9 ms·

Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week

320 points by josephcsible 2y ago

tantalor 2y ago
Just do what Apple does, less likely to be sued by DOJ
safety_sandals 2y ago
[flagged]
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  Not really clear how moving this project to a private repo is evil. If you're going to argue it is a "bait and switch", that implies intent to deceive. Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo?
  - soraminazuki 2y ago
    It's called a bait and switch. Regarding this parent edit: > If you're going to argue it is a "bait and switch", that implies intent to deceive. Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo? Whether they had nefarious intentions from the get go is irrelevant. Oracle closed the once open source Open Solaris, stating at first that it will merely make real time development private just like Android. This was widely condemned, despite there being no intention to pull off a switcheroo when it was open sourced. > We will no longer distribute source code for the entirety of the Solaris operating system in real-time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s
  - johnea 2y ago
    Depending on how it's done of course. If all commits are squashed into a single giant commit for each release to AOSP, then tracking exactly what happened since the last release will become much more difficult. All of this highlights the ever increasing need for linux phones, with the ability to run android apps in virtual machines. Although, goggle apps already refuse to operate in some of these environments, and I'm sure API update requirements will increase the goggle play API dependency. For anyone interested in freedom of communication, this is a significant development. (this is different from freedom dollars, where the one with the dollars gets the freedom) Goggle will continue to exert ever increasing restrictions and surveillance on communication via android for one simple reason: because they can...
    - g-b-r 2y ago
      > with the ability to run android apps in virtual machines. Play Integrity
  - ferbivore 2y ago
    This isn't some random project nobody cares about, it's the most widely used operating system in the world. Gating access to their main branch behind a GMS license was already extremely evil, this is just adding insult to injury for Android fork maintainers.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo? Sure. Not a long con, but I'm sure some executives were arguing for years, even a decade+ about moving stuff privately. It's an argument every company has at some point regarding its code. I'm sure those who championed for OS are either gone or have given up, so now this prevails.
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    > Not really clear how moving this project to a private repo is evil. it effectively kills off all hope of virtually all open source projects and most corporate forks keeping up with upstream changes. The Linux kernel is bad enough but at least you know what you'll get and can keep up with the development. But this here? Everyone writing ROMs of their own will get a truckload of changes that have to be integrated and local forks rebased.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
It will remain open source > This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished.
ironman1478 2y ago
This headline really is misleading. The source will still be released, it just means that the work leading up to a release will be in private. IMO, there's nothing wrong with that, since it's likely that a lot of the intermediate com mediates are likely just noise.
- mberlove 2y ago
  I think the determinant will be how transparently this process is maintained.
  - hypercube33 2y ago
    Right - Google has been less than stellar with Chromium with ad revenue motivations behind manifest v3. One can only assume that other changes are being pushed and it'll be too late to fight when the OS ships before or same day as source. As others say, it breaks contributions and any chance that other forks will keep up.
- nthingtohide 2y ago
  First they came....(Explains the strategy)
- bsimpson 2y ago
  If I understand correctly, it sounds a bit like Valve and SteamOS. They publish the source, but they optimize for their internal developers and tools, not for easy source access by anonymous members of the public. Valve has been publishing its source as tarballs, not git commits (hence, projects like Jovian and Evlav reconstructing it in GitHub).
- npodbielski 2y ago
  Which is bad since all the forks will be behind at least few weeks, months maybe. And think about all the merge conflicts you have to resolve after 3 months of code changes.
- rs186 2y ago
  "likely just noise" It's always noise to people that don't care, but matters to people who rely on AOSP, including third-party ROM developers.
johnnyanmac 2y ago
>This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished. I'll believe it when I see it. These days, words are basically meaningless from these large tech companies. Actions are what matter. at the very least, I'm not convinced this internal branch and AOSP will be close to feature parity if they do throw some stuff out.
- merb 2y ago
  The good thing is that at least the kernel and the VM/runtime need to be open source
  - microtonal 2y ago
    the VM/runtime need to be open source Isn't ART Apache 2-licensed? They don't have to provide the source. I don't see why they would completely close it though. It would lead to forks, plus they have a lot of control through Google Play Services etc. already.
    - fweimer 2y ago
      Parts are GPLv2 with Classpath exception: https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/main/+/main:libcore/ojluni/src/main/java/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandle.java https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/main/+/...
      - merb 2y ago
        yeah it’s mostly the runtime which is basically openjdk bits.
  - schmorptron 2y ago
    Until they swap out linux for fuschia!
IshKebab 2y ago
Hmm while this could be sold as just to prevent leaks (which occasionally happen), I think this is more likely a first step to closing the source, in light of the EU messing up their open source monetisation strategy. Well, more like the 5th step really. They already moved a ton of functionality into Google Play Services, and discontinued a load of the open source stock apps like Calendar.
- hypercube33 2y ago
  Google kinda irked me when they purchased Motorola - I was hopeful we'd get nice hardware with the android team focused on making android better but they instead gutted the company and sold it off and android has been more solid on non Google devices from what I can tell. From pixels not having an operating system shipping to people to pixels 4 and 7 having notable worse camera features (I should note I'm biased to how well the camera works since it's one of my three main uses of a smartphone) compared to say the Nexus 6 phones. I've wondered if android and pixel breaking off Google would be a good thing or not honestly since there is talk about cutting chrome off.
  - shaftway 2y ago
    The real hidden gem in that deal would have been keeping Motorola's cable set-top box. It owned more than half of the cable box market, and would have been an opportunity to push YouTube TV and Google TV into the hands of the majority of the market overnight.
- tripdout 2y ago
  A classic Ars story I always like linking in discussions like these: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mainecoder 2y ago
I hope they make it closed source and make us much money out of it as possible for shareholders that is their job and their duty, why are they giving this away for free they have already captured market share by claiming opensource and building a community now all they have to do is make it proprietary and the old opensource version slowly wither and become unstable, then they can charge money for the operating system just like mircrosoft but this time on phone millions and billions of phones, $$$$$. /S (I obviously do not agree with this)
- monetus 2y ago
  It's a bit disturbing that that might be the plan though.
  - microtonal 2y ago
    But they can already do that, because most people and apps (outside China and maybe some other regions) expect Google Play/Play Services to be present.
    - echelon 2y ago
      They're under antitrust scrutiny. You have to boil the frog slowly.
    - npodbielski 2y ago
      What apps? I think only android auto requires it. All the rest works just fine with occasional glitches. Of course that most probably greatly depends of what kind of apps you are using but usually microG is just enough.
      - maelito 2y ago
        No, most "geo" applications depend on Google services and will crash without them. Local authority transit apps, etc.
        2y ago
jokoon 2y ago
I mean nothing changes, it was already open source, and few people outside Google know how to dev things around android, it's now a very complex os
soraminazuki 2y ago
This really reminds me of Open Solaris. > We will no longer distribute source code for the entirety of the Solaris operating system in real-time In the case of Open Solaris, the code never came out from that point onwards. For Android, the likely end goal is to do the bare minimum of distributing only copyleft code that they don't own copyright to. Until those get replaced with a closed alternative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s
- EGreg 2y ago
  Can someone just fork it? Like MySQL was forked into MariaDB?
  - fmajid 2y ago
    Yes: https://illumos.org/ https://illumos.org/
    - jazzyjackson 2y ago
      This doesn’t appear mobile oriented, or is this an open Solaris fork? I suppose lineageOS is the closest thing for Android tho from what I understand it is built upon AOSP
      - fmajid 2y ago
        Yes, an OpenSolaris fork. I thought that was the "it" you were referring to, as that was what the parent was talking about. There are quite a few AOSP forks, like LineageOS and GrapheneOS to cite the most famous ones, but with this change in process by Google, they will have to wait a year of no changes, then scramble when the next release of Android drops.
- rwmj 2y ago
  But copyleft is bad and everyone should use BSD ... Code is turned proprietary by huge corporate with massive development resources. No one could have predicted this.
llarsson 2y ago
Help me understand what this means to e.g. GrapheneOS, please. Will it be able to exist and just have to wait longer for updates or will it be in real jeopardy?
- lunar_rover 2y ago
  Potentially longer gaps between major updates, since they can no longer follow upstream closely. However, Google might have planned to slowly make Android proprietary, which means death to 3rd party forks.
  - pas 2y ago
    Most of those forks twiddle a lot of low-level knobs, and if Google does not want to support those then the forks will have a hard time anyway. The big problem is that aaaaaalll these forks are still just a tiny tiny tiny drop in the bug mobile phone OS bucket. If the forks want to be sustainable they need to cater to the market a bit. (Of course that's much harder said than done, but we see - for example with Nothing Tech - that there are new successful upstarts from time to time.)
- achierius 2y ago
  Discussion on the GrapheneOS forum: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21231-google-will-develop-the-android-os-fully-in-private https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21231-google-will-develop-t...
- Happily2020 2y ago
  https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230629374651118 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230629374651118 > not much will change overall. It's a major step in the wrong direction but without a large direct impact on us
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lenerdenator 2y ago
But at least Windows isn't the number one OS anymore.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  Yeah, yet my 2009 laptop still gets updates.
bsimpson 2y ago
Both The Verge and 9to5 are citing this as the original source: https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-development-aosp-3538503/ https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-development-...
- MishaalRahman 2y ago
  Thanks for linking it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
andrewmcwatters 2y ago
Can we please just go back to having some sort of Debian-based GNU/Linux on a smartphone. Just create a really great mobile interface on top of that. The more I learn about Android, the more I think the whole thing is a waste of time.
- SllX 2y ago
  You say “go back” but that was never more than a niche thing. For better or worse, Google’s Android has pretty much always been the chief representative of mobile Linux. And far from being a waste of time, Android is the most widely distributed mobile operating system on the planet.
  - owebmaster 2y ago
    > You say “go back” but that was never more than a niche thing. but you could walk to a phone shop and buy a Linux phone, for example FirefoxOS.
    - SllX 2y ago
      Firefox OS lived a short and obscure life years after Android entered the market and certainly wasn’t a GNU or Debian-like distribution of Linux.
    - Phrodo_00 2y ago
      Yeah, and there was also Maemo/Meego that was also sold on stores. Neither had a very high market share.
- rmholt 2y ago
  > just go back to having some sort of Debian-based GNU/Linux on a smartphone Two years of full time engineering man hours > Just create a really great mobile interface on top of that. Probably another 3 years of full time engineering man hours
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
amlib 2y ago
And lots of people wants to yield full control of the web to google by letting then be the sole web browser engine...
fblp 2y ago
Keeping android open source would be a helpful antitrust defence when some of Alphabet / Googles other products dominate markets (chrome, search). I wonder if they're now less worried about anti trust under the current administration.
- kccqzy 2y ago
  Google has had a strategy of keeping some parts of Android open source for the benefit of the world, and other parts closed source inside Google Play Services. However European regulators continue to rule that Google Play Services itself is the leverage Google uses to lessen competition. If regulators have antitrust concerns with just one proprietary blob, there's really no incentive to make Android truly open. Opening up the rest of the Android literally doesn't help with antitrust.
axegon_ 2y ago
I've seen that one before. Next thing you know licenses start changing, features locked out and completely removed and development slowly starts creeping towards full proprietary prison. Time to throw some money at Jolla and Sailfish OS and migrate I suppose.
bfrog 2y ago
Android is going to go closed source. There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. Maybe longer still... I could see Google fully jettisoning the "other" phone makers and going all in on its own hardware to boost profits further. The iPhone is highly profitable, wouldn't you as a Google share holder want them to maximize the value there? Personally I gave up on Android years ago. It was never great, but the endless poor support of software updates (mostly stemming from Qualcomm blobs as I understand it) was enough to drive me away. Apple really does support iPhone's for a very long time, and their sole goal isn't to sell more eyeballs. Good enough reason for me.
- gopher_space 2y ago
  > There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. There's nobody at Google who knows what to do with that kind of market leadership, so they're just folding up shop?
- nukem222 2y ago
  > There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! This might give them more credibility. Anyway, I think we're a half decade past where android source has been worth stealing: China now has strong domestic competition.
zakki 2y ago
It will be interesting when the world move to HarmonyOS
graymatters 2y ago
Well, I hope that if they do so, the FSF and all copyright holders of the Open Source software used to make Android Great In-the-First-Place will sue their a$$e$ off.
nukem222 2y ago
[flagged]
zmmmmm 2y ago
Will they still push all the native commits once they release? I think it's OK if they do the dev internally, but if they just release source snapshots and we lose visibility of the dev process that occurred to get there, that will be a big loss.
colordrops 2y ago
They are giving reasons that claim it will be better for everyone in the end, but this is obviously not true for devs of LineageOS and Graphene. Why is it OK for corporations to make self-interested sociopathic decisions that harm consumers then slap a post-hoc rationalization that is basically a lie to appease the public? It's so common that almost every corporation does it, and most people don't even take note.
WorldPeas 2y ago
I bet they'll regret turning their back on grapheneOS https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230671644378529 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230671644378529
shmerl 2y ago
Too bad. There should be a proper open Linux + Wayland for mobile, not Android Frankenstein anyway.
- em3rgent0rdr 2y ago
  That's what https://plasma-mobile.org https://plasma-mobile.org is supposed to be. But the problem is there is yet to be a single device that has every hardware feature working %100...see https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices#Main https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices#Main
  - shmerl 2y ago
    Right, plus it needs a better backing to make a nice UI. Plasma mobile is more of a POC, not really a polished user experience by far. One good thing Google could do is demand upstream open drivers from hardware makers.
Khaine 2y ago
the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make” - Andy Rubin This has really stood the test of time...
- tripdout 2y ago
  It's funny because this only works on a single device, the Android emulator, and not even first-party Nexus and Pixel devices without first downloading hundreds of megabytes of proprietary blobs.
noncoml 2y ago
I was there and applaud when Google shared their "Don't be evil" motto. Everybody used to absolutely hate "M$" at the time. How naive we were. We never realized that "Don't be evil" was not a choice, it something that natural happens to a public company. Today it would feel so much of quixotism for a company were to to come out and say "Don't be evil".
distalx 2y ago
They might be cooking up their own silicon, like Apple did when transitioning from the A-series chips to the M1. If that's the case, they'd definitely want to keep any low-level system tweaks or new APIs under wraps. This whole situation also reminds me of the Manifest V3 drama with Chromium. They might be planning something similar and want to avoid the early headaches of public criticism. Or maybe they're doing a bigger overhaul of Android's core, changing how apps can communicate and control each other (e.g., computer-user, Operator)! Idk, I dnt want to be cynical fingers crossed.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- prossercj 2y ago
  Don't they already have their own silicon (Tensor)?
  - Kirby64 2y ago
    Kind of. If you look at the specs of the tensor chips they appear to essentially copy exactly what Qualcomm is doing. They use off the shelf ARM reference design cores packaged together the same way QC does. They’re also about a year behind QCs latest stuff. In comparison Apple (and the very very latest QC chipsets) use custom ARM cores. Google has yet to do this.
TexanFeller 2y ago
I’m glad they’re dropping the pretense of being an open platform. Maybe this will create space for a truly open mobile platform that respects our privacy even better than Apple. I never liked Android anyway, felt half baked and unpolished even on several flagship phones I used it on some years ago before giving up on it.
- dineol 2y ago
  what did you switch to?
  - TexanFeller 2y ago
    The only reasonable alternative for now, Apple. Only thing worse about their devices than the competition is the price. One day they’ll turn as evil as Google, but hopefully other viable options will exist by then.
    - ac130kz 2y ago
      How come Android, that you can build yourself, is worse than Apple, which had plans to use CSAM?
footlose_3815 2y ago
Android was really cool for the first couple years, but now it's optimized for brand presence and ad delivery. Every Android device I've purchased for the last 10 years there's been a common expectation of the manufacturer trying to totally capture, record, sell, and leverage my digital experience in ways you never wanted. The only escape was LineageOS, and the technical barrier was plenty hard to make it work just right. I'm currently on iOS and as many other commenters said, I'm still waiting for a truly open and privacy-respecting OS that we can install on open hardware. It worked for Unix in the computer world.
- thebytefairy 2y ago
  More and more Apple has been adding ads into iOS. Always have another Apple credit card ad in wallet, or Apple Music ad in settings, etc.
rognjen 2y ago
This is an entirely predictable next step - the only surprise is that it took so long to happen. They progressively replaced all the default apps with the Google alternatives. A Chrome-Chromium type split was only a matter of time.
karemmom 2y ago
[dead]

320 points by josephcsible 2y ago

tantalor 2y ago

Just do what Apple does, less likely to be sued by DOJ

safety_sandals 2y ago

[flagged]

IncreasePosts 2y ago
Not really clear how moving this project to a private repo is evil. If you're going to argue it is a "bait and switch", that implies intent to deceive. Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo?
- soraminazuki 2y ago
  It's called a bait and switch. Regarding this parent edit: > If you're going to argue it is a "bait and switch", that implies intent to deceive. Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo? Whether they had nefarious intentions from the get go is irrelevant. Oracle closed the once open source Open Solaris, stating at first that it will merely make real time development private just like Android. This was widely condemned, despite there being no intention to pull off a switcheroo when it was open sourced. > We will no longer distribute source code for the entirety of the Solaris operating system in real-time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s
- johnea 2y ago
  Depending on how it's done of course. If all commits are squashed into a single giant commit for each release to AOSP, then tracking exactly what happened since the last release will become much more difficult. All of this highlights the ever increasing need for linux phones, with the ability to run android apps in virtual machines. Although, goggle apps already refuse to operate in some of these environments, and I'm sure API update requirements will increase the goggle play API dependency. For anyone interested in freedom of communication, this is a significant development. (this is different from freedom dollars, where the one with the dollars gets the freedom) Goggle will continue to exert ever increasing restrictions and surveillance on communication via android for one simple reason: because they can...
  - g-b-r 2y ago
    > with the ability to run android apps in virtual machines. Play Integrity
- ferbivore 2y ago
  This isn't some random project nobody cares about, it's the most widely used operating system in the world. Gating access to their main branch behind a GMS license was already extremely evil, this is just adding insult to injury for Android fork maintainers.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >Do you think that was the plan? Release the first version in 2007 and then wait 18 years and pull the ol switcheroo? Sure. Not a long con, but I'm sure some executives were arguing for years, even a decade+ about moving stuff privately. It's an argument every company has at some point regarding its code. I'm sure those who championed for OS are either gone or have given up, so now this prevails.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > Not really clear how moving this project to a private repo is evil. it effectively kills off all hope of virtually all open source projects and most corporate forks keeping up with upstream changes. The Linux kernel is bad enough but at least you know what you'll get and can keep up with the development. But this here? Everyone writing ROMs of their own will get a truckload of changes that have to be integrated and local forks rebased.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

It will remain open source > This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished.

ironman1478 2y ago

This headline really is misleading. The source will still be released, it just means that the work leading up to a release will be in private. IMO, there's nothing wrong with that, since it's likely that a lot of the intermediate com mediates are likely just noise.

mberlove 2y ago
I think the determinant will be how transparently this process is maintained.
- hypercube33 2y ago
  Right - Google has been less than stellar with Chromium with ad revenue motivations behind manifest v3. One can only assume that other changes are being pushed and it'll be too late to fight when the OS ships before or same day as source. As others say, it breaks contributions and any chance that other forks will keep up.
nthingtohide 2y ago
First they came....(Explains the strategy)
bsimpson 2y ago
If I understand correctly, it sounds a bit like Valve and SteamOS. They publish the source, but they optimize for their internal developers and tools, not for easy source access by anonymous members of the public. Valve has been publishing its source as tarballs, not git commits (hence, projects like Jovian and Evlav reconstructing it in GitHub).
npodbielski 2y ago
Which is bad since all the forks will be behind at least few weeks, months maybe. And think about all the merge conflicts you have to resolve after 3 months of code changes.
rs186 2y ago
"likely just noise" It's always noise to people that don't care, but matters to people who rely on AOSP, including third-party ROM developers.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

>This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished. I'll believe it when I see it. These days, words are basically meaningless from these large tech companies. Actions are what matter. at the very least, I'm not convinced this internal branch and AOSP will be close to feature parity if they do throw some stuff out.

merb 2y ago
The good thing is that at least the kernel and the VM/runtime need to be open source
- microtonal 2y ago
  the VM/runtime need to be open source Isn't ART Apache 2-licensed? They don't have to provide the source. I don't see why they would completely close it though. It would lead to forks, plus they have a lot of control through Google Play Services etc. already.
  - fweimer 2y ago
    Parts are GPLv2 with Classpath exception: https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/main/+/main:libcore/ojluni/src/main/java/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandle.java https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/main/+/...
    - merb 2y ago
      yeah it’s mostly the runtime which is basically openjdk bits.
- schmorptron 2y ago
  Until they swap out linux for fuschia!

IshKebab 2y ago

Hmm while this could be sold as just to prevent leaks (which occasionally happen), I think this is more likely a first step to closing the source, in light of the EU messing up their open source monetisation strategy. Well, more like the 5th step really. They already moved a ton of functionality into Google Play Services, and discontinued a load of the open source stock apps like Calendar.

hypercube33 2y ago
Google kinda irked me when they purchased Motorola - I was hopeful we'd get nice hardware with the android team focused on making android better but they instead gutted the company and sold it off and android has been more solid on non Google devices from what I can tell. From pixels not having an operating system shipping to people to pixels 4 and 7 having notable worse camera features (I should note I'm biased to how well the camera works since it's one of my three main uses of a smartphone) compared to say the Nexus 6 phones. I've wondered if android and pixel breaking off Google would be a good thing or not honestly since there is talk about cutting chrome off.
- shaftway 2y ago
  The real hidden gem in that deal would have been keeping Motorola's cable set-top box. It owned more than half of the cable box market, and would have been an opportunity to push YouTube TV and Google TV into the hands of the majority of the market overnight.
tripdout 2y ago
A classic Ars story I always like linking in discussions like these: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

mainecoder 2y ago

I hope they make it closed source and make us much money out of it as possible for shareholders that is their job and their duty, why are they giving this away for free they have already captured market share by claiming opensource and building a community now all they have to do is make it proprietary and the old opensource version slowly wither and become unstable, then they can charge money for the operating system just like mircrosoft but this time on phone millions and billions of phones, $$$$$. /S (I obviously do not agree with this)

monetus 2y ago
It's a bit disturbing that that might be the plan though.
- microtonal 2y ago
  But they can already do that, because most people and apps (outside China and maybe some other regions) expect Google Play/Play Services to be present.
  - echelon 2y ago
    They're under antitrust scrutiny. You have to boil the frog slowly.
  - npodbielski 2y ago
    What apps? I think only android auto requires it. All the rest works just fine with occasional glitches. Of course that most probably greatly depends of what kind of apps you are using but usually microG is just enough.
    - maelito 2y ago
      No, most "geo" applications depend on Google services and will crash without them. Local authority transit apps, etc.
      - 2y ago

jokoon 2y ago

I mean nothing changes, it was already open source, and few people outside Google know how to dev things around android, it's now a very complex os

soraminazuki 2y ago

This really reminds me of Open Solaris. > We will no longer distribute source code for the entirety of the Solaris operating system in real-time In the case of Open Solaris, the code never came out from that point onwards. For Android, the likely end goal is to do the bare minimum of distributing only copyleft code that they don't own copyright to. Until those get replaced with a closed alternative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2482s

EGreg 2y ago
Can someone just fork it? Like MySQL was forked into MariaDB?
- fmajid 2y ago
  Yes: https://illumos.org/ https://illumos.org/
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago
    This doesn’t appear mobile oriented, or is this an open Solaris fork? I suppose lineageOS is the closest thing for Android tho from what I understand it is built upon AOSP
    - fmajid 2y ago
      Yes, an OpenSolaris fork. I thought that was the "it" you were referring to, as that was what the parent was talking about. There are quite a few AOSP forks, like LineageOS and GrapheneOS to cite the most famous ones, but with this change in process by Google, they will have to wait a year of no changes, then scramble when the next release of Android drops.
rwmj 2y ago
But copyleft is bad and everyone should use BSD ... Code is turned proprietary by huge corporate with massive development resources. No one could have predicted this.

llarsson 2y ago

Help me understand what this means to e.g. GrapheneOS, please. Will it be able to exist and just have to wait longer for updates or will it be in real jeopardy?

lunar_rover 2y ago
Potentially longer gaps between major updates, since they can no longer follow upstream closely. However, Google might have planned to slowly make Android proprietary, which means death to 3rd party forks.
- pas 2y ago
  Most of those forks twiddle a lot of low-level knobs, and if Google does not want to support those then the forks will have a hard time anyway. The big problem is that aaaaaalll these forks are still just a tiny tiny tiny drop in the bug mobile phone OS bucket. If the forks want to be sustainable they need to cater to the market a bit. (Of course that's much harder said than done, but we see - for example with Nothing Tech - that there are new successful upstarts from time to time.)
achierius 2y ago
Discussion on the GrapheneOS forum: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21231-google-will-develop-the-android-os-fully-in-private https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21231-google-will-develop-t...
Happily2020 2y ago
https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230629374651118 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230629374651118 > not much will change overall. It's a major step in the wrong direction but without a large direct impact on us

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

lenerdenator 2y ago

But at least Windows isn't the number one OS anymore.

pjmlp 2y ago
Yeah, yet my 2009 laptop still gets updates.

bsimpson 2y ago

Both The Verge and 9to5 are citing this as the original source: https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-development-aosp-3538503/ https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-development-...

MishaalRahman 2y ago
Thanks for linking it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

andrewmcwatters 2y ago

Can we please just go back to having some sort of Debian-based GNU/Linux on a smartphone. Just create a really great mobile interface on top of that. The more I learn about Android, the more I think the whole thing is a waste of time.

SllX 2y ago
You say “go back” but that was never more than a niche thing. For better or worse, Google’s Android has pretty much always been the chief representative of mobile Linux. And far from being a waste of time, Android is the most widely distributed mobile operating system on the planet.
- owebmaster 2y ago
  > You say “go back” but that was never more than a niche thing. but you could walk to a phone shop and buy a Linux phone, for example FirefoxOS.
  - SllX 2y ago
    Firefox OS lived a short and obscure life years after Android entered the market and certainly wasn’t a GNU or Debian-like distribution of Linux.
  - Phrodo_00 2y ago
    Yeah, and there was also Maemo/Meego that was also sold on stores. Neither had a very high market share.
rmholt 2y ago
> just go back to having some sort of Debian-based GNU/Linux on a smartphone Two years of full time engineering man hours > Just create a really great mobile interface on top of that. Probably another 3 years of full time engineering man hours
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

amlib 2y ago

And lots of people wants to yield full control of the web to google by letting then be the sole web browser engine...

fblp 2y ago

Keeping android open source would be a helpful antitrust defence when some of Alphabet / Googles other products dominate markets (chrome, search). I wonder if they're now less worried about anti trust under the current administration.

kccqzy 2y ago
Google has had a strategy of keeping some parts of Android open source for the benefit of the world, and other parts closed source inside Google Play Services. However European regulators continue to rule that Google Play Services itself is the leverage Google uses to lessen competition. If regulators have antitrust concerns with just one proprietary blob, there's really no incentive to make Android truly open. Opening up the rest of the Android literally doesn't help with antitrust.

axegon_ 2y ago

I've seen that one before. Next thing you know licenses start changing, features locked out and completely removed and development slowly starts creeping towards full proprietary prison. Time to throw some money at Jolla and Sailfish OS and migrate I suppose.

bfrog 2y ago

Android is going to go closed source. There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. Maybe longer still... I could see Google fully jettisoning the "other" phone makers and going all in on its own hardware to boost profits further. The iPhone is highly profitable, wouldn't you as a Google share holder want them to maximize the value there? Personally I gave up on Android years ago. It was never great, but the endless poor support of software updates (mostly stemming from Qualcomm blobs as I understand it) was enough to drive me away. Apple really does support iPhone's for a very long time, and their sole goal isn't to sell more eyeballs. Good enough reason for me.

gopher_space 2y ago
> There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. There's nobody at Google who knows what to do with that kind of market leadership, so they're just folding up shop?
nukem222 2y ago
> There's no benefit to Google when a Chinese company takes Android, guts the Google parts, and shoves it on a cheap ass phone for a market with a few billion people. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! This might give them more credibility. Anyway, I think we're a half decade past where android source has been worth stealing: China now has strong domestic competition.

zakki 2y ago

It will be interesting when the world move to HarmonyOS

graymatters 2y ago

Well, I hope that if they do so, the FSF and all copyright holders of the Open Source software used to make Android Great In-the-First-Place will sue their a$$e$ off.

nukem222 2y ago

[flagged]

zmmmmm 2y ago

Will they still push all the native commits once they release? I think it's OK if they do the dev internally, but if they just release source snapshots and we lose visibility of the dev process that occurred to get there, that will be a big loss.

colordrops 2y ago

They are giving reasons that claim it will be better for everyone in the end, but this is obviously not true for devs of LineageOS and Graphene. Why is it OK for corporations to make self-interested sociopathic decisions that harm consumers then slap a post-hoc rationalization that is basically a lie to appease the public? It's so common that almost every corporation does it, and most people don't even take note.

WorldPeas 2y ago

I bet they'll regret turning their back on grapheneOS https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230671644378529 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114230671644378529

shmerl 2y ago

Too bad. There should be a proper open Linux + Wayland for mobile, not Android Frankenstein anyway.

em3rgent0rdr 2y ago
That's what https://plasma-mobile.org https://plasma-mobile.org is supposed to be. But the problem is there is yet to be a single device that has every hardware feature working %100...see https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices#Main https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices#Main
- shmerl 2y ago
  Right, plus it needs a better backing to make a nice UI. Plasma mobile is more of a POC, not really a polished user experience by far. One good thing Google could do is demand upstream open drivers from hardware makers.

Khaine 2y ago

the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make” - Andy Rubin This has really stood the test of time...

tripdout 2y ago
It's funny because this only works on a single device, the Android emulator, and not even first-party Nexus and Pixel devices without first downloading hundreds of megabytes of proprietary blobs.

noncoml 2y ago

I was there and applaud when Google shared their "Don't be evil" motto. Everybody used to absolutely hate "M$" at the time. How naive we were. We never realized that "Don't be evil" was not a choice, it something that natural happens to a public company. Today it would feel so much of quixotism for a company were to to come out and say "Don't be evil".

distalx 2y ago

They might be cooking up their own silicon, like Apple did when transitioning from the A-series chips to the M1. If that's the case, they'd definitely want to keep any low-level system tweaks or new APIs under wraps. This whole situation also reminds me of the Manifest V3 drama with Chromium. They might be planning something similar and want to avoid the early headaches of public criticism. Or maybe they're doing a bigger overhaul of Android's core, changing how apps can communicate and control each other (e.g., computer-user, Operator)! Idk, I dnt want to be cynical fingers crossed.¯\_(ツ)_/¯

prossercj 2y ago
Don't they already have their own silicon (Tensor)?
- Kirby64 2y ago
  Kind of. If you look at the specs of the tensor chips they appear to essentially copy exactly what Qualcomm is doing. They use off the shelf ARM reference design cores packaged together the same way QC does. They’re also about a year behind QCs latest stuff. In comparison Apple (and the very very latest QC chipsets) use custom ARM cores. Google has yet to do this.

TexanFeller 2y ago

I’m glad they’re dropping the pretense of being an open platform. Maybe this will create space for a truly open mobile platform that respects our privacy even better than Apple. I never liked Android anyway, felt half baked and unpolished even on several flagship phones I used it on some years ago before giving up on it.

dineol 2y ago
what did you switch to?
- TexanFeller 2y ago
  The only reasonable alternative for now, Apple. Only thing worse about their devices than the competition is the price. One day they’ll turn as evil as Google, but hopefully other viable options will exist by then.
  - ac130kz 2y ago
    How come Android, that you can build yourself, is worse than Apple, which had plans to use CSAM?

footlose_3815 2y ago

Android was really cool for the first couple years, but now it's optimized for brand presence and ad delivery. Every Android device I've purchased for the last 10 years there's been a common expectation of the manufacturer trying to totally capture, record, sell, and leverage my digital experience in ways you never wanted. The only escape was LineageOS, and the technical barrier was plenty hard to make it work just right. I'm currently on iOS and as many other commenters said, I'm still waiting for a truly open and privacy-respecting OS that we can install on open hardware. It worked for Unix in the computer world.

thebytefairy 2y ago
More and more Apple has been adding ads into iOS. Always have another Apple credit card ad in wallet, or Apple Music ad in settings, etc.

rognjen 2y ago

This is an entirely predictable next step - the only surprise is that it took so long to happen. They progressively replaced all the default apps with the Google alternatives. A Chrome-Chromium type split was only a matter of time.

karemmom 2y ago

[dead]