
The Huawei Disaster Reveals Google’s Iron Grip on Android - samrohn
https://onezero.medium.com/the-huawei-disaster-reveals-googles-iron-grip-on-android-b1ccee34504d
======
Roritharr
Google invested Billions into Android.

Samsung tried to hedge for this by building Tizen(Bada) and realized how much
needed to be invested to get an Android competitor going, so they kept the
development going, but focused for their Smartwatches, as this would have to
be a "if the worst happens" plan, not something that could be a profitable
venture.

LG has the Palm/HP borne WebOS for their TVs, i suspect with a similar idea at
the back of their minds.

Everyone else? They're too small to realistically try to save their smartphone
businesses when the green robot becomes their enemy.

Google bought this platform with every dollar invested over more than a
decade, they didn't do this only so that Apple had a competitor, but so that
THEY had control over mobile eyeballs.

~~~
harryf
It’s possible that Google cutting off Huawei will actually backfire, because
it makes having a viable alternative to Android a MUST HAVE instead of just
NICE TO HAVE.

Perhaps it’s possible to resurrect Blackberry 10 (
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry_10](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry_10)
) for example, which seemed to be an impressive piece of engineering that got
trampled by Blackberrys failing business. I played with a demo once that could
run Android apps and was amazing at multi-tasking thanks to its microkernel
architecture. Plus would be governed by Canadian export laws I guess. Perhaps
I’m just daydreaming though.

Either way think it’s going to lead to more mobile OS competition again, which
is a good thing

~~~
ehonda
I have both an S9 and a BlackBerry Q10 on me every day. The BB10 OS, even
though its now defunct, was designed in a way that it is FAR easier and more
practical to use. I really, really hate the Android interface as a result.

1: BlackBerry hub is a lot nicer to view messages

2: Smart use of Bezel gestures makes it much easier to actually interact with
the phone:

-If you want to access the hub while using an app, you take your thumb from the bottom of the screen and swipe up and to the right. The interface is very forgiving of where you swipe, you can do it without even looking, yet you wont accidentally do it either. If you don't want to fully enter the hub and just take a peak without leaving your app, just do a partial swipe.

-If you want to view all your running apps, you swipe up from the bottom of the screen to the middle of the screen, and voila , you get a tile arrangement of your running apps (easier to view than a Rolodex), as well as phone and camera access. And you are also less likely to lose track of what windows you have open. I find lots of peoples android phones have like 30 windows open - this is a fault of its interface.

-If you want to access your apps, swipe up from bottom bezel (shows running apps), and then swipe left, now you can view all your other apps.

-Every app is expected to have its settings menu accessible by swiping down from the top bezel.

There are no silly little cumbersome function buttons at the bottom like
Android has (the back/home/apps buttons). Smart use of bezel gestures make
this unnecessary.

Everything can be accessed easily in a simple, comfortable gesture with your
thumb. As a result, it is a lot faster to use day in day out. And it is not as
cluttered as Android.

I am sad the whole world chose Android. It's a crappy interface.

~~~
nextos
BB10 is nice. Meego, as seen in the Nokia N9 was a really good UI too.
Extremely elegant card interface, that meshed so well with a curved OLED
screen. In 2011.

I would love to see an alternative to the iOS / Android duopoly. One way to go
would be a better F-Droid ecosystem, and pure AOSP.

But perhaps, even better, a true Linux userland. Maemo lives on with Jolla.
Although I hate they still have many closed components.

~~~
ptx
Maybe the Purism Librem 5?
[https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/](https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/)

The UI is still very much a work in progress, though. But it's fully open
source. Based on GNOME.

~~~
shorts_theory
To my knowledge, this is based on Plasma Mobile which shares some features
from the KDE Plasma desktop environment and uses Qt for widgets.

[https://www.plasma-mobile.org/](https://www.plasma-mobile.org/)

------
Ultramanoid
Does it reveal Google's iron grip on Android ?

Really ?

I'd say it rather reveals most users' unhealthy addiction to Google's
services, without which, this whole thing wouldn't be the 'tragedy' and wake
up call it's turning out to be for many.

I have used Android for a decade now completely Google-free and no one could
pay me enough money to be tracked and to run pure spyware 24/7 at this
point... I enjoy immensely having a laptop replacement always on, always with
me, in my pocket. No use for Play Services, advertising companies data mining
all I do at all times, or 27, 42 or 59 'social media' applications running to
give purpose to my life and 'communicate' with my 'friends'...

File manager, web browser, terminal, editor, LTE... That's what I need or care
about. I guess not many of us left.

~~~
nhanb
Could you share your current phone model and OS?

~~~
Ultramanoid
I use several devices, lately usually HTC or SONY. I run my own build based on
a barebones cleaned up LineageOS ( no Lineage applications or many libraries
), just need the core OS and monthly security patches up to date. Applications
are my own binaries, packages available through Termux, and from developers
either through F-Droid, GitHub or XDA forums.

I only need LTE and very rarely WiFi, so Bluetooth and NFC if available on
device are disabled and neutered. Devices are encrypted but hold no data other
than that in use, all data is always kept on external encrypted cards, and
those go up to a tera now, so no issues even with large, very large files.
Makes no sense to me that people tie data to a device, be it laptop,
smartphone, tablet or desktop.

The 'phone' part is just for emergencies; police, ambulance, that sort of
thing. Otherwise even a mid-range device works as a fully fledged laptop
substitute for me, can be my main computer, and has for years.

Edit : Most of what I use is open source, and no adware, spyware, analytics,
or crash reporters anywhere on my system. The current software business model
based on data mining needs to die. Also, a decent web browser does, and
better, what 90% of so-called 'apps' do.

~~~
jackpeterfletch
How do you message people?

SMS only?

~~~
Ultramanoid
Mostly E-mail. ( We had mail in phones in Japan way before iOS or Android. SMS
has always looked like a regression if you ask me. )

~~~
manjunaths
You could use signal for messaging. But why not SMS? It is not like text
messaging is owned by anyone like WhatsApp or Telegram.

I found that my only requirement for a smart phone is the Uber and Lyft apps.
If I can get somehow free of them I can switch to a Nokia 1100 and be happy.

------
necovek
The article links to an interesting view on how even AOSP is a no-go for
Huawei: [https://www.xda-developers.com/analysis-huawei-aosp-
google-b...](https://www.xda-developers.com/analysis-huawei-aosp-google-ban/)

What I find interesting is that Apache Licensed software can be relicensed
even in proprietary form (as long as you make it a derivative work, with your
derivative bits with a proprietary license), thus the easy way out seems to be
to have a non-US entity make a proprietary fork of AOSP. I do not see a legal
reason why this company would not be able to sell AOSP to Huawei under these
conditions.

I am sure plenty of us remember the days when free and open source encryption
software was distributed exclusively through non-US servers due to US export
restrictions.

IANAL, so I wonder if I am missing something?

As for alternative platforms, I imagine plenty are US based/originating (QNX,
webOS from Palm/HP originally, Android), but there are alternatives like Jolla
and Ubuntu Touch which aren't.

While I dislike Huawei since they decided to stop sharing unlock codes for
their phones, Huawei has one killer app that's not very much reliant on
Android: camera.

Getting that camera app on one of the less known platforms and enabling Huawei
phones for them would still make them appealing to a large number of customers
in eg. Europe.

~~~
jeremyjh
I believe that if Google _doesn 't_ license AOSP to Huawei (whether by their
own free choice or not), it might be that they are in violation of the Linux
kernel GPL2 agreement that they have made with Linus / Linux Foundation.

~~~
tantalor
Elaborate?

~~~
jeremyjh
Users of GPL licensed software such as the Linux kernel, are bound by the
terms of that license to release modifications under the same license. Android
and AOSP incorporates and uses the Linux kernel; this is the entire reason
AOSP exists. You cannot pick and choose which users you distribute sources to
under the GPL.

------
spodek
It reveals the value Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen created in the GPL, how
much market forces will tend toward monopoly, and how we've let up on
resisting those trends.

------
enitihas
Yeah, and it also reveals what the world would look like if Windows phone won
instead of android. Atleast for Android you have AOSP, which is atleast
somewhat open source. If Windows phone and iOS were the only two alternatives,
a ban on a phone company like huwaei would be a death sentence. Can't do much
with windows or iOS.

~~~
alkonaut
The app ecosystem is a mess on AOSP. It feels like google just uses it to show
a faux openness but there is no way that a non-enthusiast will get the
experience they have in one of the 2 (formerly 3) major brand app stores. And
that's really what this is about: app ecosystems. Making a good OS is easy,
but getting mindshare/appshare is difficult (as microsoft learned the hard
way).

AOSP makes no difference I think. If you are locked out of the official store,
you are locked out of "Android" as people recognize it.

~~~
fspeech
Europe could disallow preintalled app stores so everyone can install their own
app store of choice.

~~~
petra
And everybody will still install Play, Because many apps need Google Play
Services.

~~~
gsich
Just remember the shit Microsoft had to do with the browser selection screen.

~~~
ggg2
which was a direct result of Google suing them to show it.

oh the irony!

~~~
slrz
Pretty sure that it wasn't Google doing the suing. I remember it being Opera.
Did Chrome even exist back then?

~~~
gsich
yes

------
turtlecloud
So they trigger the PRC gov to build their own OS. A temporary setback or
worse? Who do we bet on in 10 yrs? State sponsored technology or Google?

My bet is on China.

~~~
DeonPenny
Lol do that seems like a strange bet. State sponsor rarely win in those cases

~~~
bildung
Yet here we are, talking to each other over the state-sponsored internet.

~~~
jessaustin
Thanks Al Gore!

------
vebu
I for one have been using a Honor (Huawei) phone for over 3 months with
DNSFilter app running 24x7. Blocked all google domains after I installed the
necessary apps from playstore. I don't see any problems if google shuts of
Honor/Huawei devices permanently. I'd say it will be a benefit of Honor/Huawei
phones. It will be the most privacy friendly phone out of the box.

Edit- I use Newpipe instead of Youtube. So thats the alternative for the last
google service I'd need everyday.

~~~
krageon
In my experience it is relatively easy to migrate off of Google services,
except for the cloud messaging stuff. Unless you don't care when you get
messages and only want to see them when you check (or god forbid only use
email), you want GCM/firebase to work.

------
fspeech
It seems that it is up to Europe to give its people the choice in hardware and
software by making appropriate regulations.

~~~
_iyig
It’d be a better world if Europe could give people more choices by... giving
them more choices, instead of regulating the choices that other countries
provide and fundamentally control.

~~~
rchaud
The purpose of regulation is to change the environment to allow for a more
level playing field. Where would Spotify have been if the EC didn't force MS
to unbundle Windows Media Player from installs of Win XP in 2004? For those
who don't remember, WMP 9 already had streaming radio via the MSN
entertainment arm.

Competition doesn't happen overnight. The changes need to be in place for some
period of time before entrepreneurs consider a new product/software in that
sector to be viable.

~~~
cameronbrown
This completely disregards mobile - without which Spotify was completely
irrelevant. Un-bundling WMP, in the long run, did virtually nothing.

~~~
rchaud
Spotify started in 2008 with 40 million tracks and desktop and web clients
only. Back then mobile streaming was a non-entity as the iOS and Android app
stores had not launched.

So the business case for Spotify was very much focused on desktop users, where
WMP would have been the dominant competitor had it not been for the Microsoft
case.

------
wpdev_63
Huawei is a massive company with a large lineup of affordable Android phones.
Why can't they just fork Android just like Amazon and Microsoft?

I guess they would have to come up with alternative to google play
marketplace, gmaps, gmail, etc. but it's not really a big deal with the
resources they have. Not to mention that the open source equivalent of these
apps are serviceable.

~~~
mcrae
Don't think it is that simple for a couple of reasons:

1) Without GMS, developers will need to fork their apps and reimplement
everything they use Play services for today. That's non-trvial and I suspect a
substantial number of developers would not be willing to do this.

2) Even if Huawei developed their own app store, IAP framework, etc, as I
understand it the order in the US prevents Huawei from entering into any new
business with US companies without a license. So, does that mean that FB,
Twitter, et all would be prohibited from listing their apps? I believe so.

~~~
wpdev_63
>1) Without GMS, developers will need to fork their apps and reimplement
everything they use Play services for today. That's non-trvial and I suspect a
substantial number of developers would not be willing to do this.

True but Hawuei has the resources to actually make great open source
alternatives that developers can take advantage of.

>2) Even if Huawei developed their own app store, IAP framework, etc, as I
understand it the order in the US prevents Huawei from entering into any new
business with US companies without a license. So, does that mean that FB,
Twitter, et all would be prohibited from listing their apps? I believe so.

I guess but that's not their business.

They will have to come up with a alternative to Arm due to licensing. A RISC-V
chipset developed by a major company is an interesting prospect.

~~~
mcrae
> I guess but that's not their business.

I mean my point is that it is a total show stopper for their business if they
cannot have US apps on their store! Good luck selling a £800 Android phone in
the UK with no Instagram! Or a $200 one in India with no WhatsApp.

~~~
wpdev_63
True - it definitely will be a big hit but the chinese are used to sideloading
their apps and in the long run, this will mostly hurt American companies as it
will teach its users how to bypass these restrictions and even come up with
better alternatives.

------
pas
“Consumers are attached to the Google products and services that sit on top of
the operating system,”

I doubt that. Google is pretty bad at keeping users. (Probably GMail is the
strongest anchor point, but as we have seen with the G+ real name gotcha, it's
better to be prepared to stop using that. Though of course most GMail users
are not prepared for that.) Users will use whatever is the default.

Probably the YouTube app is what users would miss the most. And I don't know
whether it works without Play Services. But it certainly works on iOS, so if
there were a new platform, Google/Alphabet/YT would make apps for that
platform too.

~~~
dindresto
I think Windows Phone has shown that "Google/Alphabet/YT would make apps for
that platform too" is far from true.

~~~
rchaud
The issue with Windows Phone was that it was a Microsoft venture, and Google
was already paying MS around $5 in license fees for every activated Android
device [0]. They weren't in any hurry to make WP more competitive by offering
a Youtube app. I had a WP device in 2011, and there were third party apps
(MetroTube I think) that were like Newpipe in that you could watching and
download YT videos for offline viewing. Not surprisingly, Google changed their
APIs and broke the download capability.

That said, Google didn't build third-party YT apps for BB10 or WebOS either.

[0] [https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475440/microsoft-
gets...](https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475440/microsoft-gets--
2-billion-a-year-in-android-patent-fees--really-.html)

~~~
pas
Because platforms were not lucrative for G compared to how big of a barrier to
entry the lack of YT meant for those platforms.

------
writepub
Such iron, much grip. You can trivially install Google play store and services
on 98% of the non-licensed phones in China.

The fact that a $50B Chinese domestic Android market is thriving with zero
control by Google proves the thesis to be untrue.

Then there's Amazon's fire product line. The only reason it lags Google's play
store is quality. If Amazon's hardware and software/store selection were 80%
as good, they'd be a serious contender - again one needs to look at China for
evidence of this, where Tencent, Baidu etc. run their own successful app
stores agnostic to hardware

~~~
luckylion
> You can trivially install Google play store and services on 98% of the non-
> licensed phones in China.

 _You_ can. _I_ can. My mother and 95% (99? 99.9?) of the android users
cannot.

> The fact that a $50B Chinese domestic Android market is thriving with zero
> control by Google proves the thesis to be untrue.

In Western countries it's true. You also can't build an online business in
Europe if you're blocked by Google because they have a monopoly on search and
nobody will find you. You can in China, but that doesn't change the situation
in Europe (or, to a lesser extent, the US, I hear bing has some market share
still).

~~~
necovek
> You can. I can. My mother and 95% (99? 99.9?) of the android users cannot.

My mom is quick to install shitload of stuff on her phone that would be much
harder for me to do (I once tried shutting down Facebook group notifications
on her phone and gave up after manually going through a 100 or so ;)). She
will gladly follow a tutorial on the web, download apks from unsafe sources,
allow all permissions the app asks for etc.

I, on the other hand, would look for a trusted source which would be much
harder to find, would be weary of giving my credentials to any app, and would
be even more weary of giving permissions that I do not find strictly necessary
to an app that's coming on my phone.

~~~
luckylion
Good point, trust is another issue.

Your mother sounds like she trusts herself to be able to do it, then looks for
information (with you hoping she chooses trustworthy people) on how to do it.
Most people I know pretty much shut down when they hit something they haven't
encountered before, so they won't even search for the error message. Trust out
of the way, a more open android is a good option for tech savvy people, but I
fear the majority wouldn't be able to work with that.

------
rdlecler1
Arguably Huawei wouldn’t be where they were today if they wrote their own OS
from scratch. People complain about the power of Google. They’re complaining
about the power of a great product. Anyone is welcome to build on top of
Android it’s just really really hard so they let Google do that work.

------
karmakaze
We already know this, which is why we want a free platform based on AOSP and
replacements for Google services.

~~~
pmlnr
... or just a Free platform that doesn't have a malware-able god process
called zygote and all those insane layers of abstraction Android has.

~~~
gruez
>that doesn't have a malware-able god process called zygote

What?

~~~
pmlnr
[https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/triada-
trojan/11481/](https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/triada-trojan/11481/)

~~~
gruez
Is this really an issue? Presumably you need some sort of privilege escalation
exploit to modify zygote. At that point you could also modify other processes
as well. It might make exploitation slightly easier, but it's not really a
vulurability.

~~~
pmlnr
I never said it is; it's a bad design decision.

------
mark_l_watson
I have a few comments on this. First, Google as a money making corporation
would probably not like this restriction enforced by the US government.
Second, I used to use Android and when I did I avoided installing any apps,
preferring to use web versions of the services I needed. The Huawei phones
could be functional with some thoughtful default setups, home screen icons
linked to appropriate web URIs, etc. The big kicker would be lack of games.

~~~
YayamiOmate
I concur. Google ws forced to force their hand for almost no value. If
anything they will lose client/data base.

Also google product lost trust, as a business platform in result. So imho they
lose double time here. Because they are forcing out 3rd biggest phone seller
to competition.

The fact that this competition is practically non existent makes things even
more unpredictable imho, which businesses doesn't like.

------
drtillberg
Here's a granular discussion of another instance of Google exerting control
over Android, from a decade ago (2010):

[https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ma-court-of-
appeals/1683074.html](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ma-court-of-
appeals/1683074.html)

------
wtdata
I would like to see an open source project taking the spot here, not Huawei
doing the same (actually probably worst) thing as Google and create their own
semi-closed OS.

In fact, in Huawei's particular case, I don't even think it will be a push to
create momentum for a truly open smartphone OS out of necessity, after all,
Huawei goes through great lengths to keep the bootloader in their phones
locked.

------
kpremote
Curious to know, are there ways that a country (in fact mainly the U.S.) can
'flip the switch' (weaponize, if you will) on fundamental internet tech, such
as DNS, TCP/IP, HTTP and many many others, to severely affect a foreign
adversary's business (either a company or a country)?

Sure those are merely standards/protocols, still, is it possible these tech
and their current world-wide setup be effectively used in conflicts by issuing
government executive orders or enacting new laws?

Edit: just found this on reddit. Not exactly what I was asking (fundamental
internet standards/protocols), but still somewhat related.

From a reddit post -- "Huawei is no longer able or allowed to work on
standards for Wi-Fi, USB and SD cards. "Temporarily restricted" by Wi-Fi
Alliance, voluntarily withdrew from JEDEC (USB etc) and no longer a member of
SD Associaton (which technically means no more SD slots)"

~~~
clwg
Fundamentally I would say yes, however most of the countries that the US would
likely do this to (Russia, Iran, China, Cuba) have contingencies in place
through the implementation of country wide intranets[0][1]. Within those
countries you also have localized social, financial and e-commerce services
that minimize the general populations dependency on foreign companies and
services.

So the US could cut cut them off or manipulate their connectivity to the
global internet through something like BGP or DNS, but the impact would be far
less than the US doing that against a country such as Canada that has a deep
reliance on US infrastructure and services.

[0] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/12/great-
firewall...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/12/great-firewall-
fears-as-russia-plans-to-cut-itself-off-from-internet) [1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_intranet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_intranet)

~~~
kpremote
China's economy is very export dependent. If Chinese businesses cannot use
internet to access a lot of U.S. allies, it would suffer badly.

For example if, say, all U.K's companies are not allowed to use email or skype
to talk to the Chinese, or all U.S., Canada and Australia, etc. web sites are
not accessible from China because of some executive orders or laws by the U.S.
(similar to google complying with the order currently), then I guess China's
economy would be severely affected.

~~~
IllogicalLogic
Exports only account for 18% of China's GDP.

------
Justsignedup
Ugh... Google owns the android brand. Is this somehow news?

Google open sources the core operating system and people use it for embedded
systems or grad projects as reference materials.

If anyone wants to know what Android is like without Google, look at Amazon
Kindle. Amazon did the whole no Google Android.

Point is that this should have shocked nobody.

------
Tsubasachan
In defense of Google none of the smartphone makers have tried to make their
own mobile OS based on Android.

Besides I think it more reveals how Google is in the grip of US politics- it
might be time for Google to draw up some contingency plans for when America
goes completely nuts.

~~~
luckylion
They've moved a lot of their profits out of US tax jurisdiction, is that
possible with patents and technology as well so they wouldn't be affected by
US export/business restrictions?

~~~
gruez
I'm pretty sure that if you operate in the US, you can't bypass sanctions by
having your corporations registered somewhere else. At the very least you have
to ensure none of your US division isn't violating the sanctions.

------
StreamBright
It is not an accident that successful tech companies that provide devices for
their users control their own destiny from the hardware to the UI level, great
examples Apple, Microsoft. You can team up with Google but then your destiny
is controlled by them.

------
bertomartin
My feeling is that this whole silliness will backfire spectacularly! Huawei
will develop their own OS. It's hard but not impossible. Who cares if there's
buy-in from the entire developer community...nowadays people don't use apps
that much anyways. Apps are just another way of consumption. Most apps can
probably be replaced with webviews with little lost of functionality. I don't
know enough about the technical difficulties they'll have in developing a
brand new os, but it's been done multiple times. In any case, this sux for all
parties.

~~~
ovi256
30% of smartphones sold in the EU in 2019Q1 were Huawei.

You can bet that no bank or whatever will abandon such a large fraction of the
users of their app, but is already calling people to get the Huawei OS version
of their app started.

Especially given that Huawei OS looks to be a fork of AOSP with the
proprietary Google Services replaced with proprietary Huawei services. The
developpers will just fork the existing app, using Android studio, and the
same language!

~~~
cameronbrown
People won't buy a phone without Snapchat or Instagram who can't actually
implement said support without violating the Huawei ban.

~~~
JohnFen
Many people won't. Many other people couldn't care less about Snapchat or
Instagram. That latter set of people almost certainly still constitute a large
enough market to be worth addressing.

------
cftorres
US enterprises are losing reliability with this dirty game of its government.
I hope this issue will be taken as a wake up alarm for the necesity of a
pluricultural and far more diverse technology market.

------
tech6
Can someone explained what happened recently to cause such aggressive action
against Huawei with ARM , Google etc refusing to work with them. Is it related
to arrest of their executive recently ?

~~~
dagw
It's part of the US/China trade war. Trump believed the existing tariff
situation with China was unfair and wanted to negotiate a new trade deal. When
negotiations failed he started to implement a bunch of tariffs and trade
restrictions on chines goods and companies to try to force their hand. This is
just a part of that 'negotiation' strategy.

Google, Arm etc. don't want to stop doing business with Huawei (since doing so
no doubt costs them a lot of money), they're being banned from doing business
with Huawei by the US government.

~~~
hutzlibu
But why is everyone silently accepting that?

Also google, are they so bowed down to the government, that they just accept
this, or do they know more reasons to declare Huawei a enemy?

~~~
disgruntledphd2
They have no choice except to comply.

I worked for a non-Google tech company and there is literally code which
prevents users in any sanctioned countries from being able to use the
services.

Unless Sundar Pichai would like to go to jail, there's very little that they
can do about this.

~~~
hutzlibu
I believe there is something called the legal system? Which companies or
people can use to challenge government decisions, if they don't like them. And
they can at least openly express their concerns.

But I do not see that hapoening, so something (or quite a lot) is going on
behind the scene.

~~~
joatmon-snoo
The judicial system is for challenging the _interpretation_ of the law.

Changing the law is a different process.

~~~
hutzlibu
Yes. But banning Huawei is a interpretation, right?

~~~
gruez
No, it's an executive order.

------
polyterative
I understand that AOSP and open source is cool and stuff, but still the
alternative is Apple's OS. I'm not even mad

~~~
sdan
You don't really get too much with AOSP. Google's just flexing it off to
portray its "open" when in reality Google's using a reasonably different
version of AOSP for Android.

~~~
yoz-y
In China using AOSP base is fine as people there don't (and can't) use Google
services.

------
theyinwhy
It is such a good time for Firefox OS / KaiOS. Really sad Mozilla threw in the
towel.

------
known
Google is prosecuted for abusing Android monopoly in
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google)

------
NicoJuicy
I don't know what I would have done, but as a multinational I would have
bought Windows Phone OS and their platform.

Launch could be within months of acquiring everything. And the heavy lifting
was already done ( compatibility).

------
kpU8efre7r
I don't see the problem. Android, the operating system, is open source. App
developers make a choice to use Google Play services? Why do developers choose
to do this? Does Google provide features people want?

------
gotenyama
If you lose access to google play do you also lose access to Google Cloud
Messaging for notifications ? Because if that's the case that's huge. Hosted
notification is so important these days.

------
peter_retief
Everyone acts as if this came out of the blue, in reality there have been
problems with China's state owned enterprises for a decade. Everyone has to
play by the rules or why have rules at all?

------
izzydata
But Google made and owns the Android OS. Why shouldn't they have an iron grip
on it? Should Apple not have full rights to iOS or Microsoft to Windows? It is
a product that Google made.

------
k__
They should have pumped more effort into the Web. Would have made it a real
competitor in every way and no one would have cared about native apps and
stores anymore.

------
xmly
It only affects the European market for Huawei. But this may be a win for
google for short-term. But long term speaking, it is a lose-lose situation.

------
tibbydudeza
Google also invested $$$ in KaiOS and is busy porting their apps to it.

------
alfiedotwtf
There was no Huawei disaster... it was all FUD for Trump's triumphant trade
war. As Trump shows his hand, the world now can see that the real disaster is
US hegemony:

[https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/24/tech/donald-trump-
huawei-...](https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/24/tech/donald-trump-huawei-
ban/index.html)

------
cxromos
The Huawei disaster reveals iron grip of the Chinese military intelligence on
Huawei. What a malarkey of an article.

------
needle0
The rationale for cutting off Huawei seems to be "No matter how much you claim
to not spy, you are forced to comply when the Chinese government tells you to
do so" \- which so far appears to be the hypothetical worst case scenario.
Considering that, it's kinda ironic that Google/Amazon/ARM et al are all
_actually_ carrying out Huawei's own (formerly)hypothetical worst-case
scenario because the US government told them to do so.

~~~
penagwin
Huawei isn't part of the Five Eyes (or the extensions of it), so any data they
collect of Five Eye nations is a threat. Data Five Eye nations collect on each
other or themselves isn't a threat because they're allies, often using each
other to allow surveillance while loopholing some laws in their respective
countries.

I don't like it either, just explaining the motivations at play here. Also you
must expect any entity (company, individual, etc.) to obey their government,
otherwise there's not much point in a government is there (not that the
governments decisions are necessarily good ones)?

------
microcolonel
This title is an extreme framing of the situation. A similar title would be
"The Huawei Travesty Reveals Microsoft's Iron Grip on Windows NT".

Yes, copyright is a thing, and if you own a copyright, you are entitled to
control its copying through license agreements. To characterize that as an
"Iron Grip" is quite strange, as short of releasing all of this investment as
open source, there is no other kind of "grip" that Google is entitled to.

Google has invested billions of dollars into applications and infrastructure
for their most successful Linux distro, and yes, they own the copyright to
that.

As far as I'm aware, Google does not market their current Android distro as
"open source" to any great extent, so why is it more of a problem than any
other piece of popular proprietary software? What about the millions of Linux-
based kiosks, pub games consoles, and giant social media and advertising
juggernauts who also have proprietary software that they sell access to?

