24 ms·

The Huawei Disaster Reveals Google’s Iron Grip on Android

• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• polyterative 7y ago
  I understand that AOSP and open source is cool and stuff, but still the alternative is Apple's OS. I'm not even mad
  • bhaak 7y ago
    Apple is not an alternative for anybody but Apple themselves. Huawei or Samsung don't have the option to go there.
  • sdan 7y ago
    You don't really get too much with AOSP. Google's just flexing it off to portray its "open" when in reality Google's using a reasonably different version of AOSP for Android.
    • yoz-y 7y ago
      In China using AOSP base is fine as people there don't (and can't) use Google services.
• writepub 7y ago
  Such iron, much grip. You can trivially install Google play store and services on 98% of the non-licensed phones in China. The fact that a $50B Chinese domestic Android market is thriving with zero control by Google proves the thesis to be untrue. Then there's Amazon's fire product line. The only reason it lags Google's play store is quality. If Amazon's hardware and software/store selection were 80% as good, they'd be a serious contender - again one needs to look at China for evidence of this, where Tencent, Baidu etc. run their own successful app stores agnostic to hardware
  • luckylion 7y ago
    > You can trivially install Google play store and services on 98% of the non-licensed phones in China. You can. I can. My mother and 95% (99? 99.9?) of the android users cannot. > The fact that a $50B Chinese domestic Android market is thriving with zero control by Google proves the thesis to be untrue. In Western countries it's true. You also can't build an online business in Europe if you're blocked by Google because they have a monopoly on search and nobody will find you. You can in China, but that doesn't change the situation in Europe (or, to a lesser extent, the US, I hear bing has some market share still).
    • baybal2 7y ago
      Chinese phones come without Google apps in quite a number of countries other than China, and those are not only African countries. Last time I saw google free Xiaomi's in Malaysia and Indonesia for example
    • fspeech 7y ago
      If Europe mandates no preinstalled app store every phone maker will make sure that the grandmas could install the store on their own.
      • acchow 7y ago
        What is the timeline on this happening?
    • necovek 7y ago
      > You can. I can. My mother and 95% (99? 99.9?) of the android users cannot. My mom is quick to install shitload of stuff on her phone that would be much harder for me to do (I once tried shutting down Facebook group notifications on her phone and gave up after manually going through a 100 or so ;)). She will gladly follow a tutorial on the web, download apks from unsafe sources, allow all permissions the app asks for etc. I, on the other hand, would look for a trusted source which would be much harder to find, would be weary of giving my credentials to any app, and would be even more weary of giving permissions that I do not find strictly necessary to an app that's coming on my phone.
• enitihas 7y ago
  Yeah, and it also reveals what the world would look like if Windows phone won instead of android. Atleast for Android you have AOSP, which is atleast somewhat open source. If Windows phone and iOS were the only two alternatives, a ban on a phone company like huwaei would be a death sentence. Can't do much with windows or iOS.
  • kwanbix 7y ago
    AOSP is fully open source. What is not is google services.
  • alkonaut 7y ago
    The app ecosystem is a mess on AOSP. It feels like google just uses it to show a faux openness but there is no way that a non-enthusiast will get the experience they have in one of the 2 (formerly 3) major brand app stores. And that's really what this is about: app ecosystems. Making a good OS is easy, but getting mindshare/appshare is difficult (as microsoft learned the hard way). AOSP makes no difference I think. If you are locked out of the official store, you are locked out of "Android" as people recognize it.
    • fspeech 7y ago
      Europe could disallow preintalled app stores so everyone can install their own app store of choice.
      • enitihas 7y ago
        Would they do the same for iOS too?
        • fspeech 7y ago
          I would assume any regulation will need to be vendor neutral so yes. I am just pointing out that Europe is not powerless even though I think the odds isn't high that they will do something like this.
• fspeech 7y ago
  It seems that it is up to Europe to give its people the choice in hardware and software by making appropriate regulations.
  • _iyig 7y ago
    It’d be a better world if Europe could give people more choices by... giving them more choices, instead of regulating the choices that other countries provide and fundamentally control.
    • luckylion 7y ago
      I'd really love to see that as well, but at the same time I have zero trust in our governments' ability to choose the right project/company/people to support/fund/subsidize. I do hope they consider pushing alternatives, but also that it's a more organic process where "the market" has some say and not a move to give plenty of money to a university/company only to shut the project down after a few years of failure.
    • rchaud 7y ago
      The purpose of regulation is to change the environment to allow for a more level playing field. Where would Spotify have been if the EC didn't force MS to unbundle Windows Media Player from installs of Win XP in 2004? For those who don't remember, WMP 9 already had streaming radio via the MSN entertainment arm. Competition doesn't happen overnight. The changes need to be in place for some period of time before entrepreneurs consider a new product/software in that sector to be viable.
      • cameronbrown 7y ago
        This completely disregards mobile - without which Spotify was completely irrelevant. Un-bundling WMP, in the long run, did virtually nothing.
        • rchaud 7y ago
          Spotify started in 2008 with 40 million tracks and desktop and web clients only. Back then mobile streaming was a non-entity as the iOS and Android app stores had not launched. So the business case for Spotify was very much focused on desktop users, where WMP would have been the dominant competitor had it not been for the Microsoft case.
• Roritharr 7y ago
  Google invested Billions into Android. Samsung tried to hedge for this by building Tizen(Bada) and realized how much needed to be invested to get an Android competitor going, so they kept the development going, but focused for their Smartwatches, as this would have to be a "if the worst happens" plan, not something that could be a profitable venture. LG has the Palm/HP borne WebOS for their TVs, i suspect with a similar idea at the back of their minds. Everyone else? They're too small to realistically try to save their smartphone businesses when the green robot becomes their enemy. Google bought this platform with every dollar invested over more than a decade, they didn't do this only so that Apple had a competitor, but so that THEY had control over mobile eyeballs.
  • NotPaidToPost 7y ago
    This is different from Korean manufacturers this time. This is China caught in a national security issue. - China has a huge domestic market and it may be sufficient in itself for a profitable venture - About half of Android phones are manufactured by Chinese brands. - China has deep pockets and are willing to play the long game. - They have no choice. Trump's used the nuclear option, which may well work in the short term but in the long term this has shown China and others that they have to get rid of their reliance on US tech and companies as a matter of national security. I think Trump's move has set a ball rolling and that in 10 years we'll see the results of that... And that won't be a pretty picture for the US.
    • fspeech 7y ago
      I think Google can compete on its own merit without having to be viewed as a monopolist, so I disagree that it won't be pretty for the US. Google will do fine on a more level playing field.
      • NotPaidToPost 7y ago
        The problem is not Google per se, but the power the US government yields through Google and tech companies in general. If 50% of Android phones are by Chinese brands then once an alternative exists they will have a big incentive in dropping Android. The end result can only be a massive market share loss for Google. The same goes for other tech companies like Qualcomm, ARM (not US but in same boat). Anything that can be weaponised. This is geopolitics and a global strategic issue. Google is just caught in it.
• karmakaze 7y ago
  We already know this, which is why we want a free platform based on AOSP and replacements for Google services.
  • pmlnr 7y ago
    ... or just a Free platform that doesn't have a malware-able god process called zygote and all those insane layers of abstraction Android has.
    • gruez 7y ago
      >that doesn't have a malware-able god process called zygote What?
      • pmlnr 7y ago
        https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/triada-trojan/11481/ https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/triada-trojan/11481/
        • gruez 7y ago
          Is this really an issue? Presumably you need some sort of privilege escalation exploit to modify zygote. At that point you could also modify other processes as well. It might make exploitation slightly easier, but it's not really a vulurability.
          • pmlnr 7y ago
            I never said it is; it's a bad design decision.
• tech6 7y ago
  Can someone explained what happened recently to cause such aggressive action against Huawei with ARM , Google etc refusing to work with them. Is it related to arrest of their executive recently ?
  • dagw 7y ago
    It's part of the US/China trade war. Trump believed the existing tariff situation with China was unfair and wanted to negotiate a new trade deal. When negotiations failed he started to implement a bunch of tariffs and trade restrictions on chines goods and companies to try to force their hand. This is just a part of that 'negotiation' strategy. Google, Arm etc. don't want to stop doing business with Huawei (since doing so no doubt costs them a lot of money), they're being banned from doing business with Huawei by the US government.
    • hutzlibu 7y ago
      But why is everyone silently accepting that? Also google, are they so bowed down to the government, that they just accept this, or do they know more reasons to declare Huawei a enemy?
      • disgruntledphd2 7y ago
        They have no choice except to comply. I worked for a non-Google tech company and there is literally code which prevents users in any sanctioned countries from being able to use the services. Unless Sundar Pichai would like to go to jail, there's very little that they can do about this.
        • hutzlibu 7y ago
          I believe there is something called the legal system? Which companies or people can use to challenge government decisions, if they don't like them. And they can at least openly express their concerns. But I do not see that hapoening, so something (or quite a lot) is going on behind the scene.
• turtlecloud 7y ago
  So they trigger the PRC gov to build their own OS. A temporary setback or worse? Who do we bet on in 10 yrs? State sponsored technology or Google? My bet is on China.
  • dagw 7y ago
    So they trigger the PRC gov to build their own OS They've tried before. Anybody else remember Kylin and Red Flag OS?
    • ggg2 7y ago
      which ended with Microsoft running to give them windows source for inspection. redflagOS was a huge success when you see the goals and few resources invested.
  • DeonPenny 7y ago
    Lol do that seems like a strange bet. State sponsor rarely win in those cases
    • turtlecloud 7y ago
      Mossad would like a word with you :)
    • luckylion 7y ago
      State sponsored != state run.
    • bildung 7y ago
      Yet here we are, talking to each other over the state-sponsored internet.
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • jessaustin 7y ago
• necovek 7y ago
  The article links to an interesting view on how even AOSP is a no-go for Huawei: https://www.xda-developers.com/analysis-huawei-aosp-google-ban/ https://www.xda-developers.com/analysis-huawei-aosp-google-b... What I find interesting is that Apache Licensed software can be relicensed even in proprietary form (as long as you make it a derivative work, with your derivative bits with a proprietary license), thus the easy way out seems to be to have a non-US entity make a proprietary fork of AOSP. I do not see a legal reason why this company would not be able to sell AOSP to Huawei under these conditions. I am sure plenty of us remember the days when free and open source encryption software was distributed exclusively through non-US servers due to US export restrictions. IANAL, so I wonder if I am missing something? As for alternative platforms, I imagine plenty are US based/originating (QNX, webOS from Palm/HP originally, Android), but there are alternatives like Jolla and Ubuntu Touch which aren't. While I dislike Huawei since they decided to stop sharing unlock codes for their phones, Huawei has one killer app that's not very much reliant on Android: camera. Getting that camera app on one of the less known platforms and enabling Huawei phones for them would still make them appealing to a large number of customers in eg. Europe.
  • fulafel 7y ago
    Is the article really right in this one? " A country banning its resident companies from engaging in contracts with a specific company breaks how our copyright system works, and as a result, breaks how open source licenses work. -- If Huawei cannot enter into a contract with Google, then they cannot enter into the Apache 2.0 licensing agreement with Google, which means that they would not have a license to distribute the AOSP codebase." If we look at the cited license (https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html) it's just a one sided license from the copyright holder, not a contract between parties, right?
    • masklinn 7y ago
      Software licenses are contracts.
      • deng 7y ago
• pas 7y ago
  “Consumers are attached to the Google products and services that sit on top of the operating system,” I doubt that. Google is pretty bad at keeping users. (Probably GMail is the strongest anchor point, but as we have seen with the G+ real name gotcha, it's better to be prepared to stop using that. Though of course most GMail users are not prepared for that.) Users will use whatever is the default. Probably the YouTube app is what users would miss the most. And I don't know whether it works without Play Services. But it certainly works on iOS, so if there were a new platform, Google/Alphabet/YT would make apps for that platform too.
  • dindresto 7y ago
    I think Windows Phone has shown that "Google/Alphabet/YT would make apps for that platform too" is far from true.
    • pas 7y ago
      Why and how? You can look at the difference between iOS and WP. Since iOS was a big market Google wanted [and wants] to be in they made the YT app. And since WP was small and late to the game Google had the upper hand, because MS wanted any users more than G wanted the small number of WP users. https://www.theverge.com/2013/5/7/4308662/youtube-windows-phone-app https://www.theverge.com/2013/5/7/4308662/youtube-windows-ph... Therefore if there were a credible new platform that Google wants to be on, they will develop the necessary apps.
      • laken 7y ago
        and only a few months later, this happened: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/appsblog/2013/aug/15/google-disables-windows-phone-youtube-app https://www.theguardian.com/technology/appsblog/2013/aug/15/... After August 2013, there was never an official YouTube app for Windows Phone.
    • rchaud 7y ago
      The issue with Windows Phone was that it was a Microsoft venture, and Google was already paying MS around $5 in license fees for every activated Android device [0]. They weren't in any hurry to make WP more competitive by offering a Youtube app. I had a WP device in 2011, and there were third party apps (MetroTube I think) that were like Newpipe in that you could watching and download YT videos for offline viewing. Not surprisingly, Google changed their APIs and broke the download capability. That said, Google didn't build third-party YT apps for BB10 or WebOS either. [0] https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475440/microsoft-gets--2-billion-a-year-in-android-patent-fees--really-.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475440/microsoft-gets...
• tibbydudeza 7y ago
  Google also invested $$$ in KaiOS and is busy porting their apps to it.
• microcolonel 7y ago
  This title is an extreme framing of the situation. A similar title would be "The Huawei Travesty Reveals Microsoft's Iron Grip on Windows NT". Yes, copyright is a thing, and if you own a copyright, you are entitled to control its copying through license agreements. To characterize that as an "Iron Grip" is quite strange, as short of releasing all of this investment as open source, there is no other kind of "grip" that Google is entitled to. Google has invested billions of dollars into applications and infrastructure for their most successful Linux distro, and yes, they own the copyright to that. As far as I'm aware, Google does not market their current Android distro as "open source" to any great extent, so why is it more of a problem than any other piece of popular proprietary software? What about the millions of Linux-based kiosks, pub games consoles, and giant social media and advertising juggernauts who also have proprietary software that they sell access to?
• drtillberg 7y ago
  Here's a granular discussion of another instance of Google exerting control over Android, from a decade ago (2010): https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ma-court-of-appeals/1683074.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ma-court-of-appeals/1683074.html
• Tsubasachan 7y ago
  In defense of Google none of the smartphone makers have tried to make their own mobile OS based on Android. Besides I think it more reveals how Google is in the grip of US politics- it might be time for Google to draw up some contingency plans for when America goes completely nuts.
  • luckylion 7y ago
    They've moved a lot of their profits out of US tax jurisdiction, is that possible with patents and technology as well so they wouldn't be affected by US export/business restrictions?
    • gruez 7y ago
      I'm pretty sure that if you operate in the US, you can't bypass sanctions by having your corporations registered somewhere else. At the very least you have to ensure none of your US division isn't violating the sanctions.
  • wpdev_63 7y ago
    You mean like FireOS and lineageOS? They are forks of Android.
• Ultramanoid 7y ago
  Does it reveal Google's iron grip on Android ? Really ? I'd say it rather reveals most users' unhealthy addiction to Google's services, without which, this whole thing wouldn't be the 'tragedy' and wake up call it's turning out to be for many. I have used Android for a decade now completely Google-free and no one could pay me enough money to be tracked and to run pure spyware 24/7 at this point... I enjoy immensely having a laptop replacement always on, always with me, in my pocket. No use for Play Services, advertising companies data mining all I do at all times, or 27, 42 or 59 'social media' applications running to give purpose to my life and 'communicate' with my 'friends'... File manager, web browser, terminal, editor, LTE... That's what I need or care about. I guess not many of us left.
  • nhanb 7y ago
    Could you share your current phone model and OS?
    • Ultramanoid 7y ago
      I use several devices, lately usually HTC or SONY. I run my own build based on a barebones cleaned up LineageOS ( no Lineage applications or many libraries ), just need the core OS and monthly security patches up to date. Applications are my own binaries, packages available through Termux, and from developers either through F-Droid, GitHub or XDA forums. I only need LTE and very rarely WiFi, so Bluetooth and NFC if available on device are disabled and neutered. Devices are encrypted but hold no data other than that in use, all data is always kept on external encrypted cards, and those go up to a tera now, so no issues even with large, very large files. Makes no sense to me that people tie data to a device, be it laptop, smartphone, tablet or desktop. The 'phone' part is just for emergencies; police, ambulance, that sort of thing. Otherwise even a mid-range device works as a fully fledged laptop substitute for me, can be my main computer, and has for years. Edit : Most of what I use is open source, and no adware, spyware, analytics, or crash reporters anywhere on my system. The current software business model based on data mining needs to die. Also, a decent web browser does, and better, what 90% of so-called 'apps' do.
      • 7y ago
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• vebu 7y ago
  I for one have been using a Honor (Huawei) phone for over 3 months with DNSFilter app running 24x7. Blocked all google domains after I installed the necessary apps from playstore. I don't see any problems if google shuts of Honor/Huawei devices permanently. I'd say it will be a benefit of Honor/Huawei phones. It will be the most privacy friendly phone out of the box. Edit- I use Newpipe instead of Youtube. So thats the alternative for the last google service I'd need everyday.
  • thepangolino 7y ago
    For me, not having any Google code would be a selling point if anything.
  • krageon 7y ago
    In my experience it is relatively easy to migrate off of Google services, except for the cloud messaging stuff. Unless you don't care when you get messages and only want to see them when you check (or god forbid only use email), you want GCM/firebase to work.
• lyrachord 7y ago
  Iron grip is the mother of death.
• k__ 7y ago
  They should have pumped more effort into the Web. Would have made it a real competitor in every way and no one would have cared about native apps and stores anymore.
• spodek 7y ago
  It reveals the value Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen created in the GPL, how much market forces will tend toward monopoly, and how we've let up on resisting those trends.
• StreamBright 7y ago
  It is not an accident that successful tech companies that provide devices for their users control their own destiny from the hardware to the UI level, great examples Apple, Microsoft. You can team up with Google but then your destiny is controlled by them.
• kpU8efre7r 7y ago
  I don't see the problem. Android, the operating system, is open source. App developers make a choice to use Google Play services? Why do developers choose to do this? Does Google provide features people want?
• cxromos 7y ago
  The Huawei disaster reveals iron grip of the Chinese military intelligence on Huawei. What a malarkey of an article.
• rdlecler1 7y ago
  Arguably Huawei wouldn’t be where they were today if they wrote their own OS from scratch. People complain about the power of Google. They’re complaining about the power of a great product. Anyone is welcome to build on top of Android it’s just really really hard so they let Google do that work.
• Justsignedup 7y ago
  Ugh... Google owns the android brand. Is this somehow news? Google open sources the core operating system and people use it for embedded systems or grad projects as reference materials. If anyone wants to know what Android is like without Google, look at Amazon Kindle. Amazon did the whole no Google Android. Point is that this should have shocked nobody.
• alfiedotwtf 7y ago
  There was no Huawei disaster... it was all FUD for Trump's triumphant trade war. As Trump shows his hand, the world now can see that the real disaster is US hegemony: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/24/tech/donald-trump-huawei-ban/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/24/tech/donald-trump-huawei-...
• theyinwhy 7y ago
  It is such a good time for Firefox OS / KaiOS. Really sad Mozilla threw in the towel.
• mark_l_watson 7y ago
  I have a few comments on this. First, Google as a money making corporation would probably not like this restriction enforced by the US government. Second, I used to use Android and when I did I avoided installing any apps, preferring to use web versions of the services I needed. The Huawei phones could be functional with some thoughtful default setups, home screen icons linked to appropriate web URIs, etc. The big kicker would be lack of games.
  • YayamiOmate 7y ago
    I concur. Google ws forced to force their hand for almost no value. If anything they will lose client/data base. Also google product lost trust, as a business platform in result. So imho they lose double time here. Because they are forcing out 3rd biggest phone seller to competition. The fact that this competition is practically non existent makes things even more unpredictable imho, which businesses doesn't like.
• bertomartin 7y ago
  My feeling is that this whole silliness will backfire spectacularly! Huawei will develop their own OS. It's hard but not impossible. Who cares if there's buy-in from the entire developer community...nowadays people don't use apps that much anyways. Apps are just another way of consumption. Most apps can probably be replaced with webviews with little lost of functionality. I don't know enough about the technical difficulties they'll have in developing a brand new os, but it's been done multiple times. In any case, this sux for all parties.
  • jeroenhd 7y ago
    Let's be honest, if Huawei (sponsored by the Chinese government) creates their own open/shared OS together with other Chinese manufacturers, Chinese people will switch eventually. If WeChat is ported to the new OS, other apps will soon follow. The result: a Chinese OS that's completely independent of American manufacturers. It's also possible that this will cause Huawei and the Chinese government to pour funding into Chinese chip designs. Eventually, China will become less dependent on the US and the US will lose another point of influence. Is this bad for Huawei in the short term? Of course. But is this hurting the Chinese economy in the long term? I don't think so.
  • tgtweak 7y ago
    If there is an app compatability layer (API parity) I'm sure most users won't notice the difference, and app developers wouldn't cry too hard about missing Google play services, provided there is an alternative. My bet is Huawei will pick up a team or company (lineage team start packing your bags) to move forward with minimal risk. That or partner with a few other b-list manufacturers and create an alternative. Hell even Google itself is trying to drop Android.
  • ovi256 7y ago
    30% of smartphones sold in the EU in 2019Q1 were Huawei. You can bet that no bank or whatever will abandon such a large fraction of the users of their app, but is already calling people to get the Huawei OS version of their app started. Especially given that Huawei OS looks to be a fork of AOSP with the proprietary Google Services replaced with proprietary Huawei services. The developpers will just fork the existing app, using Android studio, and the same language!
• wtdata 7y ago
  I would like to see an open source project taking the spot here, not Huawei doing the same (actually probably worst) thing as Google and create their own semi-closed OS. In fact, in Huawei's particular case, I don't even think it will be a push to create momentum for a truly open smartphone OS out of necessity, after all, Huawei goes through great lengths to keep the bootloader in their phones locked.
• needle0 7y ago
  The rationale for cutting off Huawei seems to be "No matter how much you claim to not spy, you are forced to comply when the Chinese government tells you to do so" - which so far appears to be the hypothetical worst case scenario. Considering that, it's kinda ironic that Google/Amazon/ARM et al are all _actually_ carrying out Huawei's own (formerly)hypothetical worst-case scenario because the US government told them to do so.
  • penagwin 7y ago
    Huawei isn't part of the Five Eyes (or the extensions of it), so any data they collect of Five Eye nations is a threat. Data Five Eye nations collect on each other or themselves isn't a threat because they're allies, often using each other to allow surveillance while loopholing some laws in their respective countries. I don't like it either, just explaining the motivations at play here. Also you must expect any entity (company, individual, etc.) to obey their government, otherwise there's not much point in a government is there (not that the governments decisions are necessarily good ones)?
• wpdev_63 7y ago
  Huawei is a massive company with a large lineup of affordable Android phones. Why can't they just fork Android just like Amazon and Microsoft? I guess they would have to come up with alternative to google play marketplace, gmaps, gmail, etc. but it's not really a big deal with the resources they have. Not to mention that the open source equivalent of these apps are serviceable.
  • mcrae 7y ago
    Don't think it is that simple for a couple of reasons: 1) Without GMS, developers will need to fork their apps and reimplement everything they use Play services for today. That's non-trvial and I suspect a substantial number of developers would not be willing to do this. 2) Even if Huawei developed their own app store, IAP framework, etc, as I understand it the order in the US prevents Huawei from entering into any new business with US companies without a license. So, does that mean that FB, Twitter, et all would be prohibited from listing their apps? I believe so.
    • wpdev_63 7y ago
      >1) Without GMS, developers will need to fork their apps and reimplement everything they use Play services for today. That's non-trvial and I suspect a substantial number of developers would not be willing to do this. True but Hawuei has the resources to actually make great open source alternatives that developers can take advantage of. >2) Even if Huawei developed their own app store, IAP framework, etc, as I understand it the order in the US prevents Huawei from entering into any new business with US companies without a license. So, does that mean that FB, Twitter, et all would be prohibited from listing their apps? I believe so. I guess but that's not their business. They will have to come up with a alternative to Arm due to licensing. A RISC-V chipset developed by a major company is an interesting prospect.
      • mcrae 7y ago
        > I guess but that's not their business. I mean my point is that it is a total show stopper for their business if they cannot have US apps on their store! Good luck selling a £800 Android phone in the UK with no Instagram! Or a $200 one in India with no WhatsApp.
• NicoJuicy 7y ago
  I don't know what I would have done, but as a multinational I would have bought Windows Phone OS and their platform. Launch could be within months of acquiring everything. And the heavy lifting was already done ( compatibility).
• kpremote 7y ago
  Curious to know, are there ways that a country (in fact mainly the U.S.) can 'flip the switch' (weaponize, if you will) on fundamental internet tech, such as DNS, TCP/IP, HTTP and many many others, to severely affect a foreign adversary's business (either a company or a country)? Sure those are merely standards/protocols, still, is it possible these tech and their current world-wide setup be effectively used in conflicts by issuing government executive orders or enacting new laws? Edit: just found this on reddit. Not exactly what I was asking (fundamental internet standards/protocols), but still somewhat related. From a reddit post -- "Huawei is no longer able or allowed to work on standards for Wi-Fi, USB and SD cards. "Temporarily restricted" by Wi-Fi Alliance, voluntarily withdrew from JEDEC (USB etc) and no longer a member of SD Associaton (which technically means no more SD slots)"
  • clwg 7y ago
    Fundamentally I would say yes, however most of the countries that the US would likely do this to (Russia, Iran, China, Cuba) have contingencies in place through the implementation of country wide intranets[0][1]. Within those countries you also have localized social, financial and e-commerce services that minimize the general populations dependency on foreign companies and services. So the US could cut cut them off or manipulate their connectivity to the global internet through something like BGP or DNS, but the impact would be far less than the US doing that against a country such as Canada that has a deep reliance on US infrastructure and services. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/12/great-firewall-fears-as-russia-plans-to-cut-itself-off-from-internet https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/12/great-firewall... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_intranet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_intranet
    • kpremote 7y ago
      China's economy is very export dependent. If Chinese businesses cannot use internet to access a lot of U.S. allies, it would suffer badly. For example if, say, all U.K's companies are not allowed to use email or skype to talk to the Chinese, or all U.S., Canada and Australia, etc. web sites are not accessible from China because of some executive orders or laws by the U.S. (similar to google complying with the order currently), then I guess China's economy would be severely affected.
• gotenyama 7y ago
  If you lose access to google play do you also lose access to Google Cloud Messaging for notifications ? Because if that's the case that's huge. Hosted notification is so important these days.
• peter_retief 7y ago
  Everyone acts as if this came out of the blue, in reality there have been problems with China's state owned enterprises for a decade. Everyone has to play by the rules or why have rules at all?
• izzydata 7y ago
  But Google made and owns the Android OS. Why shouldn't they have an iron grip on it? Should Apple not have full rights to iOS or Microsoft to Windows? It is a product that Google made.
• cftorres 7y ago
  US enterprises are losing reliability with this dirty game of its government. I hope this issue will be taken as a wake up alarm for the necesity of a pluricultural and far more diverse technology market.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• known 7y ago
  Google is prosecuted for abusing Android monopoly in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google
• xmly 7y ago
  It only affects the European market for Huawei. But this may be a win for google for short-term. But long term speaking, it is a lose-lose situation.