Until now Google didn't really care about manufacturer skins/customizations, because at the end of the day, they were still getting growth with Android, and to put their services on each one of those devices. So no matter what they might've said to the users that they care most about them, it's been pretty clear that they didn't care enough to force out all OEM customizations.
But this time - well, this time it might be different, because instead of being complementary to their services, this one actually threatens them. It might finally make them ban OEM/3rd party customizations, and get everyone to use stock Android, just like every PC out there has to use the same Windows interface.
As an Android user who would like to see more phones without OEM customizations, Facebook Home couldn't make me any happier, if it actually forces Google into banning it and any other such customizations, starting with Android 5.0.
They can't stop anyone from customizing Android outright, but they reserved the right to ban them from the Open Handset Alliance, a lá Amazon.
The closest I've seen to straight up bans from Google are against malware/virus apps and selective bans against violators of their ToS (some ad-blocking apps were banned for using a workaround, but other apps that used that workaround were not banned).
Don't forget that Windows is closed source.
While they could potentially close off the platform going forward, they can't retroactively un-open source code.
This article seems to miss the main threat of Facebook Home - it's pushing aside Google+ integration and subverting Google's strategy to weave G+ into their user's experience. While that is eventually about advertising, the advertising is a far removed long term goal.
Nonetheless, the Play Store is the beating heart of an android phone, and as long as all the Facebook phones are running it I think Google's going to be pretty philosophical about this. It's a lot better than Facebook launching their own phone or teaming up with Samsung on Tizen or something like that. And while ever Facebook is playing on Google's turf, Google can afford to give them a pretty long leash, knowing they always hold the reigns through the Play Store requirements, and their ability to out code Facebook on their own platform is always going to give them a big advantage.
>Google+ integration and ... Google's strategy to weave G+ into their user's experience.
does this exist? i've got the google+ app on my phone, and i quite like it, but i wouldn't call it an integrated experience. i get notifications and it installs itself as a sharing option, but that's just like any other app. google+ isn't deeply integrated with android at all.
This certainly advances an interesting argument. That Facebook Home could capture an Android device. It raises a really interesting question of where the ad revenue goes. Which is to say if Home starts showing you ads ("Your friend Johnny just got a copy of Halo9 want to buy a copy and play him?") that ad revenue won't go to Google obviously any more than Ad revenue collected by web sites that happen to be accessed by Chrome.
Here's my off the wall prediction, Google makes an equivalent product for Google+ but some how figures out how to credit you with the bandwidth you use while its on your home screen.
Don't forget that Google's primary goal with Android was to avoid an Apple (or anyone else's) monoculture. That was a serious risk when the iPhone came out and it no longer is.
We're now looking at a market likely split between Apple, Android proper, Android forks and maybe some market share for RIM and Microsoft.
That's a lot less horrific than Google being shut out of mobile entirely which was a not-implausible scenario at one stage.
Android started before the iPhone was announced. Google's stated goal with Android was to build a rich, common phone platform to enable the smartphone revolution. Remember that before Android, most phone's came with shitty little browsers and little-to-no room for third-party software.
When Google bought Android, very few people had done any amount of mobile web browsing. Now, mobile makes up a notable fraction of total web usage.
Google's accomplished its goal so far with Android, but it certainly didn't start out to prevent an iOS monoculture - it did to prevent a carrier-dominated oligarchy of shitty web-less feature phones. (More strategically, it's made sure that when the mobile web became important, Google services were still front-and-center.)
This is interesting for Google. It one way it's huge validation. Afterall, Facebook is working with Android and not Apple. Android still in general suffers from at best apps on par with Apple's and usually they feel a little behind. So this is significant from a simple PR coup perspective. Facebook's big announcement evolves around Android!
Yet as noted in this article it comes with it's own set of challenges which are well documented here. In general, I think Google is the winner here - only because I don't see Home being that much of a threat as a concept. I think Facebook has now positioned itself as a "necessary evil" in our culture. In general people use it to keep up on friends and family. But embracing the entire experience a la home probably makes you look like more of a dork than a hipster.
That is probably correct. There is no kosher way to replace a lock screen if you are not the OEM (or have rooted).
Home is more than another launcher, though. In some ways it defines a new class of application software for Android - a cooperating suite of apps, with a coordinated set of interfaces.
> The upside of HTC First: will be the first HTC device to have native Android UI - if you turn off Home.
How soon we forget. HTC did make a little phone called the Nexus One. Prior to that they also made the T-Mobile G1 / HTC Dream.
That being said, I don't know if the HTC First will really have a native Android UI underneath. It could just as easily be "Sense themed to look AOSP" like the (US) T-Mobile G2. That probably depends on how much Facebook cares about what's underneath.
FB is in direct competition with Google. So Google has to respond. If they ban it, then everyone will fork the source and it'll be the end of Android as we know it. If FB is successful (which I have serious doubts) then, I suspect the same thing will happen. Everyone will fork and "brand" their version.
And since Android is already Google branded their only choice is to integrate Google +. Google + isn't exactly a runaway success now.
Now that FB has changed the rules.... if I was Verizon I'd be thinking "why the hell am I giving Google ad revenue"?
Google is gonna get squeezed. And the funny thing is, they did it to themselves.
[+] [-] mtgx|13 years ago|reply
But this time - well, this time it might be different, because instead of being complementary to their services, this one actually threatens them. It might finally make them ban OEM/3rd party customizations, and get everyone to use stock Android, just like every PC out there has to use the same Windows interface.
As an Android user who would like to see more phones without OEM customizations, Facebook Home couldn't make me any happier, if it actually forces Google into banning it and any other such customizations, starting with Android 5.0.
[+] [-] hayksaakian|13 years ago|reply
They can't stop anyone from customizing Android outright, but they reserved the right to ban them from the Open Handset Alliance, a lá Amazon.
The closest I've seen to straight up bans from Google are against malware/virus apps and selective bans against violators of their ToS (some ad-blocking apps were banned for using a workaround, but other apps that used that workaround were not banned).
Don't forget that Windows is closed source.
While they could potentially close off the platform going forward, they can't retroactively un-open source code.
[+] [-] untog|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zigurd|13 years ago|reply
Amazon saved Google from having Apple run away with the tablet business.
Tighter grip, more star systems slip through, and all that.
[+] [-] zmmmmm|13 years ago|reply
Nonetheless, the Play Store is the beating heart of an android phone, and as long as all the Facebook phones are running it I think Google's going to be pretty philosophical about this. It's a lot better than Facebook launching their own phone or teaming up with Samsung on Tizen or something like that. And while ever Facebook is playing on Google's turf, Google can afford to give them a pretty long leash, knowing they always hold the reigns through the Play Store requirements, and their ability to out code Facebook on their own platform is always going to give them a big advantage.
[+] [-] notatoad|13 years ago|reply
does this exist? i've got the google+ app on my phone, and i quite like it, but i wouldn't call it an integrated experience. i get notifications and it installs itself as a sharing option, but that's just like any other app. google+ isn't deeply integrated with android at all.
[+] [-] ChuckMcM|13 years ago|reply
Here's my off the wall prediction, Google makes an equivalent product for Google+ but some how figures out how to credit you with the bandwidth you use while its on your home screen.
Interesting times indeed.
[+] [-] niggler|13 years ago|reply
This is the bothersome part of the ad proposal: who pays for the bandwidth? And I'm guessing facebook is expecting users to bear that cost.
[+] [-] danielhunt|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andybak|13 years ago|reply
We're now looking at a market likely split between Apple, Android proper, Android forks and maybe some market share for RIM and Microsoft.
That's a lot less horrific than Google being shut out of mobile entirely which was a not-implausible scenario at one stage.
[+] [-] bsimpson|13 years ago|reply
When Google bought Android, very few people had done any amount of mobile web browsing. Now, mobile makes up a notable fraction of total web usage.
Google's accomplished its goal so far with Android, but it certainly didn't start out to prevent an iOS monoculture - it did to prevent a carrier-dominated oligarchy of shitty web-less feature phones. (More strategically, it's made sure that when the mobile web became important, Google services were still front-and-center.)
[+] [-] jusben1369|13 years ago|reply
Yet as noted in this article it comes with it's own set of challenges which are well documented here. In general, I think Google is the winner here - only because I don't see Home being that much of a threat as a concept. I think Facebook has now positioned itself as a "necessary evil" in our culture. In general people use it to keep up on friends and family. But embracing the entire experience a la home probably makes you look like more of a dork than a hipster.
[+] [-] radley|13 years ago|reply
The upside of HTC First: will be the first HTC device to have native Android UI - if you turn off Home.
[+] [-] Zigurd|13 years ago|reply
Home is more than another launcher, though. In some ways it defines a new class of application software for Android - a cooperating suite of apps, with a coordinated set of interfaces.
[+] [-] fpgeek|13 years ago|reply
How soon we forget. HTC did make a little phone called the Nexus One. Prior to that they also made the T-Mobile G1 / HTC Dream.
That being said, I don't know if the HTC First will really have a native Android UI underneath. It could just as easily be "Sense themed to look AOSP" like the (US) T-Mobile G2. That probably depends on how much Facebook cares about what's underneath.
Edit: Apparently HTC's OpenSense SDK includes lock screen APIs (see http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/opensense-sdk/lock-screen/lo... ). That seems like another argument for a Sense-derivative.
[+] [-] mikecane|13 years ago|reply
And we saw that both iOS and Android incorporated Synergy.
So I don't think it'll be too long before both iOS and Android introduce multitasking chat.
If anything, we should thank FB for forcing their hands and moving everyone forward.
Home's advantage might not last for long, in other words.
[+] [-] Irishsteve|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] crag|13 years ago|reply
And since Android is already Google branded their only choice is to integrate Google +. Google + isn't exactly a runaway success now.
Now that FB has changed the rules.... if I was Verizon I'd be thinking "why the hell am I giving Google ad revenue"?
Google is gonna get squeezed. And the funny thing is, they did it to themselves.
[+] [-] andybak|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]