[snarf21]

I know that a lot of us more tech inclined want this freedom. But grandma is never running toolchain on a computer to install custom software. What 99% of people want is cheap/free and they will give up privacy to get it. I see this as SK giving its citizens what they say they want. I wish that wasn't the case but it seems like that is the world we live in.

[pessimizer]

> I know that a lot of us more tech inclined want this freedom. But grandma is never running toolchain on a computer to install custom software

This is thought-terminating nonsense, constantly repeated. What my grandma wants is for me to pick what's best for her and install it. What she doesn't want is Google (or Samsung for that matter) keeping her grandson from doing what he thinks she'll like best.

edit: and to be clear, that's what all of my computer-illiterate family members want, although not all of them from me (there are other grandchildren, uncles, etc.). The radical idea that people would rather have decisions made by the people that they love and trust rather than companies that actively and constantly prey upon them should be accepted without question.

[kijin]

Ordinary citizens don't really care. This is SK giving Samsung what they want: an Android-fork OS for their smartwatches and other gadgets where the app store can be controlled by Samsung, not Google.

[turtlebits]

I think the issue is Google blocking customizations if they want the Google Play store on the device.

I don't think there is anything stopping Samsung from using AOSP.

[ocdtrekkie]

You are incorrect. Google's AFA is viral in nature. Daring to ship a non-Google Android will cancel your ability to ship any devices with Google Play.