r/Android • u/thomythenigersaurus • 4d ago
Could Samsung actually pull off its own mobile OS in the long run?
I mean creating something like iOS. When using my Galaxy, I noticed that there are a lot of “duplicate” apps, meaning apps that serve the same purpose.
I've been thinking about an idea I call Project TOS. Basically, it's a concept for an independent Samsung mobile OS, potentially based on Tizen.
The idea is to give Samsung more control over its own software, build a stronger ecosystem, and make its devices feel more integrated. One thing that got me thinking about this is how Samsung phones come with apps that do pretty much the same thing as Google's apps. Why not have a more unified experience, kinda like Apple does with iOS?
I know competing with Android and iOS would be a huge challenge, especially when it comes to app support and getting developers on board. But could Samsung actually make it work with a solid long-term plan?
Would you guys be interested in something like this, or do you think it's just not realistic?
84
u/Human-Visual-9087 1d ago
They did a series of phones that had tizen on them, did not work out.
Edit: The Z line lmao, Z1 (2015) through Z4 in 2017
19
u/MegatronsKnee 1d ago edited 1d ago
Surprised this wasn't at the top.
Yeah, they already did it with Tizen - TVs, phones, watches, iirc.
It may not have been a serious attempt - it might have just been a hedge against Google shutting them out or doing something they couldn't abide with the android ecosystem, or a negotiating tactic to get more rev share, but it was very real. Samsung were/are a massive share of the Android business and lots of people inside Google would have taken their threat to take their ball elsewhere to play incredibly seriously.
In some ways, it's still working - there's still the implicit threat of "we could dust off Tizen if you reduce our percentage or force us to do X". It's a similar reason to why Samsung kept copies of their own apps and services - in case they ever left/threatened to the leave Google Play Services sub-ecosystem.
Given the very low profit margin on (Android) hardware, it's very hard to justify as building a new OS, mostly because of difficulty in fostering a developer ecosystem. Also, companies build android apps because it's where users are. On a new OS, the manufacturer would need to be paying millions to Netflix, Meta, Snapchat and so on to port their own apps to the OS (or build their own copies) as consumers are going to returning their phones immediately if they take it out the box and can't find the apps they need.
I think the fact that Samsung and Google have moved ever closer, and Samsung are shuttering some of their own apps, indicates that Samsung are being forced by economic reality to accept they're stuck in Google's Android orbit. Even Google internally are doing the same by killing off Chrome OS.
Huawei were forced into it and seem to be making a go of it, but China is a big enough market to support it, especially with government help.
1
u/Neg_Crepe 1d ago
It’s not at at the top because OP already acknowledge the Tizen phones
•
u/LordKwik Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 12h ago
at no point did OP sound like they knew of the Tizen phone attempt and failure, only that Tizen existed.
since the failure of their own OS, Samsung and Google have created one of the strongest, if not the strongest multi-billion dollar partnership in history. they are literally co-architects of the Android experience now. it's a symbiotic relationship to keep up with the oligopoly alongside Apple, which works very well in the capitalistic age.
trying to break free of Android wouldn't just cost Samsung their market share, it would jeopardize the South Korean economy. it was a good attempt a decade ago, but today it's not worth it. no offense to OP, but their post read like a 14 year old thinking they had a good idea.
•
u/Neg_Crepe 12h ago
It's implied that it failed by it not being a thing anymore and him waiting a Samsung phone os.... You missed some context. Maybe next time
•
u/LordKwik Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 12h ago
nope, read it again. you filled in blanks that OP didn't leave. it's a terrible idea nonetheless
•
u/Neg_Crepe 12h ago
You missed what was said between the lines. I bet it happens a lot.
•
u/LordKwik Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 12h ago
all you've done is assume, of both OP and me. and y'know what they say when you assume...
2
u/bankkopf 1d ago
Samsung had Bada as their own OS running on the Wave series phones in the early 2010s concurrently with the first Android Galaxy phones. Tizen was their second attempt to get their own OS running.
1
u/OrionGrant Xiaomi 14 Ultra 1d ago
I worked at Samsung during this time, they were decent feature phones but ultimately crap smartphones.
25
28
19
u/visceralintricacy 1d ago edited 1d ago
They'd lose me, and 95% of their customer base overnight. I couldn't imagine a worse decision.
And your whole thought for why this is a good idea, is because there* are too many choices for apps?
8
u/WittieApps 1d ago
Indie dev take: I build my game with Kotlin Multiplatform, which is exactly the tooling that supposedly makes a new OS cheap to support. However, every platform is another store account, another review process, another set of device-specific bugs that are now my problem (ask me about OEMs and their creative interpretations of Android APIs). The chicken and egg isn’t porting effort, it’s that nobody small can afford to own one more platform’s weirdness for a sliver of market share. Huawei got apps because Chinese devs had no alternative. Samsung would just have to pay, a lot.
7
u/onolide 1d ago
I'm pretty sure Samsung considered this since their early Galaxy Watches were all running their own Tizen OS, but one day Samsung fully pivoted towards co-developing WearOS with Google instead, so it doesn't bode well for their ability to independently maintain a mobile OS long-term. If they couldn't continue maintaining Tizen OS for a watch, I doubt they could manage to maintain a full mobile OS for a phone or iPad, which need so much more features
11
u/Cantripping_ 1d ago
No. They could create an OS, sure. But mobile OS's live and die by app support.
Either you spend billions on incentivizing this, and risk the entire endeavour likely failing anyway, or it definitely fails.
Amazon has tried this, Microsoft has tried this, Firefox has tried this. They all failed. Now, Samsung is somewhat better positioned than them, having their own chip fabrication process, but that changes nothing about the simple fact that no one will use a plattform without apps. And that porting over millions of apps is expensive enough to the point no one tried a crack at it unless absolutely forced to (Huawei.).
It's just not economically feasible otherwise.
Unless of course AI can eventually port apps from one OS to another at a press of a button. That would open up some avenues...
Though you underestimate just how loyal people are to their chosen "thing." People would resent a new OS. We subconsciously resist change as unpredictable.
You would have to have a damn good, immediate value proposition as to why a new OS is better. And the truth is, it won't be.
12
u/gordolme Galaxy Fold 8 OneUI 9 1d ago
They tried that once. Twice, if you count both phones and watches.
Android and iOS are too entrenched for a third to try to go mainstream, this is a factor in the demise of Windows Phone, Blackberry, and before those PalmOS, despite the advantages each had entering the modern(ish) smartphone market. Pretty much all of the separately named systems running on other phones are either Apple iOS or forks or clones of or skins on top of Android, and done for reasons other than "let's be different".
What Samsung is reportedly doing here is not a new OS, it's a rename of their skin. ColorOS (Oppo), OxygenOS (OnePlus) aren't separate OSes, they're skins. Graphene is a fork.
3
u/bert93 1d ago
It's a bit weird to refer to those as skins and then GOS as a fork.
They are all downstream forks.
3
u/gordolme Galaxy Fold 8 OneUI 9 1d ago
From my understanding of Graphene, it's a more hardened version of Android, way more than the overlays and additions that Samsung, Oppo/OnePlus, etc, apply.
1
u/BevansDesign 1d ago
Yeah, when you can only make one choice, eventually you're left with only two options (minus a few mostly-nonviable alternatives). A lot of stuff is like that, from tech to political parties. And unfortunately, those two options can often become so entrenched that they're impossible to replace, and gradually get bogged down and stop trying to be better.
6
u/PineapplePizza99 1d ago
All it takes is for Google to not make Youtube, Google Chrome and Google Search available for all of it to fall apart.
5
u/mpgd 1d ago
There's virtually no incentive for that. The money is not on the operating system itself. The R&D investment to reinvent the wheel is not worth it. They do have plenty of customizations already, on top of the vanilla Android, which has some really good quality of life features. Some of which are being implemented by Google in later versions of the OS.
7
u/leonidasmark Galaxy S23 1d ago
They couldn't even maintain their own Messaging app and they gave it up for Google Messages and you think they could develop and maintain their own OS?
6
u/dogpoopy_ 1d ago
Have you used Samsung during the Touchwiz era? Their UI is literally designed to have their own apps along with stock aosp apps because they can't simply remove it. Nowadays they are trying to indeed unify with Google stuff that's why Gemini is the default AI assistant and Google Messages is the default SMS app. And a money grabbing corporate like Samsung will not take the risk to make their own OS while having one of the most successful custom android OS in the current market.
2
u/Far_Reserve9938 1d ago
Nowadays they are trying to indeed unify with Google stuff that's why Gemini is the default AI assistant and Google Messages is the default SMS
Nop. Google message is required because Google owns RCS on Android.
And Gemini is the default because they gave Samsung an enormous pile of money. Google need everyone to use Gemini right now because they need that data to feed the LLM.
2
u/dogpoopy_ 1d ago
No one own RCS it's an open industry standard. Most any other brand has it on their own messaging app in Android. It's not even present in AOSP it belongs to the entire mobile industry. It's just Samsung step back from maintain their own RCS infrastructure.
And the deal with default AI isn't Google's doing all alone. Samsung let Google handle the heavy-lifting to cut cost managing their own LLM while being paid.
Whatever corporate deals or backend strategy went on, the actual result for the user is what matters. It finally kills off the useless bloat compared to the previous versions of the UI. Now you won't bought a phone and will be forced to live with two of almost everything two messaging apps, two browsers, two assistants, two gallery apps cluttering up the OS. Samsung specific apps has become so optional that you can just disable/uninstall most of them except the core components and live with google counterparts for better cross android device continuity
3
u/Far_Reserve9938 1d ago
RCS is open in principle, in reality it’s Apple and Google.
Samsung worked with carrier to support rcs, carrier stopped working on their own solution when Google embedded it into their messaging app and assumed the infrastructure behind.
Samsung could spend millions on making an alternative infrastructure, just so they can ship their own messaging app… but the reality is that it doesn’t make any sense economically speaking.
Google is buying its way into everything with enormous pile of money. They always worked like that, and it’s not different today.
At one point, you don’t even have a choice anymore. If you get offered 10 billions to make Gemini you default assistant, you can’t say no.
6
u/darknecross iPhone X 1d ago
This is actually an interesting thought because the current dev environment is so different than it was 10 years ago.
First, there are much more mature and popular cross platform frameworks now that are used to target different devices, so a new player contributing an extra output target for a new platform would be a much more reasonable amount of work to enable those developers to quickly onboard their existing apps.
Second, the actual time and effort spent to port an app would be a fraction of what it used to be since coding agents could do the majority of the work. A new platform would need to write up some solid docs for porting apps from iOS or Android, but if you can sic an agent on the task there’s a lot less friction.
From an actual business standpoint Samsung would need to offer major incentives, either App Store discounts or tokens for LLM compute or something to get developers in the door. But the barrier to introducing a new OS is much, much lower than it would have been 10 years ago.
4
u/NotAnUncle 1d ago
A technical barrier, sure, but a consumer mindset one, that's going to be massive.
3
u/spiderweb91 1d ago
You do realize Google still owns many of the worlds most popular services and apps though?
Do you think Google would happily let the new OS have things like Maps, Gmail, YouTube, Search, Chrome, etc while it basically breaks up Android? And do you think consumers will buy a phone without those when they have two other OS options where they get all this?
2
u/darknecross iPhone X 1d ago
Doesn’t impact the Chinese market too much, though?
I think the only major stickler there is YouTube. But the thing about Google services is that they’re all available via a mobile browser. Not having Google apps may be a lure to competing services to try and capture some user share.
2
u/spiderweb91 1d ago
The Chinese market has basically been an insulated market forever and have their own apps. Unless Samsung can magically do that for all of the world, how is it relevant?
Also if native apps did not matter you could just create a phone that only runs chrome and calling/messages/camera and no one would need apps?
1
u/Fractal-Infinity Samsung S25U One UI 1d ago
Samsung aren't very relevant for the Chinese market with its huge competition from local brands. So, Samsung should consider the other markets. And those markets demand the Google Services.
0
u/Realistic-Nature9083 1d ago
I expect more antitrust on apple and Google. They are the gatekees of this century. The east india company in history. Those two stores are the most powerful gatekeepers in human history.
Once Google can't force oems to use Google bundle, I expect Samsung to have Samsung maps and messages and I guess keep everything else from Google
3
u/spiderweb91 1d ago
Sorry but that's the most bullshit comparison I have seen. The east India company was backed by the biggest colonizer in history and uses literal violence and an army to capture one of the most populated places on earth.
You can switch from most of googles products by typing a different address in a search bar. It's absolutely a shit comparison.
Secondly it does not really seem like that's going to happen at all. American hegemony was built on the back of massive economic success (among other things) and anti trust on the most successful companies (like apple and Google) seems extremely unlikely anytime soon.
0
u/jetjitters 1d ago
came here looking for this take - the landscape is completely different from what it was even only a few years ago. It would be more viable than ever to build up their own mobile OS again, albeit still with plenty of friction along the way. I expect we'll see another budget line launch with a refreshed Tizen (or possibly something new) launch within the relatively near future as a bit of a test to the feasibility of it. I still can't imagine the juice will be worth the squeeze though ultimately.
1
•
u/TwT_i_hate_myself 3h ago
And ai makes super buggy code with major security vulnerabilities which will take longer to fix than if you just coded it yourself so people will associate the new os with a lack of security and very buggy apps
3
u/Unlucky-Touch8754 1d ago
They would implode if they did that. It’s not viable. They would lose support for pretty much every app unless the devs were to make a native version
3
3
u/Negative-Fix5290 1d ago
i'd rather have a stable & mature os than experimental one. i agree that dupes or bloatwares are big issue but the solution is to allow users to uninstall pre-installed apps, not a new os.
3
u/punIn10ded MotoG 2014 (CM13) 1d ago
They did this once before already it was a failure and a security nightmare (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/04/samsungs-tizen-is-riddled-with-security-flaws-amateurishly-written/).
If you've used any of their TV's you'd see really quickly how horrible of an experience modern Tizen is.
3
3
3
4
u/sid_raj7 Pixel 10 1d ago
They could just as well offer users the choice when setting up to use Samsung apps or Google apps.
One of the reasons I moved from samsung is due to app bloat.
•
u/Pokemon_Name_Rater Xiaomi 13 Pro 12h ago
They have no incentive right now. As crazy as this current US administration is, I don't see Samsung ever having to worry about the risk of being cut off from US (or US aligned) software or hardware, not like Huawei.
Way back when Tizen was still a real consideration, it was mainly leverage with Google, but Samsung now is basically synonymous with Android in more than a few major markets and clearly enjoy an extremely close working relationship with Google, often seeing features launch on their devices pretty much as they do on Pixel, being featured in Google launch events etc.
Could they conceivably do it? Sure. Would it be doomed to failure? Not necessarily (but I wouldn't bet on its success). Is there any reason for them to consider it given the current landscape? No.
2
•
u/Idle0095 7h ago
I always said Samsung would become apple if they had there own OS. Both these companies are the same. Other then iOS and android. Android has come a very long way. But I do agree. Samsung you don't need your own browser, phone, calendar etc apps when Google has them. I'm glad Samsung finally moved to Google messages and dropped Samsung messages.
1
u/aucheukyan 1d ago
It’s app support that is the problem not the OS, tizen and even microsoft mobile failed because of lack of apps
1
1
u/o_Divine_o 1d ago
The word "could" makes every question essentially a "yes" as a response.
I wouldn't see why they would want to. Google is the largest ecosystem. Then Samsung adds their own ecosystem. Result, nobody can compete ecosystem wise.
1
u/Mexetudo S2\S3\Nexus5\Nexus6P\Note8\Note10+\S23U\S26U 1d ago
The time for that has long passed. They've tried, others have tried, it didn't work out in the end.
1
u/pendelhaven 1d ago
No. The closest is Huawei with their Harmony OS. Samsung is fighting Google if they have their own OS and they risk getting kicked out of Android if they succeed, which will essentially kill whatever international business they have.
1
1
u/CyberHouseChicago 1d ago
Samsung software is garbage most of the time , they have zero chance of making their own os that anyone would use , I can't even stand Samsung TV software would never use their software unless I had to
1
u/WatchfulApparition 1d ago
The problem is the app store. The OS can be done easily. They just can't match Google Play Store or the App Store on iOS
1
u/NoDoze- 1d ago edited 1d ago
Why reinvent the wheel? The development and testing alone would take years. Also to be compatible with all the different hardware and UI would take additional time. Sure, some Chinese mobile providers have done it, but the OS still isn't even up to par.
Samsung has their own store to compete with Google play, and there are many of the same apps. They build it to support their default apps, and there is overflow into regular apps. But it's clear the Samsung store isn't anywhere near par. And they can get rid of their store because they still need to support their default apps.
1
1
u/TheACwarriors 1d ago
That already tried and it flopped. While samsung can make good software they struggle to keep up. That and app support would be horrendous. They already have a good deal with google so I doubt they would switch.
1
u/ByWillAlone 1d ago
Amazon tried this and they got their asses handed back to them. The Amazon AppStore was always a ghetto compared to Apple & Google. The first thing anyone did with an Amazon device was try to figure out how to connect it to the Google Play store.
I give this idea a 0% chance of succeeding.
1
u/ritesh808 1d ago
The OS isn't the issue. The apps and adoption are. Also, Samsung signed an agreement with Google long ago to not develop an alternate mobile OS.
Also, if you're thinking of Huawei, you have to realise that Samsung (especially MX) doesn't have a tenth of the will or the capabilities of Huawei. Also Huawei can do just fine without GMS because mainland China is a different world in this regard.
Also, Microsoft is a software company, unlike Samsung, and they had a pretty great mobile OS and still failed. Just because they were a few years late.
1
u/Fractal-Infinity Samsung S25U One UI 1d ago
Samsung could build their own OS. But if they split from Android, they're gonna lose all that ecosystem and apps. Do they really have the power to push devs to make apps for their OS? I doubt it. Without apps, they will have the fate of Windows Mobile. Samsung should have done that when iOS and Android were barely released, now it's too late.
1
u/moronfromtheabyss 1d ago
Historically, companies that tried their own OS usually fell short from what I heard, it's probably not going to end well if they try.
1
u/3d_Plague 1d ago
Even if they were to roll out the most polished OS imaginable tomorrow it wouldn't matter that much.
The apps you (and everyone else) rely on daily won't work on it out of the box. Developers would need to port over their apps.
At this point the OS isn't the bottleneck it's the apps people use.
1
u/Unreal_NeoX 1d ago
I hope if they do it, they do not base it on the DEX mode. This is currently a mess when you try to use it productive and need many other apps to make it work somehow usefull.
3
u/jknvv13 1d ago
Don't let your TV or your monitor or whatever this is do the overscaling. Just let it show the original input.
4
u/Unreal_NeoX 1d ago
Thats the problem! There is no screen adjustment setting or scaling option by it. This is RAW-input and display by DEX via HDMI. No way to adjust this.
2
u/jknvv13 1d ago
That's kind of interesting. I've never had this kind of issue before. I thought it was even possible to adjust.
I've read somewhere there is software to change some Dex settings that are hidden, like resolution and so on, so you might look for it. I think it has something to do with Good Lock maybe? I'm not sure 100%.
1
u/Unreal_NeoX 1d ago edited 1d ago
yeah i tried all these but except for better "window" handling and more free placement on the screen, there is nothing to solve this.
Normaly if you plugin a pc/notebook you do not have this issue. Its not overrendered there + you can easily change the resolution and scaling/frame-size rendeirng in any display setting, but not with DEX.1
u/haokincw 1d ago
You have to adjust it from the TV not from DeX. I have no problems with DeX on wherever I plug it.
1
u/Unreal_NeoX 1d ago
The TV does not offer such an option for this input, because it already displays it as 100% raw and inside the boundrys. Its DEX that sends it already overrendered. I have the same with some Monitors at work.
1
u/bert93 1d ago
Have you tried setting the name or label of the input on your TV to PC? It's stupid but that is how its done on many TVs.
1
u/Unreal_NeoX 1d ago
i can trigger HDR. Anything else has to be configured by the source of the HDMI input. Normaly if you plugin a pc/notebook you do not have this issue. Its not overrendered there + you can easily change the resolution and scaling/frame-size rendeirng in any display setting, but not with DEX.
0
0
u/godnorazi 1d ago
Absolutely not ... I have a ton of Samsung devices and the garbage software has always been the weakest link
0
u/ghunterx21 1d ago
No, Tizen OS is fucking horrendous and honestly should burn.
I legit will not buy a Samsung if they play this shit.
0
u/Talrynn_Sorrowyn 1d ago
Given how bad Tizen, their TV OS, is supported by third party companies for streaming, it's better & easier that they just keep paying for a fork license.
•
u/cjb110 15h ago
What problem are you solving though? There's tons of obvious problems you'll create and then need to address.
As you said it's a massive challenge and they don't sell enough devices of any kind to overcome that challenge, they know that. So they've limited tizen to where it does help.
0
u/vas060985 1d ago
They tried with tizen os in mobile space, it failed, now it's only used on their TV's.
165
u/synth_mania 1d ago
It would be a monumentally stupid decision to create their own operating system. They'd be going from a software platform used by more people than any other in the world to a distant minority.