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 535460
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[11]: Interesting
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 13:06 UTC in reply to "RE[10]: Interesting"
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

No, my point is that Haier will very likely not bring new Aliyun OS devices to market. They may got the same memo Acer got but unlike Acer did not forward it to Alibaba which dragged it into the public.

Second, for oPhone there exist following detail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPhone

"It is based on technologies initially developed by Android Inc., a firm later purchased by Google, and work done by the Open Handset Alliance."

This means oPhone is not based on Google Android but.on Android Inc Android. Not only legally a huge difference but also technical.

The second part of the sentence about the OHA is a bit missleading in that its not the OHA which developes the next Android version (but also not google alone, multiple partners.coperate there independent of the OHA). What it may mean (misses proper sources) are concepts, ideas or maybe even code (like from Lenovo itself). Hard to guess without proper sources. Do you have better ones? In any case oPhone was long before Google Android and has not much in common. Not even the SDK, the apps or anything else works there. It also will not have the/a Dalvik vm since that was introduced by google later on.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[12]: Interesting
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 13:13 in reply to "RE[11]: Interesting"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Why would Haier be permitted to release Aliyun phones for a little while but then stopped? Doesn't Google know their own rules?

Also, you keep ignoring the fact that oPhone is not old, pre-Android. Yes, it uses older Android code but it was released 2 years after the OHA was formed. Yes, that old Android code is still Android code.

And, thirdly, yes, the LePhone should also get Lenovo kicked out of the OHA, but that hasn't happened. I'm not going to waste my time educating you and Google about it.

I am merely questioning Google's inconsistency and lack of clarity.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[13]: Interesting
by cdude on Mon 17th Sep 2012 13:34 in reply to "RE[12]: Interesting"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Maybe they did not care? Maybe it was not on there radar? Maybe they just now realize that its not a single case but other OHA try to do the same and hence they have to do something NOW before all of the OHA do the same?

But yreally who cares? The OHA terms are known since a long time and just because google did not force them last year does not.mean they will never enforce them. That is even a legal fundament our whole system is build up on. Only if you keep on to ignore long enough you may get problems to enforce legally later. But this sin't even a legal case so...

For oPhone its irrelevant how ling it took to bring to the market. oPhone is not.based on google Android. Point. You not agree? Please provide sources that prove your point or accept the facts.

Reply Parent Score: 2