The android operating system is a linux-based operating system and is completely open source.

Android is the most trending operating system in the world right now. But do you know that Android is a Linux-based operating system? Did you know that the source codes on which the developers built the Android Operating System are initially Linux kernels? Believe it or not, it is accurate, and we will reveal the story in detail.

Today here we are going to discuss why Android is a Linux-based operating system and the difference between Android and Linux. Now, before we dive deep into this conversation, you should understand the origin stories of both the Linux Kernel and the Android Operating System. So, let us discuss why Linux is most suited to develop the Android OS. Also, we will debate some points to differentiate both the operating system.

Linux Kernel

Linux Kernel is an open-source software package developed from Unix OS. You have to understand that Linux can’t operate on its own, it needs proper driver software for the operating system to run, which Kernel provides. Without the Kernel, you can’t perform tasks or manage the CPU & memories. All in all, the Kernel associated with the Linux OS makes it a complete operating system.

The Kernel is what makes you do multi-tasking and therefore many portable devices that you use run on the Linus Kernel OS. We can say that “Kernel is the middle man between the software and hardware”.

What is Android?

In layman’s terms, Android is a full-fledged operating system typically used in smartphones and tablets. There are recent implementations of Smart TV and SmartWatch running on the Android operating system as well.

Now, if we do a bit of research on the native OS, Android is based on the Linux Kernel. Meaning, that the source codes of the native Linux OS are tweaked to form a definitive operating system of its own. Just like in the 90s, several companies used the Linux source codes to develop a modified operating systems like Ubuntu and Mint Linux. Here you can know more about the Kernel used in Android.

You may wonder why the developers of Android choose Linux for its native source codes. There are several reasons why you should prefer Linux over any other operating system. However, that is not relevant here. So, skipping that point, we can say that the developers of Android wanted a seamless operating system, especially for portable devices. Moreover, since Windows is a proprietary product of Microsoft, they have to rely on an open-source platform.

Apart from that, Linux is the most compatible and works on almost every platform or device. To add to that, the security in this operating system is top-notch, so you can do pretty much what you like. When it comes to performance, you can’t compare it to any other operating system of its kind, making Linux the ultimate choice for Android.

How Android and Linux are Different?

You can argue that the source code of Android is from Linux, but there is no doubt that Android is not Linux! We can say that Android is a Linux-based operating system just because it makes on the Linux kernel.

In spite of the similarities, there are some significant differences between the two operating systems. First of all, Android doesn’t use the usual Linux kernel. Secondly, the GNU software and libraries are missing in the Android operating system, and most importantly, you can’t use an Android app on Linux or the reverse.

Conclusion

Android is the most popular and obvious choice for your Smartphone, Tablet, Smart TV, and other portable devices. You can say it is similar to Linux, but can’t say it is identical. Moreover, people are trying to innovate every day to make more flagship content for the Android operating system.

You would think that Android relationship with Linux and open source would be fairly well understood by now. However, recent articles in the tech and general press have created confusion where none ought to exist. Let me see if I can un-muddy the waters.

Let's take a look inside Android, open source and licensing.

The Guardian published a story, which they have since taken down, spreading FUD about Google, Android, Linux, open source, and licensing. The paper later published another article trying to get the Android facts right, but, well, they still don't.

Not long afterwards, Ben Edelman, Harvard Business School professor and consultant to "various companies that compete with Google,"  analyzed the Google's Mobile Application Distribution Agreement (MADA PDF Link) that was revealed in the 2011 Oracle v. Google lawsuit. When all the MADA provisions are taken together, Edelman argues, they tie Google's apps into a near seamless whole. These provisions detail how Google applications are presented on a licensed device to help Google expand into new markets.

To Edelman, this means that Google suppresses competition and harms consumers.

Really? It sounds like ordinary business practices to me.

For example, let's look at Microsoft and Red Hat. The former is a leading proprietary company, the latter is the top Linux vendor. If I buy a computer or device running Windows or Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I expect it to come with Microsoft or Red Hat-specific services respectively, such as Windows Azure and RHEL OpenStack, for their native cloud services. (Not to mention Minesweeper in Windows' case) This isn’t cutthroat competition; it’s bundling services and tools the market wants and expects.

It irritates me to see these mistakes about how Android is made, sold, and licensed. So it's high time to spell out the facts. Let's go over the list of Android myths, shall we?

Myth #1. Google Services define Android.

Google Services are very handy. Maps, Gmail, Google Drive, Calendar, and Search are all great, but you don't have to use them. Android is a fine mobile operating system in its own right, with its built-in home screen launcher; contacts directory; dialer and phone app; and camera and gallery. You can, if you want to, add your own services to it.

Indeed, that's exactly what has happened in China. There, 270-million Android users use Android, but, thanks in part to China and Google's continuing feud, 70 percent of them don't use Google services.

Part of the confusion about services-and-platform tie-ins is that we're moving from a device-centric computing world to a cloud and services-based one. When people look at a device, they still see it as a standalone thing. That's often no longer the case. Instead, no matter who made it or what runs on it, the hardware is simply the endpoint for a variety of cloud services. That doesn't change the nature of the operating system, but it does change the user experience.

Each device has its preferred service provider: Microsoft for Windows; Apple for iOS; Google for Android; and so on. At the same time, each is usually open to other services, thanks to HTML5, and other development tools that trump native apps and services.

Myth #2. Android is not open source.

Yes, yes it is.

You can take Android Open Source Project (AOSP) code today and make your own version of Android today. If you want to, you can even take a page from CyanogenMod's book and make an Android that works with multiple devices instead of being tied to one vendor's smartphones and tablets.

Contrary to Edelman's claims, you can also build commercially viable operating systems off Android without Google Mobile Service (GMS) apps. Or, at least, you can try to. That's exactly what Mozilla is doing with Firefox OS. And, Canonical's Ubuntu Touch started out using CyanogenMod Android for its foundation. Indeed, it still uses Android during its initial boot up.

Granted, when Google is working on its latest version of Android, it has not always released beta code as early as some would like. Historically, the big hardware manufacturers, such as Samsung, HTC, and ASUS, get an early private look at Android source code. The goal is to enable these top Google hardware partners to create devices that work well with the newest version of Android as soon as it's released.

At times this has caused tension between Google and its smaller partners. This came to a head in 2011 before the release of Android 3.0, Honeycomb. This delay between the release of early Honeycomb, not ready for prime time binaries, and its corresponding source code to the broader community led to bitterness between smaller OEMs and developers and Google. Since then, Google has closed the time gap between early access to major players and general access to all Android OEMs and developers.

You can argue all you like about how open source Android is, or isn't. It's certainly not "free software" by Richard M. Stallman's definition, but it's open enough for all practical purposes.

Myth #3. Google charges licensing fees for Google Mobile Services.

No, they don't. A Google representative said, "Such stories are inaccurate. Google does not charge licensing fees for Google Mobile Services (GMS). We will not be commenting further."

Other sources, from major Android device manufacturers, agreed. One top Android smartphone and tablet vendor told me, "The Guardian story's just wrong."

That's not to say there isn't a fee to create "official" Android devices with GMS. Sources both at Google and Android OEMs confirm that Google charges no fee per se, Google does require devices to be certified; and the factories that do this certification do require a fee.

This certification fee varies from vendor to vendor, device to device, and from one version of Android to another. At the end of the accounting day, it appears to average about 75 cents to a dollar per shipped device. No one, however, would confirm this amount on the record. There is, however, no licensing fee per se.

Myth #4. Android isn't Linux.

Come on, folks! It's always been Linux.

I think this is the source of the recurring misconception: In 2010, a Google engineer put his foot in his mouth and said that Android isn't Linux. There were some technical differences which kept Android out of the main Linux tree for a while, but they were resolved.

Even at the height of the conflict, Android was still based on Linux. By March 2012, Android and Linux were re-merged into a single operating system.  I can't imagine that the two will ever fork again, not in any way, shape, or form.

What it all means in sum is that Android is indeed an open-source operating system and that anyone—yes, even you — can use it as the basis for their own devices, applications, and services. As such, it's more open than Apple or Microsoft's mobile operating systems, and it's only significant open-source competitors, are — oh the irony — were actually built on AOSP.

Related Stories:

• Android OEM requirements unveiled
• Nokia's Android phone: X marks the forked spot
• Android and Linux re-merge into one operating system
• How open is Google's Android?
• A Google Android and Java history lesson

Is Android a Linux

Is Android an open source operating system?

What is a Linux

Is an open source Linux