
AT&T replaces Google with Yahoo on Android phone - abennett
http://www.itworld.com/internet/98500/att-replaces-google-yahoo-android-phone
======
CoryMathews
What can google do? When you release under the open source license they did
anyone can fork it and create whatever they want from it. This is what exactly
what AT&T is doing.

~~~
awa
They can push an update to Android and can switch the search provider to
Google with/without user consent.

~~~
pwim
The updates to Android are pushed by the carrier, not Google.

~~~
sli
Or sometimes by the user, if they're sneaky. Or tech savvy. Same thing most of
the time.

------
cheald
It's a tribute to Android that this is possible.

~~~
ajross
And a head scratching mystery as to why AT&T would want to....

~~~
periferral
revenue. at&t can charge yahoo/bing as the default browser/search engine on
their android handsets

------
sh1mmer
This is exactly the same as OEM computers and Windows. Microsoft have such
dominance in OSes that they can't object to manufacturers making their own
deals to set default search engines in browsers. It's an anti-trust issue. OEM
manufacturers get paid by Google, Yahoo, etc to set the default to them.

Google can't get into the Mobile space with a platform and then expect they
can enforce that their platform maintains their dominance in search. It's not
competitive, and I'm sure they were expecting this to happen.

Disclaimer: I work for Y! but not in search.

~~~
sonnyz
I could be wrong but I don't think this situation is the same as Microsoft's.

Apple has full control over whats installed on an iPhone. They openly admit
that they block any applications that compete with theirs. Couldn't Google do
the same?

~~~
sh1mmer
But Google aren't making these devices. They are providing an OEM operating
system which can be installed on a device made by another manufacturer and
sold branded by yet another company.

It's exactly the same circumstance.

------
jamesmcintyre
When Google released the Nexus One it revealed another very important
strategic imperative for offering Android free of charge. Google realized that
all the smartphone manufacturers were scrambling to build/acquire mobile
operating systems that would stack up to the iPhone OS. These handset
manufacturers were vulnerable, in other words, to the kind of offer Google
would present to them in the form of the open source Android OS. They needed
what Android had to offer and the risks involved with sacrificing so much
leverage over to Google (by relying on a third-party company for a key
component of their product) did not outweigh the benefits of the collusion-
like behavior all these manufacturers planned on partaking in by together
building-out a large mobile app store that could champion iPhone's app store.
Now that Google has released their very own handset, the Nexus One, it's
obvious why Google wanted as many Android handsets in hands as possible:
higher the market share, more developers willing to build apps, the more apps
in the Android app store the better the Nexus One looks in light of iPhone's
enormously successful app store, the more Nexus One handsets Google will sell.

Google has always explained that they give Android away because it will
encourage more usage of their web services. But after Nexus One, it's obvious
Google has more of a vested interest in Android than just "the more people on
the internet, the more money Google makes".

------
biafra
I think Google will do nothing about this. If the Yahoo users are not
satisfied jwith the non-google experience they will install apps from then
android market that do use Google or whatever they wish to use. It would be
interesting to see what happens if the first distributor is closing their
Android distribution so this is impossible for users. I hope the OHA forbids
labeling such a closed system Android.

------
rit
This is going to probably become a branding nightmare for Google.

I know many of the Android phones have "with Google" printed somewhere on the
casing (on my Eris it's on the battery door), and the Android brand has been
fairly well associated with the concept of "Google Phone".

AT&T is presumably free to switch the services out as they wish - but I have
to wonder if their replacement apps will provide a user experience that is at
all tolerable. If things break, don't work as expected, etc. the assumption
from the average user is going to be that Google is broken. They don't know or
care that AT&T has replaced their services with Bing/Yahoo/etc.

On top of which, users who hear the Android name may expect certain things
such as Google Voice, support for GMail, Google Calendar, etc. and be mighty
upset when they aren't there.

~~~
mortenjorck
"With Google" handsets such as the Motorola Droid or (obviously) the Nexus One
are part of the "Google Experience" program where the handset maker and
carrier have to agree to use Google's first-party version of Android bundled
with the proprietary Google apps.

Other handsets that aren't part of the Google Experience program, such as ones
from HTC that run the Sense UI or from Motorola that run the Blur frontend,
can do whatever they want within the terms of the open-source license.

------
pwim
Google created the android platform to drive forward technology and openness
on the mobile. As long as people can use Google search, access GMail, and most
importantly view Google ads, I doubt it's a big deal to Google.

------
zitterbewegung
Whats so bad about this they are still using android? I don't see this as a
problem since google still gets to own the handset market by using their
software.

------
periferral
as far as I'm concerned this is exactly how it should be if windows os's in
the EU gives user a choice of browser/search engine and does just push IE. The
same should apply to smartphones. I dislike the fact that google products are
so tied in into android. I should have the option to choose the apps I want
even if they are from google.

~~~
cheald
You do realize that an OS is basically a kernel with a bunch of supporting
applications that your vendor decides to ship with the kernel, right? If
you're going to be uppity about "picking your own apps" you're going to need
to be properly outraged about the vendor picking everything that makes your
system run before you ever install a third-party app.

------
Zak
This site doesn't load on Chrome 5.0.307.11 beta on x64 Linux with Adblock
1.3.30. All that loads are a search box and orange header/banner with the
ITWorld logo on a grey gradient background.

