Google will now only release Android source code twice a year | Hacker News Reader

Google will now only release Android source code twice a year

androidauthority.com

72 pointstripdout21 comments

Is it me, or has every major operating system (macOS, iOS, Windows and now Android) variously shot itself in the foot in some spectacular way over the last year?

macOS and iOS 26 are the most unstable, unpolished operating systems I've used from Apple since the early 2000s. Windows has had a set of baffling bugs, like the crashing File Explorer – seemingly the result of overzealous layoffs in favour of AI development. And on Android, restrictions to APK installations and now this – which, yes, general consumers are unlikely to care all that much about – but it all signals something deeper going on in management across the board.

I can only hope the time for Linux-all-the-things is slowly but surely arising – even if it remains a minority, seeing Linux emerge from 1-2% market rate and becoming a usable alternative for most people would be fantastic.

I suspect you are badly mistaken if you think this is Google shooting themselves in the foot

Why? You have many examples throughout history when an overconfident manufacturer lost their momentum before they even realized it. I mean, take Sony for example. They had the best product but completely ignored public's demand for MP3 and thought they could peddle their own proprietary shit forever. People's private sentiment towards product/brand can change simultaneously en masse often without notice to the manufacturer. Especially if something better comes along out of the sudden — and it usually does.

I have been an Apple fanboy for 10 years and their recent abysmal software quality and complete lack of the 'final touch' they've been known for made me go back to Linux and Android. Because there I can at list fix those annoying bugs myself — or at the very least, I can have them reported publicly for visibility.

I went from an advocate to 'fuck that shit' in 6 months, and if I recall it was one annoying bug too many that was the tipping point. I have a feeling many people share a similar experience roughly at the same time. And I actually think same thing is happening with Windows. So why not Android, too?

So yeah, I think companies can absolutely inadvertently reach a tipping point with one of those seemingly benign decisions.

Android just isn't getting many outside contributions, and this doesn't affect manufacturers.

There's simply no reason for AOSP to matter to google because AOSP doesn't matter to any serious manufacturer.

Person you responded to complains about restricting sideloading, not closing the source.

The people who care about that aren't paying

I'll be moving off a google phone running GrapheneOS to Apple on my next phone refresh because of this, how is this not Google shooting themselves in the foot?

GrapheneOS is doing well and has an OEM partnership for devices launching in 2027. The switch to 2 major releases per year applies to both the Android Open Source Project and non-Pixel stock operating systems. Non-Pixel OEMs weren't shipping the quarterly releases but rather at most the yearly ones, usually with massive delays. Google is trying to get them to ship 2 releases per year on time instead. They gave up on getting them to ship 4 releases. It's not clear if the stock Pixel OS will continue having 4 major releases per year, but it's clear that if it does that the 2 other OEMs are meant to ship will have more changes. Bear in mind they only had 1 major release per year until trunk-based quarterly releases began with Android 14 QPR2. Android 16 QPR1 being pushed to AOSP delayed until almost right before Android 16 QPR2 was released to AOSP on launch day, they already came close to implementing the new policy in practice without telling anyone about it. The whole thing appears to be due to massive cost cutting for Android and ChromeOS. Android 16 QPR1 appears to have been delayed for AOSP due to major bugs in the code which they worked around for Pixels.

Everything at Google is going downhill due to cost cutting, not specifically this. It's more of a neutral thing for GrapheneOS than a bad thing since it presents a lot of opportunities too. Google is likely to lose control of Android via antitrust action but whether that ends up better for open source is an open question.

Let's say Samsung decides tomorrow to cut ties with Google and fork Android, who would be the loser in that situation?

My guess is all these execs realize there's no more growth left in the tech industry, so everyone is just trying to maximize profit capture to cash out while they still can.

Related: Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week (320 points, 10 months ago, 230 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

We'll get a "Google will now release Android source code once a year with a celebratory video about how they're all for open source" very soon now

EU should start forking all these pseudo-source projects and perserve open access for the future. The tech world and politics are becoming toxic partners with the most anti-social planning.

https://media.ccc.de/v/39c3-a-post-american-enshittification...

Anyone still thinks Android has any future under Googles stewardship?

I don't understand what Google is doing.

On the one hand, you have the CEO apparently all in on Gemini and subscriptions which should push for some kind of Office 365 "we don't care where you use it as long as you subscribe" and strong gestures towards their hardware partners.

On the other hand, you have Osterloh who won the tug of war and is now trying to turn the hardware division and Android into some kind of Apple vertically integrated machine like if he was still at Motorola while their SoC is lagging behind one to two generations and they don't seem to have the volume to sustain this kind of investment. Plus, they have regulatory pressure on the competition side from both the USA and the EU.

Google strategy is still as unreadable as ever. It's frankly a miracle this company is still standing. They are living testimony to the power of having a monopoly on a large market.

Interestingly I now view the Motorola acquisition as a massive mistake, not because of the assets, but because the culture it brought in is actively damaging to the overall company. It's so weird trying to emulate Apple exactly when the regulatory environment is focused on tearing down this model.

Honestly, Apple is getting gifts and gifts from all sides (though with the huge blunder that has been *OS 26), Google doesn't know how to make ecosystems and has never known to do so. Android is great as a single device, but the whole integration, even with their own devices is horrible (Near Share, setting their 'Find My' ecosystem as opt-in instead of opt-out...).

It's another example of EEE (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish), as they finally succeeded with Chrome. And there is likely quite a lot of political interference.

And no, it has nothing to do with the lack of vertical integration. Microsoft, despite all the millions of issues with the platform, has succeeded in making an ecosystem on the enterprise side despite having very little to say in the PC hardware.

the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make” - Andy Rubin

This has really stood the test of time...

So basically Apple with looser handcuffs.

Didn't oracle say the same thing?

https://youtu.be/-zRN7XLCRhc?t=2459

> It's actually funny to go through these slides, August 3rd 2010, because the slides are like, because there's no way Oracle would be so stupid as to close the operating system. So like, that's obviously going to stay open and ... we're not going to be a fork, ... which I actually had misgivings about because I didn't necessarily want us to have to merge what was going on upstream when we couldn't control it. But that was what it was.

> Well, this was actually resolved for us, and it was resolved for us in what I think is the one of the most shameful moments in the history of Open Source. ... On Friday August 13th 2010, this memo was sent out to folks internally at Sun, and in particular, in this memo "we will no longer distribute source code for the entirety of the OpenSolaris operating system or the Solaris operating system in real time." This is absolutely shameful. And it is shameful because for so many who worked so hard to open up this system, and not just for the folks inside of Sun. The reason that this is shameful, the reason that this is reprehensible is because a social contract was formed with the community. And there are folks, including folks in this room, that had source code that was contributed back under that copyright agreement under that copyright assignment and that source code was now being made proprietary. That is reprehensible. That is shitting in the pool of open source and it is disgusting corporate behavior. And sadly, it is behavior like this that forces the rest of us to need to be cynical and suspicious. This is a body blow for open source. And the worst thing was, not only was it shameful — it was cowardly. Because this was never publicly announced. Oracle has not publicly announced once — once — that they are stopping contributions to Open Solaris. They simply silently stopped. Now I get that the lawnmower doesn't just understand why that's a big deal. Okay, I get that. But you know what, we're not all lawnmowers and that's disgusting. It's cowardly behavior. And I have never been so embarrassed of my former colleagues than I was when I saw that mail. Humiliated.

> And as it turns out it was a lie as it also says in there, "... following full releases of our Enterprise Solaris operating system, ... source license and code is going to be made available." Yeah well, Solaris 11 was shipped on November 9th 2011, and I don't see the goddamn source code. So now admittedly, in Oracle's defense, they didn't lie to us because they didn't tell us anything, right. They lied to themselves.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com