[methodsignature]

So maybe open source, [mostly] closed ecosystem? Add a bunch of Spyware from Google and get every app maker to add a dependency to Google services and they are golden for the collection of data on all your "smart" things

Sorry/not sorry for the cynicism; I feel it is warranted given what "open source" means on Android. Google talking like they have noble open source ambitions means nothing. They have a lot of amends to make before they begin to seem like a win for society and the industry and they seem to be going in the opposite direction.

[baybal2]

Fully warranted caution.

You cannot expect they would not do the same bait and switch as with android without a legally binding pledge.

And even then, I bet Sundar will try to wiggle around it.

There is a clear repeating pattern in what he does:

"Google does not store geographic information of AGPS requests" — It did.

"Google will never attempt to block adblock from Android store" — It did.

"Google never shares your cellphone network data" — It did!

Clearly, he lies, and does it very intentionally.

[jmnicolas]

yeah the base open sources Android is barely usable. Even simple things like getting a local notification at the right time are not a given.

If they do the same with Fuschia, they'd better make it closed sources then.

[mushufasa]

Same with Darwin and MacOs.

Is there even a functioning darwin build for Big Sur??

[actuator]

Sorry, not familiar with Android core. For your example, how would it work without proprietary technologies? AFAIK, Android uses GCM for notifications. Adding integrations for it don't seem to make much sense in core open source Android as that will make you tied to Google's ecosystem.

[LukeShu]

Because I don't have Google's services on my phone, I have two always-visible notifications that never go away:

"Telegram" / "Push service: tap to learn more" (tapping opens https://github.com/Telegram-FOSS-Team/Telegram-FOSS/blob/mas...)

"Signal" / "Background connection enabled"

Both are serving the same purpose, for different apps. Even before we get to network connections and servers (the things that might make sense to be proprietary), without Google's ecosystem the local side has a bad UX and requires hacks.

[lern_too_spel]

That is just because they are not using something like https://bubu1.eu/openpush/ and instead implementing their own push services. This is not a problem with Android but with the apps.

[jmnicolas]

I was speaking about _local_ notifications, not push: some clock / reminder apps never fire notifications or way too late. I think it's because the OS aggressively shutdown apps running in background.

[dingaling]

IMAP Idle works fine for e-mail so long as Android doesn't kill the background process. No need for proprietary service.

[zepto]

An open platform would have a framework that supports multiple back ends.

[actuator]

This would be definitely nice to have but why does core Android itself need to have support for every feature?

We can have open source OSs on top of Android that build with a specific service set. Sort of how Ubuntu builds over Debian.

[zepto]

It doesn’t have to do anything, but if it doesn’t support what are considered standard features of a phone today in an open manner, it’s hard to take AOSP seriously as an open platform.

Also worth noting that when someone does build on top of AOSP, they are at the mercy of Google’s roadmap for the closed versions of Android.

[zepto]

To clarify - I should have said: “it’s hard to take AOSP seriously as an open phone platform”

[lern_too_spel]

It already does. https://bubu1.eu/openpush/

The fact that this is possible is something I have commented about on this very forum for years. It is trivial for the Amazons and Huaweis of the world to build an API like this that supports Google's FCM, Amazon's ADM, etc. and provide a library for developers to use that will let them easily deploy push-enabled apps on devices across all ecosystems.

[zepto]

Already does?

“The OpenPush project aims to create ... Development is still ongoing.”

Doesn’t sound like it from the website.

[lern_too_spel]

It is already usable. Nobody would claim that a Linux distro isn't open just because it doesn't have a built-in push API. You can build one on top for other apps to use, and you can do the same on Android. This is notably different from iOS.

[wojciii]

Thank you for writing this so that I don't have to. :)

This would probably be a good time to mention https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr.

[Arelius]

Can you give extra context? It's unclear to me how Zephyr relates other than being an operating system. It doesn't on initial look seem to be designed with the same goals as Fuchsia.

[wojciii]

This is an OS which can be used to create IOT devices - it works on many devices and architectures without binary blobs other than some firmware for stuff like BLE or WiFi.

"Fuchsia is an open source effort to create a production-grade operating system that prioritizes security, updatability, and performance. Fuchsia is a foundation for developers to create long-lasting products and experiences across a broad range of devices."

"The Zephyr ProjectTM strives to deliver the best-in-class RTOS for connected resource-constrained devices, built to be secure and safe."

This sounds a lot like the same to me - Fuchsia is perhaps more a general OS, but I would think that Zephyr can solve the same problems as Fuchsia.

What I like about Zephyr is that it is developed in the open and not in some google lab.