I don't want the OS to have any material differences at all between devices. Android should be like Windows, which is the same no matter where it's running. Even the "good" changes that manufacturers make are unwelcome, because they dull much of the appeal of an OS like Android where hardware vendors are interchangeable and can be switched on a whim without software downsides. I don't want to become dependent on some manufacturer-specific change.
If it were practical to do so, every Android device I buy would immediately have its OS replaced with something like LineageOS or Pixel Experience to eliminate these variances, much as technically inclined people will wipe the Windows install that comes stock on a prebuilt PC in favor of vanilla Windows.
> Even the "good" changes that manufacturers make are unwelcome, because they dull much of the appeal of an OS like Android where hardware vendors are interchangeable and can be switched on a whim without software downsides. I don't want to become dependent on some manufacturer-specific change.
So you want a worse software experience all the time in case you have to use said worse software experience in the future because of a hardware change? And you don't want Android hardware vendors to be able to differentiate themselves with software, giving all of the power to Google?
Doesnt make sense to me. Seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It's something I see as necessary because products manufacturers you trust can and will sour on a dime (see OnePlus) or even get out of the business entirely (see LG and countless other former Android handset companies). If manufacturers want my loyalty, they can get it by consistently producing superior hardware (both technically and in fit and finish) and treating me well as a customer. Those things on their own are stronger differentiating factors (excellence is unusual) than software gimmicks that rarely live up to promise.
That "OS should be coherent" argument would work if android itself was providing all those options.
But it's not.
Go to AOSP source and the "phone app" you'll find there is deprecated, ugly crap that no one ever uses.
The 'nice' one is just a google app that's not only closed source, but equally bloated as the samsung's one.
People give google's apps this weird pass, as it's not the same kind of bloat as the manufacturers one, but there is no reason to treat them differently.
This is increasingly true as Google is moving further and further away from AOSP, and I think it's eroding the appeal of Android as a whole.
That said, at least Google apps talk to just Google. Samsung apps for example have been shown to connect to numerous different analytics services and ad networks even if you spring for the most expensive devices they sell which isn't great.
It is, if you wipe it and reinstall plain Windows and whatever drivers are necessary, which is trivial on x86 PCs and basically the default for technically capable individuals.
But even then, PC manufacturer bloatware doesn't typically modify the OS itself and is just extra crap bolted to it. The versions of Android that gets shipped on phones and tablets by contrast are different at the source level, sometimes bearing significant divergences from AOSP.
Razer and Nvidia drivers almost force a login on you and do things like constantly spin up and wear out your idle HDDs searching for games to "optimize." You often have to do a research project filled with SEO spam to get around stuff like that.
At least in the case of Nvidia, the drivers bundled with Windows are good enough for most peoples' needs. It sucks for those of us who want up to date drivers for more demanding use cases though.
If it were practical to do so, every Android device I buy would immediately have its OS replaced with something like LineageOS or Pixel Experience to eliminate these variances, much as technically inclined people will wipe the Windows install that comes stock on a prebuilt PC in favor of vanilla Windows.