Google Tightening Grip on Android - Less Open, "Open Source"

[cpjr]

We are talking about the OS, Apple's OS has a deathgrip on it and now Google is trying to tighten the belt on theirs. How is that not heading in the same direction?

If it does not lead to the issues I described before, I dont see how it is a bad thing. The OS deathgrip is only a bad thing when abused. Apple abuses it. I have not seen evidence that google has or will.

I never said they are abusing it and I havent said they will. You taking words out of my mouth.

Im quite simply saying they are on the same path....now whether they go a mile down that path and stop.......or 1000 miles down that path like Apple, only time will tell

 

[New2u]

Exactly what I was thinking. Suddenly this is "a great idea" and people "agree with this" haha. Now had Apple done this, "cult", "sheep", "Uncle Steve", and "Kool Aid" would have already been posted about 50 times....

I think this is a good idea, just like I think when Apple does it it's a good idea. You have an amazing product, why wouldn't you want to protect it?

No, everybody doesnt hate them for it. Dont assume the fanboys speak for the majority of Android users. Like I dont think the fanboys speak for the majority is iPhone, iPad users.

I think there were some pro Android ppl that wished the Android market was more like the iPhone's. And there were pro Android ppl that wished for something like this last year.

We cant say what ppl woulda posted cuz its just 1 iPhone. Sometimes I think we make more outta the fanboy thing than there is.

No you're right, I did generalize there, but I just find it funny. And I know this is an android centric forum so this sort of thing should be expected, but you gotta admit it's hilarious that people who would not even miss a beat in voicing their displeasure for something like this had Apple done it are not explaining what a "great idea" this is...

If all google does is this and stays with this level of "closed"ness then it's not how closed off apple is. While i do agree there is some weird irony here, it's also alittle off to compare the two. Seeing as all google wants to do is secure the core, it's a little different then wanting to close it all up. It is still going to be very open to alot of other things, now people can view this however they want to. Many view it as a way to protect against companies trying to put a UI on there, i can understand this view because this directly relates to the updates google puts out for the phones. Some view it as a way for google to protect their monies, which i guess in a roundabout way it is. But from everything i've heard this was a step taken because of the phone manufacturers not because google just wanted to make it closed. I remember one of the exec's from google talking months ago about how google views the UI's that are put on the system. He basically took the stance of that google didn't like that, because then it fragments phones by waiting on manufacturers to update their UI's to work with each specific phone and the update. So he stated back then that this was something they were trying to work out between google and the manufacturers but if they couldn't reach an agreement that google would take more drastic steps in forcing them to not be able to do it.

 

[jacobbond]

Android is only free because people are inevitably going to do Google searches on their phones. Plus it is branding for them and a platform from which to build things off of that generate more revenue - Android Market and Google search app / mobile advertising revenue.

 

[bL33d]

Good I want a android phone not a motoblur phone or touchwiz phone. I think this is mainly because of moto trying to act like god using another companies os. And we heard moto might try and make there own os which proves it.

Moto's os will most likely suck and I would rather have pure gingerbread then blur gingerbread. I vote for google anyway cause they seem less evil then moto.

 

[joeshell20]

I think what we need is a manufacturer that will make a device with the most updated hardware. Then, you purchase for a very small fee whatever version you wish to run. Blur, sense, or stock android. Just like pcs. This will enable carriers to offer their own UI to their customers but still give the customers the freedom to choose. This way no more locked bootloader or bricking. Big red could simply say if you want your device to be covered under our protection plan, you have to run our software. How would this be a bad thing? Any thoughts?

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums

 

[jacobbond]

I think what we need is a manufacturer that will make a device with the most updated hardware. Then, you purchase for a very small fee whatever version you wish to run. Blur, sense, or stock android. Just like pcs. This will enable carriers to offer their own UI to their customers but still give the customers the freedom to choose. This way no more locked bootloader or bricking. Big red could simply say if you want your device to be covered under our protection plan, you have to run our software. How would this be a bad thing? Any thoughts?

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums

Good idea but I don't think it will happen as then the only thing differentiating these phones would be hardware. And a lot of these phones have very similar hardware so consumers would have a hard time telling them apart. The phone companies like openness just as far as they can control it, so that making it truly open (i.e. rooting, installing custom ROMs) is not easy. So having Blur, sense, or touchwiz is more exclusive and a feature of the phones themselves. Exclusivity = profit, look at the iPhone for an example of that.

 

[hookbill]

Just a reminder people. Family friendly forum. If it isn't family friendly, don't say it.

 

[joeshell20]

Oh I know that it will never happen. But just imagine how great that would be for those who get bored with their phone easily. To be able to load whatever you want, whenever you want. That would be sweet!

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums

 

[czerdrill]

No, everybody doesnt hate them for it. Dont assume the fanboys speak for the majority of Android users. Like I dont think the fanboys speak for the majority is iPhone, iPad users.

I think there were some pro Android ppl that wished the Android market was more like the iPhone's. And there were pro Android ppl that wished for something like this last year.

We cant say what ppl woulda posted cuz its just 1 iPhone. Sometimes I think we make more outta the fanboy thing than there is.

No you're right, I did generalize there, but I just find it funny. And I know this is an android centric forum so this sort of thing should be expected, but you gotta admit it's hilarious that people who would not even miss a beat in voicing their displeasure for something like this had Apple done it are not explaining what a "great idea" this is...

If all google does is this and stays with this level of "closed"ness then it's not how closed off apple is. While i do agree there is some weird irony here, it's also alittle off to compare the two. Seeing as all google wants to do is secure the core, it's a little different then wanting to close it all up. It is still going to be very open to alot of other things, now people can view this however they want to. Many view it as a way to protect against companies trying to put a UI on there, i can understand this view because this directly relates to the updates google puts out for the phones. Some view it as a way for google to protect their monies, which i guess in a roundabout way it is. But from everything i've heard this was a step taken because of the phone manufacturers not because google just wanted to make it closed. I remember one of the exec's from google talking months ago about how google views the UI's that are put on the system. He basically took the stance of that google didn't like that, because then it fragments phones by waiting on manufacturers to update their UI's to work with each specific phone and the update. So he stated back then that this was something they were trying to work out between google and the manufacturers but if they couldn't reach an agreement that google would take more drastic steps in forcing them to not be able to do it.

just saw this. the thing is google doesn't have to take "drastic" steps. they own the license to android, they control what happens or what doesn't happen. the current license allows proprietary additions to all parts of the software. and that's mandated/allowed by google, not a manufacturer. if this happens, it's because google knows about it and agrees to it. it's not as if a manufacturer can violate the android license, go behind google's back and do something they're not aware of. the onus rests on google ultimately. the OEMs are just doing what is allowed by the current license and approved by google....you think there wouldn't be a lawsuit if some OEM violated the android license?

and yes you are correct, it's about monies...in fact it's only about money. Google, just like Apple, is not going to put their customer's needs/wants over a potential profit. No company on the planet (at least no successful company) would.

 

[Larry_ThaGr81]

Overall this is a good idea, more developers that only develop for the iOS will start developing for Google as the market becomes less fragmented. Less outdated android phones will be produced because there will be a minimum standard. The thought of manufacturers still producing phones that run android OS 1.6 makes me sick to the stomach.

Phone manufacturers aren't going anywhere because this is where they are making most of their revenue. Just like Verizon has us in their grasp as they are slowly stripping things away from us, Google can do the same thing if they choose and the vast majority of us aren't going anywhere because we are too accustomed to the android OS. All Google wants to do is create a better overall android experience. Manufacturers want to do the same thing, but sometimes they are hurting the Google experience more than they are helping. If they want to add to the experience then that's great, but it should be optional not mandatory. E.g. HTC Sense and Motoblur should be interfaces that can be turned off, without root if people don't like using them.

 

[Josefius]

E.g. HTC Sense and Motoblur should be interfaces that can be turned off, without root if people don't like using them.

I agree with this 100% we should be able to go to vanilla if we wanted to.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[geoff5093]

This doesn't say that manufacturers won't have their tweaks on phones they produce, just that it has to get approved through Google first. MotoBlur and Sense may be approved anyways.

I find this as good news, especially the fragmentation aspect.

 

[cardinal82]

First I just wanted to say I believe this is my first post even though I've been an avid reader of the forum for over a year when I got my OG Droid!

1. If Google makes it to where the UI's are either optional or can somehow be disabled I think that is a good thing. Some people love them, others loathe them. I personally would love to have vanilla android on my D2G. I actually wouldn't have switched to one had my OG Droid not been stolen from me by some low life while I was dancing.
2. If I remember correctly, I read sometime ago that Google would like to eventually move to where Android OS updates would be pushed out through the market almost in a modular form. This way if what would have been a traditional full update to the OS would have included say updates to texting, calendar, gallery, alarm clock, navigation, and blue tooth integration with a variety of functions and apps on the phone, but phone X could only support 5 out of those 6 "modules" as it stands today phone X would be left out and wouldn't get the update unless it was romed or rooted. With the modular approach that I believe I've heard Google wants to go to phone X would download and install the 5 "modules" its hardware specs could handle and thus be as up to date as possible until its hardware truly made it obsolete and unable to handle any of the latest upgrade modules. For this to work each phone would have to have a base Android OS that was free of anything extra like a manufacturers custom UI baked in that would require a custom baked OS update made by the manufacturer. The upside to this would be that every Android device that was capable of this type of modular update would be able to get it as soon as it was ready. No more waiting for custom made OS updates from the manufacturers for each model (which isn't always fool proof as I know of updates that have been halted after OTA updates have started being pushed out because they were crashing the phones and had to be rebuilt and re-released.).
3. It would prevent the bloatware that most people seem to despise from ending up on the phones in the first place.
4. It would prevent the carriers from locking down the phone and having any control over Android. If you don't think they want to control it you are in for a shock. I have a good friend who is a tech support supervisor for Big Red and if he is right (he has been everytime he's told me about changes to VZW policies, phones coming out, or OTA updates in the past) VZW has some nasty surprises in store for those of us with their phones. They basically want to neuter Android and turn our phones into as close to feature phones as they can be. Supposedly they are getting the manufacturers to include in their next update somekind of VZW anti-virus/protection app that will block the download and installation of non-VZW approved apps (most won't be approved), will prevent you from creating your own custom ringtones (if you want those you'll have to buy them through Vcast). All this in the name of protecting us dumb users who are too stupid for our own good and if left to our own devices would brick our phones. The truth is Big Red feels like it is missing out on revenue opportunities and they don't want to miss out on a chance to nickel and dime us some more. Google tightening their grip could prevent that!
5. Could Google abuse the heck out of this and go the way of Apple? Absolutely. Keep in mind though one of Google's core values/guiding principles is "don't be evil". I think they would consider going the way of Apple to definitely be evil. Does Apple have some good points? Yes, they make a good piece of hardware and their branding and messaging is extremely cohesive. Google has given us some a great OS to run some awesome phones that we love and which is what brings us to this forum, lets give them some benefit of the doubt until they give us a reason not to.

I would love to hear feedback on what everyone thinks about #'s 1-3. If anyone can back me up on #2 with either a link to that info or article thats awesome, and if I'm wrong about that please correct me.

Thanks everyone and hope I contributed some good to the conversation.