L'état du "open source" dans Android

[Vacpower™]

Ars Technica a publié aujourd'hui un article intéressant sur la partie de Android qui est encore vraiment "open source", qui commence en expliquant comment petit à petit Google tente de diminuer la part du Open Source, chose qui est acceptable, on peut pas les blâmer de pas vouloir faire du open source pour toujours.

Cependant, là où ça devient plus gris c'est où Google utilise sa position dominante sur le système d'exploitation pour forcer les constructeurs tierces qui veulent avoir le "vrai" Android avec toute l'intégration des nouvelles App Google (Google search et voice, Gmail, Youtube, Maps et GPS, etc) à entrer dans un accord avec eux qui les interdit de fabriquer des appareils pour des systèmes d'exploitation concurrents. Par exemple, Amazon est pogné pour aller chercher une entreprise inconnue pour produire sa tablette Kindle Fire parce qu'elle utilise une branche autonome de Android qui n'est pas celle de Google.

On est wuand même assez loin des principes d'ouvertures qui étaient sensé être au coeur d'Android à ses début, même qu'on commence a rentrer dans des eaux d'abus de position dominante.

Je cite le passage de l'article en question : http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/

Locking-in manufacturers

While Google is out to devalue the open source codebase as much as possible, controlling the app side of the equation isn't the company's only power play.

If a company does ever manage to fork AOSP, clone the Google apps, and create a viable competitor to Google's Android, it's going to have a hard time getting anyone to build a device for it. In an open market, it would be as easy as calling up an Android OEM and convincing them to switch, but Google is out to make life a little more difficult than that. Google's real power in mobile comes from control of the Google apps—mainly Gmail, Maps, Google Now, Hangouts, YouTube, and the Play Store. These are Android's killer apps, and the big (and small) manufacturers want these apps on their phones. Since these apps are not open source, they need to be licensed from Google. It is at this point that you start picturing a scene out of The Godfather, because these apps aren't going to come without some requirements attached.

While it might not be an official requirement, being granted a Google apps license will go a whole lot easier if you join the Open Handset Alliance. The OHA is a group of companies committed to Android—Google's Android—and members are contractually prohibited from building non-Google approved devices. That's right, joining the OHA requires a company to sign its life away and promise to not build a device that runs a competing Android fork.

Acer was bit by this requirement when it tried to build devices that ran Alibaba's Aliyun OS in China. Aliyun is an Android fork, and when Google got wind of it, Acer was told to shut the project down or lose its access to Google apps. Google even made a public blog post about it:

While Android remains free for anyone to use as they would like, only Android compatible devices benefit from the full Android ecosystem. By joining the Open Handset Alliance, each member contributes to and builds one Android platform—not a bunch of incompatible versions.

This makes life extremely difficult for the only company brazen enough to sell an Android fork in the west: Amazon. Since the Kindle OS counts as an incompatible version of Android, no major OEM is allowed to produce the Kindle Fire for Amazon. So when Amazon goes shopping for a manufacturer for its next tablet, it has to immediately cross Acer, Asus, Dell, Foxconn, Fujitsu, HTC, Huawei, Kyocera, Lenovo, LG, Motorola, NEC, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Toshiba, and ZTE off the list. Currently, Amazon contracts Kindle manufacturing out to Quanta Computer, a company primarily known for making laptops. Amazon probably doesn't have many other choices.

For OEMs, this means they aren't allowed to slowly transition from Google's Android to a fork. The second they ship one device that runs a competing fork, they are given the kiss of death and booted out of the Android family—it must be a clean break. This, by design, makes switching to forked Android a terrifying prospect to any established Android OEM. You must jump off the Google cliff, and there's no going back.

Any OEM hoping to license Google Apps will need to pass Google's "compatibility" tests in order to be eligible. Compatibility ensures that all the apps in the Play Store will run on your device. And to Google, "compatibility" is also a fluid concept that an Android engineer once internally described as "a club to make [OEMs] do what we want." While Google now has automated tools that will test your device's "compatibility," getting a Google apps license still requires a company to privately e-mail Google and "kiss the ring" so to speak. Most of this is done through backroom agreements and secret contracts, so the majority of the information we have comes from public spats and/or lawsuits between Google and potential Android deserters (see: Acer).

Another point of control is that the Google apps are all licensed as a single bundle. So if you want Gmail and Maps, you also need to take Google Play Services, Google+, and whatever else Google feels like adding to the package. A company called Skyhook found this out the hard way when it tried to develop a competing location service for Android. Switching to Skyhook's service meant Google would not be able to collect location data from users. This was bad for Google, so Skyhook was declared "incompatible." OEMs that wanted the Google Apps were not allowed to use them. Skyhook sued, and the lawsuit is still pending.

[Purosangue]

Les Chinois troll Android en tabarnac etk.

[Purosangue]

Dans le sens qu'ils sont les plus gros utilisateurs d'Android et ils n'utilisent pas le moteur de recherche google et les autres cossins y compris le magasin d'applications.

[Vacpower™]

Exact, et ça google aime pas ça, donc ils développent pus vraiment beaucoup la partie Open Source et se concentrent sur les "add on" qui font quand même une partie importante de l'expérience.