zlacker

>>joseph+(OP)
>This does not mean that Google is making Android a closed-source platform, but rather that the open-source aspect will only be released when a new branch is released to AOSP with those changes, including when new full versions or maintenance releases are finished.

I'll believe it when I see it. These days, words are basically meaningless from these large tech companies. Actions are what matter.

at the very least, I'm not convinced this internal branch and AOSP will be close to feature parity if they do throw some stuff out.

>>johnny+N8
No OEM is interested in AOSP builds, because no one is going to buy an Android phone without Google Play Services, which is required for many popular apps to work (banking, games). There were some Chinese OEMs that ran an Android build and have unofficial ways to get Play Store working (Boox eReaders for example), but those are increasingly rare now, as years of sanctions has led to Huawei de-Googling itself fast, with others following.

>>rchaud+We
Kindle Fire? Your smart TV? Your car infotainment? Android is everywhere even without Google

>>rozab+hi
Android TV is not AOSP, it is an Android variant actively developed by Google and requires Google Play Services.

Kindle Fire is based on AOSP, that was my mistake. I will say Amazon is a rare OEM in this regard; they're tablet-only, and happy with AOSP because they have their own app store that don't need Play Services integration.

>>rchaud+Yj
In the tablet / phone world where end users expect to install applications from the playstore yes but there are many other device types that do use AOSP.

For instance some parking meters / train ticketing machines / payment terminals run Android. source: I work for company that makes some of them though we are moving away from Android to more classical embedded Linux.

Google play services doesn't matter in these contexts.

>>mfuzze+8t
Interesting? So Android replaced Windows CE in some cases?