Comment by ajross
8 hours ago
> Big difference.
Not from the perspective of competition, as I see it. Like, if you want to compete with Apple by using part of its platform for your own stuff, you can't at all. But you can with Google, just not all of it and in all ways.
Point being: this is just another platform flame. People with one kind of phone in their pocket are outraged at the maker of the other thing.
No, it is different. They are using their market power over Android to prevent OEMs from selling other mobile OSs.
Apple doesn’t prevent other OEMs from selling phones.
> They are using their market power over Android to prevent OEMs from selling other mobile OSs.
That... is pretty spun, especially with regard to the Microsoft comparison upthread to which I responded.
They aren't trying to restrict "other mobile OSs", they're specifically saying GrapheneOS, and in general any AOSP-derived system which is designed to interoperate with the GMS frameworks.
Like, even AOSP alone would be fine, c.f. Fire or Harmony which never got this attention. GrapheneOS is specifically in violation because it includes a feature to suck down and essentially "pirate" an unlicensed copy of the GMS suite, thus making the phone into the practical equivalent of a Pixel.
That is what Google objects to, because they sell GMS as a product and aren't interested in their downstream OEMs "giving it away" for free by bundling a third party product that doesn't license it.
Basically GrapheneOS, as it exists right now, just can't be shipped as a commercial product. There's no license for the magic stuff they claim to support.