If my understanding is correct, this restriction only applies if you want to use the name Android.
You can do whatever you like if you call it something else.
Can anyone confirm or refute this?
German telco Deutsche Telekom is to file an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Google, according to the New York Times. The giant owns the T-Mobile networks in Germany and the USA, and has stakes in several others. The complaint will allege, reports the NYT, that restrictive contracts imposed on handset …
Not sure about restrictions on the use of the name Android, the free portion is named Android Open Source Project (AOSP). What Google restricts is access to Google Mobile Services (GMS), and instead of charging for access go GMS Google imposes specific requirements on the manufacturers. Basically in order to install a single app from GMS a manufacturer must include them all, and follow other requirements as well (like app icon placement on the home screen). Since the play store is part of GMS, non-licensed operating systems based on AOSP must find an alternative app store or build their own.
Its more than just AOSP, anyone can fork that base operating system And call it Android. But to get ALL the improvements,namely the newest operating systems,like marshmallow, the OEMs have to follow Google's guidelines for compatibility. That means the OEMs can only put on Skins, and CAN NOT use their own forked version of Android. Xiaomi was previously using their own forked versions,before they went mainstream. That is,they wanted/needed the Google package to compete in western nations. That's also why Xiaomi has their own app store and cloud services,because Google was not allowed inside China back when Xiaomi was started.
I spent 30 mins today trying to disable GooTube on my Xperia SP (Manufacturer's default load, no operator customization).
You can disable any other app. Try to disable a google app. Any of them. It will be silently re-enabled within 5 mins if you have updates on, updated to latest and shoveled down your throat do you like it or not.
So on top of that there are defences against "customer disabling it".
MS is like twenty years older than Google and Google was not into customer's hardware or software for their first decade. Android was pretty much a stratagy so it did not become an Apple & MS duopoly, with the MS probably willing to take over the bulk share of low end phones. In some ways the Android & Apple situation is better, equivalent and worse than had that resulted depending on the area.
Yep, and I'd never thought I would say it, but my next mobile purchase will be a Windows Phone, my first ever, and gladly so...and I never thought I'd say "gladly" and Windows Phone" in the same sentence, especially as I won't let Win 8 or 10 anywhere near my PC or laptop!
If you want a great Windows phone,think about getting a gently used HTC touchpro 2, running Windows 6.5 version. It has a great slide out keyboard with a tilt screen. Has all the modern hardware that you would need for today. But check out the specs for yourself. Last time I looked,you could get one on eBay for less than $100, and many under $50. There is even a way to load Android on it to run in tandem. I loved that phone,but after I cracked the screen, I upgraded to Android for free thru my carrier.
"The Commission has probed the tight bundling of Google services with Android before."
I thought it had been repeatedly settled that whatever's in the bundling, it wasn't Android itself.
"It’s even had to ask twice."
So, this makes three then. I take it that the previous investigation result was not to someone's liking.
So the argument will be that enforced lack of default variation will be bad for the consumer. Meanwhile, iPhone.
You are suprised they would be more interested in the smart phone OS that is nearing a monopoly position (some countries it is already there) verses the one with a market share that is a minority and currently declining across it's region.
Coo. Hadn't seen the market stats. Wonder how much of that Samsung owns.
Still, you know the MS browserchoice EU settlement thing where they had to make the user choose at the start which browser they wanted? There's nothing (AIUI) to stop the phonemaker doing that for each app, because the user's choices aren't bound by the appbundle contract, only the phonemaker's.
But, the phonemaker would rather the user not choose, see? You are the meat being fought over - not the wounded party. The locked gate to the cattleyard actually already opens from the inside. They want it to open from the outside too.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021