Given the way Google is steering Android these days i am not sure i want it on a "desktop" any time soon.

Back during early 3.x it had a spark of potential. But since then Google has done quite a bit to lock it down so that it is basically a media consumption terminal.

> But since then Google has done quite a bit to lock it down so that it is basically a media consumption terminal.

It remains possible to choose to install, or not to install Google play Services and Google's app suite on aftermarket Android installations, and still be running Android, and running most 3rd party Android apps.

Any app developers who wants to run on Amazon, Jolla, Blackberry, CyanogenMod, and on the embedded Android in cars and appliances, and all the Android variants in China is going to have to take care to make use of Google Play Services optional, and to correctly use Intent filtering to make of of and respond to high level IPC messages to and from other apps, no matter if they are the "official" Google apps or not.

So, while Google could be more open without risking much if any advantage, Android hasn't been locked-down. Google has little chance of doing an "embrace and extend" on Android ISVs. You still have a wide range of choices.

That is pretty much ignoring the driver issue, or maybe myopically focusing on the Android API layer.

Look at the changes to file system permissions, and the introduction of the storage access framework in 4.4.

And look from the perspective of joe user, not from hank hacker.

This comment is exactly the opposite of reality. 3.x was the most locked down Android ever. Its source was never released. Since then, AOSP has gotten strictly more functional with every release. The proprietary Google apps built on top have gotten wider distribution on the devices that have Android installed, but that doesn't make AOSP itself more locked down.

From a user perspective, Android has gotten more locked down. This in that while previously one could access the file system directly, now on has to go via a sub-system that can deny or hide access arbitrarily.

You're talking about a security issue where one app could read and write another app's data. That's like saying Android is locked down because you can't read another app's heap.

That’s the nature of any consumer-oriented product, though. Unless someone starts making a phone for hackers, they’re all going to be designed for media consumption.

With that said, you’re right about the locking down. It’s a good thing that we’ve CyanogenMod and Replicant.

Also don't forget that Android OEMs must pay Microsoft for the privilege of using that OS, so I'm not sure what Linux has won here.