> Sure a contract was signed, but as has been pointed out many times about Google's heavy-handed control over Android, it doesn't mean it was fair to all parties:

The article is basically saying "if you don't use Play store and Google apps you'll have to build them yourself". I don't really understand - yes? You would have to. But you still got a load of stuff free. You only have to build apps on top. You get a working OS for free still, which is incredibly valuable.

Android is open source and Google play services is technically possible to avoid. What other major operating system vendor for consumer electronics goes out of their way to make this sort of thing possible? Apple and Microsoft sure don't.