Neither Microsoft, Nokia, nor anyone else should fork Android. It's unforkable.
As happens from time to time, the suggestion has been made that Microsoft cancel Windows Phone, and instead fork Android. It's not the first time this suggestion has been made. It's probably not the last, either.
Context & Ripple Effects
The fork-Android idea keeps resurfacing because Windows Phone's app problem keeps resurfacing. Earlier this year Microsoft was reportedly weighing devices that let consumers pick between Windows Phone and Android, which made the more radical version of the same logic — cancel Windows Phone outright and rebuild on a forked Android — an easy column to write.
Ars Technica's counterargument is that the fork isn't actually available: Google's control of the platform means anyone who takes Android without Google's services gets a hollow OS. That the piece was picked up by outlets ranging from The Guardian to Daring Fireball and the Windows Phone enthusiast sites shows how contested the third-platform question is on both sides of the aisle.
First-order effects
- For Microsoft, the piece is a defense of the Windows Phone investment against the rumored cancel-and-fork plan — if the argument holds, the January dual-OS trial balloon stays an experiment rather than a retreat.
Second-order effects
- For Nokia, whose handsets carry Windows Phone, an unforkable Android removes the escape hatch: its hardware roadmap stays tied to Microsoft's platform commitment rather than a fallback OS.
Third-order effects
- If forks without Google's services can't attract users or app developers, the mobile OS market structurally consolidates into two ecosystems, and third platforms compete on differentiation rather than imitation.
The trend: Mobile operating systems are consolidating around Google's and Apple's ecosystems, forcing every third platform to choose between genuine differentiation and absorption into Android's orbit.