Android is open, Google is not at all. Google is actually pulling source code off AOSP (the actual open-source Android) to put more of it into their custom, closed-source applications. As a result, a base install of Android without all Google's services is very poor and pretty outdated. [0]
Most of the work Microsoft does on Android (and iOS) would easily be replicable by Google on Windows Phone: Office, Skype, OneDrive... are all apps that Google has competitors for on Android and iOS. Instead of playing the same game, Google chooses to be the evil one. [1]
> As a result, a base install of Android without all Google's services is very poor and pretty outdated.
You can install AOSP or custom ROMs such as CyanogenMod and have a perfectly free, modern smartphone OS. You won't have access to all the Android apps in the Google Play Store, but that's self-evident. The F-Droid repo provides verified FOSS apps, or if non-Google proprietary sources are permitted there's the Amazon Appstore.
> Most of the work Microsoft does on Android (and iOS) would easily be replicable by Google on Windows Phone: Office, Skype, OneDrive... are all apps that Google has competitors for on Android and iOS.
The app in question, Cortana, will be able to integrate into Android at least as deeply as the Bing app does now, which means it can replace Google search in most ways. If Microsoft had an Android launcher, they could ensure Google is completely replaced (by supplanting Google Now). Combined with Microsoft's existing Android lock screen and other apps, all that's needed to complete the Microsoft Android experience is Windows Store for Android.
On the other hand, the closest you can get to replacing Cortana on Windows Phone is to disable Cortana completely, which means queries will be handled by the search engine in your default browser instead. IE is the only browser option, but you can choose either Google or Bing (except on phones that disable the Google option).
Google does achieve remarkable results on iOS despite its restrictions. But that simply demonstrates the monumental effort it would take to bring a sub-par version of the Google experience to a locked-down platform, whereas Microsoft can take over Android with relative ease. iOS has marketshare and legacy ties to justify the expense, but WP has neither.
That is an impressive spin. He's not talking about apps like Office, etc. he's talking about Windows Phone having less extensibility points than Android. Like being able to plug in 3rd party browsers, voice search/assistants, etc.
That first article is poor and you're giving it as if it's a valid reference.
I have an older Nexus 4 that I keep around, with CyanogenMod installed on it and without Google's services, which is pretty much AOSP. Despite what seems to be popular opinion, it's quite usable. The big thing that is missing and the reason for why Google affords to keep mobile phone makers by their balls are of course Google Play, Gmail and Google Maps. You do have F-Droid and Amazon's app store. It's quite an interesting experience - if you have an Android lying around, try it out.
Most of the work Microsoft does on Android (and iOS) would easily be replicable by Google on Windows Phone: Office, Skype, OneDrive... are all apps that Google has competitors for on Android and iOS. Instead of playing the same game, Google chooses to be the evil one. [1]
0: http://www.infoworld.com/article/2610371/android/meet-aosp--...
1: https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2013/08/15/the-lim...