>Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source.
I was comparing that to other platforms, both desktop and mobile (the difference is largely irrelevant to the argument, isn't it?).
With Android, the openness is exploited by the OEMs and carriers to install applications and always running services that CANNOT be uninstalled by the user, unless you root it(not easy for average user, and tough for even geeks because of locked bootloaders). These services and apps take up space and suck down battery. With Apple, you don't get such unremovable crap. With Windows 7, you can somehow uninstall it using tweaks and workarounds. With WP7, nothing can run in the background, and OEMs/carriers get a bigger tile on the main screen that can be removed with a long press and even uninstalled. How is the openness of Android helping here?
OEMs HAVE to abide by certain rules to get access to premium Google programs like Maps and to the Android Marketplace(try selling a phone without those).
So you say the openness of Android was used to customize the UI? Most people hate the UI customization since it further lags the phone and sucks down battery.
>And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it
True, but you can install things into the kernel itself and Dell ships a OS X like dock.
Do you have any examples of Android customisations that the OEMs made as a result of it being Open Source that improved the user experience that wouldn't be possible with, say desktop Windows?
Sure. OEMs get the full source code.
> Anyone can slap it on any hardware and sell it as Windows and pre-install their own software.
As long as they pay the license. Android OEMs don't have to. And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it.
AFAIK, the only OEM that got permission to customize WP7's interface is Nokia. And we are talking mobile OSs, not desktop ones, BTW.