Arguably many of Android's core APIs now flow through Play Store Services (e.g. Location Services).
[0] PDF warning: http://www.benedelman.org/docs/htc-mada.pdf
No, I'm not.
"in order to bundle the Play Store and associated Google services you have to agree to MADA"
But "the Play Store and associated Google services" aren't part of Android. So you can ship Android devices without them.
"No major manufacturer, except Amazon, ships an AOSP variant without Google's Services."
Yup. Amazon shows that you can ship Android devices without the Play Store and Google services.
> By obligating handset makers to load the free apps along with the Android operating system
The NYC article said google was compelling handset makers to bundle free apps ALONG WITH the Android OS, they didn't say that Android OS's license required said bundling.
Google obligated handset makers via the MADA linked above. If you want the Play Store, Play Services, and all of Android's APIs to work, you have to agree to MADA which means bundling Google's apps with the Android OS.
Handset makers obligated _themselves_ by (voluntarily) signing up to the MADA.
Handset makers didn't really have much of a choice, they weren't big enough to compete directly with Google.
I find it hard to believe that they were too small in comparison with Google to compete with their own mobile OS and app market.
They already tried, more than once, and all their attempts failed.
I thought the case was about bundling (i) some set of Google services/apps and (ii) some other set of Google services/apps.
You can either ship every Android device with the Play store, or none. As a manufacturer, you don't get to pick and choose, thanks to the newspeak-ish Open Hardware Alliance (OHA).
Amazon could not get Foxconn to manufacture their Android phone for example because Foxconn would lose their license to MADA.
In Europe and the US. Worldwide, the majority do (cf. Xiaomi)
Bundling has two senses, one "physical" (Android OS and Google apps are part of the same disk image) and one business (like bundled pricing).
We're talking about economic tying[1], and they suddenly switched the physical definition of bundling. The reader would be justified in expecting them to use the word bundling in its business sense.
> By obligating handset makers to load the free apps along with the Android operating system
"Along with." It was enforced bundling.
The person above mistakenly claimed the article was wrong due to Android's license which is both a misreading of the NYT's story and also wrong in the larger sense.