Business Insider is contributing a series of columns to CNN.com that challenge commonly held beliefs about the tech world . ( Business Insider ) -- Google loves to talk about how `` open '' Android , its operating system for mobile devices , is . Especially when it comes to comparisons between Android and Apple 's iPhone , openness is Google 's favorite talking point . But what , exactly , does it even mean that Android is `` open ? '' Google would point to a number of broadly related facts about the OS , but here 's the essential point : Android is `` open '' in that Google distributes its source code under something called the Apache License . Code distributed under an Apache License is free for anyone to use as they wish . Importantly , unlike some open source licenses , the Apache License lets anyone use the code in question as part of proprietary software . That is , if you write something and distribute it for free under the Apache License , I 'm free to tack on some modifications , keep the added code a secret , and charge customers for the whole package . So , while Google likes to say that Android 's openness is about giving the consumer freedom , the real freedom here has nothing to do with consumers . Consumers do n't buy operating systems . They buy phones . Phone manufacturers -- and the mobile carriers with whom they form partnerships -- are free to add code to Android as they see fit before loading it on to their handsets and selling them to you . They 're also free to throw up all sorts of hurdles to make it difficult for you to get rid of their software and install a `` clean '' version of Google 's OS . The changes that handset makers and carriers make to Android are generally bad news for the consumer . Many pre-install shoddy , proprietary software -- `` bloatware '' -- which ca n't be removed , to drive users to their own services . They also cripple phone features . The latest version of Android , for instance , lets you use your phone as a mobile hotspot , allowing you to access the Internet wirelessly from your nearby computer , using the phone 's data connection . Unfortunately , on most phones , that feature is broken by default , and can only be enabled by paying your carrier an extra monthly fee . Google 's response to this is that because many different manufacturers are competing to sell Android phones , consumers will always win out in the end . If consumers did n't like the bloatware that came with their phones , other manufacturers would n't include it , the bad actors would lose customers , and everyone would have to adjust . As Eric Schmidt put it : `` that 's how markets work . '' That is how markets work in textbooks . It 's also more or less how unrestricted markets for undifferentiated products with large numbers of sellers work in practice . Unfortunately , it 's not how the market for cell phones works . There are just a handful of corporations in the world that make quality , high-end phones . And , in any given area , there are only a few carriers to provide service to those phones . There are two oligopolies in between you and Android , and they 're working together . With all due respect to Eric Schmidt , that sort of market generally does n't work very efficiently at all . To be fair , there are lots of great ways in which Android really does give users more freedom than the iPhone . For one thing , Google does n't try to prevent you from downloading apps of which it does n't approve . And , for the most part , opening up the OS to competition between different hardware manufacturers is terrific . These aspects of `` openness '' are a big part of why I switched to Android , and have no plans to go back . But letting handset makers and , especially , carriers make the Android experience worse is a bad move , and one the hurts Google 's customers . And , contrary to what the company claims , it would n't have to betray any principles of open source to fix this . Google can go ahead and give away its source under the Apache License , and let people run wild with it . But it should n't give away the `` Android '' brand to any company that cripples the product . Google is spending lots of money hyping that brand , and it is staking its reputation on it . These companies are taking full advantage of that . Google can be open without letting companies release inferior products with Google 's name on them . That kind of openness is bad news for the consumer , and ultimately bad news for Google . Copyright © 2010 Business Insider .
Apache License lets anyone use the code in question as part of proprietary software . Google does n't try to stop you from downloading software of which it does n't approve . ` ` It does n't give away the ` ` Android '' brand to any company that cripples the product , '' says Google .