• Merags


  • aamd11

    “They’ve also ensured that the notification area displays white icons across all devices in KitKat” correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m almost positive the droid ultra, maxx and mini still retained the blue icons in KK. But yeah this is certainly a step in the right direction

  • HelloCDN

    I don’t see how it makes sense at all. They built an open platform, they sell it as “customize it however you like”, yet now they start complaining about different UIs?

    • Guest

      Google wants every Tom, Dick and Harry to know they’re using Android and not to forget it

    • HelloCDN

      Well that would mean going same direction as Apple, because simply having a logo at start-up screen won’t cut it. I’m not exactly sure a lot of Android users will like this approach.

    • jndvrk

      Google has definitely been reigning in Android from all the OEMs and carriers lately.

      I think its a good thing overall, but seems to support the idea that Google only kept android ‘open’ to gain market-share as quick as possible, now that they have the numbers they’re closing things off.

    • Lyndon Boychuk

      No…they are getting the recognition they deserve. Having this on the boot screen makes consumers aware that they have options when it comes to Android.

    • Rimtu Kahn

      We can see it as complaining or we can see it as valid concerns. Android is an open platform and they cannot charge for it or put restrictions on what anyone wants to do with it. But they are using the leverage of Play Services which is Google’s commercial product. That is not native of Android (e.g. Kindle Fire series tablets). So, Google just wants to make sure consumers don’t start thinking that the Play Services set of products are somehow associated with Samsung, or HTC or LG. I don’t think Google is requiring Amazon to add the logo for Kindle Fire tablets, since they do not have the Play Services apps.

  • collinpage

    Google wants every Tom, Dick and Harry to know they’re using Android and not to forget it.

  • Neil V

    Protecting their brand, how dare they? lol

    • jndvrk

      But the whole point of Android’s openness was that manufacturers didn’t have to do this.

      I think this will get confusing very quickly. I can understand that Google would want some branding when the phone is using Google services, but wouldn’t it then make sense to brand it as ‘with Play services’ or something like that rather than ‘powered by Android’?

      Unless this will be a requirement for all android-based devices, so Kindles and any Cyonagenmod powered phones would then need to include this as well. But this would go against the whole free-and-open thing.

    • Neil V

      Personally, I don’t care.

      I would much rather prefer to see Google branding than a piece of fruit with a bite taken out of it any day. 😉

    • Lyndon Boychuk

      No…it’s still free and open, but they do deserve some credit for providing the operating system we love so much.

  • Humberto Giambrone

    Makes sense to me. It’s a couple of seconds on a boot screen, which I rarely see anyhow.

  • Brandon Orr

    Wasn’t Android touted as the best OS because it’s open source? It seems like every day Google is starting to make it more and more Closed. I can’t see this particularly benefiting users. I fell in love with their services because they were easy to hop on and off of. Now it seems like I’m stuck with a Gmail that is no longer active sync supported unless I pay, among basically forcing me to use Google+ just to sign into Youtube. It’s getting to the point where I just want to use Android, but I don’t necessarily want to be locked into the Google framework.

  • blzd

    I think it’s just all the system icons that would appear on the top right since 4.4 Kit Kat. App icons on the top left still seem to be able to contain colour.

  • Lyndon Boychuk

    Should be mandatory…along with the ability to use Google apps without having to root.

  • rgl168

    A few weeks ago I was at Target and a lady was chatting up with the Target phone rep about buying a phone outright. Of course the Target rep had no interest in that. So when she walked away from the cell shop area I spoke to her quietly and asked that she should consider the LG Nexus 5 – the one I’m holding. But she told me she wanted to get a Samsung phone.

    Most of us know better: Samsung and LG (and HTC and others) are all Android phones of slightly different implementations. But to average consumers – like that lady at Target – don’t know that.

  • ScooterinAB

    This sounds fair and reasonable. There is still a lot of market confusion over brands and operating systems. I still hear people talking about Samsung iPhones and Google iPads, as well as concerns about other manufacturers’ phones selling less because customers don’t realize they are also android phones.

    At worst, this clears up some confusion about what Android is, cements the brand better, and perhaps better differentiates full Android from the increasing presence of forked operating systems.

  • 1bmwdrvr1

    So what! They should require that thier brand name and logo are visable… Why not? It’s natural fit for other companies like soda pop manufacturers to require their logo on bar “coasters” and glasses, even on awnings and umbrellas. (In fact, Coca Cola will shut down restaurants if they date serve Pepsi, lol). But, rather than writing code for their logo I wish they would see to handsets getting updates in their OS… (EVEN IF WE NEED TO PAY FOR THEM!)