Open Handset + OpenSocial = Open Archaeology?

This move into the market has not been undertaken by Google alone; they've brought together an assortment of hardware manufacturers, software developers and network operators to create the Open Handset Alliance. Their product, Android, is described as "the first complete, open, and free mobile platform" - not true of course; not only is it not the first, but we're probably justified in asking just how open this is all going to be.

There are some interesting people involved; Motorola, Samsung, LG, Intel NVIDIA, SiRF, and bunch of operators, including China Mobile. China Mobile? Any Google-phobe should just have realised what's going on here; there's going to be little "open" to the Open Handset. Instead Google is, once again, going for the big emerging markets, where the big money is, and is playing by local rules. In China this means the moto of "do no evil" has to fall by the wayside.

Of course, it's hard to make any judgments based on the limited details we've got. No doubt we'll know much more next week when the SDK is released, although we can have a peek into this Open world a little earlier. From the FAQs:

Why did you pick the Apache v2 open source license?
Apache is a commercial-friendly open-source license. The Apache license allows manufacturers and mobile operators to innovate using the platform without the requirement to contribute those innovations back to the open-source community. Because these innovations and differentiated features can be kept proprietary, manufacturers and mobile operators are protected from the "viral infection" problem often associated with other licenses.

Let us also think of other Google applications released for open platforms, such as Linux; Google releases its programs as Windows binaries wrapped up within a custom WINE application.

If this was an Open platform, we could combine it with OpenSocial and create the planned OA social network recording system in an afternoon, but I worry that this is all going to remain very proprietary and closed to users. Developers, however, might get access to a cheap and open platform; but in one of the largest industries around (mobile phones, not archaeology...), does OA get to claim developer status?