
Microsoft's partnership with Cyanogen Inc. - ghosh
http://www.wired.com/2015/04/microsoft-google-cyanogen/
======
magicalist
This article's title is terrible, but just to make clear what confused many in
the Ars Technica comment section, _Cyanogen Inc_ is partnering with Microsoft,
which is a totally separate effort from CyanogenMod (except that Cyanogen Inc
is trying to commercialize it).

CyanogenMod meanwhile has announced that things are going to continue as
normal, with no Microsoft apps to be found:

> _We are not bundling or pre-installing Microsoft (or any Cyanogen OS
> exclusive partner apps) into CyanogenMod_ [1]

[1] [http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-
cm12-1-nightli...](http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/microsoft-and-
cm12-1-nightlies)

~~~
omegavesko
I wouldn't say it's a 'totally separate effort'. Much of the core CyanogenMod
dev team are also Cyanogen Inc. employees.

I assume what you meant to say is that CyanogenMod is entirely separate from
Cyanogen Inc.'s commercial product, Cyanogen OS, which has always been true.

------
hendersoon
Amazon tried the same thing and has been at best marginally successful, and
they went to the trouble of building an appstore and ecosystem around these
services.

Just offering Microsoft versions of Google Play Services functionality (maps,
games, locations, billing, sync, messaging, etc) only gets you in the door. To
actually be successful, you need to make all the apps peolple want work with
your services rather than Google's. That's why this isn't scaring Google one
bit.

Ars Technica went into a fair bit of detail about this a couple years ago.

[http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-
sl...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/balky-carriers-and-slow-oems-
step-aside-google-is-defragging-android/)

Now if Microsoft came in and decided to fork Android similarly to Amazon, and
put their full weight behind it, with their own appstore and such, now _that_
might scare Google. But that's not what they're doing.

~~~
ForHackernews
All they really need to do is duplicate the Google Play APIs, then the
existing apps would work with your version of those services.

I agree that it doesn't seem like they're doing this yet, but it doesn't seem
like it would be a big undertaking for somebody like Microsoft--given that
they already have their own mapping, email, messaging (Skype), app store, and
billing infrastructure. You just need a shim layer to convert Google-format
APIs to Bing-format.

And you don't even need to sell it to consumers, just to phone OEMs. Samsung
is pretty clearly already chaffing under Google's yoke, I bet they would
easily jump on board the MS Android train.

~~~
hendersoon
That's a pretty substantial oversimplification. Amazon did that, and like I
said, they were at best marginally successful.

~~~
ForHackernews
Amazon is playing a totally different game with Kindle. They're not trying to
compete with Google for general-purpose Android devices, they're trying to
make limited-purpose Amazon-machines that help users consume more content from
Amazon.

~~~
hendersoon
Amazon isn't stupid. Yes, obviously they're in the game to sell their content,
but they are well aware they need to offer general-purpose devices to compete,
and they are absolutely on that correct path.

Their execution hasn't been great, but they know what they ned to do and
they're trying to do it.

------
FreakyT
The title seems a bit hyperbolic. Google still controls the "real" Android;
without the Google Apps, Android is missing quite a bit[1]. Sure, bundling
OneDrive might help Microsoft take a few users from Google drive, but I would
hardly characterize it as taking over Android's future.

[1]: [http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-
on-...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-
controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/)

~~~
notatoad
The title is _incredibly_ hyperbolic. A more accurate title would be
"Microsoft OneNote to be pre-installed on the YU Yureka and Alcatel Idol
phones". That's literally all this is. That's the only customers for
CyanogenOS, and that's the extent of this partnership. They're still shipping
google apps on the phones, it's still Google's android, and this doesn't
affect CyanogenMod. Microsoft is just shoving their foot in the door.

Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger news.

~~~
yohui
> _Microsoft apps being pre-installed on the new Galaxy S was much bigger
> news._

Reportedly leveraging their Android patents to do so:
[http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-
fees-f...](http://www.androidauthority.com/microsoft-cuts-patent-fees-for-
apps-600824/)

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
That's brilliant.

------
azakai
I feel the headline is quite exaggerated.

It is interesting news. We heard a while ago that Microsoft was investing in
Cyanogen, and it turns out that this isn't just a financial relationship. They
are also going to have the Microsoft set of apps as an option on Cyanogen.

Still, this isn't "taking Android's future out of Google's hand." The Android
code is and has been open source, which is what enables things like Cyanogen
to exist, so there is nothing new there.

All that we learned of here is of an option to bundle Microsoft apps on
Cyanogen; that might interest some vendors, but it doesn't seem like a game
changer. Other apps have been bundled on various non-Google Android devices in
the past.

~~~
asadotzler
Samsung was getting close to having a viable Google Play alternative bundle of
services/apps with their "S" collection but they seemingly bailed on that with
their latest Google agreement. I think that left an opening for Microsoft to
step in with their cloud.

------
omegavesko
I'm just happy I wasn't taking a sip of my coffee when I read that title. Is
this what passes as tech journalism these days? Did they get Buzzfeed to give
them pointers or something?

------
ipsin
For me, the one compelling thing about CyanogenMod -- the only thing keeping
me on the platform -- is the ability to control app permissions. Google looked
like it was going in that direction with the "App Ops" control, but that's
gone now.

------
djhworld
Wasn't this the whole point of Android in the first place?

I remember just before, or around the time Apple were releasing the iPhone,
Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open
Handset Alliance

Android was a product of that partnership and developers/companies were free
to fork the platform should they so wish, like Amazon did with their flavour
of Android.

[http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html](http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html)

~~~
Oletros
> Google partnered with a bunch of other organisations to create the Open
> Handset Alliance Android was a product of that partnership and
> developers/companies were free to fork the platform should they so wish

No, OHA members never were allowed to fork Android as Amazon did. In fact, the
very objective of OHA is use the same Android base with a certification
process

------
chuckcode
Looking forward to some virtualization/docker type functionality on my phone
so I can run apps from any major OS without having to be tied down to a
particular platform. Makes life a lot easier in the data center and can't help
but think it could make it easier for developers to support multiple platforms
and for new platforms to enter the market.

~~~
walterbell
Virtualizion of 3D graphics/animation is challenging.

------
0x0
So this is it, then. The "Microsoft GNU/Linux" distribution that slashdot kept
joking about? Who'da thunk. :)

~~~
justincormack
Well, other than the lack of Gnu in Android.

~~~
wtallis
How much GNU is in the Android toolchain? They're still using GCC to build the
kernel at least, right?

~~~
justincormack
They now have llvm and gcc toolchains now, so imagine they are planning to
switch (although it is still GNU ld/gold even with llvm), although that is for
userspace, the kernel is not really part of Android and would still be gcc
compiled for now.

------
vezzy-fnord
AOSP is still in Google's hands, and most major companies which ship Android
devices are contractually forbidden from using derivatives as part of their
membership in the OHA.

It is evident that Microsoft wants to propel CyanogenMod in a more competitive
direction for their own benefit, but it is far too early for any conclusion to
be drawn here.

------
tomlongson
This seems like a step in the right direction for open mobile coupled with
paid software. It doesn't seem right that phones come with software you can't
remove like "NFL Mobile", and for the most part we accept this.

------
Oletros
> WITH THE ANNOUNCEMENT that Microsoft would partner with the truly open-
> source, Android-based Cyanogen OS

...

> A more open Android is on the rise, and Microsoft just provided a powerful
> updraft.

How it is more open or truly open source when both of them rely on proprietary
apps and services?

------
honksillet
Does anyone know if preinstalled app are limited in Europe?

------
vld
Can anyone predict how this will affect Windows Phone?

~~~
azakai
The article says there are no plans for Microsoft hardware with Cyanogen on
it.

I imagine Microsoft will continue as it has been with Windows Phone. This is
just a way to use the Microsoft apps across both Windows Phone and Cyanogen
devices that want those apps. There is benefit to Microsoft from growing that
ecosystem, so that switching between Android devices and Windows Phones is
less jarring.

~~~
MichaelGG
MS really needs to allow Android emulation on Windows Phone. It's just too
painful because so many apps don't exist or have shitty WP hacks only.
Controlling a speaker? Playing Go on various servers? Sending secure messages
(TextSecure/Signal)? I've no high performance needs, but WP simply lacks the
apps I need.

Also, their store is a disgrace of crap, shovelwear and outright scams. They
even had a fake Windows 8.1 Update pass their "approval" process. Even when I
find a non scam, the quality is usually poor.

~~~
azakai
It's obviously not quite the same, but Microsoft supporting Android apps on
Windows Phone reminds me of IBM supporting Windows apps on OS/2\. Supporting
your competitor's apps can prevent some immediate suffering by users, but it
isn't a good strategy for an ecosystem.

If people end up mostly running the emulated apps on your OS, you might as
well just use that other OS, and run those apps on it natively, for the best
experience. And figure out a way to run your ecosystem on top of that.
Specifically here, that would mean for Microsoft to switch to Cyanogen for its
devices, and ship a .NET runtime so Windows Phone apps can work on it.

I doubt that's a great idea, but I think it's better than emulating Android
apps on top of Windows Phone. I'm just guessing here though.

~~~
SyneRyder
On the other hand, Parallels Desktop, VMWare and Bootcamp helped a lot of
people switch from Windows computers over to the Mac. Sometimes it can work
out & bring more customers.

------
fredgrott
and how is this different than with Nokia X?..wrong title..overblown hypebole

------
shusain
Sensationalize much?

------
ourmandave
Ugh. More pre-installed apps I'll never use and can't remove.

~~~
jqm
According to the article you can remove them. Agree on the "I'll never use"
part.

------
honksillet
Now if someone can just figure out how to get this "watch" app off my iPhone.

