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 535497
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Interesting
by jared_wilkes on Mon 17th Sep 2012 19:20 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Interesting"
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

Except we don't have the contract or independent verification that OHA membership is predicated on not using Android code in non-Android OSes and/or not using Android-app compatibility unless in 100% form and/or not hosting pirated apps in competing stores and/or... whatever other excuses Rubin has used.

We know they need to comply with Google's Android compatibility compliance when producing Android phones, but we've never had our eyes on an OHA agreement. Moreover, we can demonstrate that Lenovo has been violating such an agreement for as much as 3 years if it does exist (and depending on when they joined the OHA). And further evidence of another OHA member doing the same thing as Acer.

Here's the vagueries we actually get from Google directly:

"What have members of the Alliance committed to?

All members of the Alliance have committed to making the initial version of the platform a commercial success. Some companies have contributed significant intellectual property to the Alliance that will be released under the Apache v2 Open Source license. Others are working to make sure their chipsets support the platform. Handset manufacturers and mobile operators are working to develop handsets based on the platform. Commercialization partners are working with the industry to support the platform via a professional services model."

http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_faq.html

Didn't see them mention much in terms of commitments beyond "to making the initial version of the platform a commercial success" -- which apparently every member besides Samsung seems to be failing to fulfill.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Interesting
by JAlexoid on Tue 18th Sep 2012 03:22 in reply to "RE[8]: Interesting"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

We don't have independent verification of the contract(and likely will never have), but we have facts(nasty buggers)
A) Allyun is an Android incomaptible, yet "compatible" OS
B) Acer was making their device with that OS
C) Acer cancelled the launch of that device when Google said something to acer
D) Acer is in OHA

Which one would contradict that Acer and Google have a contract that has anti-fragmentation clauses? Or new anti-fragmentation clauses that were added a year back.(Remember that?)

Or are you just trying to rationalize your stance on something?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Interesting
by jared_wilkes on Tue 18th Sep 2012 03:55 in reply to "RE[9]: Interesting"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

E) Haier released an Aliyun phone in June
F) Haier continues to sell and support the Aliyun phone
G) Haier is a member of the OHA

Reply Parent Score: 2