Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Sep 2012 16:53 UTC
Google There's a bit of a story going on between Google, Acer, and Alibaba, a Chinese mobile operating system vendor. Acer wanted to ship a device with Alibaba's operating system, but Google asked them not to, and Acer complied. The reason is that Acer is a member of the Open Handset Alliance, which prohibits the promotion of non-standard Android implementations - exactly what Alibaba is shipping. On top of that, Alibaba's application store hosts pirated Android applications, including ones from Google.
Thread beginning with comment 535420
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Interesting
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 10:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Interesting"
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

Aliyun OS is not part of the Android ecosystem, so of course Aliyun OS is not, and does not have to be, compatible with Android.


Correct and now the news: Google agrees on that. Google has no legal way to not agree on that.

Aliyun does NOT have to be compatible just like Amazon Kindle does NOT have to be compatible. Google cannot sue and has NO legal way to demand that.

And they don't. What they did was to form the OHA, formulate compatibility as target there. All OHA members agreed. Alibaba is not a OHA member and so they did not agree but even when they could decide right NOW its not there goal any longer and leave the OHA.

But this is not about Alibaba. This is about Acer which are in the OHA and they like to stay there. To be allowed to stay in the OHA Acer needs to fullfit the goal the OHA defined: compatibility. So, either Acer does not see that as priority, does the incompatible Aliyun and leaves, or they keep to define it as priority, abort Aliyun (as long as its incompatible - what can also mean Acer works on making it compatible) and stay in the OHA. Acer cannot have both cause both are exclusive. This is what google made clear and they are right about it.

You cannot define something as your target and expect to profit from things associated to it while doing the exact opposite without consequences (except your are a politican what is worse enough).

Google made clear Acer need to decide. Either they go for compatibility, and can stay in the OHA, or they don't, and need to leave the OHA. Acer decided.

Edited 2012-09-17 10:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[8]: Interesting
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 10:49 in reply to "RE[7]: Interesting"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

It's not clear that the OHA actually forbids what Acer is doing. For one thing, another OHA member is already producing both Android and Aliyun phones -- Haier. Secondly, Lenovo was one of the first OHA members to sell Android devices while selling an incompatible fork at the same time, the oPhone, several years ago.

At best, Google either doesn't know what their own rules are for the OHA or they've been doing a shit job applying them or they are arbitrarily creating new rules now for some members based on their significance.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[9]: Interesting
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 12:32 in reply to "RE[8]: Interesting"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

It is even very clear. See the Android compatibility terms linked in this article. That terms arn't exactly new but maybe, in the case of Haier, where not enforced that stri t so far. Now they are and maybe Haier got the same choice but unlike Acer/Alibaba they stay silent and not drag all the dirt into public. Original chinese business style.

The oPhone seems to be based on a Android version that existed before the OHA was formed and was since then driven forward by Chinese Mobile with an own SDK and incompatible ecosystem (eg no google or Android apps) which has only 600 apps so far but those are highly tailored to the chinese market. Hardly the same or even in a similar situation.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Interesting
by Windows Sucks on Mon 17th Sep 2012 11:29 in reply to "RE[7]: Interesting"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

So then Acer would not be able to then sell any other OS? Like the BB 10 OS which has a Android run time? I am confused here, the point of the OHA is to make sure ANDROID meets a standard. But if the OS is not Android as in this case then the OHA still covers it??

And there are other companies in the OHA who sell Aliyun OS and have not been "threatened" by Google with expulsion. (Haier for example)

Make up your mind Google is it because Acer is a bigger seller of Android?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Interesting
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 12:43 in reply to "RE[8]: Interesting"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

The Android runtime shipped with BB10 is not Android but a compatibility layer like Wine is for win32. In fact dex do not run on BB10 but you need to repackage nust like you can run some jar's on Android but need to repackage to dex.

That, compatibibility layers, is another story. Even Microsoft does not try to prevent e.g. Linux-Distributions or OSX to offer compatibility with Wine, Samba, etc.

The point is more that if you are going to offer a forked Android (and to get this right: all Androids are forks cause they are taken+extended with own stuff and noone ships an Android vanilla) AND if you are member in the OHA and agreed to the compatibility goal then you need to make sure your fork is compatible.

It just does not matter how much extra-things you put in your fork, how much you changed as long as certain criterias are fullfit. Two of them Aliyun failed:

1. Pass the Android compatibility test-suite.
2. Open the sources of your endproduct so all extensions, modifications, drivers are available to all others just like the Android Vanilla (and all the forks of other OHA mabufactors) are too.

Reply Parent Score: 2