Interesting read - thoughts? "Stock Android"

[hallux]

https://www.slashgear.com/the-stock-android-myth-16519816/

What does "stock Android" really mean?

My opinion - there is no OEM that I'm aware of that releases as "bare" of an Android OS on a mass-market device as Google does. I suppose Essential comes close but that's a small segment of the market comparatively. Also - Google used to market what I consider "reference devices" in the Nexus line. I still consider Google's build "stock Android" as Google's builds are always the first public builds to be updated (inclusive of monthly patching, point releases and major revisions).

Sure, AOSP can be considered "stock Android", but is it really? AOSP is not built with support for any particular device, it is simply the core that all device builds are based on.

Yes, one can argue that Google's builds are becoming less and less "stock" as more features are added to the Pixel launcher, but in the race for more features to differentiate devices, Google does the least in that regard - arguably allowing you to customize more by not forcing a certain messaging or notes app onto your device, allowing you to make your own choice.

Thoughts?

 

[Almeuit]

Pixel phones are what I count as "stock" when I say it. Even though it *technically* isn't -- it is how Google wants Android to run on a phone and IMO it runs amazing .

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

I think Pixel is not "stock", but you also can't buy a device that comes with "stock". So... for all intents and purposes, it's the closest we can get to stock, out of the box.

 

[metllicamilitia]

I think the closest to “stock” Android are my ZTE Blade X Max and Moto G5 Plus. Really barebones, with stock browser, Launcher3, Android Messages, Chrome, Play Store, GBoard, and a couple things from each company thrown in as well. They have a great lack of settings and customization options. True stock Android is abysmal, and while I haven’t used a Pixel or Nexus, that is also what I would consider to be “stock” Android.

 

[anon(10092459)]

This can of worms...

Well, I think there's a difference between "stock Android (AOSP)" and "Pure Android". I think "Stock Android" is what's described in the article. "Most will agree that it basically means “no bloatware” or “no customized skins”.

The Pixel is close, but people forget that UI is Google's interpretation of the best way to implement Android and in that sense it's no different that Oxygen OS or anything that Samsung decides to do ... just another interpretation.

Keeping it all 100, Is there actually a device out right now that's 100% "stock"?

 

[Ry]

Totally agree with this article.

"Nexus/Pixel is not stock Android"

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

This can of worms...

Well, I think there's a difference between "stock Android (AOSP)" and "Pure Android". I think "Stock Android" is what's described in the article. "Most will agree that it basically means “no bloatware” or “no customized skins”.

The Pixel is close, but people forget that UI is Google's interpretation of the best way to implement Android and in that sense it's no different that Oxygen OS or anything that Samsung decides to do ... just another interpretation.

Keeping it all 100, Is there actually a device out right now that's 100% "stock"?

No, there is not.

 

[hallux]

Keeping it all 100, Is there actually a device out right now that's 100% "stock"?

This is kind of what I was getting at with my first post. There is no OEM shipping a pure AOSP build with just support for the hardware added.

 

[dogsbyte]

I consider what Google released to be "stock" Android.

 

[Morty2264]

I would label any Pixel device as stock Android. Even if they have a few OS tweaks or anything like that, they're as close to stock as you can get!

 

[orangecroc]

Android One phones are stock android.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

Android One phones are stock android.

How so?

 

[orangecroc]

How so?

Android One devices are essentially stock Android phones made by OEM partner manufacturers. Being part of Android One - and labelled as such on the rear of the phone - brings with it a guarantee that it's a solid and stable version of Android that's not loaded with other apps, services and bloatware.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

Android One devices are essentially stock Android phones made by OEM partner manufacturers. Being part of Android One - and labelled as such on the rear of the phone - brings with it a guarantee that it's a solid and stable version of Android that's not loaded with other apps, services and bloatware.

Agreed in principle, but that doesn't seem to be what is actually being sold.

 

[chanchan05]

Basically, Pixel and Android One are IMO stock Android with a custom launcher on top and maybe hardware specific modifications.

 

[orangecroc]

I'm fairly certain that android One doesn't have a custom launcher over the top of it.

 

[chanchan05]

I'm fairly certain that android One doesn't have a custom launcher over the top of it.

I'm fairly certain that the launcher on Nokias are different from the launchers on the Xiaomi Android Ones.

 

[anon(10092459)]

Read an article over on AA and watched the video. While that piece is more on "Stock" vs Android One vs Android Go, there's a part of that article that made me wonder if this definition will become new or maybe widely accepted definition over the next couple of years. This part specifically:

"Note: For clarity, we’re defining stock Android as whatever Google ships on its own hardware. There are obviously differences between the Android found on Nexus phones and that found on Pixels, but given the demise of the Nexus program, we’ll be referring to the Pixels’ software as stock Android throughout what follows."

So, does Google software on Google hardware = new definition of "Stock Android"?

...and in case anyone is interested in the full article:

https://www.androidauthority.com/stock-android-vs-android-one-vs-android-go-860020/

 

[LeoRex]

Re: Interesting read - thoughts? "Stock Android"

I think that when people throw out the term 'stock', what they are really getting at is the user experience, the UX.

It's the operation of the notification shade, the share UI, etc. All those little windows and transitions that make as much of an impact on our experience as the phone's actually speed.

Why? Because there is actually a significant amount of work done to make sure all these elements work properly... They load quickly, transition quickly... They react to user input without jitter and hesitation.

Now, the Android base source code comes with plenty of optimization already built into the code, but that is a starting point. It would still have to be optimized to the hardware on which it runs. Google will 'tune' things to run well on its Pixels, without major changes to the underlying base source... They'll add some features here and there, but they don't make huge alterations to the base code because, well, they already did the work when they developed Android to begin with... They just make it so it runs as well as it possiblity can.

Some other OEMs take a similar approach and avoid trying to reinvent the wheel. They leave those systems be and add features without making wholesale changes to low level modules. Why spend all that extra R&D when Google already did all the work? There's no magic behind why Motos and Nokias run really well... The operating system is functioning as it was originally intended. They run 'close to stock', which isn't a very good term since they often are a close to true stock as Google's phones.

And with Go, they pare things down a bit to allow it to run well on lower powered hardware... But that UX that we all interface with, that remains largely untouched.

Then you have the Samsungs, LGs and Huaweis... They take the base source code and replace significant chunks of code with their own custom framework, either to have it conform to their own design language or they think they can make it run better. And what you usually end up with is a UX that is no longer as nimble or as well integrated with the core systems... Like a sports car with a few too many aftermarket parts.

Sure, Samsung has scaled things back a bit over the years, but the version of Android they ship in a S9 is still substantially different than what you'll get in a 2XL... They've made UI elements appear more stock, but that's often just window dressing and the underlying code is still heavily modified in order for them to incorporate the long list of features they include. A list that comes with a price; that finely tuned feel. The phone has to work harder to do the same simple tasks... It's a gymnist that is doing their routine wearing 10lbs ankle weights.

 

[AndroidFan128]

Stock Androids are androids that aren't modified in any way. Being the "Stock" version.