• kuneho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    true, but you aren’t obligated to use any of that. the FOSSness of the OS itself doesn’t change.

    lots of apps aren’t even FOSS on Android. FOSS ones usually have versions that aren’t dependent on Google Services, or you can patch them not to use them, with various results, that’s true.

    • habanhero@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If so much of the core Android experience is proprietary-dependent, can you really say Android itself is FOSS? Might as well call the non-proprietary, open-source parts something else… Like… Android Open Source Project (AOSP)?

      • kuneho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, sure, but this is no more than semantics.

        AOSP can stand on its own foot on a device, you don’t need any peoprietary stuff to get it up and running (except maybe vendor specific things, like drivers, if the given device needs those). Maybe it’s my fault, but I would call that Android. (maybe it’s like Chrome vs Chromium, VSCode vs Codium etc…)

        It’s another story people got used to the package Google provides, but in my understanding, it’s completely optional. You aren’t bound to the services they provide on a clean Android.

        but I may be wrong.

        • habanhero@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          As a distinction AOSP vs Android is as important as Chromium vs Chrome. It is much more than semantics, it is literally the difference between an open-source project vs not.

          Fact is if you present the de-Googled AOSP to regular users, they’d think it’s a broken experience without all the Google apps and services that people come to expect - Maps, Mail, Calendar etc. Drivers and device specifics firmware are also a big part of the foundational Android user experience. So to call Android = AOSP = open source is a mass simplification and definitely hand-waving away the reality of how each system operates and the whole point of open source projects.

          • kuneho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            So to call Android = AOSP = open source is a mass simplification and definitely hand-waving away the reality of how each system operates and the whole point of open source project

            I absolutely don’t aggree with this part, especially the second half, but I see where you coming from and your reasoning.

            • habanhero@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Separate terms to tell different things apart, I’m not sure what’s there to disagree about. It’s literally in the name, Android Open Source Project lol.

              • kuneho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Separate terms to tell different things apart

                yes

                I’m not sure what’s there to disagree about.

                I’m disaggreeing with it, since it is an opinion 🤷🏻‍♂️