6 ms·

Microsoft's partnership with Cyanogen Inc.

116 points by ghosh 12y ago

0x0 12y ago
So this is it, then. The "Microsoft GNU/Linux" distribution that slashdot kept joking about? Who'da thunk. :)
- justincormack 12y ago
  Well, other than the lack of Gnu in Android.
  - wtallis 12y ago
    How much GNU is in the Android toolchain? They're still using GCC to build the kernel at least, right?
    - justincormack 12y ago
      They now have llvm and gcc toolchains now, so imagine they are planning to switch (although it is still GNU ld/gold even with llvm), although that is for userspace, the kernel is not really part of Android and would still be gcc compiled for now.
vld 12y ago
Can anyone predict how this will affect Windows Phone?
- azakai 12y ago
  The article says there are no plans for Microsoft hardware with Cyanogen on it. I imagine Microsoft will continue as it has been with Windows Phone. This is just a way to use the Microsoft apps across both Windows Phone and Cyanogen devices that want those apps. There is benefit to Microsoft from growing that ecosystem, so that switching between Android devices and Windows Phones is less jarring.
  - MichaelGG 12y ago
    MS really needs to allow Android emulation on Windows Phone. It's just too painful because so many apps don't exist or have shitty WP hacks only. Controlling a speaker? Playing Go on various servers? Sending secure messages (TextSecure/Signal)? I've no high performance needs, but WP simply lacks the apps I need. Also, their store is a disgrace of crap, shovelwear and outright scams. They even had a fake Windows 8.1 Update pass their "approval" process. Even when I find a non scam, the quality is usually poor.
    - azakai 12y ago
      It's obviously not quite the same, but Microsoft supporting Android apps on Windows Phone reminds me of IBM supporting Windows apps on OS/2. Supporting your competitor's apps can prevent some immediate suffering by users, but it isn't a good strategy for an ecosystem. If people end up mostly running the emulated apps on your OS, you might as well just use that other OS, and run those apps on it natively, for the best experience. And figure out a way to run your ecosystem on top of that. Specifically here, that would mean for Microsoft to switch to Cyanogen for its devices, and ship a .NET runtime so Windows Phone apps can work on it. I doubt that's a great idea, but I think it's better than emulating Android apps on top of Windows Phone. I'm just guessing here though.
      - SyneRyder 12y ago
        On the other hand, Parallels Desktop, VMWare and Bootcamp helped a lot of people switch from Windows computers over to the Mac. Sometimes it can work out & bring more customers.
      - MichaelGG 12y ago
        Sure, that's obviously the debate inside MS, or they'd done it a long time ago. But it's clear, despite the Windows Store touting app counts, that WP is just not happening. So providing a slow, limited emulator could help bridge the gap on essential apps, while not totally giving up. Otherwise folks like me that would really prefer Windows Phone, we're just gonna stick to Android.
    - 12y ago
- toyg 12y ago
  I suspect it won't. MSofties are just hedging their bets. Considering they now have a full mobile stack in-house (from hardware to OS to services), they would be crazy to throw away its centerpiece just like that; but what they really care about is their cloud/services strategy, so they have to make sure device-agnostic ubiquitousness is in place anyway.
- bernadus_edwin 12y ago
  If this happend: 1. This is very bad for windows phone developer. It will make the ecosystem more suffer 2. There is a little hope. Windows phone is more efficient than android. If wp10 full compartibility with android hardware spec, wp10 can fight on below 100 dollar price
honksillet 12y ago
Now if someone can just figure out how to get this "watch" app off my iPhone.
honksillet 12y ago
Does anyone know if preinstalled app are limited in Europe?
azakai 12y ago
I feel the headline is quite exaggerated. It is interesting news. We heard a while ago that Microsoft was investing in Cyanogen, and it turns out that this isn't just a financial relationship. They are also going to have the Microsoft set of apps as an option on Cyanogen. Still, this isn't "taking Android's future out of Google's hand." The Android code is and has been open source, which is what enables things like Cyanogen to exist, so there is nothing new there. All that we learned of here is of an option to bundle Microsoft apps on Cyanogen; that might interest some vendors, but it doesn't seem like a game changer. Other apps have been bundled on various non-Google Android devices in the past.
- asadotzler 12y ago
  Samsung was getting close to having a viable Google Play alternative bundle of services/apps with their "S" collection but they seemingly bailed on that with their latest Google agreement. I think that left an opening for Microsoft to step in with their cloud.
Oletros 12y ago
> WITH THE ANNOUNCEMENT that Microsoft would partner with the truly open-source, Android-based Cyanogen OS ... > A more open Android is on the rise, and Microsoft just provided a powerful updraft. How it is more open or truly open source when both of them rely on proprietary apps and services?
FreakyT 12y ago
The title seems a bit hyperbolic. Google still controls the "real" Android; without the Google Apps, Android is missing quite a bit[1]. Sure, bundling OneDrive might help Microsoft take a few users from Google drive, but I would hardly characterize it as taking over Android's future. [1]: 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-...
- yitchelle 12y ago
  Although I wonder if some Microsoft office products appears into Android phones, will that make Android more appealing for enterprise customers.
  - Oletros 12y ago
    Microsoft products are already on Android
- notatoad 12y ago
  The title is incredibly hyperbolic. A more accurate title would be "Microsoft OneNote to be pre-installed on the YU Yureka and Alcatel Idol phones". That's literally all this is. That's the only customers for CyanogenOS, and that's the extent of this partnership. They're still shipping google apps on the phones, it's still Google's android, and this doesn't affect CyanogenMod. Microsoft is just shoving their foot in the door. Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger news.
  - yohui 12y ago
    > Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger news. Reportedly leveraging their Android patents to do so: http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-fees-for-apps-600824/ http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-fees-f...
    - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
magicalist 12y ago
This article's title is terrible, but just to make clear what confused many in the Ars Technica comment section, Cyanogen Inc is partnering with Microsoft, which is a totally separate effort from CyanogenMod (except that Cyanogen Inc is trying to commercialize it). CyanogenMod meanwhile has announced that things are going to continue as normal, with no Microsoft apps to be found: > We are not bundling or pre-installing Microsoft (or any Cyanogen OS exclusive partner apps) into CyanogenMod[1] [1] http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-cm12-1-nightlies http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-cm12-1-nightli...
- omegavesko 12y ago
  I wouldn't say it's a 'totally separate effort'. Much of the core CyanogenMod dev team are also Cyanogen Inc. employees. I assume what you meant to say is that CyanogenMod is entirely separate from Cyanogen Inc.'s commercial product, Cyanogen OS, which has always been true.
fredgrott 12y ago
and how is this different than with Nokia X?..wrong title..overblown hypebole
vezzy-fnord 12y ago
AOSP is still in Google's hands, and most major companies which ship Android devices are contractually forbidden from using derivatives as part of their membership in the OHA. It is evident that Microsoft wants to propel CyanogenMod in a more competitive direction for their own benefit, but it is far too early for any conclusion to be drawn here.
hendersoon 12y ago
Amazon tried the same thing and has been at best marginally successful, and they went to the trouble of building an appstore and ecosystem around these services. Just offering Microsoft versions of Google Play Services functionality (maps, games, locations, billing, sync, messaging, etc) only gets you in the door. To actually be successful, you need to make all the apps peolple want work with your services rather than Google's. That's why this isn't scaring Google one bit. Ars Technica went into a fair bit of detail about this a couple years ago. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-slow-oems-step-aside-google-is-defragging-android/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-sl... Now if Microsoft came in and decided to fork Android similarly to Amazon, and put their full weight behind it, with their own appstore and such, now _that_ might scare Google. But that's not what they're doing.
- mcintyre1994 12y ago
  I wonder if this could be related to the antitrust suit. Like you said, they'll have to ship Google Play - and according to that suit that has bundling rules that will force them to ship Google's apps and allegedly requires them to be on the home screen etc. They could bring that up as evidence of Google making it impossible to compete with preinstalled Google apps and maybe push their position a bit?
- ForHackernews 12y ago
  All they really need to do is duplicate the Google Play APIs, then the existing apps would work with your version of those services. I agree that it doesn't seem like they're doing this yet, but it doesn't seem like it would be a big undertaking for somebody like Microsoft--given that they already have their own mapping, email, messaging (Skype), app store, and billing infrastructure. You just need a shim layer to convert Google-format APIs to Bing-format. And you don't even need to sell it to consumers, just to phone OEMs. Samsung is pretty clearly already chaffing under Google's yoke, I bet they would easily jump on board the MS Android train.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
    Microsoft also has the money to perhaps pay developers to make their apps work on their store. I mean, they used to give you money just to make Windows 8 apps.
ipsin 12y ago
For me, the one compelling thing about CyanogenMod -- the only thing keeping me on the platform -- is the ability to control app permissions. Google looked like it was going in that direction with the "App Ops" control, but that's gone now.
chuckcode 12y ago
Looking forward to some virtualization/docker type functionality on my phone so I can run apps from any major OS without having to be tied down to a particular platform. Makes life a lot easier in the data center and can't help but think it could make it easier for developers to support multiple platforms and for new platforms to enter the market.
- walterbell 12y ago
  Virtualizion of 3D graphics/animation is challenging.
shusain 12y ago
Sensationalize much?
omegavesko 12y ago
I'm just happy I wasn't taking a sip of my coffee when I read that title. Is this what passes as tech journalism these days? Did they get Buzzfeed to give them pointers or something?
tomlongson 12y ago
This seems like a step in the right direction for open mobile coupled with paid software. It doesn't seem right that phones come with software you can't remove like "NFL Mobile", and for the most part we accept this.
ourmandave 12y ago
Ugh. More pre-installed apps I'll never use and can't remove.
- jqm 12y ago
  According to the article you can remove them. Agree on the "I'll never use" part.
djhworld 12y ago
Wasn't this the whole point of Android in the first place? I remember just before, or around the time Apple were releasing the iPhone, Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open Handset Alliance Android was a product of that partnership and developers/companies were free to fork the platform should they so wish, like Amazon did with their flavour of Android. http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html
- Oletros 12y ago
  > Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open Handset Alliance Android was a product of that partnership and developers/companies were free to fork the platform should they so wish No, OHA members never were allowed to fork Android as Amazon did. In fact, the very objective of OHA is use the same Android base with a certification process

116 points by ghosh 12y ago

0x0 12y ago

So this is it, then. The "Microsoft GNU/Linux" distribution that slashdot kept joking about? Who'da thunk. :)

justincormack 12y ago
Well, other than the lack of Gnu in Android.
- wtallis 12y ago
  How much GNU is in the Android toolchain? They're still using GCC to build the kernel at least, right?
  - justincormack 12y ago
    They now have llvm and gcc toolchains now, so imagine they are planning to switch (although it is still GNU ld/gold even with llvm), although that is for userspace, the kernel is not really part of Android and would still be gcc compiled for now.

vld 12y ago

Can anyone predict how this will affect Windows Phone?

azakai 12y ago
The article says there are no plans for Microsoft hardware with Cyanogen on it. I imagine Microsoft will continue as it has been with Windows Phone. This is just a way to use the Microsoft apps across both Windows Phone and Cyanogen devices that want those apps. There is benefit to Microsoft from growing that ecosystem, so that switching between Android devices and Windows Phones is less jarring.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  MS really needs to allow Android emulation on Windows Phone. It's just too painful because so many apps don't exist or have shitty WP hacks only. Controlling a speaker? Playing Go on various servers? Sending secure messages (TextSecure/Signal)? I've no high performance needs, but WP simply lacks the apps I need. Also, their store is a disgrace of crap, shovelwear and outright scams. They even had a fake Windows 8.1 Update pass their "approval" process. Even when I find a non scam, the quality is usually poor.
  - azakai 12y ago
    It's obviously not quite the same, but Microsoft supporting Android apps on Windows Phone reminds me of IBM supporting Windows apps on OS/2. Supporting your competitor's apps can prevent some immediate suffering by users, but it isn't a good strategy for an ecosystem. If people end up mostly running the emulated apps on your OS, you might as well just use that other OS, and run those apps on it natively, for the best experience. And figure out a way to run your ecosystem on top of that. Specifically here, that would mean for Microsoft to switch to Cyanogen for its devices, and ship a .NET runtime so Windows Phone apps can work on it. I doubt that's a great idea, but I think it's better than emulating Android apps on top of Windows Phone. I'm just guessing here though.
    - SyneRyder 12y ago
      On the other hand, Parallels Desktop, VMWare and Bootcamp helped a lot of people switch from Windows computers over to the Mac. Sometimes it can work out & bring more customers.
    - MichaelGG 12y ago
      Sure, that's obviously the debate inside MS, or they'd done it a long time ago. But it's clear, despite the Windows Store touting app counts, that WP is just not happening. So providing a slow, limited emulator could help bridge the gap on essential apps, while not totally giving up. Otherwise folks like me that would really prefer Windows Phone, we're just gonna stick to Android.
  - 12y ago
toyg 12y ago
I suspect it won't. MSofties are just hedging their bets. Considering they now have a full mobile stack in-house (from hardware to OS to services), they would be crazy to throw away its centerpiece just like that; but what they really care about is their cloud/services strategy, so they have to make sure device-agnostic ubiquitousness is in place anyway.
bernadus_edwin 12y ago
If this happend: 1. This is very bad for windows phone developer. It will make the ecosystem more suffer 2. There is a little hope. Windows phone is more efficient than android. If wp10 full compartibility with android hardware spec, wp10 can fight on below 100 dollar price

honksillet 12y ago

Now if someone can just figure out how to get this "watch" app off my iPhone.

honksillet 12y ago

Does anyone know if preinstalled app are limited in Europe?

azakai 12y ago

I feel the headline is quite exaggerated. It is interesting news. We heard a while ago that Microsoft was investing in Cyanogen, and it turns out that this isn't just a financial relationship. They are also going to have the Microsoft set of apps as an option on Cyanogen. Still, this isn't "taking Android's future out of Google's hand." The Android code is and has been open source, which is what enables things like Cyanogen to exist, so there is nothing new there. All that we learned of here is of an option to bundle Microsoft apps on Cyanogen; that might interest some vendors, but it doesn't seem like a game changer. Other apps have been bundled on various non-Google Android devices in the past.

asadotzler 12y ago
Samsung was getting close to having a viable Google Play alternative bundle of services/apps with their "S" collection but they seemingly bailed on that with their latest Google agreement. I think that left an opening for Microsoft to step in with their cloud.

Oletros 12y ago

> WITH THE ANNOUNCEMENT that Microsoft would partner with the truly open-source, Android-based Cyanogen OS ... > A more open Android is on the rise, and Microsoft just provided a powerful updraft. How it is more open or truly open source when both of them rely on proprietary apps and services?

FreakyT 12y ago

The title seems a bit hyperbolic. Google still controls the "real" Android; without the Google Apps, Android is missing quite a bit[1]. Sure, bundling OneDrive might help Microsoft take a few users from Google drive, but I would hardly characterize it as taking over Android's future. [1]: 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-...

yitchelle 12y ago
Although I wonder if some Microsoft office products appears into Android phones, will that make Android more appealing for enterprise customers.
- Oletros 12y ago
  Microsoft products are already on Android
notatoad 12y ago
The title is incredibly hyperbolic. A more accurate title would be "Microsoft OneNote to be pre-installed on the YU Yureka and Alcatel Idol phones". That's literally all this is. That's the only customers for CyanogenOS, and that's the extent of this partnership. They're still shipping google apps on the phones, it's still Google's android, and this doesn't affect CyanogenMod. Microsoft is just shoving their foot in the door. Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger news.
- yohui 12y ago
  > Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger news. Reportedly leveraging their Android patents to do so: http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-fees-for-apps-600824/ http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-fees-f...
  - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago

magicalist 12y ago

This article's title is terrible, but just to make clear what confused many in the Ars Technica comment section, Cyanogen Inc is partnering with Microsoft, which is a totally separate effort from CyanogenMod (except that Cyanogen Inc is trying to commercialize it). CyanogenMod meanwhile has announced that things are going to continue as normal, with no Microsoft apps to be found: > We are not bundling or pre-installing Microsoft (or any Cyanogen OS exclusive partner apps) into CyanogenMod[1] [1] http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-cm12-1-nightlies http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-cm12-1-nightli...

omegavesko 12y ago
I wouldn't say it's a 'totally separate effort'. Much of the core CyanogenMod dev team are also Cyanogen Inc. employees. I assume what you meant to say is that CyanogenMod is entirely separate from Cyanogen Inc.'s commercial product, Cyanogen OS, which has always been true.

fredgrott 12y ago

and how is this different than with Nokia X?..wrong title..overblown hypebole

vezzy-fnord 12y ago

AOSP is still in Google's hands, and most major companies which ship Android devices are contractually forbidden from using derivatives as part of their membership in the OHA. It is evident that Microsoft wants to propel CyanogenMod in a more competitive direction for their own benefit, but it is far too early for any conclusion to be drawn here.

hendersoon 12y ago

Amazon tried the same thing and has been at best marginally successful, and they went to the trouble of building an appstore and ecosystem around these services. Just offering Microsoft versions of Google Play Services functionality (maps, games, locations, billing, sync, messaging, etc) only gets you in the door. To actually be successful, you need to make all the apps peolple want work with your services rather than Google's. That's why this isn't scaring Google one bit. Ars Technica went into a fair bit of detail about this a couple years ago. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-slow-oems-step-aside-google-is-defragging-android/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-sl... Now if Microsoft came in and decided to fork Android similarly to Amazon, and put their full weight behind it, with their own appstore and such, now _that_ might scare Google. But that's not what they're doing.

mcintyre1994 12y ago
I wonder if this could be related to the antitrust suit. Like you said, they'll have to ship Google Play - and according to that suit that has bundling rules that will force them to ship Google's apps and allegedly requires them to be on the home screen etc. They could bring that up as evidence of Google making it impossible to compete with preinstalled Google apps and maybe push their position a bit?
ForHackernews 12y ago
All they really need to do is duplicate the Google Play APIs, then the existing apps would work with your version of those services. I agree that it doesn't seem like they're doing this yet, but it doesn't seem like it would be a big undertaking for somebody like Microsoft--given that they already have their own mapping, email, messaging (Skype), app store, and billing infrastructure. You just need a shim layer to convert Google-format APIs to Bing-format. And you don't even need to sell it to consumers, just to phone OEMs. Samsung is pretty clearly already chaffing under Google's yoke, I bet they would easily jump on board the MS Android train.
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  Microsoft also has the money to perhaps pay developers to make their apps work on their store. I mean, they used to give you money just to make Windows 8 apps.

ipsin 12y ago

For me, the one compelling thing about CyanogenMod -- the only thing keeping me on the platform -- is the ability to control app permissions. Google looked like it was going in that direction with the "App Ops" control, but that's gone now.

chuckcode 12y ago

Looking forward to some virtualization/docker type functionality on my phone so I can run apps from any major OS without having to be tied down to a particular platform. Makes life a lot easier in the data center and can't help but think it could make it easier for developers to support multiple platforms and for new platforms to enter the market.

walterbell 12y ago
Virtualizion of 3D graphics/animation is challenging.

shusain 12y ago

Sensationalize much?

omegavesko 12y ago

I'm just happy I wasn't taking a sip of my coffee when I read that title. Is this what passes as tech journalism these days? Did they get Buzzfeed to give them pointers or something?

tomlongson 12y ago

This seems like a step in the right direction for open mobile coupled with paid software. It doesn't seem right that phones come with software you can't remove like "NFL Mobile", and for the most part we accept this.

ourmandave 12y ago

Ugh. More pre-installed apps I'll never use and can't remove.

jqm 12y ago
According to the article you can remove them. Agree on the "I'll never use" part.

djhworld 12y ago

Wasn't this the whole point of Android in the first place? I remember just before, or around the time Apple were releasing the iPhone, Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open Handset Alliance Android was a product of that partnership and developers/companies were free to fork the platform should they so wish, like Amazon did with their flavour of Android. http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html

Oletros 12y ago
> Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open Handset Alliance Android was a product of that partnership and developers/companies were free to fork the platform should they so wish No, OHA members never were allowed to fork Android as Amazon did. In fact, the very objective of OHA is use the same Android base with a certification process