Google depreciating open source in Android

[akugami]

Link to Ars Technica article. I just thought this article was interesting. I've largely refrained from the Android vs iOS wars lately because while my stance hasn't changed, there isn't a whole lot to add to the discussion.

Please keep this discussion clean and this is about how Google is removing/depreciating some of the open source parts of Android now that it has the upper hand. Things like the mail app, search, web browser, etc. are being removed from open source versions to closed sourced versions.

I'm actually not surprised at what Google is doing but from a consumer standpoint, does it really matter? I'd say no. And aside from Amazon and Samsung, will this really affect any Android OEM an any meaningful way?

 

[vshah]

It won't affect amazon and samsung either. Almost all android OEMs have their own in-house versions of all of these apps anyway, and it has been that way for a long while.

 

[TerryMathews]

Article glosses over any patent issues which I believe drive at least a few of these decisions.

 

[s44]

These apps are all the stuff that got skinned anyway.

And he's just flat wrong that Samsung doesn't have a push API. That said, they're not going to leave because they never intended to leave. The development is just to keep Samsung in a good position vis a vis Google for future developments. HTC OTOH... they can't fool around. So I wonder what this HTC Amazon phone rumor stuff is really about.

 

[Joe1987]

Interesting article, and timely, I just took a lot of the duplicate crap off my Note 3, it's weird, so many duplicate apps, 1 for Samsung, 1 for Google.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Honestly I am OK with this. Everyone complained about fragmentation and lack of standards on Android and Google is fixing that.

The fact that Amazon has come thus far proves that Google's platform is the most open one of the major players.

If they want to add more value for map data and in-app purchases then the developers can still chose to say no.

 

[ilkhan]

I have no issue with this. If you want to publicly brand your device as android/play-store-compatible, you do things Google's way. AOSP is great for non-phone devices. Want to build an AOSP dishwasher? No problem. You don't want/need compatibility with play store stuff. But if you want a phone that runs play store apps, you need the compatibility with Play Store's Apps.

 

[slugg]

Link to Ars Technica article. I just thought this article was interesting. I've largely refrained from the Android vs iOS wars lately because while my stance hasn't changed, there isn't a whole lot to add to the discussion.

Please keep this discussion clean and this is about how Google is removing/depreciating some of the open source parts of Android now that it has the upper hand. Things like the mail app, search, web browser, etc. are being removed from open source versions to closed sourced versions.

I'm actually not surprised at what Google is doing but from a consumer standpoint, does it really matter? I'd say no. And aside from Amazon and Samsung, will this really affect any Android OEM an any meaningful way?

What does "depreciating" mean, as stated in the thread title and in the OP?

 

[TerryMathews]

What does "depreciating" mean, as stated in the thread title and in the OP?

Ceasing development and replacing with a new product/branch.

 

[hans007]

Its deprecate not depreciate

 

[Graze]

This article is nonsense and also inaccurate.

 

[Deeko]

Google generally close - sources their biggest products. Android was only open source to begin with because they bought it as an open source product. This isn't really surprising.

 

[Tsaar]

I'll quote my post from Hardforum:

Seems good to me. Users get updates to key parts of the Android experience without waiting 2 years for manufacturer plus carrier ineptitude.

I also read the Google launcher update as being a choice for the user. They will have a choice in using the manufacturer skin or the stock Google experience.

I own a Note 2 and never plan on buying a non Nexus device again after buying a Nexus 7. Having carrier bloat and still running 4.1 is ridiculous.

 

[s44]

This article is nonsense and also inaccurate.

I think a reddit comment got it right:

Wow. Since when did Ron Amadeo sport for the FUD team?

Everything he says is true, of course, but he states it all in such a bogus way just to add some spin to this story.

 

[Sid59]

I'll quote my post from Hardforum:

Seems good to me. Users get updates to key parts of the Android experience without waiting 2 years for manufacturer plus carrier ineptitude.

I also read the Google launcher update as being a choice for the user. They will have a choice in using the manufacturer skin or the stock Google experience.

I own a Note 2 and never plan on buying a non Nexus device again after buying a Nexus 7. Having carrier bloat and still running 4.1 is ridiculous.

Here's an article on 4.4 and what a Google Experience launcher may bring to a cohesive Android experience. It's a good companion reading piece to Ars' gloomy Godfather tone.

http://techtainian.com/news/2013/10...l-reclaim-android-and-unify-holo-with-kennedy

 

[foghorn67]

And another sensationalist article and headline. Not surprised the least.

 

[akugami]

It won't affect amazon and samsung either. Almost all android OEMs have their own in-house versions of all of these apps anyway, and it has been that way for a long while.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aside from Amazon and Samsung who wants to "roll their own Android" most other OEM's use the Google apps or at least the Google API's for their own custom apps. As these get removed from the AOSP versions and become closed versions, the OEM's are locked into Google.

I know I'm oversimplifying but even if HTC or whomever releases a custom mail app it's nothing more than a glorified re-skin of Google's default mail app. About the only two Android OEM's with the resources to put out their own Android version would be Amazon and Samsung. Everyone else is at the beck and call of Google.

Article glosses over any patent issues which I believe drive at least a few of these decisions.

Disagree. I think a lot of it is business related rather than patent related. Google wants to lock the OEM's in. The way to do this is move more and more of the basic services and functionality into closed source versions rather than the open sourced versions of early Android. This won't affect consumers much if at all though.

Just a note, there is nothing illegal or shady about what Google is doing. This is business as usual to me. From a business standpoint, I have zero problem with what Google is doing. I just found the article interesting.

Its deprecate not depreciate

Actually, either term would work for what I intended, though in this instance deprecate may work better.

This article is nonsense and also inaccurate.

Can you elaborate on what parts are nonsense and inaccurate? I just thought the article was interesting. I'm not a developer so my knowledge is not that deep. I do work with a few who develop for Android and iOS.

 

[sweenish]

ars has posted two bogus articles very recently. This one, and the barometer one.

It's the OEMs that drove Google to do what they're doing. They replace most of those parts with their own apps anyway, and then never update them. If Google showed anything at I/O this year, it's that they are determined to update Android for ALL the users without having to actually update Android itself. Hence the Play Services, and separating out their own apps and putting them in Play.

If anything, this actually makes it easier to fork Android and do your own thing. AOSP is still its own beast, but Google is making it a super modular skeleton, as it should be. Now, when Amazon or whoever decides that they want to fork it, they don't have to remove all the Google apps and bits. They just run with the source and replace what they want. All the user facing stuff is already just a placeholder in AOSP, but the infrastructure is still intact and open source.

And the language used in the article like "kiss the ring" was utter BS. Did he seriously never consider that compatibility has to be passed so that apps are guaranteed to work at your API level? That the "backroom deals" and "secret emails" are actually just correspondence to address any failings in said compatibility tests? And why shouldn't Google have them do those things to have access? They're trying to have a somewhat coherent experience and ensure cross compatibility.

Exercising a little more control is a good thing, unless everyone wants Android to fork all over the place.

As stated above, pure FUD. It's also hypocritical since these same people were praising Google for this exact stuff right after I/O.

 

[Ravynmagi]

I read the article and didn't think it was FUD or negative towards Google. They stated pretty much what I assume to be rather obvious. Google wants to keep control over Android and wants to discourage forks from becoming threats. Google wants to keep making money like everyone else and it doesn't do that by giving stuff away and not getting something in return.

And the "kiss the ring" comment. I'm very sure politics is involved in the process. So that seems normal.

As an Android fan, I'm okay with this as I don't see any negatives towards Google services and apps being closed source. It seems to be providing us with some nice benefits like even faster updates and less reliance on manufactures and carriers.

 

[Mopetar]

Its deprecate not depreciate

The two words are synonymous in some regards, so they can be used interchangeably for the most part, but when referring to software, deprecate is used.

As stated above, pure FUD. It's also hypocritical since these same people were praising Google for this exact stuff right after I/O.

It's a legitimate concern, but the manner in which it is written suggests that the author is attempting to portray it negatively. It's something that has both benefits as well as disadvantages depending on perspective.

 

[Sid59]

Another article that flips Ron's article.

http://www.androidheadlines.com/201...andardizing-android-great-news-end-users.html

 

[s44]

I think a lot of it is business related rather than patent related.

That's true, but I believe this actually *started* for patent reasons, specifically Apple's ridiculous injunction against the Nexus S for the "search your phone" capability of AOSP. Samsung/Google's answer? Well, since Apple won't sue Google directly, all the cool search stuff got rolled into Google's Search app, which *really* became its own thing soon after with Now. Suck it, Cupertino.

 

[sweenish]

It's a legitimate concern, but the manner in which it is written suggests that the author is attempting to portray it negatively. It's something that has both benefits as well as disadvantages depending on perspective.

I can see this, it's the language that turns the article from informative to FUD. Ars always pulls this, so I'm not surprised. They had been doing better lately, though.

Again, it probably would have never happened if OEMs pulled their heads out of their butts long enough.

 

[Jodell88]

Apps != Operating System.

 

[Red Storm]

Apps != Operating System.

This.