house costs for getting Android to run on these devices.

This was the only solution for Google, I just hope (for their sake) it doesnt blow up in their face, but Im not optimistic. I think this will give their weaker competitors some much needed lead time to get back into the race.

The basic side effect of the Microsoft monopoly method, of which Android is a variant, is that hardware makers get put in a profit squeeze. If any of them are smart, they'll go back to programming a branch of Android, or going off on their own.

Google:

Step 1) Close barn door.

Step 2) Check for horses.

Step 3) Profit!


>> The OTHER open issue Google has, is that their whole Java/Droid framework is open, Chinese hackers have stripped out all their "forced advertising" code, that subsidizes their "inexpensive -- NOT cheap" product.

"closed" or open has never been the issue -- it's that the PLATFORM was not integrated. Who can develop and how apps get onto the device is a separate issue from that. But having a gatekeeper, is a bit of a hindrance for a developer but I'd argue -- the BEST thing for the consumer.

Now, in a decade, their might be an issue with Apple being too big and making 30% on all the apps they deploy -- but that again, is a negotiation between businesses -- as long as the consumer is getting a fair price and a reliable product -- they don't care.

I guess we can call this an "open" and "closed" case... Boom roasted!

This makes no difference to actual end-users. Limiting what changes the manufacturer and/or carrier can make to Android may make the UI experience more consistent, but it won't affect what I think is most important, namely the software upgrade path.

Both manufacturers and carriers will continue to deny or delay updates, and lock down the firmware to make it difficult for even 3rd parties from enabling you to do so.

Maybe you already know this and that's where you got this word.

The restaurant industry uses the word "clopen". If servers have to close one evening and then open the next day it's called a clopen.

Clopen or Oplose?

Android is now Glügled?

You can stick a fork in it.

So they can't make their own layer of UI crap on the handset. I guess all that leaves is the screen size, type, CPU, GPU, battery life, voice performance, hardware quality, form factor...

They can still use Android, but they know it isn't worth much without the Google services part to it.

I don't think the complaint is about GPL vs BSD at all. Rather, the complaint is that "they said it was open and now they are behaving as though it were closed."

I don't think too many people around here would really care if Google completely closed Android (well, if that were legally possible, it's not of course). It's just the hypocrisy of blasting Apple for being closed and then acting in "less-than-open" fashion that giving all the fanbois a field day.


Yeah, the FSF crowd are a bunch of religious zealots :-)

I'd like to know this -- didn't Google learn anything from Microsoft's mistakes? They seem to be headed down the same path; especially with the whole Bing thing.

If Android was 100% GPL they couldn't pull this "closed" behavior they are doing now.



"What do all men with power want? More power."

It's easy to judge from an armchair. I doubt me or anyone else would behave any differently if they have a chance to make billions.

I'm happy they are taking some control back, Samsungs awful Touch-wiz, and Motorolas Moto-blur UI overlays suck and give Android a bad name. Pure Google Android all the way. Its not like Android is loosing market share. It's number one but I want ultimate world dominance for Android.

I wouldn't worry too much. IMHO Android has been "forked" from the beginning. I've always said it's a big forking mess.

Apple doesn't understand what open means. Remember when they said the Facetime protocol would be open? What it alls come down to is money and market share. Google is doing what they think they should to address the fragmentation issues. The problem with these huge companies like Apple and Google is every move they make, they'll piss off someone who knows how to come to forums like this one and complain extra loudly.

They never said Honeycomb won't be open source. There is no change in the license type.

Hey, Android is officially fragmented for quite some time. Check this.

Can anything really be less than 100% GPL? I thought you either have to make it 100% GPL or 0% GPL.

Why? What possible personal deficiency would lead you to such a pointless aspiration?

Not all all. Plenty of stuff is GPL, LGPL and BSD. Look at OSX and its associated apps, protocols, etc.

So can't any doofus write apps for Android and put them out into the market without any approval? I thought that was the big difference. If true, isn't it only a matter of time before someone writes an app that is designed to hack, break, corrupt or otherwise disrupt the cellular phone networks?

"It's number one but I want ultimate world dominance for Android."

Why? What possible personal deficiency would lead you to such a pointless and meaningless aspiration?

Sorry for the almost duplicate post.

Someone must have rolled a porno distro of Android and sold it on bootleg phones in HK or something.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

How should I know?

Larry Page is finally taking control here.

GOOG is now determined to make billions out of Android. And the only way they could happen is to create exclusivity, just like what Apple/Facebook is doing. It's the right move from the shareholders' point of view. Not sure if the vendors would stay with GOOG or just move on to new platforms (or even just move to e.g. WP7) though.

Except every manufacturer is drawing from the same parts bin. How many Android phones have been or will shortly be released this year that have almost identical specs? 4" 480x 800 screen, dual core Tegra 1GHz CPU, a gig of RAM, 5MP front facing camera and HD video capable rear facing camera. Cases are interchangeable. And, except for for a few higher resolution screens, that's pretty much it for the current wave of Android phones. And when the hardware increments up they'll all use it. Not that most of these incremental, spec list changes actually make much of a difference to the user experience.

Without UI modifications, the average consumer would be hard pressed to tell an Optimus from an Atrix from a Thunderbolt from an Evo. The big choice is whether or not you want a slider. And of course that fact that the handset manufactures are releasing dozens of new handsets seemingly every few minutes just makes the whole market that much more of an undifferentiated mass. How many times can they push the "new greatest Android phone" button before it stops being very interesting?

What happens next is that there is really nothing to distinguish a marquee Samsung or Motorola phone from a Chinese label free on contract phone. Nobody makes enough money selling Android phones to do much in the way of basic R&D, and why should they? They're parts assemblers doing Google's work. There aren't going to be any substantial breakthroughs or innovations in the Android handset space, there's only going to be whatever Google is shipping currently as an OS (maybe, if you're lucky) and a million cookie cutter touchscreens.

Android is now semi-open. Do what you want as long as you ask google first. We'll see if this will stop fragmentation.

Remember this?!


Unless your innovation and choice are in Google's best interest then that open door will be slammed shut in your face.

deleted

About time. My damn droid x is the biggest POS.... Thx to my providers jacked up manipulation.

Apple makes billions .... and it doesn't behave like Google in any way, shape or form. Do no evil, indeed !

Gruber's latest post makes nice use of that very quotation.

I has nice picture too:

Now look at how much money any given handset manufacturer is making off Android and get back to us.

EDIT: Ha, pipped by Sennen.

I believe Google has realized that 100 different versions of their OS configured for hundreds more devices creates problems when trying to program for Android. The more customized versions of android there are, the more test devices a developer has to buy in order to assure his application is going to work.

I think at this point, a unified Android is much more important than "openness" in order to ensure stability of the operating system.

I think this is a good move by google.

Huh. Google must be confused. According to every one of their fanboys, there is no such thing as fragmentation.