I don’t understand why Google didn’t just made Android closed source. They would’ve made custom roms impossible and therefore more able to control and spy on it’s users. Why did Google made Android open source, while Microsoft’s Windows is still closed source to this day?

    • Matte@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      let’s say google didn’t care and closed their software anyways. who would have sued them? and how would they find about it, since the source code is not public?

      • insomniac@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a lot of money wrapped up in the Linux ecosystem. They would be no shortage of people to sue them. It would also be pretty hard to hide that your operating system is secretly Linux. The operating system image can be pulled off the phone and inspected. It would be a massive effort and probably futile to obscure. On top of that, Google has a lot of employees and someone would whistle blow. They would have to really go draconian locking things down.

  • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keeping it “open” makes it much easier to find partners willing to make phones with it, increasing market share. That was probably the only way to catch up with Apple.

    I put “open” in quotes because large parts are actually closed source and more and more of the open source parts are being deprecated in favor of new closed source replacements like this: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1516202-google-sabotages-open-source-android-and-custom-roms-by-deprecating-open-source-built-in-dialer-and-messaging-apps/

  • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You can’t take an open source project closed source, not easily. They are usually published under a license that makes sure they stay open source.

    Google didn’t create android, they bought out its creator. That didn’t mean they got to own the code. Plus it’s built on top of, and still runs, the linux kernel, which is also open source.

    It’s the same for chrome, chromium is open source to this day, but that’s also one of the reasons why it’s so wide-spread. Anyone can use the code, so they do. But google didn’t make it, it existed before their involvement.

  • WhoRoger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Pretty much everything is based on open source these days. Apple’s macOS and iOS are BSD, which, unlike Linux’s GPL, allows them to not provide the source for changes.

    Everything else then runs Linux, so it was a natural choice for Android, as it’s more lightweight than Unix like BSD, and better suited for mobile and low-power devices.

    Windows is a bit of an oddball. First off, a lot of its code and philosophy is taken from elsewhere. The original DOS was bought for peanuts under a ruse. A lot of original Windows came from Apple’s OS (which was originally stolen by Apple from Xerox) of the time that MS had access to due to making Office for Mac.

    Then for the NT family (which includes everything up to W10), Microsoft stole a lot of code from IBM and their OS/2, when they collaborated. And some other stuff from BSD, without telling anybody. Which is why the NT line managed to stay relatively good for so long.

    Basically Windows is a hodge-podge of other systems, which MS has managed to push thanks to their predatory business practices and eventual monopoly. It’s been like that forever.

    If there’s any good MS product on desktop, it’s bought or stolen from somewhere else. If it’s shit, it’s their own.

    • esty@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Windows 11 is also descended from NT isn’t it? Or is it considered too different now?

  • Aurix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Android is effectively closed source anyways. If you use this OS without Google Media Services, you will be effectively locked out of almost any app, system, service unless it works in a browser.

    • 8565@lemmy.quad442.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t even remotely accurate. You can always use degoogled Android. There’s Fdroid for most apps you really need and APK installs for any others

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If your use case revolves around a limited amount of apps and features, I can see how that would work. If you travel the world, experiment with new services etc. you might end up that the only way to obtain the required service or information is an app, which mandates GMS, which goes for an absurd amount of programs, and if you don’t have that, that’s it. No access to the service or information in the middle of the road and sometimes nowhere. I used a degoogled system. It is everything, but certainly not everyday usable. As a secondary phone perfectly fine, but not as a primary.

        Of course you could start a debate with the developers of why their public or event service relies on Google, but good luck until that is implemented when you are locked out right now.

        • 8565@lemmy.quad442.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You just have to commit and be willing to selfhost stuff to replace stuff. If you are unwilling to selfhost then degoogled is harder

  • Rik@laguna.chat
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, Windows isn’t that popular in the computer scene. Linux is by far more popular for servers, IoT devices (payment terminals, heartrate monitors…) and critical systems. But Windows has an edge in the PC scene. But to be honest a Apple Mac is also in the formfactor PC. These charts are always way of, just because their definition and monitoring techniques are not trustworthy.

    The problem with Linux: it is opensource and free, and everyone can rebrand it. But at the same time everyone wants to make a euro out of it. There are a lot of companies that misuse its license by closing the source.

  • Yubishi@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In a nutshell Android uses Linux as it’s base so I don’t believe they could make it closed source, where Microsoft Windows, like Apple MacOS, have always used their “own” kernel allowing them the flexibility to keep their software closed source or source available.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Kernel is irrelevant. By the way, MacOS kernel is open source and is derived from one of BSDs.

      • Yubishi@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        MacOS is derived from Darwin but heavily modified and now closed source. While GPL is copy left, BSD has no such requirement so you can effectively make your derivative OS closed source, which NeXT and subsequently Apple did.

    • minorninth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Android doesn’t have to be open-source. Just because it uses the Linux kernel doesn’t mean the rest of the OS has to be open-source.

      Android is open-source because Google wanted it to be. They wanted to monetize it differently, not by charging money for the OS.

      • Yubishi@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Doesn’t this contradict GPL? Since Android was built on top of the Linux kernel.

        • minorninth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No. The GPL for Linux applies to the Linux kernel.

          GPL only says that one particular program has to stay open. It doesn’t say that everything else on the same computer has to be GPL.

          Most Linux distros include software with a wide variety of licensed. Many people run commercial software on top of Linux.

  • peereboominc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Android, Windows and macos all have different ways to make money.

    Windows: sell windows as a product. Mac: sell hardware Android: use Google services too gain data and sell ads. Try to make the os as widly spread as possible.

  • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Even though Android has lots of open source code in it, many core components are actually proprietary. Just look at the state of Replicant, and you’ll see how much can actually be done with just the FOSS parts. It’s not really daily driver material just yet.

  • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I remember too that google had to pivot HARD and FAST! They got blindsided by iOS and the initial iPhone. There’s a video of the original google phone OS that was a project in development and I remember people getting excited about. But then the iPhone was released, and google had to quickly pivot to a whole new paradigm for touch screen and virtual keyboards. My guess is it was an initial exploration project that they just had to lean into hard and did t have time to convert to proprietary implementations or they were just using what was readily available. It really is a wonder that androind was able to compete with iOS so quickly.

    • rm_dash_r_star@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It really is a wonder that androind was able to compete with iOS so quickly.

      Probably it’s only due to people like me that refuse to be extorted by Apple Inc. Instead I’m extorted by Google, but at least it’s not Apple.