That is how these things work. If an org isn't willing to allow forking then they forking shouldn't have open sourced it.
The FACT that Google open sourced it tells me THEY DON'T MIND.
Then why did Google threaten to banish Acer from the OHA if they dared release even a single device running a fork, partnered with a competing search engine?
Google has made it very clear they are opposed to so-called 'incompatible' forks of Android, and that they consider pretty much anything not running Google's proprietary services to be 'incompatible'.
Acer isn't responsible for what Aliyun puts in it's app store, and that's NOT the issue, Google made clear in their response: Google doesn't allow OHA members (companies allowed to ship the Play Store) to sell any devices with forks. Amazon isn't an OHA member. Cyanogen may have something interesting going on, because AFAIK they're compliant with whatever OHA terms they currently have agreed to.
What kind of thinking is that? Google open sourced it because they HAD TO. Linux is GPL so they had no other choice. Whether or not they mind is a different issue.
Indeed, as tingol wrote, parts (as the Linux kernel) had to be open sourced. But also for the large rest I believe open sourcing Android had more advantages than disadvantages for Google - thus it made sense. This does not contradict the fact that Google might not be fond of forks.
Android the OS isn't where the value lies. It is the Android ecosystem - the applications, drivers, and hardware.
Google has essentially taken over the ecosystem via their Google Play API. I know this first hand as my beloved Blackberry OS 10 was able to run Android apps. Now this is almost impossible as the majority of apps created in the last few years have hooks into Google's APIs and absolutely won't work without all of Google's hooks into your privacy.
I don't imagine roms that avoid GApps will be a viable alternative in a year or two either.
Microsoft has been trying to develop an ability to run Android apps on their phones, and it looks like they're giving up too due to Google's lock on the APIs.
Comments
But, Google open sourced it so they're cool with that. I still don't see the issue here.
Allowing forking (by the license) does not mean that Google likes forking.
That is how these things work. If an org isn't willing to allow forking then they forking shouldn't have open sourced it. The FACT that Google open sourced it tells me THEY DON'T MIND.
Then why did Google threaten to banish Acer from the OHA if they dared release even a single device running a fork, partnered with a competing search engine?
Google has made it very clear they are opposed to so-called 'incompatible' forks of Android, and that they consider pretty much anything not running Google's proprietary services to be 'incompatible'.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/sep/19/android-ch...
I think THIS was the issue, not the forked Android.
Amazon has a forked Android. Cyanogen has one.
Acer isn't responsible for what Aliyun puts in it's app store, and that's NOT the issue, Google made clear in their response: Google doesn't allow OHA members (companies allowed to ship the Play Store) to sell any devices with forks. Amazon isn't an OHA member. Cyanogen may have something interesting going on, because AFAIK they're compliant with whatever OHA terms they currently have agreed to.
What kind of thinking is that? Google open sourced it because they HAD TO. Linux is GPL so they had no other choice. Whether or not they mind is a different issue.
Indeed, as tingol wrote, parts (as the Linux kernel) had to be open sourced. But also for the large rest I believe open sourcing Android had more advantages than disadvantages for Google - thus it made sense. This does not contradict the fact that Google might not be fond of forks.
Android the OS isn't where the value lies. It is the Android ecosystem - the applications, drivers, and hardware.
Google has essentially taken over the ecosystem via their Google Play API. I know this first hand as my beloved Blackberry OS 10 was able to run Android apps. Now this is almost impossible as the majority of apps created in the last few years have hooks into Google's APIs and absolutely won't work without all of Google's hooks into your privacy.
I don't imagine roms that avoid GApps will be a viable alternative in a year or two either.
Microsoft has been trying to develop an ability to run Android apps on their phones, and it looks like they're giving up too due to Google's lock on the APIs.