20 ms·

Android Is As Open As The Clenched Fist I’d Like To Punch The Carriers With

169 points by credo 16y ago

muyyatin 16y ago
The default (or potential) to be open shouldn't simply be equal to closed.
- nanairo 16y ago
  -1 The article answers this line of thought (see below)... and instead you offer no arguments. "And before all of you pros storm the comments with how great it is to root your Android phones, consider the average consumers here. They are the ones being screwed by this exploitation of “open.” Anyone with the desire to do so can fairly easily hack an iPhone too."
ugh 16y ago
Why not buy a unlocked phone? Won’t HTC or Samsung sell them to you?
- nimai 16y ago
  I think a better question is, what intelligent, tech-savvy person still gets their phone from their carrier?
  - guelo 16y ago
    Huh? Besides the Nexus One developer phone there's no other option except maybe craigslist and ebay.
    - AndrewDucker 16y ago
      HTC Desire, on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/HTC-A8181-Quad-Band-GPS-International-Brown/dp/B0038JDF3E http://www.amazon.com/HTC-A8181-Quad-Band-GPS-International-...
      - pieter 16y ago
        Just as a note to people wanting to buy an unlocked Android phone: I'm not entirely sure, but AFAIK you still can't put a custom rom on those machines without going through some hoops. You'll have to root your HTC Desire first (even though you bought it unlocked). That differs from e.g. the Nexus One, which you are able to setup with a custom bootrom without having to hack your phone.
        ugh 16y ago
        Why is that? Seems like a software problem Google could fix if they wanted to. Can’t they?
      - martey 16y ago
        That phone only has 3G on the 900 and 2100 bands, meaning that it will not be compatible with either AT&T's or T-Mobile 3G networks in the US. While HTC Desires with AT&T compatible 3G exist, you would have to drive to Canada to buy one: http://www.telusmobility.com/en/ON/htc_desire/index.shtml http://www.telusmobility.com/en/ON/htc_desire/index.shtml
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
  - wccrawford 16y ago
    I did. Because by the time that I want to switch carriers, I'll be ready for a new phone anyhow. I might as well take the discount on the phone. If I don't take the discount, I still pay the same rates monthly anyhow. What intelligent person would throw away money?
    - jedbrown 16y ago
      T-mobile gives you a $20/month discount. I agree that it doesn't make sense with the other carriers. An important issue is that the carriers operate on different bands so your phone is still tied to a specific carrier (if you want 3G to work).
- Tichy 16y ago
  Where, how?
  - uggedal 16y ago
    Here in Norway, and probably in most other parts of Europe, you can buy unlocked version of all phones, be it HTC, Samsung, iPhone (sold unlocked directly from http://apple.no http://apple.no).
  - ugh 16y ago
    The iPhone is pretty much the only cellphone I know of that you can’t buy unlocked in Germany.
- nodata 16y ago
  Serious question (I couldn't find the answer anywhere) - do unlocked phones get OTA updates? From who?
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    The Nexus One gets updates from Google servers, and the HTC Desire gets them direct from HTC, at least on Vodafone UK.
rakkhi 16y ago
Seems like we are a bit more lucky in the UK. You can buy virtualy any model android that is not carrier locked on pay as you go or just signup to a pay monthly plan with any of the 5 major carriers: http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobiles/smartphones/android http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobiles/smartphones/android In the US I can understand your points.... how is such a large market so controlled by the carriers? How is there not someone like carphone warehouse that sells all phones unlocked and carrier free? I mean here I bought even my iPhone from the Apple UK store unlocked and chose my own carrier, would do the same with an Android - no crapware any time.
- chadmalik 16y ago
  Corporations write the laws in the US. Politicians are just order-takers.
- pierrefar 16y ago
  >any model android that is not carrier locked on pay as you go That's wrong. All PAYG phones are carrier locked - they have to be for the sake of the business. You can buy SIM-free phones easily (say from expansys). The only way to get an unlocked phone from a carrier is to get a pay monthly plan, and that's only on some carriers (IIRC, only O2 gives you an unlocked phone, and on T-Mobile you have to request an unlock code and they give it to you 28 days later). The reseller Carphone Warehouse told me that all their pay-monthly deals, regardless of carrier, come with unlocked phones.
  - rakkhi 16y ago
    I would respectfully disagree. You can buy a phone outright and go on a pay monthly plan without a contract. That is what I am currently doing with my iPhone - I paid ¬£440 for the phone outright and pay £20/month on O2 for 300 minutes, unlimited text and unlimited data. No reason why you can't do that on n an Android
    - pierrefar 16y ago
      That's a SIM unlocked phone rather than a "true" PAYG, and yes you can do that with Android. Actually I'm about to :)
nanairo 16y ago
This is very close to a previous article blaming Google for turning us back into the days of strong carrier control. (can't remember the link, but it was here on HN). And I agree, though I don't think Google did it on purpose. Their main aim---I think---was just to avoid Apple (or Blackberry) becoming too powerful. They wanted to commoditise the smartphone market. And they have succeeded. And to me it doesn't look like the hardware manufacturers got a great deal either. It's turning into a cut-throat market, where all phones are pretty much identical (and interchangeable), and your revenues come from economy of scale. Basically like the PC market. Normally (e.g PC market) this would mean that the customer can shop for the best deal, which is great. However the "customer" here are the carriers: they buy from the manufacturers and resell to the real customer. And indeed they got all the power: they can ask this or that company to lock or modify the phone under threat of taking their business elsewhere. The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. So yeah, it seems to me to be pretty much what economics theory would suggest. The only alternative would to get an unlocked phone but then the manufacturer would lose the massive subsidise and most users seem to prefer those to the hassle of getting a closed system from their carriers.
- ssp 16y ago
  The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. Not yet, anyway. But the carriers have to be the next target. The huge capital requirements to build a network is their main barrier to entry, but that's unlikely to stop Google. I wonder if they realize this (they probably do), and if so, what they are going to about it.
  - nanairo 16y ago
    I thought so too... but now I am not too convinced. Two reasons mostly: 1- Google abandoning the Nexus One 2- Google getting too friendly with Verizon I fear they've moved to plan B. :(
  - oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago
confuzatron 16y ago
MG Siegler - I just got trolled again.
pilif 16y ago
it's not just the carriers. It's the manufacturers too - I know of no phone (aside of the Google developer phones) that would allow you to freely install your own build of the OS or even just remove "value added" software that has been installed for "your" "convenience". Unless you exploit security holes in the vendors crappy security systems. The fact that they don't even invest enough resources into a quality security framework (which helps increasing their revenue) speaks volumes of the quality of the other "improvements" they make to stock android.
- tyng 16y ago
  Totally agree, after all Android is just an OS, there's no guaranteed quality or user experience across different carriers and manufacturers are the same just because they are all "Android phones". This could totally ruin the Android brand since there is too much uncertainty about what people will get.
- lunatech 16y ago
  Unlocked Nokia N900 allow you to do that. Available on Aamazon for $400. It runs maemo, but people are trying to port android over to it. I myself own the N900 and I am quite happy with it. On a side note, I like the Nokia's hardware over Apple's.
- drivebyacct2 16y ago
  But that is because of the carriers. Why do you think Motorola implemented a signed multistage boot process? I'm sure they didn't say, "We want to limit our customers and waste engineering resources on a problem that voids the warranty anyway and doesn't matter to us". Nah, they reacted to VZW's threats.
  - kelnos 16y ago
    Nitpick: regardless of what the scare-message says when you unlock your N1's bootloader, changing the software on a device cannot (by law, in the US) void the warranty on the hardware, unless it is demonstrable that the software modification actually damaged the hardware.
  - 16y ago
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
The Android 2.2 Froyo marketshare number he quotes/links (5%) is five weeks out of date. That may not sound like much but the previous version 2.1 took 25% in just two weeks and climbed by nearly 8% every two weeks since. http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-ve... I've been checking that page recently because of the absolute storm of Android updates, new devices and sales increases announced recently and I expect a big shift in the stats.
- sandipc 16y ago
  this is especially significant because the original Motorola Droid received its 2.2 OTA update recently, and that phone accounts for a huge percentage of US Android handsets.
  - enjo 16y ago
    Also the Droid Incredible, which also sold millions of units, has received it's 2.2 update in the last week or so.
  - chaosmachine 16y ago
    Sadly, the Canadian version of the Droid (Milestone) isn't scheduled to get 2.2 until "Q1 2011"... It's the same hardware, I don't know why we have to wait 6 months.
    - Pengwin 16y ago
      I believe it is because the Milestone is on more than one carrier. Verizon and Motorola Worked together on the Droid's software and they streamlined the process because the Droid is only through Verizon, but the milestone is, for the most part, carrier independent. Even though it isn't to one single carrier I believe Motorola still works with carriers to make sure the phone updates don't brake anything. Also, Motorola have done their part with the Milestone by selling it, and they probably dont make any money with ongoing support, unlike verizon, who want to keep their contracted users happy. Thats my opinion of it anyway. and i own a UK Milestone.
shareme 16y ago
Note, several things wrong.. Google/OHA is making progress on opening different parts of the development process/tree..the android sdk tools including the Adt plugin are now developed out in the open..ie no closed master tree of code.. Author IS CONFUSING US Telecom Mobile Operator situation with openness of he Android platform
forensic 16y ago
This is pretty much business as usual in the computer industry. If you want a low price you have to put up with retarded bullshit. If you want a good experience you have to pay the Apple premium.
scotty79 16y ago
If I can put debian on my phone then I guess I could also put crapware free android if I wished. Also probably there is some method of uninstalling crapware without reinstalling whole system and eventually people will find out what it is.
slamo 16y ago
Techcrunch is a troll site. Do not feed the trolls. Do not post their links.
- andybak 16y ago
  Would you care to engage with the actual points made in this article?
  - ergo98 16y ago
    What points? That Android itself being open doesn't guarantee that every piece of software, every piece of hardware, and every carrier is going to be totally open? That's an asinine, utterly idiotic argument. It's a juvenile strawman ("Gosh, and I thought Android was open...but look I can't install Skype on my Sprint phone"). MG Siegler has seldom said anything that had any merit or added to the argument in any meaningful way. Which isn't a suprise, as TechCrunch is a trollbait emporium: They know that posting such asinine nonsense gets them hits, so they'll keep doing it. It is, absolutely, feeding the trolls.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
davidk0101 16y ago
Does Siegler ever make any points or does he always ramble on like this? Is he upset that people are buying android based phones or is it that the carriers are customizing the os too much and google won't force any strict guidelines? That was the appeal of android from the beginning. Basically anyone could take the os as a starting point and do some cool stuff with it. The fact that the carriers are using their monopoly to force certain conditions on their users is not really the fault of whoever produced the os which happens to be google in this case.
- demallien 16y ago
  Where does Seigler say that it was Google's fault? Let me quote: "Maybe if Google had their way, the system would be truly open. But they don’t. Sadly, they have to deal with a very big roadblock: the carriers." At the end of the day, Siegler understands that for end users, it doesn't matter whose fault the whole mess is, all that matters is that users are once more being herded into operator-controlled ghettos, much as they were pre-iPhone.
  - greenlblue 16y ago
    He is saying google is complicit in some kind of act he finds distasteful so google is partly to blame. Is that spelled out enough for you to see why I said he is blaming google?
  - drivebyacct2 16y ago
    I guess, but the flamebait title and the feeling of an anti-Android tirade throughout is hard to shake.
rm-rf 16y ago
The key here is the unavailability of non-carrier branded unrestricted Android phones in the US. If I get subsidized by the carrier when purchasing the phone, dealing with crapware and restriction is part of the cost of getting $400 or so off the price of the phone at purchase time. Ideally I could make a choice to buy an Andriod phone from a manufacturer with no branding and no restrictions, pay full price for it, and accept that the additional cost is what I'm willing to pay for an unrestricted, unbranded phone. The inability to purchase a phone like that is the real problem, not the restrictions placed on carrier subsidized phones. Two years ago I bought an unrestricted HTC Diamond with Winmo 6.1. I paid over $600 for the phone and the privilege of being able to do whatever I want with the phone. The $400 extra over a branded/restricted phone, spread out over 24 months, is $17/month for the privilege of being able to doink around with a phone. Having done that once, I'm leaning toward putting up with the crapware and restrictions and saving the $400. I figure that in two years, I probably only really used a couple of third party apps. Most of the rest that I tried were annoying memory leaks and crashes waiting to happen - barely better than carrier provided crapware.
- jedbrown 16y ago
  If you own your phone, T-mobile smartphone plans are $20/month cheaper. That's $480 over a 24-month contract, it doesn't pay to get the subsidized phone. (Yeah, unless you get an N1, it's still a branded phone with some crapware, but they will unlock it immediately and you can change your plan at any time.)
  - enjo 16y ago
    T-mobile, in my experience, is on the right side of almost everything in this argument. Of course they probably have to be given their relative size compared to the other big players. I gave up T-mobile a couple of years ago due to call quality issues here in Denver. I'm hoping they've fixed it.
- cdibona 16y ago
  You can pickup fully unlocked dev phones here: http://android.brightstarcorp.com/index.htm http://android.brightstarcorp.com/index.htm This has been the case since october of 2008. There has always been an unlocked option for developers/users. Consumers can buy those too, but they'd obviously rather purchase carrier related phones to save money on the phone purchase.
AndrewHampton 16y ago
I don't understand how he could interpret Verizon making and promoting their own app store as meaning the platform isn't open. Am I missing something or is the fact that anyone can make their own app store mean the platform is more open? Also, one minor nit is the 2.2 stats he's referring to are from August 2. I'm sure they'll be much higher with the 2.2 rollouts that occurred for Droids and Incedibles (others?) in August. In the end, if manufacturers/carriers make a bad product, it will fail in the market, but with Android, they're free to do that if they want.
- nanairo 16y ago
  It's the usual open for whom argument. Say Verizon creates its app store, promotes it, and removes Google's Marketplace. They also make sure you can't install apps any other way, including the original Google's marketplace. Now, they have been able to do all of this because it's open, so yeah, it is more open. However what they will hand over to the customer is more closed, and possibly a worse experience.
  - AndrewHampton 16y ago
    I would agree with you if he was talking about removing the Android Market, but that's not the argument he made in the article. He said "it would likely be more prominently displayed than Android’s own Market for apps" which would leave the Android Market intact.
    - nanairo 16y ago
      Oh, then I am with you. :) I guess I was looking longer term, but I wouldn't be surprised if "don't close the system" is the new "stop messing with what I like". ;)
      - AndrewHampton 16y ago
        Yes, I definitely think it's possible for Carriers/Manufacturers to really screw up the Android experience on any given phone. I just hope that those phones fail in the market. The point I wanted to make in the original comment was just to debunk one of the arguments he was making for why Android is closed.
grammaton 16y ago
I think the author is a little unclear of the definition of "open." Specifically, what "open source," which is the "open" in question, really means. The carriers can pull these shenanigans precisely because they have access to the source for the OS. If they didn't they'd have to go through Google or pick another option.
- oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago
  Not necessarily - on windows they can install all the crapware they want without Windows being OpenSource. Now imagine you bought your new crapware loaded PC but weren't allowed admin access. And weren't allowed on 'their' internet if you deleted anything
- wvenable 16y ago
  I think he's very clear. The ironic point he is trying to make is that people are citing "openness" as their reason for purchasing Android phones when it has no benefit for them at all.
  - grammaton 16y ago
    How is it not a benefit? If a carrier's actions really disgust me, I can just switch to a different carrier and still have access to a platform that is substantially the same. I'm not necessarily locked in to a carrier, unlike, say, someone who just has to have their iPhone.
    - wvenable 16y ago
      You get that same benefit with Windows Mobile or Blackberry, yet nobody would claim they are open.
    - eddieplan9 16y ago
      At the beginning of the article, he specifically mentioned the assumption that "if it’s not the iPhone/AT&T deal". In other words, assuming iPhone is available on multiple carriers.
lenni 16y ago
I was just about to write a blog post complaining about this very same problem. My 2.1 update was 6 month late and I can't root my phone, which was exactly why I wanted an Android. I will buy an iPhone next time. If I have the choice of bending over in front of Apple or T-Mobile, I'd rather have Apple.
jrockway 16y ago
In the end, it's our fault for electing people that refuse to regulate the cell phone carriers properly. Or, it's our fault for doing business with them. There are some countries where carriers are not allowed to include un-uninstallable apps. But not the US. Why? Because consumers in the US don't care about anything but a low, low price. Right now, Android is the only popular mobile OS that you can clone from git, build, and install on some piece of hardware. All hardware? Nope. But some? Yes. This means it's basically open. Just because someone sells you a box you're not allowed to open doesn't mean that all boxes are un-openable, after all. I had no trouble hacking my EVO 4G, deleting the stock OS with HTC and Sprint crapware, and installing a build with 100% open code. While it's not possible to do this with every Android phone ever made, it's not possible to do it with any iOS or Symbian or WebOS device. This makes Android the most open; and after the industry has been closed tight for 20+ years, it is quite refreshing. We haven't achieved perfection yet, but Android is the only software stack bringing us closer. (Remember commercial UNIXes? Neither do I. Linux and Free/Open/NetBSD relegated them to a very tiny niche market. Android is the beginning of this for mobile; you don't just wake up one day, free of the oppression of closed hardware and proprietary software. It takes time and effort, and Google is leading the way right now. Someone else will build on this in the future, and things will become even more open.)
- mindslight 16y ago
  What are you running on your EVO? I toyed with Cyanogenmod a few weeks ago, but gave up because it had some rough edges compared to Sense (like two text messages coming with every voicemail). However after a day of tinkering with various home replacements just to make the phone more usable sideways, I'm thinking I may have given up on the open source option too soon. It'd be nice to have a de-facto community distribution to repave the various carrier-specific installs, but I didn't get the impression that Cyanogenmod was there yet. Should I give it (or something else) a second look?
  - jrockway 16y ago
    I use CM without any problems. (There's no 4G, but I never got it to work with the Sense image anyway.)
ergo98 16y ago
MG Siegler is a troll of the worst kind. I have to particularly laugh at the Skype comment he added (a drum that Gruber has banged on in his dismissively sarcastic manner): That has NOTHING to do with Android. Skype, the company, decided to get in bed with Verizon and limit their app to certain handsets under certain conditions. What does that have to do with anything beyond perhaps "Skype and Verizon have a business relationship"? Android, the platform, is open, although that of course doesn't mean that every piece of hardware, software, or carrier will be open. Nonetheless, it's open enough that if you don't want Verizon crapware you can get a phone elsewhere. The advantage of Android being everywhere, unlike say the iPhone in the US, is that you can get a phone from another vendor or another handset maker if someone gets abusive, as Verizon is becoming.
- dannyr 16y ago
  I decided to stop reading MG Siegler's Android-related posts. His articles about Android are just absurd. The last straw for me was when he wrote that Android is only surging because Apple is letting them too. He's the ultimate fanboy that just cannot accept that the IPhone will not be the dominant smartphone in the near future. I don't think Apple loses sleep that they will be outsold by Android since they will still be taking massive profits. It's really unfortunate that a writer like him gets a voice in an influential blog like Techcrunch. I hope he just post things like these on his personal blog.
lutorm 16y ago
All of this only applies if you buy a subsidized phone from the carriers. Until the carriers can legally forbid non-branded phones from being on the network, they only have the power that their customers, who apparently like giving up their freedom of choice for a low upfront phone price, voluntarily give them.
drivebyacct2 16y ago
Even in the worst case scenario, it's more open than it's competitors and every single problem in the article can clearly be attributed to the carrier. Send a message by buying phones that aren't locked down. Thus far, HTC has left their stock Android phones fairly "hackable". Granted, the Nexus One was the last stock Android device we've seen. I'm hopeful that their slider qwerty super phone coming to VZW will run stock Gingerbread, and thus will be open to running a CM release. In lieu of that, I hope Google gets back into the phone market (I know, I know, they said they won't) with a Nexus Two before all of the CM resources jump ship to Meego or whatever up and coming platform presents itself as more "truly" open (at least until the carriers monetize and lock it down as well).
brudgers 16y ago
What Siegler does is pretend that when people say "Android is open" they mean "Android isn't repackaged by companies for their own purposes." Of course people don't, but it's a handy strawman. "Android is open" is used to express the idea that there is competition between Android products (consumer view). "Android is open" is also used to express the idea that a companies are free to enter or exit the marketplace without permission (developer view). "Android is open" is also used to express the idea that it isn't "Apple's Gated Community" (brand differentiation). This is probably the most important, and it's right out of Apple's playbook.

169 points by credo 16y ago

muyyatin 16y ago

The default (or potential) to be open shouldn't simply be equal to closed.

nanairo 16y ago
-1 The article answers this line of thought (see below)... and instead you offer no arguments. "And before all of you pros storm the comments with how great it is to root your Android phones, consider the average consumers here. They are the ones being screwed by this exploitation of “open.” Anyone with the desire to do so can fairly easily hack an iPhone too."

ugh 16y ago

Why not buy a unlocked phone? Won’t HTC or Samsung sell them to you?

nimai 16y ago
I think a better question is, what intelligent, tech-savvy person still gets their phone from their carrier?
- guelo 16y ago
  Huh? Besides the Nexus One developer phone there's no other option except maybe craigslist and ebay.
  - AndrewDucker 16y ago
    HTC Desire, on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/HTC-A8181-Quad-Band-GPS-International-Brown/dp/B0038JDF3E http://www.amazon.com/HTC-A8181-Quad-Band-GPS-International-...
    - pieter 16y ago
      Just as a note to people wanting to buy an unlocked Android phone: I'm not entirely sure, but AFAIK you still can't put a custom rom on those machines without going through some hoops. You'll have to root your HTC Desire first (even though you bought it unlocked). That differs from e.g. the Nexus One, which you are able to setup with a custom bootrom without having to hack your phone.
      - ugh 16y ago
        Why is that? Seems like a software problem Google could fix if they wanted to. Can’t they?
    - martey 16y ago
      That phone only has 3G on the 900 and 2100 bands, meaning that it will not be compatible with either AT&T's or T-Mobile 3G networks in the US. While HTC Desires with AT&T compatible 3G exist, you would have to drive to Canada to buy one: http://www.telusmobility.com/en/ON/htc_desire/index.shtml http://www.telusmobility.com/en/ON/htc_desire/index.shtml
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- wccrawford 16y ago
  I did. Because by the time that I want to switch carriers, I'll be ready for a new phone anyhow. I might as well take the discount on the phone. If I don't take the discount, I still pay the same rates monthly anyhow. What intelligent person would throw away money?
  - jedbrown 16y ago
    T-mobile gives you a $20/month discount. I agree that it doesn't make sense with the other carriers. An important issue is that the carriers operate on different bands so your phone is still tied to a specific carrier (if you want 3G to work).
Tichy 16y ago
Where, how?
- uggedal 16y ago
  Here in Norway, and probably in most other parts of Europe, you can buy unlocked version of all phones, be it HTC, Samsung, iPhone (sold unlocked directly from http://apple.no http://apple.no).
- ugh 16y ago
  The iPhone is pretty much the only cellphone I know of that you can’t buy unlocked in Germany.
nodata 16y ago
Serious question (I couldn't find the answer anywhere) - do unlocked phones get OTA updates? From who?
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  The Nexus One gets updates from Google servers, and the HTC Desire gets them direct from HTC, at least on Vodafone UK.

rakkhi 16y ago

Seems like we are a bit more lucky in the UK. You can buy virtualy any model android that is not carrier locked on pay as you go or just signup to a pay monthly plan with any of the 5 major carriers: http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobiles/smartphones/android http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobiles/smartphones/android In the US I can understand your points.... how is such a large market so controlled by the carriers? How is there not someone like carphone warehouse that sells all phones unlocked and carrier free? I mean here I bought even my iPhone from the Apple UK store unlocked and chose my own carrier, would do the same with an Android - no crapware any time.

chadmalik 16y ago
Corporations write the laws in the US. Politicians are just order-takers.
pierrefar 16y ago
>any model android that is not carrier locked on pay as you go That's wrong. All PAYG phones are carrier locked - they have to be for the sake of the business. You can buy SIM-free phones easily (say from expansys). The only way to get an unlocked phone from a carrier is to get a pay monthly plan, and that's only on some carriers (IIRC, only O2 gives you an unlocked phone, and on T-Mobile you have to request an unlock code and they give it to you 28 days later). The reseller Carphone Warehouse told me that all their pay-monthly deals, regardless of carrier, come with unlocked phones.
- rakkhi 16y ago
  I would respectfully disagree. You can buy a phone outright and go on a pay monthly plan without a contract. That is what I am currently doing with my iPhone - I paid ¬£440 for the phone outright and pay £20/month on O2 for 300 minutes, unlimited text and unlimited data. No reason why you can't do that on n an Android
  - pierrefar 16y ago
    That's a SIM unlocked phone rather than a "true" PAYG, and yes you can do that with Android. Actually I'm about to :)

nanairo 16y ago

This is very close to a previous article blaming Google for turning us back into the days of strong carrier control. (can't remember the link, but it was here on HN). And I agree, though I don't think Google did it on purpose. Their main aim---I think---was just to avoid Apple (or Blackberry) becoming too powerful. They wanted to commoditise the smartphone market. And they have succeeded. And to me it doesn't look like the hardware manufacturers got a great deal either. It's turning into a cut-throat market, where all phones are pretty much identical (and interchangeable), and your revenues come from economy of scale. Basically like the PC market. Normally (e.g PC market) this would mean that the customer can shop for the best deal, which is great. However the "customer" here are the carriers: they buy from the manufacturers and resell to the real customer. And indeed they got all the power: they can ask this or that company to lock or modify the phone under threat of taking their business elsewhere. The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. So yeah, it seems to me to be pretty much what economics theory would suggest. The only alternative would to get an unlocked phone but then the manufacturer would lose the massive subsidise and most users seem to prefer those to the hassle of getting a closed system from their carriers.

ssp 16y ago
The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. Not yet, anyway. But the carriers have to be the next target. The huge capital requirements to build a network is their main barrier to entry, but that's unlikely to stop Google. I wonder if they realize this (they probably do), and if so, what they are going to about it.
- nanairo 16y ago
  I thought so too... but now I am not too convinced. Two reasons mostly: 1- Google abandoning the Nexus One 2- Google getting too friendly with Verizon I fear they've moved to plan B. :(
- oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago

confuzatron 16y ago

MG Siegler - I just got trolled again.

pilif 16y ago

it's not just the carriers. It's the manufacturers too - I know of no phone (aside of the Google developer phones) that would allow you to freely install your own build of the OS or even just remove "value added" software that has been installed for "your" "convenience". Unless you exploit security holes in the vendors crappy security systems. The fact that they don't even invest enough resources into a quality security framework (which helps increasing their revenue) speaks volumes of the quality of the other "improvements" they make to stock android.

tyng 16y ago
Totally agree, after all Android is just an OS, there's no guaranteed quality or user experience across different carriers and manufacturers are the same just because they are all "Android phones". This could totally ruin the Android brand since there is too much uncertainty about what people will get.
lunatech 16y ago
Unlocked Nokia N900 allow you to do that. Available on Aamazon for $400. It runs maemo, but people are trying to port android over to it. I myself own the N900 and I am quite happy with it. On a side note, I like the Nokia's hardware over Apple's.
drivebyacct2 16y ago
But that is because of the carriers. Why do you think Motorola implemented a signed multistage boot process? I'm sure they didn't say, "We want to limit our customers and waste engineering resources on a problem that voids the warranty anyway and doesn't matter to us". Nah, they reacted to VZW's threats.
- kelnos 16y ago
  Nitpick: regardless of what the scare-message says when you unlock your N1's bootloader, changing the software on a device cannot (by law, in the US) void the warranty on the hardware, unless it is demonstrable that the software modification actually damaged the hardware.
- 16y ago

ZeroGravitas 16y ago

The Android 2.2 Froyo marketshare number he quotes/links (5%) is five weeks out of date. That may not sound like much but the previous version 2.1 took 25% in just two weeks and climbed by nearly 8% every two weeks since. http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-ve... I've been checking that page recently because of the absolute storm of Android updates, new devices and sales increases announced recently and I expect a big shift in the stats.

sandipc 16y ago
this is especially significant because the original Motorola Droid received its 2.2 OTA update recently, and that phone accounts for a huge percentage of US Android handsets.
- enjo 16y ago
  Also the Droid Incredible, which also sold millions of units, has received it's 2.2 update in the last week or so.
- chaosmachine 16y ago
  Sadly, the Canadian version of the Droid (Milestone) isn't scheduled to get 2.2 until "Q1 2011"... It's the same hardware, I don't know why we have to wait 6 months.
  - Pengwin 16y ago
    I believe it is because the Milestone is on more than one carrier. Verizon and Motorola Worked together on the Droid's software and they streamlined the process because the Droid is only through Verizon, but the milestone is, for the most part, carrier independent. Even though it isn't to one single carrier I believe Motorola still works with carriers to make sure the phone updates don't brake anything. Also, Motorola have done their part with the Milestone by selling it, and they probably dont make any money with ongoing support, unlike verizon, who want to keep their contracted users happy. Thats my opinion of it anyway. and i own a UK Milestone.

shareme 16y ago

Note, several things wrong.. Google/OHA is making progress on opening different parts of the development process/tree..the android sdk tools including the Adt plugin are now developed out in the open..ie no closed master tree of code.. Author IS CONFUSING US Telecom Mobile Operator situation with openness of he Android platform

forensic 16y ago

This is pretty much business as usual in the computer industry. If you want a low price you have to put up with retarded bullshit. If you want a good experience you have to pay the Apple premium.

scotty79 16y ago

If I can put debian on my phone then I guess I could also put crapware free android if I wished. Also probably there is some method of uninstalling crapware without reinstalling whole system and eventually people will find out what it is.

slamo 16y ago

Techcrunch is a troll site. Do not feed the trolls. Do not post their links.

andybak 16y ago
Would you care to engage with the actual points made in this article?
- ergo98 16y ago
  What points? That Android itself being open doesn't guarantee that every piece of software, every piece of hardware, and every carrier is going to be totally open? That's an asinine, utterly idiotic argument. It's a juvenile strawman ("Gosh, and I thought Android was open...but look I can't install Skype on my Sprint phone"). MG Siegler has seldom said anything that had any merit or added to the argument in any meaningful way. Which isn't a suprise, as TechCrunch is a trollbait emporium: They know that posting such asinine nonsense gets them hits, so they'll keep doing it. It is, absolutely, feeding the trolls.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

davidk0101 16y ago

Does Siegler ever make any points or does he always ramble on like this? Is he upset that people are buying android based phones or is it that the carriers are customizing the os too much and google won't force any strict guidelines? That was the appeal of android from the beginning. Basically anyone could take the os as a starting point and do some cool stuff with it. The fact that the carriers are using their monopoly to force certain conditions on their users is not really the fault of whoever produced the os which happens to be google in this case.

demallien 16y ago
Where does Seigler say that it was Google's fault? Let me quote: "Maybe if Google had their way, the system would be truly open. But they don’t. Sadly, they have to deal with a very big roadblock: the carriers." At the end of the day, Siegler understands that for end users, it doesn't matter whose fault the whole mess is, all that matters is that users are once more being herded into operator-controlled ghettos, much as they were pre-iPhone.
- greenlblue 16y ago
  He is saying google is complicit in some kind of act he finds distasteful so google is partly to blame. Is that spelled out enough for you to see why I said he is blaming google?
- drivebyacct2 16y ago
  I guess, but the flamebait title and the feeling of an anti-Android tirade throughout is hard to shake.

rm-rf 16y ago

The key here is the unavailability of non-carrier branded unrestricted Android phones in the US. If I get subsidized by the carrier when purchasing the phone, dealing with crapware and restriction is part of the cost of getting $400 or so off the price of the phone at purchase time. Ideally I could make a choice to buy an Andriod phone from a manufacturer with no branding and no restrictions, pay full price for it, and accept that the additional cost is what I'm willing to pay for an unrestricted, unbranded phone. The inability to purchase a phone like that is the real problem, not the restrictions placed on carrier subsidized phones. Two years ago I bought an unrestricted HTC Diamond with Winmo 6.1. I paid over $600 for the phone and the privilege of being able to do whatever I want with the phone. The $400 extra over a branded/restricted phone, spread out over 24 months, is $17/month for the privilege of being able to doink around with a phone. Having done that once, I'm leaning toward putting up with the crapware and restrictions and saving the $400. I figure that in two years, I probably only really used a couple of third party apps. Most of the rest that I tried were annoying memory leaks and crashes waiting to happen - barely better than carrier provided crapware.

jedbrown 16y ago
If you own your phone, T-mobile smartphone plans are $20/month cheaper. That's $480 over a 24-month contract, it doesn't pay to get the subsidized phone. (Yeah, unless you get an N1, it's still a branded phone with some crapware, but they will unlock it immediately and you can change your plan at any time.)
- enjo 16y ago
  T-mobile, in my experience, is on the right side of almost everything in this argument. Of course they probably have to be given their relative size compared to the other big players. I gave up T-mobile a couple of years ago due to call quality issues here in Denver. I'm hoping they've fixed it.
cdibona 16y ago
You can pickup fully unlocked dev phones here: http://android.brightstarcorp.com/index.htm http://android.brightstarcorp.com/index.htm This has been the case since october of 2008. There has always been an unlocked option for developers/users. Consumers can buy those too, but they'd obviously rather purchase carrier related phones to save money on the phone purchase.

AndrewHampton 16y ago

I don't understand how he could interpret Verizon making and promoting their own app store as meaning the platform isn't open. Am I missing something or is the fact that anyone can make their own app store mean the platform is more open? Also, one minor nit is the 2.2 stats he's referring to are from August 2. I'm sure they'll be much higher with the 2.2 rollouts that occurred for Droids and Incedibles (others?) in August. In the end, if manufacturers/carriers make a bad product, it will fail in the market, but with Android, they're free to do that if they want.

nanairo 16y ago
It's the usual open for whom argument. Say Verizon creates its app store, promotes it, and removes Google's Marketplace. They also make sure you can't install apps any other way, including the original Google's marketplace. Now, they have been able to do all of this because it's open, so yeah, it is more open. However what they will hand over to the customer is more closed, and possibly a worse experience.
- AndrewHampton 16y ago
  I would agree with you if he was talking about removing the Android Market, but that's not the argument he made in the article. He said "it would likely be more prominently displayed than Android’s own Market for apps" which would leave the Android Market intact.
  - nanairo 16y ago
    Oh, then I am with you. :) I guess I was looking longer term, but I wouldn't be surprised if "don't close the system" is the new "stop messing with what I like". ;)
    - AndrewHampton 16y ago
      Yes, I definitely think it's possible for Carriers/Manufacturers to really screw up the Android experience on any given phone. I just hope that those phones fail in the market. The point I wanted to make in the original comment was just to debunk one of the arguments he was making for why Android is closed.

grammaton 16y ago

I think the author is a little unclear of the definition of "open." Specifically, what "open source," which is the "open" in question, really means. The carriers can pull these shenanigans precisely because they have access to the source for the OS. If they didn't they'd have to go through Google or pick another option.

oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago
Not necessarily - on windows they can install all the crapware they want without Windows being OpenSource. Now imagine you bought your new crapware loaded PC but weren't allowed admin access. And weren't allowed on 'their' internet if you deleted anything
wvenable 16y ago
I think he's very clear. The ironic point he is trying to make is that people are citing "openness" as their reason for purchasing Android phones when it has no benefit for them at all.
- grammaton 16y ago
  How is it not a benefit? If a carrier's actions really disgust me, I can just switch to a different carrier and still have access to a platform that is substantially the same. I'm not necessarily locked in to a carrier, unlike, say, someone who just has to have their iPhone.
  - wvenable 16y ago
    You get that same benefit with Windows Mobile or Blackberry, yet nobody would claim they are open.
  - eddieplan9 16y ago
    At the beginning of the article, he specifically mentioned the assumption that "if it’s not the iPhone/AT&T deal". In other words, assuming iPhone is available on multiple carriers.

lenni 16y ago

I was just about to write a blog post complaining about this very same problem. My 2.1 update was 6 month late and I can't root my phone, which was exactly why I wanted an Android. I will buy an iPhone next time. If I have the choice of bending over in front of Apple or T-Mobile, I'd rather have Apple.

jrockway 16y ago

In the end, it's our fault for electing people that refuse to regulate the cell phone carriers properly. Or, it's our fault for doing business with them. There are some countries where carriers are not allowed to include un-uninstallable apps. But not the US. Why? Because consumers in the US don't care about anything but a low, low price. Right now, Android is the only popular mobile OS that you can clone from git, build, and install on some piece of hardware. All hardware? Nope. But some? Yes. This means it's basically open. Just because someone sells you a box you're not allowed to open doesn't mean that all boxes are un-openable, after all. I had no trouble hacking my EVO 4G, deleting the stock OS with HTC and Sprint crapware, and installing a build with 100% open code. While it's not possible to do this with every Android phone ever made, it's not possible to do it with any iOS or Symbian or WebOS device. This makes Android the most open; and after the industry has been closed tight for 20+ years, it is quite refreshing. We haven't achieved perfection yet, but Android is the only software stack bringing us closer. (Remember commercial UNIXes? Neither do I. Linux and Free/Open/NetBSD relegated them to a very tiny niche market. Android is the beginning of this for mobile; you don't just wake up one day, free of the oppression of closed hardware and proprietary software. It takes time and effort, and Google is leading the way right now. Someone else will build on this in the future, and things will become even more open.)

mindslight 16y ago
What are you running on your EVO? I toyed with Cyanogenmod a few weeks ago, but gave up because it had some rough edges compared to Sense (like two text messages coming with every voicemail). However after a day of tinkering with various home replacements just to make the phone more usable sideways, I'm thinking I may have given up on the open source option too soon. It'd be nice to have a de-facto community distribution to repave the various carrier-specific installs, but I didn't get the impression that Cyanogenmod was there yet. Should I give it (or something else) a second look?
- jrockway 16y ago
  I use CM without any problems. (There's no 4G, but I never got it to work with the Sense image anyway.)

ergo98 16y ago

MG Siegler is a troll of the worst kind. I have to particularly laugh at the Skype comment he added (a drum that Gruber has banged on in his dismissively sarcastic manner): That has NOTHING to do with Android. Skype, the company, decided to get in bed with Verizon and limit their app to certain handsets under certain conditions. What does that have to do with anything beyond perhaps "Skype and Verizon have a business relationship"? Android, the platform, is open, although that of course doesn't mean that every piece of hardware, software, or carrier will be open. Nonetheless, it's open enough that if you don't want Verizon crapware you can get a phone elsewhere. The advantage of Android being everywhere, unlike say the iPhone in the US, is that you can get a phone from another vendor or another handset maker if someone gets abusive, as Verizon is becoming.

dannyr 16y ago
I decided to stop reading MG Siegler's Android-related posts. His articles about Android are just absurd. The last straw for me was when he wrote that Android is only surging because Apple is letting them too. He's the ultimate fanboy that just cannot accept that the IPhone will not be the dominant smartphone in the near future. I don't think Apple loses sleep that they will be outsold by Android since they will still be taking massive profits. It's really unfortunate that a writer like him gets a voice in an influential blog like Techcrunch. I hope he just post things like these on his personal blog.

lutorm 16y ago

All of this only applies if you buy a subsidized phone from the carriers. Until the carriers can legally forbid non-branded phones from being on the network, they only have the power that their customers, who apparently like giving up their freedom of choice for a low upfront phone price, voluntarily give them.

drivebyacct2 16y ago

Even in the worst case scenario, it's more open than it's competitors and every single problem in the article can clearly be attributed to the carrier. Send a message by buying phones that aren't locked down. Thus far, HTC has left their stock Android phones fairly "hackable". Granted, the Nexus One was the last stock Android device we've seen. I'm hopeful that their slider qwerty super phone coming to VZW will run stock Gingerbread, and thus will be open to running a CM release. In lieu of that, I hope Google gets back into the phone market (I know, I know, they said they won't) with a Nexus Two before all of the CM resources jump ship to Meego or whatever up and coming platform presents itself as more "truly" open (at least until the carriers monetize and lock it down as well).

brudgers 16y ago

What Siegler does is pretend that when people say "Android is open" they mean "Android isn't repackaged by companies for their own purposes." Of course people don't, but it's a handy strawman. "Android is open" is used to express the idea that there is competition between Android products (consumer view). "Android is open" is also used to express the idea that a companies are free to enter or exit the marketplace without permission (developer view). "Android is open" is also used to express the idea that it isn't "Apple's Gated Community" (brand differentiation). This is probably the most important, and it's right out of Apple's playbook.