News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Android P. Parent comment

Re:Android P by pjmlp on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @02:14AM (#17027727)
That is why there is this thing called legal agreements.

If Google actually cared, they would impose support requirements on OEMs that wanted to play on Android playground.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Android P by HillaryBriss on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @10:55AM (#17030291)
but ... did Google really have that much leverage in those relationships, at least, early on?

how authoritarian could Google be about forcing this on, say, Samsung?

and if they granted Samsung an exception, what would the reaction be from other manufacturers?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Android P by pjmlp on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @11:23AM (#17030521)
As much as they would be willing to go.

Given the results of Bada and Tizen, Google would have little to worry about if Samsung ever decides to go rogue.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Android P by izacus on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @02:51AM (#17027864)
And they did. It's called Project Treble.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Android P by pjmlp on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @03:07AM (#17027933)
No they did not, that is an urban myth easily dismissed with Google's documents and related ADB podcast.

OEMs are expected to push updates just like before, having a certified Treble device is meaningless, if the OEM does not care to provide OS updates.

[ Parent | on HN ]