Hacker News Reader

Comment by scarface74 | Hacker News Reader

Okay then, but Google Search is what paid for Android development, so if you can't tie them together, Android needs to seek other sources of funding. The most obvious one is some sort of licensing fee.

And that’s a good thing. I prefer simple transactions. I give a company money and they give me stuff. It’s very transparent business model.

View on HN

Yeah, that's why I'm favor of this decision. I think it's reasonable for regulators to have an anti-tying bias and make companies prove that the tying is somehow necessary. Because the alternative to tying (as you say) is a more open, competitive, and transparent "cash for stuff" market.

But then Android wouldn't be open source anymore. That would be a big shame and it's bizarre to see HN commenters arguing after so many years of shitting on things like Play Services that, in effect, they want Android to become entirely proprietary.

It'd also send a powerful signal to lots of other companies - don't create open platforms monetized through additional services. As so much open source code is funded by companies, that'd be a huge blow.

What most people think of “Android” has never been open source. Android has always been the unusable AOSP part + Google Play Services + proprietary binary drivers. Google has over the years abandoned much of the open source parts and created proprietary versions.

No one is saying that they want Android to become proprietary. There are plenty of open source projects supported by major corporations - Angular, React, NodeJS, WebKit, CUPS, Java, .Net Core, Swift, etc.

If a company only wants to license part of Google Play Services they should be able to pay for just that. If Android is so valuable, other companies should be willing to contribute to AOSP. How healthy is a piece of open source software if it completely dies once one corporate benefactor abandons it?

Would Java die the minute Oracle abandons it?

That's simply not true is it - there are plenty of people who have made their own Android ROMS using the released code, and Android still comes with the same set of apps it always did. Yes, Google has often made better apps that compete with the built in open source ones, but you can still get a very capable and powerful mobile OS for free just by downloading it. And as for proprietary drivers, well that's the hw vendors not Google doing that.

It doesn’t matter who is doing it. You can’t build a working Android system without binary closed source drivers.

No manufacturer can build an Android device using just AOSP even with proprietary drivers and hope to be competitive in any western market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com