[bofaGuy]

I think the difference here is that Apple locks things down on Apple hardware running Apple software.

On the other hand, Google is trying to manipulate the market to gain an advantage over competitors on non Google hardware running Google software.

On the Apple side of things, the full vertical is Apple. That is not the case for Google.

[kohlerm]

Ok so Google is punished for being more open in the first case? Sounds fishy to me ...

[inlined]

Especially since Google had always had the AOSP as a reasonable way of demonstrating their commitment to the industry as a whole disjoint from the places where they thought the Google ecosystem provided extra value (which they admittedly require you to take wholesale)

[gleenn]

AOSP has effectively been dead for a long time. You need Google Play services for almost everything now and more and more creeps into the proprietary portion.

[jojobas]

No you don't. Writing an app to use google services is a choice. There's MicroG for silly apps that require google services, and there's also life without using silly apps that require google services.

[stonogo]

Please note how you dismiss apps requiring Google Play services as "silly," when most people who use those services use them as part of the hardware root of trust programs for work apps, or other device attestation for banking apps. Putting demeaning adjectives in front of the things you're arguing against isn't a compelling argument, I think you'll find, and "life without" banking and work apps leads to a lower quality of life for a lot of people.

[bofaGuy]

Google is running on other hardware, not their own. That is the difference.