No! They absolutely can not! OS updates do not come via Play services... Why can't people understand that Android is open source? An Android OEM can (and does) modify their Android distribution anyway they like UNLIKE a Windows phone OEM. The fact is any OS update directly from Google would probably brick an OEM phone not that Google can unilaterally decide to update someone else's phone anyway.
I don't believe parent is saying updates come from Play, just that actually getting the approval to ship Play on your Android device requires signing an agreement with Google. That agreement provides the leverage that Google would need to enforce any policy of "updates for x years".
That don't have leverage... Google is already facing fines from the EU because of what they currently require from OEMs to use the Play Services. Trying to make OEMs accept Google updates is not in the cards.
It's far from clear if the EU complaints would apply to this, which have been strictly about anti-competitive behavior. Which competition would this negatively impact?
#facepalm Google has NO CONTROL over OEM phones. Sorry... Samsung would would fork AOSP tomorrow and create their own store. You think we have fragmentation now...
I don't know why you and others want to keep repeating yourself but that is not going to change anything. I have no idea what you said in your second sentence.
Android isn't open source. Samsung and other OEMs are only permitted to distribute it with proprietary closed source software. Therefore, the platform, as it's sold, is proprietary.
Furthermore, Samsung can't leave, Google has a backroom deal with them, it involves patents.
Not the GP: Android is NOT open source in my world. It's a code drop. It's what Microsoft used to do, before they discovered GH. "You'll get what we did after the fact".
Yes. AOSP is available as 'open source'. As a giant code drop, as far as I can tell. And the steering party for Android is .. that Ad company.
Even 'Nexus devices' aren't able to boot using AOSP last time I checked (Nexus 7, the ~newer~ version), so that is really bullshit. It looks like "Have fun with our current state, and really - nothing will work on your devices anyway because you need a ton of binary blobs matching our kernel".
Android is about as close to open source in my world as .Net was via 'the reference source' a couple years ago. "Source available" vs. "Open Source".
I actually can't produce this document. Google's contracts with OEMs are strictly confidential. Only some from way back in 2011 have leaked in their entirety. If you actually believe OEMs just get AOSP and get to do what you want, you don't know very much about Android.
Google gets to approve or veto every Android device every OEM sells. And that's just for starters. If you're an Android OEM that has access to the Play Store, Google has an incredible amount of control over your company.
Sorry, but the facts don't lie, even the linked contracts from back in 2011 gave Google veto powers over all device releases. You really have no idea how much control Google has over OEMs. Documents are linked above, please read them.
"The company shall not take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android." under 2.2
"Unless otherwise approved by Google in writing Company will preload all Google Applications approved in the applicable Territory or Territories on each device." under 3.4
Yeah, five years later we still don't have a newer example of this deal, because Google is so secretive about how they control OEMs. They're under investigation for the behavior pretty much worldwide right now, but if you want to keep your head buried in the sand in the face of documents entered into official evidence in a court of law because it doesn't suit your narrative, go right ahead.
"Company shall not Launch any Device incorporating the Google Applications until it has obtained Google's approval as set forth in (a), (b), and (c) below.", see section 4.3
OEMs can't release an open source only Android distribution. WRONG Google must approve any OEM Android phone. WRONG Samsung can't produce a forked version of AOSP. WRONG
Your only proof about any of this is quoting a clause about Google apps? LOL Yes, OEMs can only use Play services if they include certain Google apps and they need to be presented in a certain way. I already said that many comments ago. The agreement stops say Samsung from using Google Maps but naming the icon Dumbfuck Maps. Google only approves the implementation of their apps NOT the phone.
Dude, go home. You don't know what you are talking about.
You can ship a phone running AOSP without any further agreement with Google.
You cannot ship an "Android" phone. "Android" is a trademark of Google and you can only use it with permission. Moreover, you cannot ship a phone that includes the Play Store or Google apps, nor one compatible with the increasing array of apps that require Play Services, unless you make an agreement with Google.
If you take away the name and ecosystem, you've lost the vast majority of the value of Android. Users will see your phone as if it is running its own, incompatible operating system. Why would they buy this? Why not buy a Windows phone instead?
Case in point: Amazon tried making a phone based on AOSP -- the Fire phone. They made their own apps, their own app store, etc. It was a flop. They gave up. If Amazon can't make it work, why would anyone else expect they can?
So, to realistically sell an Android phone, you have to make an agreement with Google. And that's how they keep control.
Samsung bails, Google and Android is screwed...