[conite]

No need for you to complain.
Google Play services do work!
Just read the instructions Cobalt232 wrote.
Link below

http://forums.crackberry.com/android...g-page-965257/

There are some tricks to get rid of annoying warnings and allowing partial login to fool some apps, but it's FAR short of anything that can be considered "working".

Z30STA100-5/10.3.1.1949

[dejanh]

Aside from rooting which enables you to install Google Play Services on Kindle Fire devices, you can also just install them as per How to install Google apps on Kindle Fire HD or HDX

Xiaomi comes to mind as at least one brand that makes really nice Android phones and is not a member of OHA. There are others as well, some large ones.

The point at the end of the day is this. BlackBerry just has to not prevent proper installation of Google Play Services. By not preventing it they are not doing anything illegal. They are simply leaving it up to the end user to decide whether s/he wants to set up Google Play Services. This is what Xiaomi is doing.

[conite]

The point at the end of the day is this. BlackBerry just has to not prevent proper installation of Google Play Services. By not preventing it they are not doing anything illegal. They are simply leaving it up to the end user to decide whether s/he wants to set up Google Play Services. This is what Xiaomi is doing.

From a technical perspective, I do not think BlackBerry is actively preventing the installation of GPS. I don't have all the details, but it is my impression that due to all of the api's and bridges that tie the core of the Android Runtime into the bb10 OS, it makes it impossible.

Z30STA100-5/10.3.1.1949

[dale-c]

No need for you to complain.
Google Play services do work!
Just read the instructions Cobalt232 wrote.
Link below

http://forums.crackberry.com/android...g-page-965257/

That's not the point of this thread. The point is why it's blocked in the first place. BlackBerry or google.



Posted via CB10

[dejanh]

From a technical perspective, I do not think BlackBerry is actively preventing the installation of GPS. I don't have all the details, but it is my impression that due to all of the api's and bridges that tie the core of the Android Runtime into the bb10 OS, it makes it impossible.

Z30STA100-5/10.3.1.1949

If that's the case then why not build stubs and abstraction layers? Most of the applications that ask for Google Play Services don't actually need them, and those that do are just providing maps integration. Surely there must be a clever way around this.

Posted via CB10

[Cobalt232]

If that's the case then why not build stubs and abstraction layers? Most of the applications that ask for Google Play Services don't actually need them, and those that do are just providing maps integration. Surely there must be a clever way around this.

Posted via CB10

Apps that are using Google Play services have parts of the GPS framework compiled into the app. The rest of the Framework ist provided with the separate package com.google.android.gms. On startup, the app is looking for this package, and it only correctly detects it when it has been signed with Google keys.

So the problem is not to build a stub or an alternative framework. The problem is, that only a framework signed with Google keys is accepted. To circumvent this, GMaps Patcher removes the signature verification in every app so that a non google version of com.google.android.gms is accepted.

So even if someone would write a complete emulation of the Google Play services Framework, the app calling for it would still have to be patched.

[9lives353]

Ohh OK--so it's selective enforcement that's going on here. Makes sense now, thanks. And not at all surprising when it comes to Google.

Further example: the Nook HD tablets have Google Play and Google Services even though that's a forked version of Android. So I'm not sure how they negotiated that deal.

[Ment]

Further example: the Nook HD tablets have Google Play and Google Services even though that's a forked version of Android. So I'm not sure how they negotiated that deal.

Nook HD always had the technical ability to run Play ie it passed compatibility tests, BN had an agreement with Microsoft so it just wasn't allowed. After the Nook flopped they decided to get an agreement in place and made Chrome the default browser and then pushed an OS update to the HD and HD+

So is OHA the only way to get Play? No but you might as well be as any agreement to get Play on your company's devices will have plenty of strings attached.