08-21-15 08:19 AM
137 12345 ...
tools
  1. skibnik's Avatar
    Google could elect not to license Google Services and the Play Store to anyone, for any reason. It's Google's product - they own it and they control it. OHA membership is VOLUNTARY and there is plenty of other OSs on the market, and nothing prevents anyone from making their own. Any lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

    If it was that easy, why haven't all of the OHA members done so - why do they follow the OHA rules instead? More over, why hasn't SAMSUNG done it?
    Or Google could just use the OHA as a blunt instrument to get the OEM's to do anything they want as per a Google employee quote regarding the whole Skyhook fiasco.

    Loving my Passport!
    06-19-15 02:19 PM
  2. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    And this is fine. As long as standards are applied evenly. If Tizen can do it then so should BlackBerry 10 as well.

    Posted via CB10
    Tizen doesn't have Android code in it, so it isn't considered a version of Android and thus Samsung is free to pursue Tizen all they want. And Google is free to secure their ecosystem using Google Services - which means if a developer doesn't create a Services free version for Amazon and the other 3rd Party Stores that Tizen may never see updates to some apps. So unless developers see a value in Samsung's own ecosystem... they'll have as easy a time as BlackBerry and Microsoft have.

    Of course releasing Tizen in markets where ecosystem don't really matter has been pretty good for them. Releasing Tizen in the US would be a disaster.
    06-19-15 02:24 PM
  3. Mirk's Avatar
    Of course releasing Tizen in markets where ecosystem don't really matter has been pretty good for them. Releasing Tizen in the US would be a disaster.
    Hmmm... well if the rumor is true that BlackBerry is in fact working on an Android device, but with the emerging markets in mind. And, the rumors that Samsung and BB are working together on something are true. Perhaps we won't be seeing an Android device with Google Services.
    06-19-15 02:38 PM
  4. gtredman's Avatar
    I am always harsh on knee jerkers and couch experts/analysts just because i am the chIef! But for those of us that keep thinking highly of Blackberry then in ine same breath think of them as nothing i have this to say, have you noticed that Samsung, now Google and soon Apple will be seeking some little form of collaboration with Blackberry just to validate their claim to some form of security on their devices and or operating systems? Yes Blackberry has one thing that the world recognizes as true, SECURITY so Sammy is tapping in and Google too so i think this is a done deal, Blackberry will put some form of 'security " on andoid and google will free BB10 to access Google's services John Chen is not going to give up everything for nothing .
    AYC2112 and skibnik like this.
    06-19-15 02:39 PM
  5. BCITMike's Avatar
    Any company owned by BB would be considered BB. You don't really think Google didn't foresee these kinds of work-arounds when they created the OHA, did you?

    Also, the OHA applies to companies who are OEMs for other companies. If Foxconn wanted to make an OHA phone in their own name, they'd have to be an OHA member, which would mean they couldn't produce BB10 phones. If Foxconn OEM'd a phone for someone else, that company would have to be an OHA member in order to get Google Services, etc.

    Google has $65 BILLION in cash alone, and is worth hundreds of billions. Does anyone think that their lawyers are going to miss obvious ploys like this?

    And even if they did, they'd simply update the rules. The OHA rules apply to ALL companies who want Google Services, and there are currently over 200 manufacturers who are members, and every one of them would have a fit if some other company got to break the rules. Why in the world would Google break them for BB and BB10, which has 0.1% marketshare (and falling)? Because Crackberrians want them too? LOL.
    There's always loopholes. There's laws restricting anticompetitive behaviour and collusion and what not. IANAL.

    And why would BlackBerry want to ship Google Android instead of a more secure kernel?

    I think all this OHA talk is premature.

    Posted via CB10
    06-19-15 02:41 PM
  6. Bbnivende's Avatar
    Possibly there will be something on the work side that will allow BlackBerry greater flexibility to gain access to Google apps. Maybe an advance that BES can apply to increase the security of Android devices under BES.

    As far as the consumer side - I think we have to either like the Forked app solution or move on. I am not sure it will last though. It depends on whether the Leap and Slider are a success. The Classic could probably do as well or better as an Android phone.

    It is too bad that non-OHA members do not get together to have a common app strategy. ( other than Apple of course)
    06-19-15 02:41 PM
  7. BCITMike's Avatar
    Google could elect not to license Google Services and the Play Store to anyone, for any reason. It's Google's product - they own it and they control it. OHA membership is VOLUNTARY and there is plenty of other OSs on the market, and nothing prevents anyone from making their own. Any lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

    If it was that easy, why haven't all of the OHA members done so - why do they follow the OHA rules instead? More over, why hasn't SAMSUNG done it?
    Samsung is more of a hardware maker than software maker, as evidenced by bloatware.

    And, they have Tizen, which I'm sure they thought was going to be more usable by now.

    Posted via CB10
    06-19-15 02:43 PM
  8. twiggyrj's Avatar
    There's always loopholes. There's laws restricting anticompetitive behaviour and collusion and what not. IANAL.

    And why would BlackBerry want to ship Google Android instead of a more secure kernel?

    I think all this OHA talk is premature.

    Posted via CB10

    But the OHA is Googles rules and it is Googles Services, don't see how it would be anti-competitive to deny BlackBerry access to them because it isn't freely available and you have to abide by their Terms of service.
    06-19-15 02:45 PM
  9. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    I am always harsh on knee jerkers and couch experts/analysts just because i am the chIef! But for those of us that keep thinking highly of Blackberry then in ine same breath think of them as nothing i have this to say, have you noticed that Samsung, now Google and soon Apple will be seeking some little form of collaboration with Blackberry just to validate their claim to some form of security on their devices and or operating systems? Yes Blackberry has one thing that the world recognizes as true, SECURITY so Sammy is tapping in and Google too so i think this is a done deal, Blackberry will put some form of 'security " on andoid and google will free BB10 to access Google's services John Chen is not going to give up everything for nothing .
    Did these companies call BlackBerry and ask for their help? Or did Chen call them and ask to be of help?

    Haven't seen anything on Apple & BlackBerry. But if Chen's plans for the BlackBerry Experience are to work, it's very possible that BlackBerry contacted these other companies so that BES can better manage their products. So far all I have seen officially announced is that BlackBerry was working with Google to provide better integration of Android for Work with BES12. And BlackBerry working with Samsung to provide better integration between KNOX and BES12, along with Samsung could include selling BES12 as part of their complete solution for hardware and software security.

    I imagine that these "partnerships" are part of Chen's plans... to get out of the OS and maybe hardware business. As he seems to be working very hard to make his hardware solution obsolete.

    As for Google giving BB10 access to Google Play... I really think there needs to be a sticky on why this won't happen.
    06-19-15 03:00 PM
  10. BCITMike's Avatar
    But the OHA is Googles rules and it is Googles Services, don't see how it would be anti-competitive to deny BlackBerry access to them because it isn't freely available and you have to abide by their Terms of service.
    It is anticompetitive when you are prevented from making competition. By preventing a fork of Android, that's exactly what is happening.
    06-19-15 03:39 PM
  11. twiggyrj's Avatar
    It is anticompetitive when you are prevented from making competition. By preventing a fork of Android, that's exactly what is happening.


    But it is their proprietary services and the proprietor can decide how and where their services can be installed. Just because its necessary to be successful in western markets with Android doesn't mean they have to provide them.
    06-19-15 03:48 PM
  12. vladi's Avatar
    BlackBerry by Samsung?
    06-19-15 03:51 PM
  13. BCITMike's Avatar
    But it is their proprietary services and the proprietor can decide how and where their services can be installed. Just because its necessary to be successful in western markets with Android doesn't mean they have to provide them.
    And?

    Principle
    Competition law, or antitrust law, has three main elements:

    prohibiting agreements or practices that restrict free trading and competition between business. This includes in particular the repression of free trade caused by cartels.
    What your first statement forgets is that the conditions can be anti-competitive and illegal. Google doesn't get to break the laws just cause its their services.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United..._antitrust_law
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
    https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/comp...antitrust-laws

    The key thing being here, competition is good.

    I am not an American, but I read slashdot and similar stories have come up over the years related to a manufacturers language in exclusive contracts and often finding they are illegal. Companies do illegal stuff ALL THE TIME, just only curb their behaviour once caught/penalized. Often, the fine is much less than the profits from stomping out the competition and paying lawyers.

    This is a language game amongst lawyers, where the highest paid ones often win.
    Toodeurep and MarsupilamiX like this.
    06-19-15 04:07 PM
  14. twiggyrj's Avatar
    And?



    What your first statement forgets is that the conditions can be anti-competitive and illegal. Google doesn't get to break the laws just cause its their services.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United..._antitrust_law
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
    https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/comp...antitrust-laws

    The key thing being here, competition is good.

    I am not an American, but I read slashdot and similar stories have come up over the years related to a manufacturers language in exclusive contracts and often finding they are illegal. Companies do illegal stuff ALL THE TIME, just only curb their behaviour once caught/penalized. Often, the fine is much less than the profits from stomping out the competition and paying lawyers.

    This is a language game amongst lawyers, where the highest paid ones often win.

    But they don't stop anyone from joining and if it was anticompetitive wouldn't Samsung or the bigger OEMs would have done something by now? I agree competition is excellent but you can't just use somebody else's services and products to get a free ride. OS X has rules on where you can install their OS (on apple branded hardware only) Linux uses the GNU licence that requires you to provide the source code of your modifications to anyone that requests them. These licences have been around for ages and make strict requirements of what is allowed and what isn't. You have to respect the rules or licence on the product you want to use.
    mornhavon likes this.
    06-19-15 04:20 PM
  15. Mirk's Avatar
    It is anticompetitive when you are prevented from making competition. By preventing a fork of Android, that's exactly what is happening.
    It doesn't really work this way and you should know that. Google provides a service, to use their service you have to agree to certain terms and conditions they have put forth, what you're suggesting is that Google is preventing a competing company from providing a similar service.
    mornhavon likes this.
    06-19-15 04:25 PM
  16. DaedalusIcarusHelios's Avatar
    The best solution is for BlackBerry to have Samsung release an Android phone with Google Play Services with the BlackBerry Experience Suite pre-loaded (think of it replacing aspects of TouchWiz). BlackBerry could always license the physical keyboard out too. In this way BB could continue making BB10 devices with the Android runtime. BlackBerry knows that the hardware market is hard to make a profit, and it's pretty cut-throat amongst Android vendors, so if they simply license things out to other vendors, they'll get their cut without the risk. So I foresee a Samsung partnership as a step in that direction.
    06-19-15 04:30 PM
  17. Supa_Fly1's Avatar
    Google could elect not to license Google Services and the Play Store to anyone, for any reason. It's Google's product - they own it and they control it. OHA membership is VOLUNTARY and there is plenty of other OSs on the market, and nothing prevents anyone from making their own. Any lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

    If it was that easy, why haven't all of the OHA members done so - why do they follow the OHA rules instead? More over, why hasn't SAMSUNG done it?
    you are correct it's Google's license which is voluntary and all companies agree to.

    However ...

    There is a two part answer to your last two questions.

    1 Popularity of deployment and market demand.
    2. SAMSUNG DID actually threaten to do so and has the power to be VERY successful with Tizen and it made VERY big news and VERY big waves just 15-20mths ago if I recall. Enough of a VERY BIG WAVE that an exclusive or similar tight deal with Google and Samsung was done and thus work on Tizen for smartphone IMMEDIATELY ceased.


    Samsung and Android are nearly synonymous!


    Samsung is building a Tizen iceberg for Google's Titanic
    January 14, 2015 08:10 am

    The renewed effort and investment into pushing Tizen as its own legitimate platform won't, argues Samsung, come at the expense of other operating systems. Samsung says that it places a "foremost emphasis on openness" and remains open to other software. Tizen is still far from being able to challenge Android on phones (and it's doubtful that it'll ever get there), but the way it's being positioned and promoted by Samsung in other areas puts it in direct confrontation with Google's expansionary plans. No matter how conciliatory Samsung's tone may be, today's announcement of an expanding Tizen OS is a clear signal of its intent to challenge and compete with Google for the next wave of connected devices.
    Even the Tizen-powered Samsung Z1 doesn't avoid Google's ecosystem
    Jan 30 2015

    Samsung's first Tizen phone ships with Google Search and YouTube apps, and Google as its default search engine.



    Footnote: Ars Technica wrote a major piece on how Google has used the Android ecosystem (ostensibly open-source) to tie its own services to the platform.

    Heres the kicker: If device makers reject one closed-source version of an application, they dont get any of them. Google cant stop a manufacturer like Amazon from using Android, but it controls all of the licensing terms for Google apps. Those licensing terms are reportedly much simpler if youre a member of the Open Handset Alliance and the contractual terms of the OHA license prohibit device manufacturers from forking Android.
    Samsungs work on Tizen illustrates that the company doesnt much like the way Android has been turned into a Google-only show. The terms and agreements surrounding the Google applications that govern the Android experience (and that users want) are as much a prison as the ecosystem that Android was ostensibly supposed to combat. Faced with the difficulty of building its own competing applications at the heart of Android or targeting a new OS that isnt encumbered by the same license terms, Samsung has decided to pour effort into both camps. Samsungs own version of Google apps and its TouchWiz UI skin arent just annoyances (though theyre certainly annoying) theyre the manufacturers attempt to insure it has acceptable alternatives if its arrangement with Google breaks down. The Google Play ecosystem only exacerbates the trend apps that use Google APIs cant run properly on devices like the Kindle Fire.

    Tizen is the OS B to that Plan B. Ideally (from Samsungs perspective) it can build an app store based on its own open environment. After all, Tizen is based on Linux, with its own coalition of developers and contributors, and it could absolutely help free the industry from the tyranny ofof Hang on. Dj vu. Wasnt Android meant to do exactly that and release us from the shackles of Apples iOS?


    The take home of all this research that really occured ...

    Combined with this, Samsungs seemingly baffling TouchWiz strategy suddenly makes sense. While even Samsung fans decry TouchWizs heavy handedness, it achieves its aim perfectly: hide Android from mainstream users. Meanwhile the company has studied Apple well, swamping would be (and arguably better) rivals with superior advertising spend
    FYI Tizen (in any name; including Li-Mo) has been in development since 2007 apparantly a LONG run time.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2014/06/02/the-master-plan-why-samsung-is-ditching-android/
    06-19-15 05:15 PM
  18. twiggyrj's Avatar
    Samsung is a big player, BlackBerry isn't for all intents and purposes, what kind of clout could they realistically use? I doubt Samsung will stick their necks out for BlackBerry. Plus Tizen doesn't violate any OHA rules anyway.
    06-19-15 05:26 PM
  19. Ment's Avatar
    Work on Tizen didn't cease. Its at V2.3 Rev2 as of Feb. And as for TouchWiz, as part of the renewed agreement, Google made Samsung stop its progressive bloatfested UI. TouchWiz in the S6 is much closer to stock Android and than it ever was or would be.
    06-19-15 05:30 PM
  20. Toodeurep's Avatar
    OHA rules are what Google wants them to be and what Google interprets them to be. No crafty workarounds are going to fly, sorry.
    Exactly. Google will do what they want. It works both ways but I doubt BB has the power to get it done. Apple however...

    P.S. A portion of BlackBerry's holdings is still listed as an OHA member.
    06-19-15 05:33 PM
  21. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    As for Google giving BB10 access to Google Play... I really think there needs to be a sticky on why this won't happen.
    http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe.../#post10740388
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    06-19-15 05:37 PM
  22. deebo550's Avatar
    Why not have Android and use a bb10 skin/ui like Samsung's touchwiz...

    Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android
    06-19-15 05:40 PM
  23. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    2. SAMSUNG DID actually threaten to do so and has the power to be VERY successful with Tizen and it made VERY big news and VERY big waves just 15-20mths ago if I recall. Enough of a VERY BIG WAVE that an exclusive or similar tight deal with Google and Samsung was done and thus work on Tizen for smartphone IMMEDIATELY ceased.
    This was because Google threatened to revoke Samsung's OHA membership (stripping them of Google Services and the Play Store) if they proceeded with their initial Tizen plans, which included an Android runtime from the factory. Samsung was hoping to use that to slowly replace Android with Tizen underneath their TouchWiz interface. Google put a quick stop to that, and devs certainly haven't been flocking to build out the Tizen app ecosystem. In fact, just as you pointed out, when Samsung forced Google to act, the result was that Samsung ended up signing a 10-year agreement with Google, which, among other things, is why Tizen defaults to Google Search and has YouTube.

    The value of Google's app and services ecosystem should not be news to any BB10 user, and Google, who has spent literally billions of dollars to build that ecosystem, is certainly not going to give it away to companies who break their rules for access.

    If the situation was reversed, folks here would be crying "foul" over the idea of Google trying to get a free ride on BB's ecosystem without following BB's rules...
    Laura Knotek and mornhavon like this.
    06-19-15 05:45 PM
  24. BCITMike's Avatar
    But they don't stop anyone from joining and if it was anticompetitive wouldn't Samsung or the bigger OEMs would have done something by now? I agree competition is excellent but you can't just use somebody else's services and products to get a free ride. OS X has rules on where you can install their OS (on apple branded hardware only) Linux uses the GNU licence that requires you to provide the source code of your modifications to anyone that requests them. These licences have been around for ages and make strict requirements of what is allowed and what isn't. You have to respect the rules or licence on the product you want to use.
    Yes they do, by putting conditions on them. It's the specific conditions that this conversation is about.

    Samsung will pull out the lawyers when it fits their strategy. Lawyers aren't cheap. Sometimes companies intentionally wait a few years before suing so that there is more benefit (ie, larger financial settlement, easier to prove, etc). Setting the wrong precedence sucks, and having an awkward relationship with a major partner is almost never good. Perhaps your argument would be better if you used Acer or HTC or someone who isn't Android's number 1 vendor.

    Many companies agree to illegal deals just because they have to or because they'll also benefit from it. Can you pick up a newspaper without hearing of some major fine by some major company doing something obviously wrong but treating it like standard business operations somewhere in the world? Sometimes it benefits them (ie, when a manufacturer tries to force a minimum sales price, then the sellers don't need to undercut each other on margin or service). There are Canadian companies co-operating with Canadian authorities investigating the Apple monopolistic deals and provide insider details that will no doubt hurt Apple. From what I've read from these reports, it seemed pretty clear there was anti-competitive language involved by specifically preventing sales of competitive devices through various means.

    Licenses don't supersede the law. Private contracts are often thrown out for being illegal. On this past week's episode of Silicon Valley, the employee contracts were found to be illegal in California and voided. I'm sure lawyers looked over those contracts for years and thought they were fine, or thought they had an argument for why they are valid.

    I am not a lawyer. Neither are you guys. It's a pretty moot argument, other than to just indicate its not simple or straight forward like its being represented.

    I don't think this is just about Google Play services on Android, which I think your argument would be closer, but this is for Android the OS.

    I think a lot of people are treating Android=Google Play Android.

    Edit: Was thinking this thread was just "Android", but just correctly re-read it as "Android OHA" specifically. So "Android" is "Android OHA" in this thread. Some of my comments might be out of context then.
    Last edited by BCITMike; 06-19-15 at 06:05 PM.
    06-19-15 05:51 PM
  25. Toodeurep's Avatar
    ...As for Google giving BB10 access to Google Play... I really think there needs to be a sticky on why this won't happen.
    It would probably just be more of an opinion piece that circles back on its own logic and it would be full of information without a proper source.
    06-19-15 05:56 PM
137 12345 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-11-15, 06:20 AM
  2. Getting Email notifications on Subscribed Threads!
    By KR2013 in forum Site Feedback & Help
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 06-24-15, 05:53 AM
  3. how am I supposed to
    By a7madberry in forum New to BlackBerry App Dev
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-15, 11:13 PM
  4. How to erase the data from a Z10 --3?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum BlackBerry Z10
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-15, 06:40 PM
  5. Can you use the Classic trackpad to move cards when playing solitaire?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum BlackBerry Classic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-18-15, 06:02 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD