4 ms·

Not sure if the big manufacturers would want to depend on a proprietary Google OS. Samsung does make a lot of changes to the OS, for instance.

by palata 11mo ago

WhyNotHugo 11mo ago
> Not sure if the big manufacturers would want to depend on a proprietary Google OS. They already do; Google's flavour of Android adds plenty of proprietary components on top of AOSP.
- palata 11mo ago
  They depend on the Play Service and Play Store, that's for sure. But I'm pretty sure they know it's a risk already. Don't get me wrong: they are locked-in, that's a fact. And to be fair they benefit from all the work of Google on the OS. But that's not a reason to desire to go further and lose even more control.
  - fsflover 11mo ago
    What exactly are they going to do? Support GNU/Linux?
    - palata 11mo ago
      If Google goes proprietary with AOSP? They could fork AOSP, or go with their own proprietary system (like Huawei is successfully doing). Linux distros (including non-GNU/Linux distros, e.g. busybox/Linux distros) are way behind for smartphones. I don't think they would switch to that.
      - fsflover 11mo ago
        Are you saying that developing their own system is easier than using existing one that needs some tinkering?
tonyhart7 11mo ago
"Not sure if the big manufacturers" thats the thing, they would supply android os to these major manufacturer, but for the rest??? need vetted applications
Telaneo 11mo ago
What's the alternative? I doubt even someone as big as Samsung will be willing or able to develop their own alternative OS (atleast one that can actually grab marketshare enough that critical apps get ported), and I can't imagine them wanting to hitch their wagon to the Linux alternatives.
- berdario 11mo ago
  > I doubt even someone as big as Samsung will be willing or able to develop their own alternative OS Huawei pulled it out with HarmonyOS (I don't know how good/bad is it, and if it'll have staying power, but other companies are putting in the effort) PS: btw, Samsung already had its own, non-Android OS with Bada (of course, developing a new OS is only the first step, getting it to be successful wouldn't be easy)
  - Telaneo 11mo ago
    Huawei has a whole-ass Chinese government behind it with quite a lot of incentives to move away from Google. Samsung does not. Heck, China's making its own GPUs and x86 CPUs. They're not great, but when the incentives over there are that strong, the market forces are clearly in a whole different universe compared to the rest of the world. Bada lasted, what, 3 years? So it did better than Firefox OS (unless you want to count KaiOS as the same thing), but not by much? Not a great look I'd say. And things haven't gotten any easier during the past 15 years, with Apple and Google's positions being more entrenched than ever.
    - palata 11mo ago
      > Huawei has a whole-ass Chinese government behind it I don't like how Chinese companies systematically get reduced to "it's because the government can help them". The US TooBigTech get a ton of help from the US government, starting with political pressures when other countries want to regulate them. Huawei have really good technology and very competent engineers. It's not the Chinese government that does the engineering. DJI is years ahead of everybody else technologically, and that's again not the Chinese government doing the engineering. Let's stop believing that the US are superior in every single way and that someone else doing better means that they must be cheating.
ranger_danger 11mo ago
They could still be given the sources, for a hefty license fee.
- palata 11mo ago
  Pretty sure that Google sells the Android licence for as much as they think they can. Make it too expensive and the manufacturers will try to move away.

Not sure if the big manufacturers would want to depend on a proprietary Google OS. Samsung does make a lot of changes to the OS, for instance.

by palata 11mo ago

Not sure if the big manufacturers would want to depend on a proprietary Google OS. Samsung does make a lot of changes to the OS, for instance.

WhyNotHugo 11mo ago

> Not sure if the big manufacturers would want to depend on a proprietary Google OS. They already do; Google's flavour of Android adds plenty of proprietary components on top of AOSP.

palata 11mo ago
They depend on the Play Service and Play Store, that's for sure. But I'm pretty sure they know it's a risk already. Don't get me wrong: they are locked-in, that's a fact. And to be fair they benefit from all the work of Google on the OS. But that's not a reason to desire to go further and lose even more control.
- fsflover 11mo ago
  What exactly are they going to do? Support GNU/Linux?
  - palata 11mo ago
    If Google goes proprietary with AOSP? They could fork AOSP, or go with their own proprietary system (like Huawei is successfully doing). Linux distros (including non-GNU/Linux distros, e.g. busybox/Linux distros) are way behind for smartphones. I don't think they would switch to that.
    - fsflover 11mo ago
      Are you saying that developing their own system is easier than using existing one that needs some tinkering?

tonyhart7 11mo ago

"Not sure if the big manufacturers" thats the thing, they would supply android os to these major manufacturer, but for the rest??? need vetted applications

Telaneo 11mo ago

What's the alternative? I doubt even someone as big as Samsung will be willing or able to develop their own alternative OS (atleast one that can actually grab marketshare enough that critical apps get ported), and I can't imagine them wanting to hitch their wagon to the Linux alternatives.

berdario 11mo ago
> I doubt even someone as big as Samsung will be willing or able to develop their own alternative OS Huawei pulled it out with HarmonyOS (I don't know how good/bad is it, and if it'll have staying power, but other companies are putting in the effort) PS: btw, Samsung already had its own, non-Android OS with Bada (of course, developing a new OS is only the first step, getting it to be successful wouldn't be easy)
- Telaneo 11mo ago
  Huawei has a whole-ass Chinese government behind it with quite a lot of incentives to move away from Google. Samsung does not. Heck, China's making its own GPUs and x86 CPUs. They're not great, but when the incentives over there are that strong, the market forces are clearly in a whole different universe compared to the rest of the world. Bada lasted, what, 3 years? So it did better than Firefox OS (unless you want to count KaiOS as the same thing), but not by much? Not a great look I'd say. And things haven't gotten any easier during the past 15 years, with Apple and Google's positions being more entrenched than ever.
  - palata 11mo ago
    > Huawei has a whole-ass Chinese government behind it I don't like how Chinese companies systematically get reduced to "it's because the government can help them". The US TooBigTech get a ton of help from the US government, starting with political pressures when other countries want to regulate them. Huawei have really good technology and very competent engineers. It's not the Chinese government that does the engineering. DJI is years ahead of everybody else technologically, and that's again not the Chinese government doing the engineering. Let's stop believing that the US are superior in every single way and that someone else doing better means that they must be cheating.

ranger_danger 11mo ago

They could still be given the sources, for a hefty license fee.

palata 11mo ago
Pretty sure that Google sells the Android licence for as much as they think they can. Make it too expensive and the manufacturers will try to move away.