3 ms·
I disagree. Going to Google was good for Android, but not good for Samsung. While it is not clear that Android under Samsung would have become big (likely not)
by gvb 13y ago
I disagree. Going to Google was good for Android, but not good for Samsung.
While it is not clear that Android under Samsung would have become big (likely not), it would have been an effective blocking move for Samsung, delaying and possibly thwarting Google's dominance in the smartphone market. Samsung had an opportunity to control Android (and possibly kill it). Instead, Android went to Google who built it into a major powerhouse... and now (a) Samsung is heavily dependent on that powerhouse and (b) has very little control over that powerhouse.
- mseebach 13y agoSamsung could have bought and suffocated Android, but it's not obvious that they could have killed the movement towards and open platform(1). It's not like the idea of an open smartphone OS was unique or even new at the time. I don't think Android as it stood in 2005 was something Google could not have re-built from scratch in a few month if they decided it was the way to go - in other words, wasn't it more of an aquihire? 1: Let's skip the discussion as to whether Android is actually free and open source and instead remember how much more open Android is compared to what was before.
- Consultant32452 13y agoGoogle was clearly in the market for a phone OS. If they hadn't purchased Android they would've likely purchased something else. Android was likely not the only phone OS they looked at and may not have even been their first choice. That's just the way it goes sometimes, semi-random chance.