[bubblethink]

>if Google had kept Android proprietary, and made their own hardware, they'd be totally OK

Yes, why is that surprising ? They would also not get the benefit of OEMs shipping their bundle of services across the globe.

>gave it away for free under the Apache license specifically to encourage competition

It has nothing to do with increasing competition. It's anything but. That's one of the reasons for the fine. The non compete clause prevents OEMs from creating forks of Android.

[repolfx]

No, you're completely wrong. Have you even ever used Android devices? Samsung's flavour of Android is quite different to HTCs or LGs. Google doesn't prevent people creating competing forks of Android, that's the entire point of Android's design.

What their agreements require is that the forks be compatible with base Android, that is, apps should run the same on every variant of Android. It's designed to ensure app compatibility and avoid the mistakes of the past, like with J2ME where apps had to be debugged on every single phone because they were all riddled with bugs and incompatibilities.

But outside of app compatibility issues vendors can and do make big changes, everything from the appearance to the UI to the set of bundled apps - Samsung for instance replaces the browser, replaces the calendar, replaces the contacts app, replaces the home screen, replaces nearly everything. And Samsung is a Google licensee. So clearly, your understanding of what Google is doing here is not accurate.

[bubblethink]

>Google doesn't prevent people creating competing forks of Android, that's the entire point of Android's design.

Did you read the main points of the press release ? If you (say an OEM like LG) license google play, you cannot create a competing OS based on AOSP. It has nothing to do with OEMs customizing AOSP for the devices they sell. It has everything to do with, say, an OEM selling a different phone that can run Amazon's version of Android with Amazon's services. I think that's one of the reason's why Amazon's phone never caught on. Nobody other than Amazon would be able to make or sell one because everyone had licences from Google.

From the press release:

"Google has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called "Android forks")."

[repolfx]

The press release is wrong, who'd have guessed. What is Samsung TouchWiz or whatever they call it these days, if not a competing OS based on AOSP. Ditto for every other Android device. Android was forked so much that for the longest time the lament of geeks everywhere was "give me a device with stock Google Android". That doesn't sound like an monopoly to me.

[dannyw]

A competing OS is one without Google Play Services (and all the requirements it imposes).