Google claps down on Android Devs, starting today!!

Post Reply New Topic

Google starting today is clamping down on Android developers.

All Android apps starting today will receive an age rating and content rating (if certain content exists).

Also Google is ending its automated app submission and review process.
All Android developers will have their apps reviewed and approved by a human review team, to ensure quality and legality of the apps.



Google is in the process of forcing all Android developers to use the Google Playstore.

This is being done to end the wave of malware, viruses, broken and/or apps that violate copyrights, while giving Google more control over the OS.


Google and it's fans have publicly attacked Apple for it's handling of the iOS app store, claiming Apple was being "controlling", "evil", "tyrannical", "restrictive", "censoring" etc...

Now Google has decided to match Apple.

Welcome to the New Android Experience...!

Welp, so much for Android's open ecosystem. Hopefully they don't make it so that apps can't be sideloaded.

Android is forkable, it is Apache license, the kernel is modified Linux (GPL).

You are talking about people using a service and marketplace, you just have to have fork which uses another repository.

Google has a no fork clause in the Android license.
Google has vowed go after anyone who forks Android and uses Android without Google's consent.

Amazon is the only company to date to fully fork Android to create the Fire OS.
Google and Amazon have been fighting over Amazon's fork of Android, each promising to win.


Google does claim full ownership of Android and has been filing patents left and right to secure it legally.

So every Android device uses Google's Android as it's core, which means you get the Google Play Store as the only App store.

Right now Android is facing a battle between the OEMs who claim Android is open source giving them the right to modify it without Google's permission and Google who claims Android is their's and the OEMs need their permission to do anything with Android.

Anything that happens to Android reflects on Google.

What Google has started doing this week, is clamping down on the Android developers as Google tries to make the Google Play Store an unremovable feature.
The Google Play Store is going to become the main and possibly the only way to download Apps as Google plans to secure it's control over Android to prevent OEMs from forking it.

Google is now just waking up to it's error in originally making Android an open OS.

What about AOSP? Isn't that open? Anyway, I hope that people disobey Google, and keep pumping out the forks. Or better yet, someone should come up with an ARM-based GNU/Linux distro with an Android compatibility layer, that can be flashed on Android devices. I only use Android because it's the lesser of two evils, and I would much rather use a smartphone OS that isn't controlled by a big corporation.

Already done, just not available stateside.

link

Luckily enough, I'm not in the 'States. Canada, f**k yeah! XD

EDIT: Damn, it's not available in Canada either. Oh well, once they release the Galaxy S3 image, I may just install it.

PM me when you do & I'll dust off my S3, I have to fix recovery but XDA must have cracked that nut by now. I also have a non-production Nokia N9 on which it would be amazing.

You do know that in most countries the carriers have most open source OSs blocked from their networks.

It means if you install an unapproved OS or piece of software, you will have that device banned from the network.
They regularly scan every device that connects to their networks to ensure "compliance".

The major carriers are even considering blocking Google services to force Google to capitulate to their demands (The control of Android services).

Apple, Microsoft, and Blackberry are at least on good terms with the major carriers, in part because their users generate decent profits for the major carriers and Android users don't (biggest market share ≠ profit).

Oh on a fun note, Google just stated that Android 5.0 is just now hitting 3% market share, though Kit Kat and Jelly Bean are still over 40%+ and growing in market share (OEMs aren't willing to adopt 5.0 yet).

That's just ridiculous. I remember back when I had my first Android phone, I was able to access the cell networks just fine with Cyanogenmod installed.

Still, that might explain why T-Mobile won't re-register my N9... The only device I know was Linux powered on a US market carrier was the Motorola ROKR E8; independent or not there isn't a whole lot of GNU in Android...

Access to a cell carrier and network are a privilege not a right.

They've alway held the right to block anything they want.
This is why not all brands of phones are compatible.

If you think it's ridiculous try canceling Comcast

Can you provide info on the no fork clause? My understanding is the core is Apache license, or at least there was an apache licensed early edition, but there are proprietary components, which must be left out. The kernel cannot have a not fork clause becuase it is based on linux, and that is an "infectious" license.

I don't think that Fire OS is the only fork, it may be the only commercially branded fork.

TBH the problem is not with code review. Code review is a normal and acceptable practice, in many open source project, and many specific software repos.

The issue is going back on their original license if that is the case. If they hadn't licensed it that way I could not really complain.

I use chromium, rather than chrome for similar reasons.

The Play Store, this is only a problem for me if you can't override or patch. It is sensible to prevent link install apps by default. If people want to use alternative source, then would be stupid for doing it without using a service with some code review, and malware checks. People should be allowed to take risks, but they should know they are taking huge risks.

Nobody can pretend that malware isn't a serious issue. Mobile is the new frontier for malware. You only have to go into a school or workplace and do an audit, you will see how many have apps and games, which are essentially sharing more data than they are aware of.

As far as Apple being "evil", well that may be true it is subjective, but as far as using their own services anyone who is an apple user should know what they are getting into regarding the system. It is foolish to buy into their brand then complain about it after.

There is also Ubuntu mobile. I suspect they will also tighten their code review, and malware checks. The incentive to produce malware is too high. Again you should be allowed to do something stupid, but at least make it a bit harder.

I'm a competitist, but i think Anti-trust is completely the wrong approach.

Why build up bloated inefficient companies with a whole load of protectionist company law, then all of a sudden single out select companies to for anti-trust retrospectively? Competition should be about alternatives, and variety.

This is the problem with branding certain companies as 'evil', it misses the point.

A company is a legal definition, primarily so don't provide so much protectionism in the first place. Naturally I'm a strong proponent of Patent reform, it should be more limited.

Competition law has to work universally, singling out companies that you made successful through protectionism the jurisdiction has provided, then trying to backtrack is pointless. It is also irrelevant to lot of smaller companies. It only relates to choice of companies of the same size.

Regarding proprietary licenses. Some copy left license can be as restrictive as proprietary licenses, if not more.

OS is not something that exists in a magical land with ample supply of candy floss. Everything that gets made needs a funding model, be it bank of mom and dad, your day job, SaaS (one of the most popular), dedicated support, the fact you are living in your research lab and are taking along time to finish your PhD and they just think you are first one in last one out, etc.

I love and support OS software, but I find it odd when people rile against services considering they are one of the most realist and popular ways of funding very popular OS projects. There isn't a one size fits all model, it has a lot to do with viability based on the product.

I support permissive OS licenses too. You have to allow any type of license that is legally tenable, too much ideology and lack of pragmatism is bad.

Will they stop F-Droid from working?

True, but isn't that kind of behaviour kind of anti-competitive? I remember Microsoft got in a lot of trouble back in the day over forcibly bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, and pretty much forcing OEMs to include Windows on their PCs. This just sort of smacks of that.

Canadians often like to complain about the telecom industry here, but I'd argue that things are worse in the 'States. I'd much rather deal with someone like Shaw or Telus than Comcast.