Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday February 24 2020, @05:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the change-of-plan dept.

Verizon is reportedly shelving further plans to sell Pixel phones:

Verizon has put an "indefinite hold" on plans to sell Google's Pixel phones, Android Police reported late Wednesday citing an unidentified source described as familiar with the company's plans. No specific reason was cited, but poor sales could have motivated the change.

Verizon on Thursday morning pushed back against the report, with a spokeswoman saying the mobile carrier will continue to work with Google and looks "forward to the new portfolio of devices." Android Police retracted its story hours later.

Since the original Pixel phone launched in 2016, Google and Verizon have been tied at the hip, with the nation's largest carrier serving as the exclusive partner for the phone franchise. That changed when Google unveiled the budget Pixel 3A in May, which was made available on multiple carriers for the first time.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday February 24 2020, @08:25PM (7 children)

    by Freeman (732) on Monday February 24 2020, @08:25PM (#961975) Journal

    Having a monopoly on cows, doesn't mean you have a monopoly on sheep. Even though, you may be a monopoly in one area. It's disingenuous to say they're a monopoly when in fact, they barely have a foothold in the production of the hardware.

    --
    Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday February 24 2020, @08:30PM (6 children)

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday February 24 2020, @08:30PM (#961978) Journal

    Having a monopoly on cows and being a major vendor in sheep dealing with one of the three remaining grocery stores is all kinds of fucked up.

    "We'll stop shipping you milk unless we get a better deal on lamb" is a perfectly valid threat. Monopolies suck.

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday February 24 2020, @09:01PM (5 children)

      by Freeman (732) on Monday February 24 2020, @09:01PM (#961997) Journal

      That would be quite true, but there's no evidence for the "We'll stop shipping you Android" equivalence.

      While the 3 main cell service providers are near monopolies, they aren't, because they have direct competitors. They could definitely collude like the TV manufacturers did a while back, which kept the TV prices unreasonably high for so long, but that's not legal. In fact T-Mobile earned a name for themselves by trying to shake things up a bit. Which actually did some good. Since, T-Mobile was really more of an afterthought up until that point.

      Technically, Google isn't a Smart Phone OS monopoly, either. Since, there's Apple. They're not a monopoly as far as Search Engines go, they're not a monopoly as far as ad agencies go as far as I know, they're not a monopoly where web browsers are concerned. They have at least one competitor, if not multiple competitors in essentially all areas of their business. They just happen to be a super huge corporation that left behind their "Don't be evil" motto a long time ago.

      Without Apple, both Microsoft and Google would be monopolies as Apple is the only other major competitor in both fields.

      --
      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
      • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday February 24 2020, @09:04PM (1 child)

        by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday February 24 2020, @09:04PM (#961998) Journal

        No, I guess there's no evidence for it.

        But the power's there, and I restate my central premise. Monopolies suck.

        • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday February 24 2020, @09:10PM

          by Freeman (732) on Monday February 24 2020, @09:10PM (#962002) Journal

          That they do, but Google is no "Ma Bell".

          --
          Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Monday February 24 2020, @09:59PM (2 children)

        by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Monday February 24 2020, @09:59PM (#962027) Journal

        Samsung can probably break out of the Android trap quickly if Google tries anything, using Tizen. I don't think they will ever have a reason to do so since they don't face U.S. sanctions problems like Huawei does, and they already modify Android to their liking. Huawei's HarmonyOS will get developed to work on smartphones. It may end up being used by tens or hundreds of millions of people in some form.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 1) by petecox on Monday February 24 2020, @11:01PM (1 child)

          by petecox (3228) on Monday February 24 2020, @11:01PM (#962060)

          Tizen, along with its predecessor Bada, enjoyed a lukewarm response on Samsung handsets due to the "app gap".

          Any rival would need some sort of AOSP runtime, be it Anbox paired with microG. But even Android compat wasn't enough to save BB10 or make Sailfish OS a runaway success.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Monday February 24 2020, @11:36PM

            by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Monday February 24 2020, @11:36PM (#962075) Journal

            If they can make it compatible with existing Android apps, they could force it on users without most of them noticing or caring. It just has to happen seamlessly for the users, and they will want to quell any media scaremongering.

            https://commonsware.com/blog/2019/08/10/harmony-compatibility.html [commonsware.com]

            One way that it could be “easy” is if they take the approach that BlackBerry did with their early Android efforts. Before BlackBerry retired BlackBerry OS and moved to Android, they had an Android runtime for BlackBerry OS. Developers could use some tools to convert an Android APK into a different file (BAR), and a BAR could be distributed to a BlackBerry OS device. This approach failed for BlackBerry for several reasons, none of which would preclude Huawei from trying and perhaps succeeding. It might still require a fair amount of work to port an Android app to be a native Harmony OS app, though, if this is Huawei’s approach.

            Another possibility for this being “easy” is if Huawei basically adopts the Android SDK. Basically, they would have their own SDK with the same class structure, perhaps with some cosmetic changes (e.g., you have to convert android. to harmony. in packages). I would be somewhat surprised if they went this route, as it ties them to Google and Android more than they might like. It also raises interesting parallels to the Oracle v. Google series of lawsuits, with Huawei in the role of Google.

            Yet another possibility is some sort of a converter, that can take code that makes Android SDK calls and convert it to making Harmony OS SDK calls instead. That would be difficult to pull off, since it has to convert both app code and libraries. But the Jetifier (sorta) accomplished it for converting Android Support Library references to AndroidX ones, so I certainly cannot rule it out.

            --
            [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]