• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • Mobile Phones
Google considers taking control of Android OS updates from Manufacturers
Everything Goes
17-02-2016
Google may be considering taking control of Android OS updates from the incompetent hands of manufactures. Android fragmentation is actually getting worse despite Google's efforts to sort it out.

Google I/O is in May so we might see something then?

Quote:
“"Google will end up taking complete control of Android by moving the entire OS into its services layer known as Google Mobile Services (GMS). This is the only way that Google can end the endemic fragmentation that continues to plague its devices as well as take back control of software distribution," Windsor said.

"The net result is that a Google device will become much like an iOS or a Windows 10 device with absolutely no options for handset makers to make any changes."”

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02...roid_takeover/
Zack06
17-02-2016
With so much of Android updated server side these days, they've been heading this way for a while.

Unfortunately for Google it will force manufacturers to consider other options.

But for this platform, I think some change is needed at this stage. They should be weary though that the "closed door" approach to manufacturers tinkering with the OS didn't do Windows Phone any favours.
jonmorris
18-02-2016
Can Google not just come up with a standard way for manufacturers to skin (via themes) Android devices, so even after you get a major OS update, the TouchWiz skin can still remain?

After all, for the most part, that's all TouchWiz and the like is. If you make that essentially a theme, you make it very easy for all concerned. Both for Android to do an update without breaking things, and for Samsung (for example) to change things without breaking Android.

Samsung can still have its own launcher, keyboard, browser etc.

I know the next Android will finally have window support, and hopefully bring back the dark/light skins so it would seem like a logical next step. Then manufacturers can still make their devices 'their own'.
Aye Up
18-02-2016
The only manufacturer that can realistically release their own OS is Samsung and even then it would likely be a fork of Android so as to ensure compatibility for existing users. The rest of the market probably don't have the resources in which to launch an OS of their own, and even if they did it would tank on a colossal scale.

Google needs to get the balls to start swinging its thingy around. The only way to end fragmentation is to take the whole OS into the Google Services banner, that way Google would have control over everything and could set the pace of change. If it does happen then wave goodbye to it being open source, I expect Google will seriously restrict the code made available publicly. Amazon and their fire tablet range will suffer massively as a result.

@jonmorris I agree the underlying OS should be standard but allowing device makes to add their own art style etc. Google was warned about this 7 years ago, people from the UK and US said this would happen if it didn't stick to the OHA it setup in support of Android. Frankly they only have themselves to blame, if this change does go ahead there will be a helluva lot of bad publicity. Being honest I don't think it will be retrospective as that would bring its own problems, most likely a date will be set sometime next year ensuring all manufacturers can meet the deadline in time.

In a nutshell nothing will change in 2016.
moox
18-02-2016
Originally Posted by Zack06:
“Unfortunately for Google it will force manufacturers to consider other options.
.”

To what? The only OSes that truly matter are iOS and Android. I'm sure Samsung can invent yet another proprietary OS like Bada or Tizen but it won't have the pulling power that Android has. Even Blackberry has decided to stake its future on Android.
prking
18-02-2016
Originally Posted by moox:
“To what? The only OSes that truly matter are iOS and Android. I'm sure Samsung can invent yet another proprietary OS like Bada or Tizen but it won't have the pulling power that Android has. Even Blackberry has decided to stake its future on Android.”

When buying a car the majority of people don't care who makes the engine. They care more about how it looks and what the satnav/radio/media does.

I think many people don't particularly care about OS. They buy for other reasons brand, what apps there are, what colour is it, does it come with headphones, what's the camera like etc.

Google could solve the fragmentation issue by splitting Android so there is a customisation layer above the OS. Manufacturer writes a "BIOS" or similar, Android runs on that and then the manufacturer adds a customisation layer containing support for any unique hardware. Launcher, themes and stock apps come from the play store (as is often already the case). As long as everyone sticks to the rules governing the interface between the layers then everyone is happy.

Except for the cheapest handsets, because they wouldn't have the speed and memory to run anything other than stock.
WelshBluebird
18-02-2016
Originally Posted by jonmorris:
“Can Google not just come up with a standard way for manufacturers to skin (via themes) Android devices, so even after you get a major OS update, the TouchWiz skin can still remain?

After all, for the most part, that's all TouchWiz and the like is. If you make that essentially a theme, you make it very easy for all concerned. Both for Android to do an update without breaking things, and for Samsung (for example) to change things without breaking Android.

Samsung can still have its own launcher, keyboard, browser etc.

I know the next Android will finally have window support, and hopefully bring back the dark/light skins so it would seem like a logical next step. Then manufacturers can still make their devices 'their own'.”

I guess the only problem with that is that things like TouchWiz aren't just skins. You have extra features (Samsung Pay, the Edge stuff, Multi Window etc) that I am not so sure would be as easy to implement if the core OS wasn't modified by the manufacturer.
jonmorris
18-02-2016
Originally Posted by WelshBluebird:
“I guess the only problem with that is that things like TouchWiz aren't just skins. You have extra features (Samsung Pay, the Edge stuff, Multi Window etc) that I am not so sure would be as easy to implement if the core OS wasn't modified by the manufacturer.”

I am sure there are ways around most of those issues. The secure payment aspect is possibly a valid concern though, although personally I would sooner have manufacturers stop coming up with their own systems for stuff like this.

We all know that for the best chance of uptake for things like mobile payments, we don't need 101 different systems!
WelshBluebird
18-02-2016
Originally Posted by jonmorris:
“I am sure there are ways around most of those issues. The secure payment aspect is possibly a valid concern though, although personally I would sooner have manufacturers stop coming up with their own systems for stuff like this.

We all know that for the best chance of uptake for things like mobile payments, we don't need 101 different systems!”

Oh I defo agree about having too many systems that do the same things as Android itself does (S Voice anyone! - does anyone even use that?). I think with secure payments though this is partly Google's fault. It looks like Samsung pay will be available in the UK before Android Pay is. And in the US having the MST tech is a massive benefit in a place where mag strip transactions are still common. Google could have had a a huge headstart with Google wallet but we all know how that ended up.

Another thing to consider too is that manufacturers playing with Android like they do does eventually lead to Android getting better and getting more features. Things like multi window and decent stylus support are finally being worked on by Google to be included in stock Android. I am not sure if they would would be it wasn't for Samsung.

Sure it is bloody annoying that it messes up the update schedule, but it isn't all bad.
gavo360
19-02-2016
I don't think Google needs to take over OS updates for new versions, the most important thing for them to get control of is the monthly security patch and how it gets installed and distributed. Most phone users don't want to spend potentialy half an hour every month updating and wait for app cache to rebuild till they can use their phone again. A quick reboot would be fine enough for most people. Also if Google want to be responsible for OS updates if they update a billion+ phones a very small percentage will brick during the process and Google will be responsible for putting it right for those people that don't have a phone anymore.

As mentioned already like it or not Samsung and other manufacturers add alot of proprietory benefits to android, from camera software, split screen, pen support, sound drivers and many other things.
Gigabit
19-02-2016
How are Google going to manage updating millions of devices with millions of different configurations?
DevonBloke
19-02-2016
As someone said, surely the underlying OS should be the same on every device and the customisations need to be on top of this in such a way that they don't affect the workings of the OS at all.
I know, then you are just getting closer to the iPhone with more control from the top.
Problem is we have all seen what a nightmare rolling things like WC and VoLTE is for the networks on Android.
But it must really irk Google when it's always the iPhone that gets a new service first simply because that feature is controlled by Apple and all the network has to do is say to Apple "can we have xyz configuration in the next carrier update please" and Hey presto! it works on all iPhones.

Not taking sides here, just saying it's like many things in life, go down the controlled route, pay more, have less options but get more stuff quicker. Go down the open / do what you like, cheaper route and the sheer variety this stirs up (which in itself is great) causes problems moving forward.
Swings and roundabouts as they say.
jonmorris
19-02-2016
I think we've reached a point where people would not care about Android itself being 'the same' on every device, as long as there was still the ability to customise things on top.

It wouldn't necessarily have to mean that suddenly the Play store will tightly control all the apps you can install, to make a device your own (if you want). Launchers, keyboards, browsers, messaging apps.. even payment apps that would utilise the secure authentication in the OS itself (so, any third party app could call upon the handset's own fingerprint authentication).

I don't think it would make Android suddenly like iOS where Google would call all the shots and put everyone on lock down. I mean, they could want to do that, but I don't think that's the plan (for now at least).

What most people want today are apps. The phone is the computer that allows them to run apps, and that's it. The phone is a dumb terminal, where people choose based on screen size, battery, camera and not much else. If happy, they keep that device until it breaks.

More and more people are realising that the SIM only route is the way to go, and my wish is that one day hardly anyone would buy a snazzy new phone on a 24 month contract and then, due to the excessive monthly bill, feel compelled to upgrade every 2 years from then on. It's a slow process, but more people all the time are doing the maths and realising.

I bought the new 5K iMac Retina because of the new display. I'll keep it for years (i.e. until it breaks, or something major comes along to make me upgrade). My MacBook Air is from 2011 and going on strong. My tablet is nearly three years old and doing fine. I've got old laptops that can run Windows 10 - so even in my tech-obsessed world, even I don't need to have the latest and greatest (bar when getting a device in to review).

It would make sense for Android to be more controlled and I don't think anyone would be upset, or not for justified reasons (it's easy to get upset just to jump on a bandwagon).

I'm sure the likes of Xda-developers would still carry on with their work and be happy too.
rosetech
22-02-2016
Google already have control of their own devices and distribute security and system updates. The wider android community is the responsibility of the individual manufacturers.

Earlier in the the thread someone mentioned splitting up android so it is easier to update the ui. Unfortunately the issue is not with the ui changes but the kernel. Google cannot legislate for changes made outside of AOSP tree, which means a single system of distribution is not currently feasible.

Google have generally made a good job of making android more modular over the past year. As a business Google first and foremost profit from internet usage not android.

Android doesn't need to be the same on each device, and it would seriously limit the potential of each operating system should that ever occur (interestingly Apples key limitation, trying to work with a single task metaphor).
Aye Up
22-02-2016
Originally Posted by jonmorris:
“It would make sense for Android to be more controlled and I don't think anyone would be upset, or not for justified reasons (it's easy to get upset just to jump on a bandwagon).

I'm sure the likes of Xda-developers would still carry on with their work and be happy too.”

I agree Android should be more controlled, however Google should also figure out a system that can act as a half way point between openess and the closed shop that is Apple's Appstore. Much of the biggest security wobbles from from rogue apps in the Google Play store, yet they only ever act reactionary, rather relying on the goodwill of the community. I don't see why they can't just certify developers once making sure they deliver good code and then freely update as and when, not needing to submit for approval each time like the Apple's Appstore.

Google is very much to blame for all this mess and in part manufacturers are also. Google along with msot of the industry set up the Open Handset Alliance to develop open source code that everyone could benefit from. As each Android release passes, Google pisses all over that without so much as a boo from Samsung and the rest.

I'm still waiting for Marshmallow on my S6 Edge, though if I'm honest I am in no rush for the damn thing anyway.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map