“Here’s a [snippet from a] document from a Google-internal presentation that Judge Alsup (the federal judge presiding over Oracle’s patent and copyright infringement lawsuit against Google) didn’t want to be withheld from the public,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents.
• Do not develop in the open. Instead, make source code available after innovation is complete
• Lead device concept: Give early access to the software to partners who build and distribute devices to our specification (ie, Motorola and Verizon). They get a non-contractual time to market advantage and in return they align to our standard.
Mueller writes, “If Google already intended to give privileged access to Motorola in the past, how can anyone seriously believe that if the acquisition of Motorola Mobility was closed, a wholly owned Google subsidiary named Motorola Mobility would not enjoy key privileges over its competitors? …There are reasons for which some Android device makers (unlike Samsung, which indicated plans to invest more money in other platforms) officially declare that everything’s going to be fine. But the document I showed above removes whatever little doubt anyone had left that Google certainly plays favorites with certain Android OEMs, and if the MMI deal goes through, it will play favorites with only one: its own subsidiary, of course.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Google’s expensive attempt to be Apple’s clone – September 7, 2011
Google’s acquisition of Motorola set to doom Android, Chrome OS – August 17, 2011
Keep shooting Google! I think you have a toe or two left.
But at least Android is open! …. ?
Yeah, that concept got pulverized when Google yanked Android 3, (what was it called? ‘Pumpkin Head’ or something?), out of their open source project. Way to go.
Spine tinglingly EVIL!
Android is open but it’s more open to some.
It’s open only if Google has sole control over. It is not interested to join any consortium to promote open-source wares if it cannot pushed its ads business on any platform. For example, Wikipedia is as open and altruistic any open-sourced advocate could wish for. But because Wikipedia prevents all advertisements, Google could not profit from this openness. What did it do to sabotage Wikipedia? It decided to have a competing product, known as knol, to kill off Wikipedia. There were other projects that Google was invited to contribute, such as the Open Content Alliance to scan books and the consortium to bid for Nortel patents. But Google wanted to go it alone and did want to cooperate with anyone so that it can have a monopoly in the ads business. Therefore Google is not open as it wants people to think that it is. It wants to be the sole owner of any open-source enterprise so it can ride high on the ads franchise and blocked other browsers on a level playing field.
Hardware vendors will stay with Google as long as it makes them money. The facts disclosed this week that Dell, Amazon, Samsung, and all the Chinese manufactures are dropping Google’s version of Android is just a coincidence.
Agreed. This merely confirms what the OEMs had to know already. And I think it has more to do with lack of viable alternatives and switching costs than it does with the money they make. Their earnings are pretty modest.
Probably will not matter very much. The new trend going forward will NOT be to use Android “as released” by Google. It will be to “take” a cut of Android and build a “fork” that is essentially a custom mobile OS free of Google’s services.
Amazon’s unreleased Kindle tablet reportedly uses an old version of Android (even earlier than 2.2) as its base, and Amazon’s customizations make it unrecognizable as “Android.” Chinese companies are doing the same thing for their markets.
The end result… Even more fragmentation. It will be iPhone’s mostly unfragmented market share versus many distinctly separate mobile OS’s based on Android.
For consumers, the key question will be whether all these forked versions will run apps or not.
And the answer to that question is “most probably will”, which is no answer at all. Device makers will make their unrecognisable versions of Android, making sure they test 20 or 30 most popular apps out there. They will then advertise them as phones “Running Android Apps*” (with that dreaded asterisk pointing to a disclaimer about not all apps running, or something equally ambiguous).
The fragmentation is about to get escalated to a whole new level.
But…. but…. but….
YES! Fragmandroid here we come. Whole universes are going to split. Unfortunately for Google it’s the Android universe.
Wow. Didn’t see that coming.
Google — we’re all about the open™
“You keep using that word. It do not think it means what you think it means.”
Plethora.
Ok, I’m drunk. Wrong movie. But you get what I mean (?)
Inconceivable! And stop with the rhymes, I mean it!
Anyone want a peanut?
Hey – why just a LEAD time. Now they own Moto, they can transition to Android being Moto only. All the others built up the “Android brand” now Google can capitalize on it.
All for one and all for one!
This is actually a Very Real Possibility. It could have been their plan all along. It really is the only way to compete with Apple. But they no have no taste or the ability to cross good engineering and humanities.
“Do not develop in the open.”
“Give early access to the software to partners…”
How deliciously EVIL of you Google. BWAHAHAHA!
Why is anyone surprised? Didn’t Google originally release beta versions of Android to 50 of its closest developers rather than all developers? This is a pattern of favoritism which doesn’t fit well with the notion of “open”.
It’s open only if you suck Google’s dick.
“It’s open only if you suck Google’s dick.”
That is disgusting!
Open is the only way phones should go. No one wants Apple’s Closed Gay Designed iPhones.
acgdi
Android Rules!
you clearly have no idea of what “open” means in this context.
Have fun with those viruses and malware and rootkits on those beta google phones.
… Oh and your comment @ Android Rules is gay. ≥Bigoted scapegoat term of the age≤ 😛
Android Rules:
1) Steal
2) Screw your friends
3) Do only evil
“No one wants Apple’s Closed Gay Designed iPhones.”
Have you ever seen Jonny Ive, the bloke who actually designs Apple products?
Quite apart from the fact he’s married with kids, he’s a muscular stocky skinhead who would probably punch you repeatedly in the face for a remark like that.
Schmuck.
Even Dr. Evil warns, Don’t be Google.℠
“Do not develop in the open” needs to be Google’s new slogan. It sure fits!
I like our strategy, I like it a lot ….. Ah I mean, we will keep it open …..
….. Ah I mean, I’m not sure, we will have to see how it evolves …..
hello, OEM suckers?
it’ll be fun to see how the “open” fandroids rationalize their way out of this one.
Don’t be Evil my arse! Goople you guys are awesome. Fooled just about everyone with your bullshite message! LMAO
This is so bad it’s making Ballmer look good. Another plus for Apple!
I think I’d like to hold off judgment on a thing like that, sir, until all the facts are in…I don’t think it’s quite fair to condemn the whole program because of a single slip up, sir.
General Buck Turgidson from Dr Strangelove!
Its been like this since the beginning im not sure what is supposed to be new here.
They have never developed android in a typical “open source” model and HTC, moto and other partners always got the latest source before anyone else.
Sounds like business as usual
Written before Goog ever thought of buying Moto.
But prescient? Let’s see if they buy Vizio next.