Now Is the Time to Start Planning for the Post-Android World

We need a free software mobile operating system. Is it eelo?

Remember Windows? It was an operating system that was quite popularin the old days of computing. However, its global market share hasbeen in decline for some time, andlastyear, the Age of Windows ended, and the Age of Android began.

Android—and thus Linux—is now everywhere. We take it for grantedthat Android is used on more thantwo billiondevices, which come in just about every form factor—smartphones,tablets, wearables, Internet of Things, in-car systems and so on. Now,in the Open Source world, we just assume that Android alwayswill hold around 90% of the smartphone sector, whatever the brand nameon the device, and that we always will live in an Android world.

Except—we won't. Just as Windows took over from DOS, andAndroid took over from Windows, something will take over fromAndroid. Some might say "yes,but notyet". While Android goes from strength to strength, and Appleis contenttomake huge profits from its smaller, tightly controlled market,there's no reason for Android to lose its dominance. After all,there are no obvious challengers and no obvious need for somethingnew.

However, what if the key event in the decline and fall of Android hasalready taken place, but was something quite different from whatwe were expecting? Perhaps it won't be a frontal attack by anotherplatform, but more of a subtle fracture deep within the Androidecosystem, caused by some external shock.Somethinglike this, perhaps:

Today, the Commission has decided to fine Google 4.34billion euros for breaching EU antitrust rules. Google has engagedin illegal practices to cement its dominant market position ininternet search. It must put an effective end to this conduct within90 days or face penalty payments.

What's striking is not so much the monetary aspect, impressivethough that is, but the following:"our decision stops Google from controlling which searchand browser apps manufacturers can pre-install on Android devices,or which Android operating system they can adopt."

Whether or not you agree with the EU's decision, and assuming thatit isn'toverturnedon appeal, that demand for Google to loosen its control overthe Android ecosystem is significant, and it may be the beginning ofthe end of the Android era as we know it. Even if it isn't, theEU fine is a timely reminder that the moment will, inevitably, come.Google clearly knows that, which is probably why it is developingFuchsia.

Fuchsia will be open source, made up ofamix of BSD 3 clause, MIT and Apache 2.0 licensed code, but notbased on Linux. Significantly,theFuchsia "book" readme file begins: "Fuchsia is not Linux". IfFuchsia turns intoamajor project that appears on smartphones and elsewhere, theimplications for the Linux community are clearly huge. The OpenSource world therefore needs to start thinking about what that willmean for the community—and to start planning for it.

Smartphone manufacturers currently dependent on Android alreadyhave back-up plans of varying degrees of seriousness. For example,the Chinese tech giant Huawei,nowthe number two smartphone manufacturer after Samsung, isdevelopingits own alternative, although there are no details yet.Samsungstill has Tizen, for what it's worth. The question is, whatkind of insurance policy should the Open Source world be puttingin place against the day when Google moves off Android?

Alongside all the previous (failed) attempts to come up with a viablefree software smartphone operating system, andPurism's promising Librem 5system, there's a new option that's well worth a look.It comes fromGaëlDuval, who probably is best known as the creator of the MandrakeGNU/Linux distribution in 1998. Based on Red Hat, Mandrake setgreat store by ease of use, and it was the first of a new generationof distros aimed at ordinary users, which have become commonplacetoday. His new project is the free software mobile operating systemcalled eelo. Duval says he chose the name in part "because eels aresmall fish that can hide into the sea. That's perfect for my questof more privacy". Addressing the woeful lack of privacy that is aby-product of using today's smartphones isamajor aim of the project:

Last year, I decided to leave Apple and Google: I wantto free myself from the smartphone duopoly; I want to regain controlover my data privacy; I want to protect my freedom.

At first, I thought I would just fork Android, add a better design,remove any Google stuff, select a few privacy-compliant web servicesand add them to the system.

A little more than 6 months later, I realize that we're buildingsomething really, really bigger than I had expected. This is madepossible by the tremendous support I'm getting from many peoplearound the world, and by a growing community of eelocontributors.

After asuccessfulcrowdfunding campaign, Duval has set up afoundation called /e/ to support eelo'sdevelopment. Its website contains details about themobile operating systemroadmap, theapplicationsthat are planned and theteambehind the project. There's also a "manifesto",which is nothing if not ambitious.

It's still the early days for eelo. However, what sets it apart from previousopen-source mobile operating system projects—and what makes itworthy of support by the coding community—istheemphasis on privacy. In this respect, it can be seen as arepresentative phenomenon of theGDPR-suffusedworld we now inhabit:

eelo is committed to providing desirable mobile phonesand web-services that respect the user's data privacy. The eelo OSwill not send a user's data to eelo, such as his location, hiscontacts, his agenda, in an exploitable manner. eelo users will beable to use eelo cloud services with the guarantee that their datawill be kept private and stored as securely as possible.

That's only an aspiration at the moment, but it's a laudable one.For too long, the Open Source world has been complicit with Googlein undermining the privacy and freedom of Android users. It'sunderstandable—Android has helped make Linux the most widely usedoperating system in the world, overthrowing Windows. Fighting againstGoogle in the early days of smartphones, as it tried to establishAndroid as an alternative to completely proprietary offerings, wouldhave been quixotic. But the time has come to assert free software'sunderlying ethical foundation and to move on from an Android worldto something better—in all senses. Whether that will be Duval'seelo or something else is a matter for the Open Source communityto debate. But it's a debate that we need to have now, as a choice,before it becomes a necessity.

Glyn Moody has been writing about the internet since 1994, and about free software since 1995. In 1997, he wrote the first mainstream feature about GNU/Linux and free software, which appeared inWired. In 2001, his bookRebel Code: Linux And The Open Source Revolution was published. Since then, he has written widely about free software and digital rights. He has ablog, and he is active on social media: @glynmoody onTwitter.