[RyanZAG]

Replying to my own comment...

Regarding Touchwizz and Android app compatibility - without the core Google services (maps, play, etc), many popular Android apps will not run. The differences in the underlying platform is also likely to cause many errors and incompatibilities on non-modified Android apps run on Tizen. This means more app crashes and more uncertainty.

In any event, full Android app compatibility and Android apps as first class apps means that Tizen basically is Android in any case - it will have to have Dalvik, Linux ARM compatibility, identical OpenGL interfaces, identical Linux interfaces, etc. Seeing as Android is Apache licensed anyway, I'm having difficulty in seeing the point? Why not just take Android, create a fork, and rename it to Tizen? I don't see any benefits in re-inventing a platform that will just mimic Android (and have all the same limitations to keep compatibility).

Legal issues - I can't see any legal difference in forking Apache licensed code and renaming vs starting from scratch.

Usability - both Samsung Android devices and Tizen devices will have the same Touchwizz UI. Far as I can tell, Samsung is actually aiming for identical usability here.

Compatibility - all of the Google Maps based Apps won't work. Users won't get the great gmail/gtalk/google now integration that they can on Android. No free best-of-breed navigation. No Google Play - users will have to rely on devs uploading their app to Samsung store along with Google Play. Seems like a big point against Tizen here.

Control (for Samsung) - Samsung can already add/remove whatever they want to Android. I'm guessing Google puts certain demands on Samsung to use the Android name and Google apps, but Samsung can just use a different name and no Google apps. In Tizen they're going to have to do this anyway.

The more I look into this, the stranger it becomes. I can't work out what Samsung is trying to accomplish here. This smells like a project they inherited with Intel with the likely purpose being rivalry with Nokia and perhaps internal politics. Maybe some misunderstanding of how much freedom they actually have with Apache licensed Android?

[MatthewPhillips]

Google added a non-fragmentation clause to their OEM agreement[1] which is meant to prevent anyone from forking it in the way that Amazon has. You can fork it, but you can't make official Android phones anymore if you do. Obviously Samsung wants to continue to sell their Galaxy S phones. Tizen is a hail mary pass.

[1]http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/31/google-tightening-control...

[RyanZAG]

Far as I can tell, those clauses are specifically related to the Android trademark / Google Apps / etc. Creating a full fork (of the publicly available source) as allowed by the Apache license with different name and no direct relation to Android should be just as good as creating Tizen.

I guess the sticky point here is the closed-source early access releases that Samsung gets. Google must be threatening access to this if any OEM gets on their bad side. Fairly nasty move if so, and Tizen doesn't protect Samsung here. If Tizen takes off, you can expect Google to drop Samsung's access to early release builds in any event as Google will then try to force customers to use Moto/LG/HTC/etc devices.

So I don't think Tizen helps here at all, as Google can drop Samsung's early access rights for any reason they want. They can just as easily decide that Tizen is fragmenting Android.

[MatthewPhillips]

No, the clause applies to Android forks, not just those using the Android name, Acer was forced to cancel a phone using an Android fork going by another name because of it: http://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/09/13/alibaba-claims-google-...

[ben1040]

That no-forking requirement was a function of Acer being a member of the Open Handset Alliance.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/09/google-blocked-acers-...

[fakeer]

I doubt Tizen will take off. Samsung's software prowess is nowhere near to companies making and capable of making world class/sophisticated OS(or mobile OS). There is a lot of things that goes against Samsung which is in the company's DNA (culturally embedded it) and those are the things that hinder innovation and cutting edge research(esp. from s/w research perspective). (Probably the same things actually help them do great in the numbers game and on factory floor)

And even if it does. Samsung is the one vendor that actually sells Android phones - those millions of phones and I am sure Google gets a cut from it, not to mention ads and other ways of monetization. So, it is unlikely Google is denying them early code access. Other OEMs have failed on one more front - providing upgrades and this is where Samsung beats them all (except Nexus line; last 2 Nexus were from Samsung BTW). HTC makes good phones(better than Samsung IMHO, at least some models) but their users are doomed on upgrades. LG is not even worth mentioning. We have their phones in test lab and almost they all suck. We've yet to see where Moto goes and what it does. I guess Google will try to pull an Apple with Moto(though it's just a guess, I've no solid backing for this argument). Sony just keeps trying to make their devices all the pretties and they end up screwing the overall design and their s/w support is even worse than LG.

Tizen is not fragmenting Android. I also had doubts about it and talked to the guys working in that team and they explained it doesn't. They also said that Tizen Android app experience is nowhere going to be near the native Android experience.

[RyanZAG]

Great points. I think that helps me fill in a few gaps in what Samsung might be thinking here.

Google has threatened that Samsung lose support if they fork Android. They might or might not actually do it - Samsung is a major Android player. The threat is still enough that Samsung have chosen not to try forking Android.

However, Samsung still wants more control. The solution is to use Tizen with Android compatibility to try and wrest that control from Google, but while still acting within the boundaries Google have given them. If Tizen doesn't take off then Samsung can just fall back on Google Android. If Tizen does take off, then they now have enough weight to push Google around as they wish.

Google isn't worried about Tizen as they believe that Samsung will not be able to out code them, and that Android apps running on Tizen will not be as good as Android apps running on Android. While I'm sure that Google would prefer if Samsung wasn't trying out Tizen, they believe they have a strong enough bet that Tizen will fail and Samsung will come crawling back anyway.

So the whole situation now makes a lot of sense from both Google and Samsung's side. From this we can probably take away that Tizen will get the best hardware first to give it more chance of taking off. Also, Google is likely to try and add new services in future Android versions that will make it more difficult to run Android apps on other platforms. Interesting and falsifiable, in a year's time we can see if these predictions are true!

Anybody think I've got way on/off track here?

[fakeer]

>>The threat is still enough that Samsung have chosen not to try forking Android.

I can't think of anything great or innovative Samsung can after forking Android. It will let it die a sad and quick death by turning into an extended TouchWiz all over. I think Samsung knows that it's better to let Google do the dirty job.

As per Tizen, not sure about its potential. I think other OEMs, if tried together would a lot better, rather than just Samsung(or practically the only one and leading the push) would try for it, work fir it would be better. Samsung just going to make this mobile OS a bulky ugly mammoth. It looks like Bada I think. Doesn't feel elegant but what I used was not a final version. It was boot-up phase and haven't checked after that.

But this is not the case. It's Samsung and Intel and the rest - means just two of them. Nokia had a good opportunity. But then it's hardly in a situation to risk sth other than MS.

Anybody think I've got way on/off track here?

Naah, you are pretty fine. All one can do right now is speculate.

[Apocryphon]

I wonder how much support Intel is going to be investing into Tizen. On paper, a Samsung/Intel collaboration sounds considerable, but based on other comments it seems like there hasn't been much cooperation so far.

[sachingulaya]

One correction: The last nexus(nexus 4) was from LG. The Galaxy Nexus & Nexus S were from Samsung.

[fakeer]

Yes, that is why I said last two. I knew that. I own Nexus #3 and have worked on both #2 and #3 (and of course #4 is LG's and maybe #5 too) :-)

Thanks for reminding though. Maybe I should have explicitly excluded the current from from last two.

[wildster]

I just got an upgrade on a Sony Xperia J from their version of 4.0 to their version of 4.1.

[OGinparadise]

If Tizen takes off, you can expect Google to drop Samsung's access to early release builds in any event as Google will then try to force customers to use Moto/LG/HTC/etc devices.

The HN gods banned me for saying bad things about Google, but I have one word for you: antitrust.

[kyrra]

Which part of antitrust law would the government use against Google in this case? Google does not hold a monopoly and they are not price-fixing anything. They may be accused of anticompetitive behavior, but unless Google does something very irrational I don't see that happening.

[OGinparadise]

Check Android market shares on smartphones all over the world and see what you get. Google escaped Search scrutiny in US by buying off lots of politicians with tens of millions in lobbying but they'd get crushed if they blackmailed Samsung over Tizen.

[nicholassmith]

Sorry to break it to you but it's still not antitrust, whilst Android enjoys a large percentage of usage it's not an all out monopoly to the extent an antitrust case would survive. It's high granted, but not monopoly stakes yet.