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 535451
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Wait a minute
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 12:32 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Wait a minute"
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

If they stay in the OHA but stop making new Aliyun devices then you have your answer.


That's nonsense. I already have my answer. I already have proof that 2 OHA members are doing exactly what Google claims is not permitted. Either Google doesn't care, doesn't know its own rules, doesn't enforce its rules, doesn't have these rules, or are being complete hypocrites, changing the rules when it really matters. Either way, it seems very clear that OHA members may not believe that they are required to only support one true Android.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Wait a minute
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 14:22 in reply to "RE[8]: Wait a minute"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

LePhone/oPhone is not based on Google Android. Please read up on Wikipedia for example.

To the otger Aliyun OS case: I doubt any of them OHA members will in future bring out any device running Aliyun. That may also explain Alibabas try to make tgis a public case.

You can see Alibabas mind on that in there last reply. Stating Aliyun is not a Android fork but using just some opensource parts of Android. And my cat eat my homework. Sureeeeeee.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Wait a minute
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 14:43 in reply to "RE[9]: Wait a minute"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

No, you are incorrect, oPhone most assuredly contains Android code.

LePhone is a different initiative than oPhone (oPhone has largely failed over the last 3 years) is 100% most-assuredly an Android fork that is not fully compatible.

No one but Google has to explain their inconsistency with respect to Haier. It seems perfectly reasonable that OHA members felt perfectly free to release Aliyun phones as Google/OHA had already permitted it.

I'm sure they will try to restrict other OHA members in the future -- it doesn't change that they've been inconsistent and that they do not have clear rules or enforcement of them.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[10]: Wait a minute
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 14:47 in reply to "RE[9]: Wait a minute"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Stating Aliyun is not a Android fork but using just some opensource parts of Android. And my cat eat my homework. Sureeeeeee.


Why isn't that perfectly reasonable? (I'm not suggesting that I actually believe Alibaba, but I think that's a perfectly reasonable arguement.)

For example, Google argues that OHA members can use competing OSes but not parts of Android. But non-OHA members are perfectly free to emulate Android apps and/or include AOSP code in their OSes. Does that mean that OHA members may someday be forbidden from using competing OSes? Certainly, it's a reasonable possibility -- the only question is when Google would decide to move the line again. One would wonder how quickly BlackBerry could be considered "against the rules."

Edited 2012-09-17 14:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3