Sometimes I am wondering what Google employees think when they read headlines like this one. I mean they probably have no problem giving the personal data to Google, but at the same time many of them are probably open source proponents and would support a world where the Google services would be entirely optional to Android.
A few days ago I was thinking about a new smartphone and because my main problem with my current android is the outdated kernel and driver setup, I was searching for smartphone with open source drivers. Wikipedia tells us since the start of the Smartphone era about 22 phones had open source drivers (with the exception of the proprietary baseband firmware):
Doesn't look like something where you can select the hardware specifications you prefer. So I feel a little lost.
In general, I like Android but for my taste the Google services are too intrusive. Uploading my data before I had a chance to deactivate it is just unacceptable. Asking me every day to add photos to Maps sucks too. I can accept giving some of my information to Google to improve the product, but lately Google feels like the data mooch on my smartphone...
> Sometimes I am wondering what Google employees think when they read headlines like this one.
Hello Google employee here! I suspect we don't all have the same opinion but I can share my own since you asked. Note that I work in Cloud so I work in an area far far away from this stuff and opinions are obviously my own.
Frankly the headline makes me a little bit sad because of course I would like to make things which people are happy about. On the other hand, I also realize that it's not easy to make a product which fits every single person's use case, and in this case I suspect most this level of privacy is overkill for most people, and it's wonderful that there is something for those who want that extra privacy and security.
I also think it's awesome these people contribute security patches to AOSP!
> I mean they probably have no problem giving the personal data to Google, but at the same time many of them are probably open source proponents and would support a world where the Google services would be entirely optional to Android.
I like to think I'm a proponent of open source as I try to contribute but to be honest I don't actually think it really matters for Android to be independent of Google services because as far as I can tell, most people like Android with Google services?
Is there a reason that removing Google services would be better for the users? I can understand from a philosophical or ideological standpoint why it would be better but not really from a product point of view since I think I can confidently say 99% of Android users do not care or even know that it is open source..
>I like to think I'm a proponent of open source as I try to contribute but to be honest I don't actually think it really matters for Android to be independent of Google services because as far as I can tell, most people like Android with Google services?
People like Google services, but they're less enthusiastic about Google's data collection practices. My father, who is now retired from a career in semiconductor manufacturing and programming, was unaware of Google's practice of monitor users' credit cards [0] and was visibly uncomfortable when he was made aware of it. Google's terms of service were effectively changed in a manner that harmed him, but he has no recourse.
Google services are frequently useful, but let's not pretend that there are other good choices. Google offers their apps for free, and has immediate access to approximately one billion Android devices by mandating an app's inclusion. That's an impossibly high barrier for all but the largest companies.
> I like to think I'm a proponent of open source as I try to contribute but to be honest I don't actually think it really matters for Android to be independent of Google services because as far as I can tell, most people like Android with Google services?
That's exactly why it should be independent of Google services–it makes it too easy to make changes to benefit those who use Google services and harm those who don't in the name of "but it's great for most people…"
Actually, I think removing Google services by default is not what we have in mind here. So we are okay that most users like Android as it is. Well, I think many of them just don't know which information Google collects and if they would learn about, some would not want to share that information either, but that is something everyone has to care for themselfs.
We just want the options to opt-out of every Google service easily and use alternatives (without having to flash custom roms) and to have up-to-date kernels and drivers. So having closed source drivers actually reduces the security (missing updates after a few month) and life time aspects of the product (the device). With the Android market domination Google has, it could easily force the hardware manufacturers to produce devices with open source drivers.
You might be a Google employee, but you do not seem to be an Open source proponent. That's you prerogative, but you completely miss the point of the discussion if you ask why should users want to be independent from proprietary services. Sure, 99% don't want that and would click any colored and shiny button if it promises them a free Justin Bieber ringtone, but this is not the topic of the thread.
Cloud services are probably the thing that is the farthest away from being open-source non-proprietary software... and he is working on cloud services, so I can understand where he comes from...
While I understand what you were getting at, we actually do open source some of our software as well as contribute to an early open source project so I wouldn't say it's the FARTHEST away..
The software that you are open sourcing, is it software that allows you to access the back-end or are you actually releasing software that could allow someone else to start his own cloud service?
We have an incubator project for Kubernetes as well as software to access the backend.
I don't think our team is releasing software to let others start their own cloud service if I understand you correctly. Are you thinking of something like what GitLab does? If so our team isn't doing that sorry!
I prefer software that is open source. I like to contribute my time, effort, and money to open source software as well, at least that which I find useful and interesting.
I guess I'm not an open source proponent but just whatever you would call the above?
What would you consider to be an open source proponent? Someone who believes all source code should be open source?
> That's you prerogative, but you completely miss the point of the discussion if you ask why should users want to be independent from proprietary services
Well don't just leave me hanging.. what is the point of the discussion? Please do enlighten me.
> Sure, 99% don't want that and would click any colored and shiny button if it promises them a free Justin Bieber ringtone, but this is not the topic of the thread.
Isn't it? I mean the comment was literally asking for an opinion which I gave. I'm not sure I understand why this is off topic? Most businesses would be unbelievably successful if their product appealed to 99% of people.
From a cursory scan of the comments, it looks like people are frustrated about not having control over their devices. Right now, iOS and Android control the user, restricting freedom and choices. For example iOS won't let me record my screen while the Netflix application is running. Clearly this is to protect DRM interests, but the principle is that Apple has ultimate control over how my iPhone behaves. I cannot provide a false GPS location to apps. I can't lie about battery level. I can't lie about notification permissions or fool applications. We need to be able to lie to our devices to have freedom and control them.
So back to how this relates to an Android being tied to Google Play: you as the user don't have ultimate control over your device. And that means you don't fully own your device.
That's my perception of the main issues with control from Apple and Google. Lots of great software and hardware being produced, but we need to have more power over the operation of our gadgets.
There doesn't seem to be any point to this discussion for GP to miss because the premise was plainly incorrect. As multiple people have pointed out, Android itself is completely independent from proprietary services. If you buy a Google-flavored Android device (which is a spectrum itself), your device will come with proprietary services on it. That doesn't mean you have to use them, nor does it mean you have to have a Google-flavored Android build. You're free to use apps that use Pushy or some other third party push messaging service, OpenStreetMap or some other map provider, Bing or some other search provider, Fastmail or some other mail provider, etc.
> I like to think I'm a proponent of open source as I try to contribute but to be honest I don't actually think it really matters for Android to be independent of Google services because as far as I can tell, most people like Android with Google services?
Yeah but what about people who aren't most people? Are you saying they don't matter? That doesn't sound very open source.
Those people by definition aren't Googles customers. And Google is the one developing the OS. Maybe Apple will be more open to developing an OS for people that hate them? :)
Is Halium an old project? If it is, I imagine everything just got a whole lot easier with Project Treble and with the new six-year LTS Android kernels.
Google services are entirely optional to Android. See AOSP. This criticism appears often on HN, despite how little sense it makes. If you don't like the data that Google Maps collects, simply use another map application. I delete all the useless Google apps off my phone as soon as I get it and keep only the ones that are actually useful.
They mostly have their own version of it, just developed by Chinese companies and controlled by the government. From what I have seen, it's quite on par with Google Play Services.
And those APIs actually rely on things hosted on Google servers (Push notification system, fused location system, Google login and other come to mind) which can't exist without Googles involvement.
Making people implement their own services proved to be problematic, because most developers didn't care enough to optimize their services for low memory and battery usage, resulting in terrible battery life on Android devices. Since Android must compete against iOS, a central system had to be established to reach similar battery life.
>fused location system ... which can't exist without Googles involvement
That's kind of a cop-out though. It certainly could exist without Google's involvement if the location provider were a pluggable module within AOSP. microG does this - my phone supports the fused location API using Mozilla's location database instead of Google's. (There are other modules too, like a local database of cell towers if you're willing to dedicate some storage to it.)
Push notifications and Google login sure, but some of what's in the Play Services APIs should really be in AOSP, IMO.
EDIT: For that matter, you could even have the push provider available as a module too, even though Google's push service is the only one currently available.
Sure and you can use microG and other services on your Google free phone. I do agree that flashing firmware without Google services should be easier on devices, but the actors preventing that aren't Google (locked bootloaders are demanded by your American telcos like Verizon, DRM lockdown is demanded by the copyright lobby and SoC vendors refuse to release the kernel sources).
But in general, I don't get what your expectation is, that Google will spend millions developing an OS and then give it to competition or deliberately provide worse user experience than their main competitor?
In what way does that mean that Google services are required for Android? Lots of Linux games rely on Steam being present.
If you don't want Steam, don't use games that require it. If you don't want Google services like Google's Maps widget or its push messaging service or its game leaderboard, use apps that use another data source for maps and another persistent connection for push messages and another leaderboard service.
F-Droid and Amazon's App Store are filled entirely with apps that don't (can't) use Google's services, yet many on HN blindly continue to claim that this is not possible.
Except AOSP doesn't even pass the Android certification [edit: should be compatibility, not certification] test suite, so stage one of building non-Google Android is making AOSP actually work as it should. :(
It's mostly not functionality missing to pass the CTS, but just broken untested AOSP-only code (that is replaced by Google closed source code in Google builds).
These only fail because there is extra unused noop functionality in AOSP that CTS complains about (a bug in AOSP), not because Google services are required to pass CTS.
The point was that AOSP isn't a perfect base, because the Android team obviously don't care enough to actually test it, not that Google services are required.
That makes your first comment completely irrelevant with respect to its parent. It's also a stretch to say that you need to do anything to make AOSP work as it should simply because it contains extra noop APIs.
You might want to check out Eraser, made by Mapzen. Eraser is a Google Maps like app that uses OpenStreetMap data and is backed solely open source software and open data. It's a little rough around the edges (especially when it comes to transit routing).
Created an account to share this, as it seems not many people know...
You can use an AOSP such as lineage, or carbon. There are quite a few options.
Then, use fdroid and a play store alternative. You DO NOT need the google play services, such as microgapps, or opengapps. Even to use Google Maps! I use google maps by downloading maps anonymously with the Yalp store, and then I don't sign in. I don't have the so called high accuracy location, but I still have GPS, which, obviously, is sufficient. I can navigate easily in a large city, for example.
As far as I know google can't link me to any data that maps sends.
Spotify works fine, along with a half dozen other apps.
Signal can a bit of a pain, as it complains about not having a google api backend, which I think is for contacts. Again, the pain is worth it. And there are open source contact alternatives.
I can't get apps that I paid for, for that I would have to sign in with Yalp, which I haven't bothered with. The freedom is so much better.
Everything else works, banking apps, Firefox, Dropbox, etc.
I'm using a Sony Xperia Z2. The battery is AMAZING! I really wish a largish company would pick this idea up, and start selling phones without google. Sony? The freedom and privacy is worth a lot in my opinion.
Well, Fdroid is great and with the automatic upgrade extension (totally optional) really easy to use. But using an Android without access to the Play Store is just kinda weird.
So yes, you can remove Google completely from your smartphone, but then many things are getting much more complicated. So I don't want to remove Google completely from my phone. I just want to have easy options to turn things off I do not like.
I just wish Google would respect their users wishes a little more and would keep developing their services in a direction which would embrace community contributions to the eco system.
> So yes, you can remove Google completely from your smartphone, but then many things are getting much more complicated.
> I just wish Google would respect their users wishes a little more [...] I just want to have easy options to turn things off I do not like.
This is not how things work in reality. People/corporations don't do what you want just because you're wishing it. If you are unwilling to tolerate a little bit of discomfort why should they tolerate the risk of changing their practices which have been proven to work? By continuing to buy Android devices, despite your complaints, you are, in fact, providing them with the opposite incentive.
A few days ago I was thinking about a new smartphone and because my main problem with my current android is the outdated kernel and driver setup, I was searching for smartphone with open source drivers. Wikipedia tells us since the start of the Smartphone era about 22 phones had open source drivers (with the exception of the proprietary baseband firmware):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_mobile_pho...
Doesn't look like something where you can select the hardware specifications you prefer. So I feel a little lost.
In general, I like Android but for my taste the Google services are too intrusive. Uploading my data before I had a chance to deactivate it is just unacceptable. Asking me every day to add photos to Maps sucks too. I can accept giving some of my information to Google to improve the product, but lately Google feels like the data mooch on my smartphone...