The worst case scenario is that someone feels so left out by Google's development that Android is forked. Not that big of a deal. It is just the typical government agency doing what they do best....drawing more attention (and funding) to themselves.
It is very difficult to believe dependency on Android is a bad move. Relying on Google's support to build a device might be.
The computer industry has become more open for years. Embracing open source is widely adopted. What Chinese's firms have to do is to be able to make their own device w/o any help from Google. In addition, they shall focus on developing apps. If they don't like Android, there is Ubuntu (generally speaking, Linux) to choose from. If GUI wasn't ready, put their hand on it to make it attractive. Really! In today's world, if OS is widely available from source code level, why spending extra effort to re-invent an OS? Efficiency is very important.
*Which* GUI? There are a number of them, and which default you get will depend on the distro you run.
I run Ubuntu, which defaults to a new interface they designed called Unity. I wasn't thrilled by it, and because it's Linux, I had alternatives. I prefer XFCe4, but Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment and a number of others exists and can be used.
"While the Android system is open-source, the core technology and technology roadmap is strictly controlled by Google,"
Since Android is opensource, Anyone can create their own roadmap.. like Amazon did. So whats the problem with too much dependency?
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.