Sources: Nokia , , , Reuters
quote: Also I believe you're using "open source" incorrectly. Android is completely 100% open source. Even Microsoft is allowed to fork it.
quote: Android is completely 100% open source.
quote: If you're going to get on a high horse and look down on people, maybe you should know wtf you're saying. Just an idea.
quote: If you fork AOSP, you don't get access to certain APIs Google deems essential to its own ecosystem. Herein lies the major problem in your argument.
quote: Again, that's not an issue of closed versus open source.
quote: For some of these apps, there might still be an AOSP equivalent, but as soon as the proprietary version was launched, all work on the AOSP version was stopped. Less open source code means more work for Google's competitors. While you can't kill an open source app, you can turn it into abandonware by moving all continuing development to a closed source model. Just about any time Google rebrands an app or releases a new piece of Android onto the Play Store, it's a sign that the source has been closed and the AOSP version is dead...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...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......Play Services is a closed source app owned by Google and licensed as part of the Google Apps package. Any feature you see move from "normal" Android to Google Play Services is also moving from open source to closed source. This app pulls off the neat trick of not only enticing users with exclusive, closed source features, but locking in third-party developers with Google's proprietary APIs as well...At Google I/O 2013, Google revamped the Android location APIs and released them as part of Google Play Services. In other words, Android's top-tier location services are now closed source. If the above history is any indication, the open source location stack will be left to rot...Most developers probably say "yes" to Google APIs, and the next question is what should they do about the Kindle and other Android forks? Developers are largely on their own to find a replacement API solution, which might be out of date and might not work perfectly with their existing app. If this other solution isn't a perfect drop-in replacement, the developer will have to figure out how to design their app around the missing feature. Since this is such a small amount of users compared to their current iOS + Android user base, is it even worth it to try to figure out this separate ecosystem? Will they get a return on their time investment? It would be easy to say "the hell with forked Android" and skip all the extra work and Q/A that would entail...
quote: Android is NOT 100% open source. Full. Stop.
quote: Android is 100% open source the problem here is you think Google apps and services are part of Android when they never were.