Google could finally face serious competition for Android

The mere fact that Google will start charging in Europe what could be called "parts of Android" is in itself a huge news. The change, announced yesterday following a lawsuit filed by the European Commission, is a major change in Google's business model and could loosen its grip on the search engine and browser market. It's a big problem.

But of all the changes that this new licensing model might bring, the simple billing of licensees might not be the most important. The biggest detail may well be that Google's partners for phones and tablets, such as Samsung, LG and Motorola, can now offer Android-based phones in Europe without Google apps or services. This is a big problem, and if the manufacturers dare to try it, the Android phone market could be considerably different in a few years.

Until now, Google has locked phone and tablet manufacturers into its ecosystem. If they wanted to include Google's apps and services, they had to include them on every Android phone or tablet that they manufactured (with the exception of China, where Google does not work). This means, for example, that Samsung could not market a variant of the Galaxy S9 including only the Galaxy Apps store, the Samsung browser and is not include Chrome, Google Play, or Google Search.

Businesses have essentially been forced to sign this agreement. The vast majority of Android apps are distributed through the Google Play Store – and many of them depend on Google Play services to work. Abandoning Google would mean giving up the Play Store, which could mean sending a device without using Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, etc. Device makers should rely on another app store and convince developers to distribute their apps on it and, in many cases, rework those apps for them. operate without Google services.

It was something that the European Commission considered a big problem. And as part of its $ 5 billion decision condemning Google for fines for "illegal practices" with Android, it has forced Google to no longer impose this exclusive arrangement to its partners. The Commission wrote that Google was denying users "access to other innovations and smart mobile devices based on alternative versions of the Android operating system" and "shutting down". an important channel allowing competitors to introduce applications and services ".

We have never seen what Samsung, Motorola, Sony, HTC, LG, etc. would do. on an Android phone without Google. Now we could.

There are valid questions here about whether it's a good idea. All of these companies that are creating their own app stores and their back office services would be a mess for the developers and a source of confusion for the consumers. The transition would be ugly and could weaken the already rudimentary state of the Android premium apps.

Or, it could make all these things prosper. Samsung could do anything on the Galaxy Apps store, or an independent third party could create its own service, which will become the distributor of Android applications. These stores could offer better conditions to developers and better enforce privacy requirements to protect users, thus resulting in the development of the ecosystem of applications.

Perhaps more importantly, we have no idea what this world looks like, good or bad. We can have a glimpse of China, where applications are spread across many different stores. None of them has more than a quarter of the market, according to the Newzoo mobile research firm. Companies have little interest in offering phone variants, not to mention totally different materials, for one country only. Now, they have almost all over Europe to market these non Google devices.

Even if it is not a revolution, it could lead to remarkable projects. Amazon's Fire without Google tablets are some of the cheapest options on the market. And there is a sign that other companies could join Amazon's efforts. The Commission wrote that it had "found evidence that Google's conduct had prevented a number of major manufacturers from developing and selling Amazon's Android-based devices called" Fire OS ".

Who knows if they will? Businesses make money from Google search credentials and customers want Google apps. This exception is also limited to Europe because that is where the decision is made. Because of this limitation, it may be difficult for companies to have the scale needed to make the creation of an alternative ecosystem a wise decision, as these devices can not be sold elsewhere.

But they can try. And finally, it means that Google must be careful. Before, Android phone makers had no alternative – now they do it. For Google, which does not really own Android, this could be the first serious threat to its global dominance over phones for years.