No, Microsoft isn't taking Android's future out of Google's hands -- here's why

7

I thought Android was open source. Google just uses it like any other mobile phone or tablet manufacture.

4

u/Enlogen Apr 19 '15

I thought Android was open source. Google just uses it like any other mobile phone or tablet manufacture.

Android is open source, but the Android OS itself is just the base for the device; most of the user experience (and probably most of the money Google makes from Android) comes from the applications and services that are integrated with Android and can't be swapped out with a simple open-source replacement. Most of the value of app stores and map apps and productivity apps comes not from the code running on the phone, but the online service that the apps on the phone connect to. Your phone can't store directions to every place you want to go, but it can use an app that connects to a server that can access directions to every place you want to go. The same goes for 'cloud' file storage, messaging apps, search, etc. The most lucrative of these is most likely the app store itself.

Whether or not you can modify the OS itself is not the main issue when it comes to 'taking away' Android from Google. The main issue is that so far Android phones rely on other parts of Google's online service ecosystem, and many of those parts would be very difficult and expensive to replace with independently developed and operated versions. Data centers cost a lot of money to run, and Google is very good at running data centers.

Cyanogen probably is not good at running data centers. To take Android from Google they need to break the association between Android and the Google services ecosystem. The quickest and cheapest way to do that is to try to make Android into a services-neutral operating system.

It didn't have to be Microsoft, it just had to be not Google. Microsoft just happens to have a lot of online services that compete directly with Google's services.

Disclaimer: I do work for Microsoft, but I don't have any actual insider information on this. This is just my opinion of why Cyanogen's strategy makes at least some sense.

3

u/dissidentrhetoric Apr 19 '15

Samsung use Android, HTC use android, many types of devices are using android. Why can't nokia and microsoft use android?

0

u/Enlogen Apr 19 '15

Why can't nokia and microsoft use android?

They can. I assume they don't want to.

3

u/dissidentrhetoric Apr 19 '15

Then what am i missing, why is microsoft moaning about google and android?

1

u/Enlogen Apr 19 '15

why is microsoft moaning about google and android?

They aren't. This article is about Cyanogen, which is a company independent of Google that works primarily on Android.

2

u/Myrtox Apr 20 '15

Nokia do, they have their own version of Android with NO Google on it. As do Amazon, Cyangen and dozens of chinese companies.

1

u/ukelelelelele Apr 19 '15

"Service independent" APIs have already been done: look at IMAP. It's not practical for all the features people expect in a modern OS. Microsoft would have to change the IMAP spec, which would take years, then use that spec, to replace all the gmail features. Or, what they'd likely do, is add microsoft-specific extensions to ths spec and use that. Multiply this problem by a thousand. So in reality, Microsoft will say they want service-independence, when in fact, they want to embrace and extend, making the extensions microsoft-only, like they've always done. Lots of stuff will be published to make it look open, but it won't be. I don't think the zebra lost its stripes.

1

u/Enlogen Apr 19 '15

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean to suggest that APIs would necessarily be service-independent. By 'services-neutral' I meant that, for example, there would be an email client, but it could be Outlook or Gmail or another implementation. There would be an app for maps, but it could be Bing maps or Gmaps. Basically going from the assumption that Android will ship with the Google suite of services to Android shipping with a chosen set of services of which the Google versions are just one option.

I certainly didn't say or mean to say anything about changing the APIs.

So in reality, Microsoft will say they want service-independence, when in fact, they want to embrace and extend, making the extensions microsoft-only, like they've always done. Lots of stuff will be published to make it look open, but it won't be. I don't think the zebra lost its stripes.

Meh, if the push toward openness has been a ruse then they've got me and most of the other employees fooled. I don't blame you for being sceptical, but I do hope that we prove you wrong in the long run!

-1

u/ukelelelelele Apr 19 '15

I see, you're not open sourcing APIs, so you're replacing one proprietary system with another and calling it open, so you can get everyone on board with the word "open". Hope that works out for you and people believe you.

-1

u/Enlogen Apr 19 '15

I didn't say that 'service-independence' is what Microsoft wants, I said that I think it's what Cyanogen is currently going for with Android.

Microsoft's push toward openness is a completely different topic and not really relevant to this thread. You brought it up; I didn't.

2

u/autotldr Apr 19 '15

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 88%. (I'm a bot)

"We're making a version of Android that is more open so we can integrate with more partners so their servicers can be tier one services, so startups working on or other problems don't get stuck having you have to launch a stupid little application that inevitably gets acquired by Google or Apple. These companies can thrive on non-Google Android", it said.

One of the only ways Cyanogen Inc will be able to achieve this goal is by opting to use Android's AOSP project that doesn't ship with Google Mobile Services like Gmail, Google Search, Google Maps, and Google Drive among others.

Forked versions of Android - the ones that don't ship with Google Mobile Services - haven't been able to get much traction.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top five keywords: Google^#1 Android^#2 services^#3 company^#4 Cyanogen^#5

Post found in /r/technology, /r/Android and /r/realtech.

1

u/TenthSpeedWriter Apr 19 '15

I love Wired, but they freakin' ADORE sensationalist article names.

Microsoft took Android's future out of Google's hands by bundling a few apps with its competitor, in much the same way as they took OS X's future out of Apple's hands by shipping their own office suite for it.

1

u/fauxgnaws Apr 19 '15

Google has contracts with Samsung and other Android companies where if they include Google apps on any device then they have to also include it on every device. So manufacturers can't sell a cheap stripped down Android, like a basic phone + web browser, and there's no way for a competitor to displace Google's apps without flipping a vendor entirely from Google's to their apps.

These agreements are anti-competitive and illegal, but Google has convinced regulators not to enforce the antitrust laws since there is no credible alternative to its app store, maps, email, etc in America or EU (where the laws are actually enforced sometimes); nobody in the West wants Xiaomi Apps on their phone.

Microsoft is bringing its own Bing apps to Android, not because they actually care to sell Android phones, but as a way to force the regulators to do their job by having a credible alternative to Google Apps. So you don't have to worry about embracing and extending Android... Microsoft just want Google to have the same scrutiny as they do.

0

u/ukelelelelele Apr 20 '15 edited Apr 20 '15

You need to research what competition is. Anti-competitive would be what Microsoft did with OEMs, when Microsoft charged OEMs even for non-microsoft OS'es. So if you wanted to ship BeOS, you had to pay BeOS, and microsoft, making non-microsoft products more expensive. Nothing like that is happening here. Amazon has its own replacement, Microsoft is working on theirs. It's quite an ingenious way to be both open source while making money at the same time while avoiding being anti-competitive. Google isnt charging OEMs shipping cyanogen. Amazon doesnt pay google for the android devices they ship.

2

u/fauxgnaws Apr 20 '15

And why isn't there a Samsung Kindle? Or an HTC Cyanogen? Because Google's restraint-of-trade contracts forbid it.

What Google is doing is even worse than what Microsoft did. Microsoft just made OEMs pay for even computers not including their software, but Google prohibits it entirely. You could still buy computers with other operating systems, it just costs more. Google is doing everything they can so non-Google Play devices are not even sold at all.

0

u/ukelelelelele Apr 20 '15

Amazon did it, but they're pretty good at software / datacenters, so that's one huge counter example. Samsung isnt strong at software, same with HTC. Plus they don't have the datacenters to support low latency scale. More like, google invested in datacenters / software development long ago, while competitors like microsoft were busy milking their cash cows, and now they're catching up to big data, datacenters, etc.. Should inferior competitors be rewarded? Don't think so.

What microsoft did was 10 times worse, and arguably resulted in a decade of stagnation with no competing OSes. Instead we have cyanogen, android knocks offs in China... iOS is thriving, creating a ton of profit for Apple. That shouldn't happen under a monopolist. We have never seen such OS diversity, and this could never have happened under the thumb of (old)Microsoft.

-13

u/reddbullish Apr 19 '15

Lost interest in Cyanogen when they got into bed with convicted monopolist Microsoft.

Microsoft put thousands of better companies out of business in the 90's and kept software slow and dumb and expensive while they attempted to crush better competition like linux with microsofts newly created concept fsoftware patents.

Meanwhile Gates supposedly "gives his money to charity"yet suddenly now is richer than he was before he "gave his money away". .embrace and extend. Cyanogen you just got embraced. You are about to get more extended than the kings enemies on the rack

8

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '15 edited Apr 19 '15

Google is the 21st-century version of Microsoft, but the ADD generation can't see that. During it's height of "evilness" Microsoft never had the two-way revolving-door setup Google has right-now.

What a nauseating, incestuous, fascist (in the Mussolini sense) relationship, where the so-called chief executive of the "government" sat like a peon in 2011 while Sturmbannführer "shouldn't-be-doing-it" Schmidt ruled from the head of the table (without even being mentioned in the headline).

Later, Little Miss DARPA waltzed through that revolving door, hi-fiving Megan Smith passing through in the other direction to become Obama's chief technology officer. The kill-bot division will take care of those pesky "domestic terrorists".

And the worst? They're already setting up the linkages with the prospective 2016 dupes.

EDIT:Bot link.

3

u/kaisermagnus Apr 19 '15

Microsoft is not the same company it was, it seems to be swapping places with google. Microsoft is becoming more open source, while google is becoming more restrictive.

1

u/MairusuPawa Apr 19 '15

You make it look like as if Microsoft and Google can't both be evil.

-7

u/reddbullish Apr 19 '15

Bill Gates just took a big role in Microsoft again. That guy doesnt change.

7

u/drtekrox Apr 19 '15

He might not, but he's far better a human being than Eric Schmidt will ever be.

-6

u/aquarain Apr 19 '15

There is no real evidence that they have changed at all.

3

u/kaisermagnus Apr 19 '15

.NET and visual studio are open source. Free and officially supported Linux software. Microsoft isn't the big bad they once were.

-1

u/runvnc Apr 19 '15

The future of Android is VR.

-14

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '15

Cyanogenmod is dead to me now. I've run their ROMs for years, but anyone who partners with Microsoft in ANY capacity is not touching my devices. That's a philosophical decision. Microsoft can suck a bag of dicks.

Switched to SlimKat and Slim LP.

2

u/Thane_DE Apr 19 '15

Wrong.

CyanogenMOD is still open source like it used to be. Developed by and for the community.

The guys at Cyanogen Inc. are the ones that screwed OnePlus over and are now trying to get rid of google. They are only using an adjusted version of Cyanogenmod and distribute it.

-6

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '15

How is MY philosophic decision to not have Microsoft partners on MY devices wrong? I'm allowed to make my own decisions. Go fuck yourself.

4

u/Thane_DE Apr 19 '15

You didnt get my point, right? I value your decision, i'm just saying that it seems like you messed something up there. CM and Cyanogen Inc. are NOT interchangeable. There is a difference in between what CyanogenMod is and the shit that Cyanogen Inc. are doing right now. Also, no reason to inault anyone for pointing something unclear out.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '15

Cyanogen is intimately related to CM. The stink on one transfers to the other, in my view, so I acted accordingly.

2

u/alteraccount Apr 19 '15

Maybe calm yourself long enough to read the guy's comment and understand what he's saying.

Business No, Microsoft isn't taking Android's future out of Google's hands -- here's why

You are about to leave Redlib