Team China: Nation's biggest mobe makers link arms to battle Google's Play Store

How to supplement falling handset margins and rising tensions with the Trump government? Let me see....

A consortium of Chinese phone makers are to create alternatives to Google's dominant Play Store, reducing their reliance on America tech and building another potential source of income.

The Global Developer Service Alliance (GDSA) - comprised of Huawei, Xiaomi, OPPO, and Vivo – will seek to lure developers to deploy their content across each manufacturer’s mobile app store. In addition to apps, the GSDA’s platform will let individuals share movies, music, and magazines.

An early website for the project has gone live, containing basic documentation, and lists a bunch of early target markets: Spain, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Russia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Vietnam.

“The Global Developer Service Alliance (GDSA) is committed to providing one-stop services including content distribution, development support, marketing operation, brand promotion and traffic monetization to global developers,” the project’s website states.

China selfie revolution

No Huawei out: Prez Trump's game of chicken with China has serious consequences


Developers will be able to monetise their applications, although support is contingent upon the OEM and the territory of the user. The documentation notes that developers currently aren’t able to use the GSDA platform to market premium applications to Spanish users.

According to Reuters, the project is supposed to formally launch in March. However, with the novel coronavirus disrupting the Chinese tech sector, forcing some employees to miss work, it’s not clear if it’ll hit this deadline.

The Register has contacted Oppo, Vivo, Huawei, and Xiaomi for comment. At the time of publication they had not responded.

This app store will allow China’s biggest phone manufacturers – who collectively represent 40.1 percent of all phones sold globally during Q4 2019 – to break free from Google.

Last summer, Huawei and other Chinese based businesses, were placed on America's Entity List, which effectively forces US suppliers to attain a government-approved special license to trade with them. As part of this, Google yanked the Play Store and additional services from future shipments of Huawei smartphones. The resulting loss of confidence from consumers killed off Huawei's ambitions to become the world's biggest seller of phones, though it still rules the roost in China.

Other members of GDA, namely Oppo, Xioami and Vivo, have not been caught up in the crossfire between the US and Chinese to the same extent.

Another reason for the alliance is commerically based: With profit margins on handsets – particularly low-to-mid-range phones – incredibly tight, China’s big OEMs will diversify into services, allowing them to try to capture a bigger proportion of the app spend in China, the world's biggest smartphone market since 2012.

In September, Huawei announced it was investing $1bn into its own app bazaar – the Huawei App Gallery – to entice developers. That move was no doubt also motivated by the company’s desire to salvage its European handset business. Oppo, Vivo, and Xiaomi also operate their own app stores.

In many cases, users have tended to ignore these app stores, using instead the more developed Google Play Store, which has just shy of three million apps according to AppBrain.

Closing the “app gap” may allow these OEM-made app stores to become competitive. Crucially, the plan could make China’s increasingly prominent app stores resilient against any future disruption caused by a US-government embargo. ®

Other stories you might like

  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading
  • Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near
    Overhaul of Chrome add-ons set for January, Google says it's for all our own good

    Special report Seven months from now, assuming all goes as planned, Google Chrome will drop support for its legacy extension platform, known as Manifest v2 (Mv2). This is significant if you use a browser extension to, for instance, filter out certain kinds of content and safeguard your privacy.

    Google's Chrome Web Store is supposed to stop accepting Mv2 extension submissions sometime this month. As of January 2023, Chrome will stop running extensions created using Mv2, with limited exceptions for enterprise versions of Chrome operating under corporate policy. And by June 2023, even enterprise versions of Chrome will prevent Mv2 extensions from running.

    The anticipated result will be fewer extensions and less innovation, according to several extension developers.

    Continue reading
  • I was fired for blowing the whistle on cult's status in Google unit, says contractor
    The internet giant, a doomsday religious sect, and a lawsuit in Silicon Valley

    A former Google video producer has sued the internet giant alleging he was unfairly fired for blowing the whistle on a religious sect that had all but taken over his business unit. 

    The lawsuit demands a jury trial and financial restitution for "religious discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliation and related causes of action." It alleges Peter Lubbers, director of the Google Developer Studio (GDS) film group in which 34-year-old plaintiff Kevin Lloyd worked, is not only a member of The Fellowship of Friends, the exec was influential in growing the studio into a team that, in essence, funneled money back to the fellowship.

    In his complaint [PDF], filed in a California Superior Court in Silicon Valley, Lloyd lays down a case that he was fired for expressing concerns over the fellowship's influence at Google, specifically in the GDS. When these concerns were reported to a manager, Lloyd was told to drop the issue or risk losing his job, it is claimed. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022