4 ms·

It is possible to unbundle Android, but if you are a phone manufacturer that makes Google Android phones, you get very strong pressure from Google if you try to

It is possible to unbundle Android, but if you are a phone manufacturer that makes Google Android phones, you get very strong pressure from Google if you try to also make non-Google Android phones. So any large manufacturer can not try new innovative Android variants at fear of being cut off from Google Android.

ocdtrekkie 12y ago
It's not just pressure. They outright cut you off. You cannot ship Google Androids and non-Google Androids. It's part of the MARA.
- Oletros 12y ago
  > You cannot ship Google Androids and non-Google Androids. Any source for this?
  - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444709004577652362341112898 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100008723963904447090045776523... and various other articles on the same incident. OHA members are required to agree not to ship devices running Android forks.
    - Oletros 12y ago
      That article doesn't say what you have claimed. And, apart that Aliyun store had pirated Google apps, it was not an Android fork. Still waiting those MADA clauses forbidding non Google Android
      - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        MADA is confidential unfortunately. (Wonder why?) And no, that incident had nothing to do with whether or not Google apps available in Aliyun's store were pirated. Acer was told they'd be removed from the OHA if they shipped Aliyun's fork of Android.
        Oletros 12y ago
        > MADA is confidential unfortunately. (Wonder why?) If MADA is so confidential why you talk about some clauses as facts? Or you have proofs of them or you're just inventing things > cer was told they'd be removed from the OHA if they shipped Aliyun's fork of Android. Second time, Aliyun is not an Android fork Why do you talk about things you clearly don't know? Are you just spreading FUD because of your hate against some companies?
        ogurechny 12y ago
        It has already been discussed even in the mainstream news quite some time ago: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-... Presumably (judging by comments on Russian websites), Yandex has got an agreement to include (or included) in the report documents that show you have to play by Google's rules and install Google services on every model in every region of the world once you signed the service agreement, or (even better for them) direct prohibition to pre-install Yandex services.
        Oletros 12y ago
        Yes, I know that has been discussed, but there is no article (and not even in the Ars one) were it is said that an OEM is forbidden to launch a non Google Android device like the op is repeatedly claiming
        ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Again: See the Acer/Alibaba incident.
        Oletros 12y ago
        Apart that what the OHA forbids are forks that doesn't pass the ACT, Aliyun was not an Android fork Please, stop talking about what you clearly don't know. Still waiting those clauses that you post as facts. Can you link to them or not?

ocdtrekkie 12y ago

It's not just pressure. They outright cut you off. You cannot ship Google Androids and non-Google Androids. It's part of the MARA.

Oletros 12y ago
> You cannot ship Google Androids and non-Google Androids. Any source for this?
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444709004577652362341112898 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100008723963904447090045776523... and various other articles on the same incident. OHA members are required to agree not to ship devices running Android forks.
  - Oletros 12y ago
    That article doesn't say what you have claimed. And, apart that Aliyun store had pirated Google apps, it was not an Android fork. Still waiting those MADA clauses forbidding non Google Android
    - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
      MADA is confidential unfortunately. (Wonder why?) And no, that incident had nothing to do with whether or not Google apps available in Aliyun's store were pirated. Acer was told they'd be removed from the OHA if they shipped Aliyun's fork of Android.
      - Oletros 12y ago
        > MADA is confidential unfortunately. (Wonder why?) If MADA is so confidential why you talk about some clauses as facts? Or you have proofs of them or you're just inventing things > cer was told they'd be removed from the OHA if they shipped Aliyun's fork of Android. Second time, Aliyun is not an Android fork Why do you talk about things you clearly don't know? Are you just spreading FUD because of your hate against some companies?
        ogurechny 12y ago
        It has already been discussed even in the mainstream news quite some time ago: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-... Presumably (judging by comments on Russian websites), Yandex has got an agreement to include (or included) in the report documents that show you have to play by Google's rules and install Google services on every model in every region of the world once you signed the service agreement, or (even better for them) direct prohibition to pre-install Yandex services.
        Oletros 12y ago
        Yes, I know that has been discussed, but there is no article (and not even in the Ars one) were it is said that an OEM is forbidden to launch a non Google Android device like the op is repeatedly claiming
        ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Again: See the Acer/Alibaba incident.
        Oletros 12y ago
        Apart that what the OHA forbids are forks that doesn't pass the ACT, Aliyun was not an Android fork Please, stop talking about what you clearly don't know. Still waiting those clauses that you post as facts. Can you link to them or not?