Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Phrodo_00 620 days ago
> Google appears open yet is closed in practice

How is Android closed in practice?

3 comments

For years, OEMs were made to install a number of Google apps onto the homescreen at predefined places. One of which is the Play Store. Amazon (for example) absolutely did not have this advantage, despite this kind of thing happening on non-Google hardware.

Or we can look at why Google's Play Store is allowed to auto-update apps without user interaction, and... that's it. That's the only store that's allowed to do that. And while the tech community might like being able to control which apps auto-update, everyone wants some apps to be allowed to update without user interaction.

Speaking of OEMs (and non-Google Android in general), Google has moved some functionality from base Android into Google Play Services so some apps won't work unless you get that installed.
This is easily seen to be false, but I see it repeated often. The functionality in Google Play Services requires a server. If you don't use Google services, you don't need Play Services. https://developers.google.com/android/reference/packages
Apparently you don't know enough about Android, a perfect example of this is eSIM, you simply couldn't use eSIM without Google Play Services.
That functionality was never available in phones with Google builds without Google Play Services, so it doesn't fit GGP's claim. The reason it's not in base AOSP out of the box is that it requires a server, and any carrier can build an implementation for downloading carrier profiles without Google Play Services and any OEM can build an LPA using https://source.android.com/docs/core/connect/esim-overview.
You don’t have GPS satellite data, “location services” without Google Play services. That means a gps lock takes minutes. This data could be stored on the phone, but it’s better for google if you fetch it from them when you need it.
eh. you can't provision the esim without google play services today. after the esim is provisioned you can put whatever firmware on the phone you like, and it will just work.

i'm running lineageos with no google play services on a verizon esim as my daily driver

That isn't true anymore, F-Droid for example auto-updates
Ah, this is true, but it's weird consider this issue (that I agree google might be overstepping in) in a lawsuit that doesn't involve an affected OEM.
> Amazon (for example) absolutely did not have this advantage

Google incentivized the OEMs to do that. Amazon could have incentivized OEMs to do that also, but the business plan that Amazon pursued did not involve third parties building their own Kindle devices.

> Or we can look at why Google's Play Store is allowed to auto-update apps without user interaction, and... that's it.

This has never been true for Android in general. This hasn't been true for phones that only ship with the Play Store since Android 12, which I credit Epic for.

Microsoft also “incentivized” OEMs to not install competing browsers by threatening to remove their OEM licensing. Didn’t Google do something similar?
No. They just threatened to remove access to the Play Store.
So, something similar then. OK, not as onerous as removing the whole OS, which they can’t do because Android uses an open license, but the next big thing. No play store, no Google services. May as well remove the OS.
> This has never been true for Android in general. This hasn't been true for phones that only ship with the Play Store since Android 12

I'm on Android 14 here, shipped with Play Store by default. It still auto-updates apps.

Exclusivity hasn't been true. eg F-droid can auto update apps.
Many of the fundamental apps on Android, and the Play store itself, can only be used under license. Android OSP does not contain many things that you would expect to be part of Android.

Also, most modern devices won't even let you flash your own OS, even a modified copy of Android. It's irrelevant if the source code is available if you can't actually run it anywhere. It's the TeVo case all over again.

SafetyNet’s successor and effectively forced hardware attestation make devices designed for consumption, not development.