Amazon reportedly working on proper Android ‘Ice’ smartphones with Google’s apps | Hacker News Reader

Amazon reportedly working on proper Android ‘Ice’ smartphones with Google’s apps

theverge.com

40 pointslando231947 comments

I got a Fire phone when they went on sale for $199 (and it included a year of free Prime, which I usually pay $99 a year for, so $100 phone). It was a terrible phone. I hated it more every day I used it. Even once I'd added Google Play Store and could install most Google apps, it just wasn't a good phone. The changes they made from stock Android were almost universally negative for usability and enjoyment, and because it was a forked Android, it ended up being a couple years behind Android mainline on release day (it was forked from Android 4.x, and 6.x came out maybe a few months after the Fire phone...something like that).

It was a relief when my girlfriend dropped it and cracked the screen and I had to replace it (I bought a Blu Life One X2, which is a longwinded name for a generic nearly stock Android device that is competent in all areas and excels in none, but is very cheap for its specs). I've been much happier since switching.

I hated it so much I think I'll wait a long while before considering an Amazon mobile device. Of course, according to the article, it's not targeting the US market, which may be smart, since they screwed up so badly in the US market (though it sold so poorly, I don't guess very many people have my level of distaste for Amazon mobile devices, since not a lot of people have actually used one).

I bought the BLU R1 HD-16GB [1] as basically a throwaway for travelling. I was surprised at the value for $80-150 CDN of the Blu line. It wasn't a horrible experience at all and even has dual-sims. I would definitely recommend as a basic device that's unlocked and near stock Android (albeit, the OS is out of date, so security might be a concern).

[1] https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B01H2E0KVA/

This could almost be seen as a trojan horse for Amazon to break into new markets without having to do any of the heavy lifting Google and Apple do. Increased brand recognition + Amazon's growing developer community interested in bringing apps to their platforms only reinforces their clout in consumer technologies. As the app stores of old fade away in importance their efforts in consumer hardware and developer communities are being further pushed into prominence. I.e. eventually they won't need Google's play store and can more ambitiously take on the market.

> This could almost be seen as a trojan horse for Amazon to break into new markets without having to do any of the heavy lifting Google and Apple do...eventually they won't need Google's play store and can more ambitiously take on the market.

You've got it backwards - Amazon has been using a forked Android-without-Google-services for years now across many products, with varying levels of success. Kindle, Fire tablet, Fire phone, Fire TV, Echo, Echo Dot, and most recently Echo Show all run an Android fork[1]. Only now have they allegedly chosen to use official Android with Google services.

Perhaps they have decided that passing Androids CTS (and getting Google's blessing) is necessary for a successful phone? Or perhaps keeping their fork updated with Android HEAD is proving to be a challenge because the latest Fire OS is based off a 3-year old Android 5 (lollipop).

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_OS

Think the OP still had it the right way around, even if it's their second bite of the cherry.

They failed with the Fire Phone to really make inroads as the value proposition wasn't there - they went too hard into their walled garden and priced themselves out of developing markets. Now this time they're trying a softer, longer term approach, especially in places where they don't have the reach at the moment to get lock in from day one. They have the Android development chops, the vision for where they want to get to, and the infra to start devolving phone features to the cloud, now all they need to do is get some dedicated users.

It's resetting their starting point for sure, but not sure it's an admittance their vision is wrong.

How much of it do you think deals particularly around security updates? Samsung is getting a lot of flack for the OS they use in embedded devices being notoriously behind on security updates(think TV's, Fridges, appliances etc), that it may not be worth the potential headache of being the one to roll their own android and not patch security updates promptly. It seems to me a logical step to momentarily disband the competitive aspect of this market in an aim for higher security for all devices. It also is a nice easy PR win for Amazon, reduces overall costs for them, and just have to accept Google possibly getting to double dip their feet in data that Amazon is actively collecting.

Echo 1st Gen does not run Android. It is the only device running Linux among Amazon products.

Source: echo team member

They already tried that.

The fact that most people don't really know they have their own Android version with their own weird Android "app store" shows you how successful they were. Not much.

> As the app stores of old fade away in importance their efforts in consumer hardware and developer communities are being further pushed into prominence. I.e. eventually they won't need Google's play store and can more ambitiously take on the market.

This might happen, but seems like wishful thinking. The web really damaged Windows, but the mobile web still has a looooong way to go to unseat mobile apps.

No matter how much noise the big guys make about voice as the next platform, voice is not going to replace most apps any time soon since it is just too low bandwidth as an output channel.

It's bizarre thinking to be honest.

iOS is never getting rid of the App Store and given that it is the lead development platform for most apps it still sets the direction for the industry. Which is perfect for Google because it cements their control over the Android ecosystem as well.

If Amazon was smart they would go after Microsoft instead and try to build some smart, next-gen cross platform productivity and consumer apps backed by intelligent backend services. Control over user data is where the real money is.

> If Amazon was smart

its one thing to have alternative opinions about their strategy, but im not too sure about judging Amazon / Jeff Bezos as lacking in business smarts

What I'm saying is Bezos & Co. might be gaming for the next generation of the handset. Bezos loves his 2-year runways so I doubt he's interested in any current smartphone ecosystem but in making inroads with consumers and developers.

What good would it be for Amazon to go after Microsoft's bread and butter? Google's already made its move towards them (Microsoft) with Chrome OS so I doubt there's really going to much more room for another titan.

Amazon, call it the Alexa phone and make it good and you have a winner. I would buy one.

Do you think Micosoft should have rebranded their mobile products as Skype?

Not dissimilar to what you're proposing (which may work).

I think Cortana for their voice assistant was a brilliant move

Not me. Every time I think "Cortana", I can't help but think video game (Halo) since that's the point of reference making it seem less serious and by extension less helpful. Whether that's rational or not is neither here nor there as part of what makes this stuff a success is perception. My perception of Alexa and Google Assistant is that's it's more serious, i.e., a legitimate tool.

Fair enough of an assessment, I just thought it was clever and happened to like the continuity between an established IP from the game and a competitor to Siri. As far as it being part of a game, my take on it was that people in real life would use Cortana as a virtual assistant similar to how she is used in Halo.

They might have if Skype had a better reputation.

Hopefully this is also a change of stance in general to the Google Play store in general and we'll see the line of Fire tablets actually get a usable app store. I like the Fire tablets more than most other budget Android tablets, but the lack of Google Play store keeps me from recommending it to anyone.

Amazon's killer feature for this phone and the Indian market(which suffers from extreme levels of noise[1]) may be a great quality active-noise-cancellation at a very low-cost, and with USB-C analog support(so you can put noise cancellation chip in the phone), detachable cables, and Amazon audio/chip expertise it seems possible.

[1]http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/03/28/52014087...

I just hope this means they throw away their "app store" functionality, which is the only thing keeping their app from going in the Play store. They force installing that app to install the Prime video-streaming app, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's the biggest source of installations.

ice cream sandwich?

This is depressing to hear. The one company that most likely had the clout and capability to compete with Google's monopoly is throwing in the towel.

This continues to emphasize that the only solution to Google is government intervention. If Amazon can't successfully break into the market, nobody can.

Except for that other company everyone loves to worship and has 40%+ market share in USA.

Amazon is on the fast track to become a monopoly just like Google, but that's not why they couldn't break into the market. The reason is because their products are sub standard. One of the only reason they have done as well as they have with the fire product line is because it's cheap, and it's only cheap because it's subsidized.

Amazon isn't a monopoly in anything and is not on track to being one either.

There are plenty of online stores and Azure and Google Cloud are doing very well and have excellent growth opportunities.

Nah. Amazon is the same "evil" as google. This would not make any difference.

When the people get tired of apps and crappy software we will see a new re-packaged ideas executed better. But yeah it is incredibly hard to compete with good enough products.

What market are you talking about specifically?

Mobile apps and services. Or an OS. Essentially, Amazon throwing in the towel on pushing their own Appstore indicates confirmation that, in fact, nobody can compete with the Play Store. And since the Play Store is illegally tied to a couple dozens apps as part of Google's Mobile Applications Distribution Agreement, it's a monopoly that extends far beyond just an app store.

Actually, that bears an interesting question: If Amazon actually were to release such a phone, unless Google makes them a special exception in the standard MADA, Amazon would have to agree to either switch Kindle Fires away from Android or start putting Google Play (including very direct competitor apps like Google Play Books) on Kindle.

Google forbids any developer who has access to the Play Store from selling any so-called "incompatible forks" of Android.

What? Amazon will NOT allow competing products like the Google Home or CC or Apple TV to be sold on Amazon yet Google has not removed the Echo or Amazon from search. Think you mixed up where the issue is at.

Amazon will NOT allow competing products like the Google Home to be sold on Amazon as well as Apple TV and CC yet Google still has the Echo in search. Think you have it wrong and Amazon a problem not Google. I am a big Amazon customer but can still see what it is.

Their failure to break in to the market was because they didn't make good products, not because Google kept them out because of a monopoly

Actually, this is exactly incorrect. The reason Amazon couldn't include any Google Play Store compatibility in Kindle or Fire products, for example, is because in order to do so, Google illegally requires OEMs to also bundle other apps... like Google Play Books, a direct competitor to Amazon's Kindle. This is a practice called "tying" in antitrust law.

The fact that Google doesn't allow OEMs to pick and choose what apps are included is the subject of an EU antitrust investigation, and Google has already been prohibited from doing so in Russia. It's also illegal under US law, but Google has an incredibly significant amount of money invested in the right US politicians.

if it was true, why didn't Amazon sue Google?

Because look what happened with Microsoft. You are talking about a multi decade long process that will go to trial. This sort of thing distracts companies and often ends up killing them.

I don't know about the merits here but I can understand why Amazon would rather leave it up to governments.

what happened with Microsoft? i know what happened with Oracle when they sued Google about java in android. nothing. except they lost because they were wrong.

False, the reason for Amazon not including Play Store is because they didn't wanted it and they forked Android.

Why do you think Amazon did that? It was in response to Google's behavior. Google refused to allow their products to work with Amazon's products (without the painful concessions I mention here), so Amazon refused to sell them.

It sounds like you've unfortunately only heard a small part of the story.

Side note: Replying with the same incorrect comment three times is truly unnecessary.

Why should google's products must work with Amazon's products?It's not Amazon who sell google's products but google sell its own products via amazon online shopping platform.Does amazon echo have to work with google's product or install google's software or services to appear in search results?

This is pure hyperbole. "Painful concessions," really?

I can't imagine a more painful concession than requiring that Amazon be forced to include a competitor's eBook platform on their device if they want to use an app store. I don't think that's hyperbole at all.

You need to stop posting the same argument everywhere.

It's a stupid one anyway since everyone knows that the only reason Google has been allowed to operate Search the way it does (limited transparency + oversight) is because we know that it doesn't interfere with search results. If they ever did and deliberately removed competitors governments would simply force Search to be an independent company.

Few people seem to remember that Google didn't create Android -- they bought it. I'm not saying they could never have created it from scratch themselves, but there is something to be said about the innovation capabilities of a Goliath like Amazon or Google.

Yes Google purchased and has not done anything with it or invested into improving.

Few people seem to remember that Apple didn't create iOS or OSX from scratch. They bought it when they purchased NeXT.

I realize that you would rather have Amazon continue making phones with their second rate services and outdated app store with abandoned apps, but Amazon doesn't want to continue losing money just to satiate your dislike of Google.

>This continues to emphasize that the only solution to Google is government intervention. If Amazon can't successfully break into the market, nobody can.

Why do your monopolistic complaints always have to do with Google? Where are your monopolistic complaints about Amazon or Microsoft in your post history?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com