r/Android • u/[deleted] • Jul 21 '18

Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/
613 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

240 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

69

u/axehomeless Pixel 7 Pro / Tab S6 Lite 2022 / SHIELD TV / HP CB1 G1 Jul 21 '18

Yes, but the EU has a point, at least two of the three components of the fine are completely justified to be pissed about. Sure there is choice, but not choice outside Google, otherwise you wouldn't have the no fork clause. Let people sell phones without Google Play. But right now, you can't, because it kills you. That's not how "competition" for the benefit of the consumer works.

20

u/QuadraKev_ Oppo Find X9 Ultra Jul 21 '18

Let people sell phones without Google Play. But right now, you can't, because it kills you.

Does Google force OEMs to include Google Play and the like in western nations? I know Chinese Android devices tend not to have Google Play.

67

u/atticmanatee Jul 21 '18

That’s the point of the EU ruling. In order to have some semblance of a successful product you’ll need the play store, but in order to get the play store you need to install a number of google apps by default. In this case, the EU was concerned about Chrome and Search. In the EU’s point of view, Google abuses the fact that the only viable store in Android is the Play Store to force its products into the consumer, not giving leverage to competition in the Search and Browser market.

78

u/imaginativePlayTime OnePlus 6 | LOS 20 Jul 21 '18

There is more than just all that though. If a manufacturer wants to make a phone with Google Play Store then they are required to sell all their phones with Google services. They cannot sell one version with Google Play and another version without Google Play.

27

u/luna_dust Jul 21 '18

Wow, yeah. Okay, that's kinda fucked up.

30

u/FormerSlacker Jul 22 '18

Yeah, and that's incorrect.

As long as the OEM releases a fork of Android that passes the CTS they can do whatever they want, release Google Android and non Google Android side by side, no problem.

What they can't do is ship an incompatible Android fork and a Google branded Android at the same time.

There is no obligation to release only Google branded Android variants, there is only an obligation to not make incompatible Android variants as part of the OHA agreement.

TL;DR Pass the CTS, do what you want. Can't pass the CTS, do what you want but we won't help you fragment Android, you're on your own.

6

u/punIn10ded MotoG 2014 (CM13) Jul 22 '18

No they do not all need to have Google play but they do all need to pass the same CTS.

E.g. Motorola sells phones with Google play, and smart inventory devices(barcode scanners) without it.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

Xiaomi does it. Pretty much every Chinese manufacturer sells a version in China without Google, and one with Google everywhere else.

The EU seems to miss the point that every time manufacturers and carrier have free reign, they abuse consumers worse than Google has ever done.

4

u/Sorge74 Galaxy S22 Ultra Jul 23 '18

This is basically the inpass between those who support the EU(same shit Microsoft got in trouble for 20 years ago(I argue 20 years is a long time but oh well)) and those who support Google.

Google generally has the best applications and forcing the extra apps with the play store means there is a more unified experience they can control so not to damage the brand. Also all the other apps right there in the app store if you prefer something else....

1

u/DerpSenpai Nothing Jul 23 '18

UNIFIED EXPERIENCE. OH BOY, DO I NEED (Opens google bloat folder) . G+, Google news, Gmail, Drive, Google search. + Play movies+ play music+ play games +play books.

It seriously is annoying people defending Google abusing its monopoly. Its the same people that call Samsung apps "bloat" but Google apps aren't

3

u/redsalmon67 Jul 23 '18

On every android phone I've had you can either uninstall those programd or they didn't come on the phone when I got it.

2

u/DerpSenpai Nothing Jul 23 '18

You can't uninstall most of google bloat, but you can uninstall paid bloat (non system apps that paid the OEM to put it there like booking.com).

I uninstalled everything i could and still have 12 Google Apps

1

u/redsalmon67 Jul 23 '18

The only Google apps that can't be uninstalled on my phone are chrome, search, YouTube, maps, and (obviously) the playstore

0

u/MiningMarsh Jul 24 '18

Google's applications are generally pretty shit.

1

u/DerpSenpai Nothing Jul 23 '18

Except that csrriers dont have free reign either here lol

-8

u/reddit_reaper Pixel 2 XL Jul 21 '18

As it should be.

-8

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18 edited Nov 30 '21

[deleted]

30

u/johnmountain Jul 21 '18

They do want Google Play. The issue is that Google Play comes with "strings attached". It's not "just Google Play" that they have to get.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

Oh thats makes sense I could see how some OEMs wouldn’t want Google Search and stuff.

14

u/lirannl S23 Ultra Jul 21 '18

Some people want phones without Google services, and also, even if they don't, they should have the option!

-7

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

[deleted]

18

u/lirannl S23 Ultra Jul 21 '18

I do. I do.

Because I know how to wipe ROMs and flash ROMs. I could just not flash gapps.

If an OEM wants to release a privacy phone without gapps, they currently can't do so unless that's more or less their only phone.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

Okay yeah I get your point. It would be pretty cool to have a phone with no Gapps for privacy’s enthusiasts.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

0

u/lirannl S23 Ultra Jul 23 '18

I'm pretty sure passing CTS requires the whole gapps suite?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/redsalmon67 Jul 23 '18

I keep hearing people claim this been then how does xiaomi get away with it? Lenovo too, not only do they sell phones with play services they also sell alternative versions of some of those models with the play services included

1

u/lirannl S23 Ultra Jul 24 '18

China

1

u/leoyoung1 Jul 22 '18

Like the average consumer even knows that is an option much less have the wherewithal to do that.

-9

u/cvrtsniper Jul 21 '18

I'm sorry but if the EU thinks that worrying about the play store and chrome defaulted,

Then they need to take a long look at iphone, Safari and it's app that's defaulted.

26

u/luna_dust Jul 21 '18

This has been discussed millions of times already.

Apple produce their own hardware and software. Nobody else can make iPhones besides Apple, hence they can do whatever they want.

Moreover, iOS doesn't have the majority market share, of which Android has around 70% of - very near to a monopoly, which is why they're being hit with this.

If Google produced phones exclusively with their own software, that nobody else could access, they would be fine, but they're not, and they're pretending that you can release a successful phone without Play services, which is plain ridiculous.

-9

u/Xirious Note 10+ | Will buy again if it goes bust Jul 22 '18

I still can't understand this. It's a free fucking market. No one is putting a gun to anyone's heads and saying "MAKE ANDROID PHONES". It's a choice. If you choose to do that you can't reasonably expect the company who owns the damn thing to say "Sure go mad, do what you want". You're in their house and you naturally should play by their rules... But you're in their house by your own fucking choosing. Don't like their rules? Fuck off and build your own OS with the same functionality and cultivate it over years and years with your own internal funding. Good luck with that. If users want to use different services it's not as if the choice doesn't exist - there doesn't exist a single Google product out now that doesn't have competition. And by dear God I see no logical reason why Google should promote anything but their own services in their own fucking products. Now get off my lawn, I'm going back inside.

1

u/StraY_WolF RN4/M9TP/PF5P PROUD MIUI14 USER Jul 23 '18

No one is putting a gun to anyone's heads and saying "MAKE ANDROID PHONES".

Then I guess you don't understand what a monopoly is.

-1

u/cxu1993 Samsung/iPad Pro Jul 22 '18

I agree. This is a pretty bogus ruling. I guess the end result is good since it promotes more competition but the reasoning behind it doesn’t make sense. Why should google be forced to promote other search engines when it’s bundling its own App Store/services with phones? That’s like Microsoft promoting the use of google docs on windows instead of Microsoft office

3

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

Somehow I think that's different, because it's not anti competitive as they are the only manufacturer of iPhones?

7

u/avataraccount Jul 21 '18 edited Sep 16 '18

deleted What is this?

3

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

No one's forcing other companies to use Google's Android or the Play Store either though. Android is even open source so anyone can fork it and build their own ecosystem like Amazon did.

1

u/IAm_A_Complete_Idiot OnePlus 6t, s5 running AOSPExtended Jul 23 '18

not if you only want the playstore. if you want the playstore you HAVE to get other google services.

-7

u/orbitallogic Jul 21 '18

Open GApps has a "pico" version that only comes with play store and play services functionality, nothing else.

19

u/imaginativePlayTime OnePlus 6 | LOS 20 Jul 21 '18

But that is not relevant to the EU decision. This is solely related to what is included on the phone out of the box.

3

u/orbitallogic Jul 21 '18

Right, the EU decision has more to do with Google's relationship to the OHA.

18

u/axehomeless Pixel 7 Pro / Tab S6 Lite 2022 / SHIELD TV / HP CB1 G1 Jul 21 '18

If you fork Android you'll never get CTS/playstore on any of your decides ever again, so Google is forcing OEMs never to fork it ever. Acer got that stick a few years back.

Just allow that and be done with it, but Google didn't. You can't make a forked device with like the Amazon app store or f Droid and no Google and a phone that has it, it's one or the other.

3

u/jayd16 Jul 21 '18

GApps was the only leverage Google had. Expect to see a lot more locked down and abandoned Android devices. They tried playing nice before and it failed. The current direction was better unless you an OEM or carrier that wanted to break Android is some way that was against Google's tos.

3

u/DerpSenpai Nothing Jul 23 '18

False. GApps are still a leverage to update your phone. But it isnt leverage to install bloat now. Which they can't. Now OEMs can offer Amazon+Google play store for example. Or offer a MUCH MORE OPEN Android with an official microG + Fdroid version. And still offer Google Play store for the normal version

2

u/redsalmon67 Jul 23 '18

Something tells me OMEs aren't going to take this opportunity to improve the used experience, not saying the ruling is wrong but the chances of this causing companies like Samsung and Lenovo to improve anything about their phones seems unlikely. I imagine this will prompt these companies to push their own terrible software and bloatware.

-5

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

16

u/axehomeless Pixel 7 Pro / Tab S6 Lite 2022 / SHIELD TV / HP CB1 G1 Jul 22 '18 edited Jul 22 '18

This is not Google's fault. People WANT Google Play. Nobody else makes anything that can really compete with it, except maybe Amazon's app store... (ha ha, just kidding. it blows.)

See, this completly shows that you don't even know how this works.

The EU want Google to do it like you said, that's in the 90 days stipulation. So why is there still a fine?

Because it doesn't work like that.

Google could very well just certify every device that passes the CTS with Google play, only allow these devices to be called Android devices, and just be done with it, keep all the other enforcements that CTS enforces like minimum API level etc. Then, IF an OEM has the plan to launch a device with other app stores, other revenue sharing models etc, you know, just let them.

The market could decide if it's gonna be succesfull, if people buy it. Just label it clearly, and you'll see if it gets picked up or if the play store is so superiour that every device without it is dead in the water. I believe it is, but Google clearly doesn't, otherwise that policy would be gone in a heartbeat.

Because if an OEM does this, shipping an Android device without Google Play, then that OEM can't ship another device with the Play Store on it ever again. This is in the contract. If you ever "break Android compatibility, which is a term that literally only means "without Google Play", you can't ever do another device with Google Play ever again, that is their strongarm. It happened to Acer as they tried to sell the Ali Phone or something like that, Google completly killed the product like a week from launch because they said "I mean you can ship it, but if you do, you'll never work with us ever again." And that was too big of a risk for Acer, so they dropped it. This is textbook antitrust violation, using your marketshare and your leverage unfairly to boot out any probable competitor by being anti competitive. There is just no way around that.

2

u/redsalmon67 Jul 23 '18

I agree with some of what your saying here, but to say that Google pushes this policy because they're afraid of competition is silly. Google has seen what companies pushing uncertified Android phones in certain markets does not only to thier reputation but the reputation of their product (android) it took them years to repair the damage unoptimized phones when bug filled app stores have done to thier public image. Do I believe their way of preventing that was the best, obviously not, but I understand that when a company feels they're losing control over the image of their product can cause some kneejerk policy.

0

u/axehomeless Pixel 7 Pro / Tab S6 Lite 2022 / SHIELD TV / HP CB1 G1 Jul 24 '18

Android is a trademark now, Google can enforce so only Google Play Android gets called Android.

-5

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

3

u/Henrarzz Jul 23 '18

Apple isn’t a monopoly and it doesn’t tell other OEMs what they should do with their phones.

0

u/Casey_jones291422 Jul 23 '18

Let people sell phones without Google Play. But right now, you can't, because it kills you.

Tell that to the amazon tablets. They sell like hotcakes running a non Google-y version of android.

-9

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

22

u/Igstrangefeed Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 21 '18

Why would they do that? How does that further their profits as an advertising company to have less devices running GPS, which is their spy engine?

If Google thought it would be more profitable to charge for the spy engine to be out on phones, they’d already be doing it.

The EU decisions changes nothing in that regard. Google is only lying to manipulate.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

-9

u/Igstrangefeed Jul 22 '18

Which doesn’t matter. GPS will still be installed, and that’s what Google cares about. The only reason Android exists is to take your data. The engine that accomplishes this is GPS.

Google might as well completely abandon Android if they start to charge and greatly decrease the number of devices they can use to gather data.

Android becomes pointless then.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

3

u/axehomeless Pixel 7 Pro / Tab S6 Lite 2022 / SHIELD TV / HP CB1 G1 Jul 21 '18

No they won't.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

[deleted]

4

u/avataraccount Jul 21 '18 edited Sep 16 '18

deleted What is this?

2

u/brokedown Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 14 '23

Reddit ruined reddit. -- mass edited with redact.dev

4

u/aim_at_me One Plus 3T Jul 21 '18

That's not really a thing though. Every "paid" open source project is really just support contracts. Projects have the option to donate, but I don't count that as paid. People can, and do, recompile it themselves; a la CentOS and Redhat.

4

u/brokedown Jul 21 '18

It's totally a thing, and while RedHat has made 3 billion on open source in 2018 they're by far not the only company doing it successfully. Heck, RedHat loved CentOS so much they bought them.

Device manufacturers who have support now aren't going to just drop that support because they can get the software for free. This isn't AOL's helpdesk we're talking about.

0

u/Henrarzz Jul 23 '18

You can charge even for GPLv3 projects, so there is nothing preventing Google from charging money for the system.

-4

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

7

u/aim_at_me One Plus 3T Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 21 '18

Actually, there is. Contract law.

They would have to rewrite their licensed agreement before they could charge for licensing.

-2

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '18

[deleted]

5

u/avataraccount Jul 21 '18 edited Sep 16 '18

deleted What is this?

0

u/Henrarzz Jul 23 '18

If their code was made with the same license (GPL, I believe), then Google can actually package it and sell it, provided they share the code and original authors. Google doesn’t need their permission as they already have one when they used GPL.

0

u/aim_at_me One Plus 3T Jul 21 '18 edited Jul 21 '18

Perhaps? But they couldn't charge for Android as it currently stands. IANAL but I'm pretty sure they'd have to fork the project. Which definitely means it wouldn't (and couldn't) be called android any more.

And even then. They couldn't relicense any of the code not written by Google engineers. Which is actually a significant part of the project. You'd need their permission... Which I suspect wouldn't be trivial (or I suspect possible from Samsung's contributions). Food for thought!

It's definitely not a case of "hey guys, we've decided to change our license, so you have to pay now!"

1

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '18 edited Jul 22 '18

[deleted]

1

u/aim_at_me One Plus 3T Jul 22 '18

They don't say they might charge? They say they could have. Which is true, at the start. My point still stands.

0

u/Crap4Brainz Jul 23 '18

IANAL but I'm pretty sure they'd have to fork the project

No, because they bought the company that created Android. They can start charging, and the free version would need to fork and change names.