To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Yeah but they can't use the Android name or Google services without permission. What they would be left with is Linux which they already have in the form of Tizen (formerly MeeGo) and the need to get permission from Oracle to use a license of Java for the cause.
That Java part is tricky, it is a mirracle that Google got the terms they did from Sun and now that Oracle owns it it is highly unlikely (read: not happening) they would give Samsung the proper licensing.
Without java they could not easily port existing Android apps. Oracle would no doubt demand a LOT of control so not only would they be no better off with the new software partner they would have an uphill battle in an already crowded market of mobile operating systems (iOS, Android, Windows mobile, BB10, Ubuntu mobile etc.)
Samsung do, and so they have a contract with google stipulating they can't fork Android.
Can you provide a citation for the terms of this Samsung-Google contract. Or, was your claim that Samsung can't fork Android purely speculation with nothing tangible behind it?





Member since:
2011-08-03
Amazon never commercialized Android devices.
Samsung do, and so they have a contract with google stipulating they can't fork Android.