| There's no legal reason to mandate FSF's philosophy, but banning the Android MADA has some huge consumer benefits, because it changes Google's priorities with Android. For instance, right now, the Play Store, Chrome, etc. are used as leverage to get OEMs to sign the agreement. Without that, Google's value proposition changes. No longer does it make sense for them to withhold these. Google should want the profits from app or book sales and stuff on all Android devices. Why wouldn't Google want Kindle users to be able to install Chrome? Why wouldn't Google want Kindle users to be able to buy movies from Play? And if Google opens up availability of their Android apps and services, this changes the dynamic considerably. They'll no longer be able to guarantee that any given Android device they offer apps on has the Play Services malware component. Play Services will need to be unbundled: Google apps will need to include everything they need to run on open source Android. Not only does this open up the opportunity for Google services on other Android devices, it also means Google has a strong incentive to take some of their existing proprietary Play Services features and contribute them to open source, so that their apps can take advantage. Additionally, Google has long used security updates as a stick to force OEMs to upgrade to the latest versions of Android. Without Android MADA level controls, Google will not be able to do that. So Google's best bet is to provide long-term servicing of their platform. Android versions will need to receive security updates for longer, and they'll need to be made as easy as possible for OEMs to integrate into their builds. Expect better written platform code. But the biggest thing is that consumers will have choice. No longer will 85% of all phones in a carrier store be nearly identical clones of Google's preferred configuration. There'll be more reason for OEMs to innovate in different ways. People will have non-Google choices available in store. Think about what Samsung could offer now that they couldn't before: Customize your phone's OS on order. Maybe Samsung offers a "Galaxy" config with all of Samsung's apps, or a Pure Google config with all of Google apps. And a Microsoft config for people who are going to use it at work with their Windows-based networks! Select the one you want, and Samsung can offer that, they're no longer beholden to an agreement that forces them to preload a prescribed set of apps. |
A Galaxy config? Yeah, they have that now more or less, they offer many alternatives next to the Google ones installed by default that are in all ways inferior to the Google versions of those apps. They replace one big company services with another and do a worse job. No benefit for users.
Anything that does not bring benefits to projects like e.g. Replicant or CopperheadOS are in the end meaningless for "consumer" freedom and progress in the mobile device space.