Scobleizer: Google Android: we want developers but…
Matt
· 2 years ago
So Open Moko will still blow this out of the water and from the developers Ive spoken to say they wont touch it till they can see a device that can run it and its basically another version of J2ME to them at first look .
neverness
· 2 years ago
I wonder whether either android or apple will have any impact on the european and asian markets. Considering the rather lukewarm reception of the iPhone in the UK and Germany, this might just not be depending on the SDK, but more on the amount of handsets that will have the OS on it.
I think that the set vendors are more worried about android then they are about the iPhone overhere in Europe, regardless of the developer support.
Google doesn't need to pitch to the end customers, the handset makers will take care of this. And as you point out correctly, after the customers will come the developers...
Just look at the development section of nokia, most of it is wide in the open and how many developers use it.... And the market share of nokia is a lot higher than apples iPhone.
Kreg Steppe
· 2 years ago
I disagree with the disappoints comment. It JUST came out, it is not for consumers yet, and it IS Open Source. Look at Nokia N800. It does a LOT, and it is based on Linux...I am sure a lot of those apps will be a no brainier to port over. So the "No making stuff for it" doesn't really hold water for me.
I think you are beating up on it a little too early out of the gate.
Also may I add that I can see the Gphone OS on several phones and the iPhone os on .. the iPhone. I think developing on a platform far and wide might make more sense than just on the iPhone. So, yes an SDK is coming for the iPhone...it still only runs on the iPhone once you make the app.
Now, was it a Dry video presentation...Oh yea, I am with you there.
Let me add...I do enjoy your insight and opinions on things like this.
-gary
· 2 years ago
With that much money you think Google boy could afford a decent haircut and a speech coach.
Ok that was just mean, but it had to be said.
Seth E
· 2 years ago
Their problem is that it seems like they're building a phone aimed primarily at 'techies' (i.e. opensource everything but unintiuitive as far as basic functioning goes) and yet their marketing strategy seems to be aimed at the average consumer, if not the down-right uniformed consumer. However, I think I disagree with you on it being 'Vaporware'. They seem to being trying to avoid the accusations thrown at Apple by releasing the SDK BEFORE the platform and not months afterwards, so it's hard for them to show you anything since I doubt much of it is implemented. But it was definitely a god-awful video.
Kevin Cawley
· 2 years ago
Robert, I think you are off on this one. I am a mobile dev and I am psyched (and it has NOTHING to doo with the $10 mill)!!!
It's about an open mobile platform where the developer is free to imagine, create, and build killer apps that are deeply integrated with the phone and other apps on the device.
It has nothing to do with the iPhone. It's about creating a technology stack that allows for kick ass mobile applications from third party devlopers, letting manufacturers build cool devices, and having these devices run on any network/provider.
You are right on one thing... the make/break is going to be if we see lots of devices with the Android stack.
BTW, my favorite mobile stack right NOW is Windows Mobile.. go Russians :)
Ali
· 2 years ago
Not Trendously impressed. I'm not getting an IPhone either until they pack a few more features.
For now, I'm very impressed with the HTC TyTN II (The AT&T Tilt) - which packs everything in - touch screen, good music/video, 3 Mega pixel camera (and a second camera for video calls), GPS, HSDPA/3G, WiFi, Video Calling and a slide out keyboard. Admittidly, Windows Mobile isn't nearly as pretty as the iPhone (although it is more producive), but HTC did a good job with building the Touch Flo interface over the top.
For me, the only reason I'd switch to an iPhone or to an Android phone would be if they took all the useful features I have on my tilt and did something better on top.
Matt
· 2 years ago
They aren't trying to beat the iPhone right now. They are just announcing a platform; it's ok if it is a little dweeby and not that impressive of a video. It's just trying to give developers an idea of what the SDK is capable of. These devices aren't going to be coming out for a year so I think it's a little premature to right them off today because of a lousy dev video.
Eric
· 2 years ago
It's early days man, give it a break. Geez it's a new approach and being open it is intended to evolve like putty in the hands of the developer community.
Peter Kasting
· 2 years ago
Google announces an SDK, and everyone gets upset that the actual prototype being used to demo some of the apps doesn't have good UI? Isn't this missing the point a bit? Google isn't building a phone. It's building a software stack other people can use to build a phone. Given that, saying things like "OK, we have working GPS, an OpenGL-based 3D API, and built-in wrapper code for common functionality like maps" seems a lot more appropriate than "hey, this prototype that you'll never get to use has some really consistent UI!"
A spinning globe is no more an indication that "spinning a globe is all you can do with this phone" than a spinning cube screensaver is an indication that that's all the Windows drawing routines can do. It's a demo.
David Jacobs
· 2 years ago
I agree it's probably too early to judge, but wow, those guys have absolutely *no* Steve Jobs mojo. Steve J could present a steaming pile of poo on a plate and make you want it more than anything you've ever wanted. Reminds me of what a friend used to say about HP marketing. That they would sell sushi as cold, wet fish.
Google has actually never had good marketing. They have cool, interesting apps and alot of fanboys.
Benoit Cazenave
· 2 years ago
The important part here is your wife is excited by her iPhone. Everybody who has touched my iPhone here in France is a believer. I've had cellphones the moment a GSM phone fitted in a pocket and I have never been as excited again until the iPhone came out. The iPhone changed the rules - super easy to use phone AND great at the Internet. The Gphone is a copycat and just "opened" at best. But open doesn't make consumers drool. Sorry.
Robert Scoble
· 2 years ago
Benoit: true. Which is why I sure wish I would have heard something different here. Open should enable developers to create different kinds of devices that simply can't exist with a closed platform.
How about putting a cell phone in a vacuum cleaner? What would you do if you could do that? How about putting one onto a sign on a street corner? How about one in your dashboard? How about a dockable cell that could do better sync with your PC? Instead we get a Google Maps commercial. Yawn. I already have that on my iPhone AND my Nokia!
Ryan Ackley
· 2 years ago
I'm a developer but not a mobile phone developer. What makes android attractive to me is that it makes mobile phone development seem like a viable software business all of a sudden. I can target a lot of phones with a single development platform. Windows mobile had the same promise but it turned out to be only for the highest end phones. Maybe android will be the same way and I am just caught up in the marketing hype.
If you look at the iPhone, I think it will follow the same arc as the Apple computer. Incredibly innovative, but eventually Apple's insistence on controlling every millimeter of the platform will relegate it to a niche market.
For example, the Macintosh is gorgeous. I drool on the anti-aliasing and wide screen monitors every time I go to the Apple store. but I use a PC because every application I need runs better on a PC. I think it is because Windows is more developer friendly. The best applications for the Mac were developed by Apple.
spinchange
· 2 years ago
I know they didn't really knock us out with anything that had a real 'Wow' factor, but seems like a lot of criticism right out the gate! It also seems kind of unfair to compare a nascent community-based, open source development environment with very polished proprietary, *closed sourced* PRODUCTS. But hey, they had a crappy video and the bloggers had to sit in the cheap seats at its release (?)
Comic Strip Blogger
· 2 years ago
Robert, as you can read HERE the language of Android SDK is Java. I am asking myself questions: why Java for SDK? is whole Android written in Java too?
eric rice
· 2 years ago
Wonder what the masses of RAZR users will think.
Jim Pick
· 2 years ago
If it's open source, I can put it on my N770, right?
Bobby
· 2 years ago
At least the prototype has buttons. I like phones with buttons. :)
Steve Brewer
· 2 years ago
Saying your not going to switch from the iPhone to Android is like saying your not trading in your BMW for a Z Platform. Product != platform.
Sean McGee
· 2 years ago
Hey Robert,
Any idea if this thing is going to have Flash?
That would be one thing the iPhone can't (currently) do.
toivo
· 2 years ago
Let's have a bet? Prizes are good.
Fnord
· 2 years ago
"I didn’t see ONE feature that will get normal people to switch from the iPhone."
Well... Normal people don't use the iPhone, do they? No, they use all the other phones that are out there. The videos appealed to me, but then you're not a developer, are you.
The markets Google and Apple are targeting are entirely different, so comparing their initiatives on the mobile front is like comparing apples and oranges.
Aaron
· 2 years ago
He sounds like Ben Stein. "I am excited about this product. I will show you how excited I am about this product by not smiling, talking in a monotone voice, and reading cue cards. Wow. That's spectacular."
sigh
· 2 years ago
I don't think Scoble understands this very well. This is not iPhone versus Android.
There is no reason iPhones can't run Android applications. Android is designed in such a way that it would be easy for Apple (or Motorola or Palm) to make products that support Android apps?
Why would they want to do that? Because there is going to be a massive community of developers out there building awesome cross-platform applications.
Christopher Coulter
· 2 years ago
Wow, agree. You sick? You've been making sense lately. Totally something developers developed for other developers to show off their way cool developer skills, like most of what Google ever does. Arrogant Stanford grads masturbating to their own code.
The iPhone is nice, but more a toy, Blackberry, full-sized QWERTY keyboarders and PDA phones far more productive, though not as much fun. But sadly iPhone is saddled with AT&T's EDGE 2g inferior network. But with hacks, it's good, and 1.1.2 was hosed almost in minutes.
With Voyager on 3g EV-DO, with the best of iPhone and QWERTY's and then a slew of new Sony Ericsson's and Nokia's (Haptikos) and Sidekick LX and on and on and on, a Googleish API Phone is a joke at best.
Rob Bazinet
· 2 years ago
I agree, this is an empty announcement. I think since Apple announced they would release an iPhone SDK, Google felt compelled to show their hand early. It turns how to be a half-baked SDK or at least the total story is not really written.
Pei Zheng
· 2 years ago
I would admit that this demo does not impress me big time. iPhone can easily beat almost most of the stuff they demoed, except the openGL part. However, Windows Mobile may have a hard time competing with Android.
Lars Fischer
· 2 years ago
The iPhone is simply too expensive (at least here in Germany). Even half the price would be too much for such a (nice) toy.
I like Apple and I could afford the iPhone but I don't like robbery.
Neil Weisenfeld
· 2 years ago
Clearly the jury is still out as we haven't really seen much of anything, yet, but I think that people should be considering this as developers showing off an architecture and some APIs, not a handset manufacturer showing off a feature-complete (or even a prototype) phone.
If Apple had shown the iPhone at the initial stages and demoed the accelerometer and multi-touch screen APIs, people would probably have fallen asleep in the audience. It wasn't until Steve rotated the phone and it switched to landscape mode and showed off the "pinch" that people went "wow." But the former had to happen before the latter.
Personally, I don't want to be excited about slick apps at the start of a project; I want to be excited about an architecture. If the architecture sucks, it's going to be a tangled, nasty mess and ultimately a poor user experience. You may be able to graft some slick apps on top of a crappy architecture, but ultimately things will fall apart. See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_OS
lningram
· 2 years ago
... at least he's cute!!!!
Callek
· 2 years ago
"...doesn’t understand how to pitch end users and developers at the same time (developers only really come after end users do anyway, look again at the iPhone)."
And yet, even this statement is missing the point. Developers are users too, they just think slightly differently. ;-)
The problem lies in the fact that you have to make a developer want the device for themselves, and then to have the [coinciding] desire to write their code/application for that device.
There is a less-common desire to write your code/application for a device others use but you don't; which while entirely true in some cases, does *only* follow end-users and even then not always, and is much more infrequent than the first case.
Michael
· 2 years ago
"I didn’t see ONE feature that will get normal people to switch from the iPhone."
Dumbest statement. Ever. Hate to break it to you Robert, but there aren't that many iPhone users out there. It is a very, very small market. Anybody just going for that market would be setting their sights low. Now of course Apple is hoping to expand that market rapidly, which is why they dropped the price by 33% just a few moths after the highly touted debut.
Further, it is silly to compare some prototypes to a polished retail product. The real success of the Android platform will be how many phones are built with it. Now you can definitely compare those phones to the iPhone. That would be a true apple-to-Apple comparison...
Meanwhile as others have pointed out, this is a huge difference maker for developers. Mobile device development is so fragmented and painful right now. This is not just an SDK, it is an SDK that provides access to phone hardware that is rarely accessible to most developers. Plus it runs Java, so one can imagine that many Java based apps and games are already going to work on this thing. That should be no surprise since Google Mail, Talk, and Maps are all Java apps.
Ron
· 2 years ago
You do know this is a platform they purchased two years ago from Danger--a company founded by BeOS engineers, right?.
FSJ
· 2 years ago
Haha! You are just pissed off because Google doesn’t love you!
Alexander van Elsas
· 2 years ago
Hi Robert, personally I welcome the competition. Even if Android turns out to be not capable of bringing better services to mobile users, it might just inspire the competition to work at it. We are still in the stone age of mobile internet with a total lack of easy and user centric UI's and applications that add value to my mobile experience. But let's wait and see. I think that if developers start working on the Android OS we might get a few surprises after all.
Joe Duck
· 2 years ago
Wow, I think you are being a iPhone PhanBoy here ... Patrick is correct that this is a "ripoff" of the iPhone which is why the phones built with this platform may be so popular - iPhones for $100 sounds good to me. I have a Treo650 which is NO match for the iPhone. I would have bought an iPhone, but now I'll wait for the gPhone. Why? Cheaper and will have better integration with my gMail and Google maps and Google document world.
Mao Tse Tongue
· 2 years ago
Why are you such a negative douche-bag? Is it because of the Fake Steve Jobs post re-telling the story of you being a sucky-baby when you were screaming and whining to Google to give you a Google-phone?
Like that article said, check with your friends Dave Winer or Om Malik first. At least people listen to them.
Julian
· 2 years ago
“I didn’t see ONE feature that will get normal people to switch from the iPhone.”
Normal people won't buy the iPhone! :)
As for other phones -- it'll be cheap. The iPhone has been out what, a few months and yes it's a great status quo. But if you compare what Android does vs pretty much any other phone, it starts looking pretty competitive I reckon.
Ronald Horowitz
· 2 years ago
I don't get you Scoble. Half the time you say some insightful things and I learn a lot from reading your blog - but the other half of the time you come across as a whiney 12-year-old.
If the OHA is successful, people are going to throw this post back in your face just like people did with the posts of all of the haters when Apple announced V1.0 of the iPod.
In my opinion, and I don't pretend to be some grand wizard of technology like you do - apparently without any justification whatsoever, I might add - there is clearly a movement toward more open standards in technology and Apple, regardless of the gee-whiz technology they've included in the iPhone, is making the same mistake they made with the Macintosh platform back in the 80s. There's a reason Apple only has 6% of the home computer market. And don't tell me that finally releasing an SDK - while still controlling what applications are available via iTunes - is really making the iPhone "open." More open, yes, but truly open as it appears the OHA handsets will be, not a chance.
Also, the iPhone's features - while they may have been difficult to envision in the first place - are not difficult to copy. And the iPhone is merely going to set the benchmark for successful mobiles in the future - including any OHA mobiles that want to be successful.
I guess you post junk like this just to stir up a controversy and thereby boost your page views, but it's frankly insulting to you readers and should be beneath you.
Artichoke Heart
· 2 years ago
"How about putting a cell phone in a vacuum cleaner?"
Is this really the best you can come up with Scoble?
James
· 2 years ago
I agree the video is boring, and looks as if the launch has been precipitated.
Vinod
· 2 years ago
I fear you did not get the actual plot of this platform. What you saw is a 'place holder'/reference implementation. Please do not any assumptions of this being the finalized UI metaphors. The UI, Phone functionality, Extra-phone features, etc.. etc.. can ALL be altered to suit your needs/tastes with this platform. Understand - this is an SDK - a Great one at it(I've got my Europa loaded already with ADT and is coding away happily) - for the ultimate+unified mobility platforms.
Chris
· 2 years ago
Hi Robert,
I have to say I'm a little nonplussed at your derision of the video. I'm a developer who writes desktop apps for a living and is starting to hack web stuff in my spare time. I live in Europe. I don't care that Steve Jobs gives great presentations (I won't be there), or that TechCrunch weren't invited. I don't care whether it looks like a copy of an iPhone - I've never seen an iPhone.
The video is ok (and it's video that matters, not whether some gadget blowhards are getting advance previews - not directed at you btw), and it's reasonably effective. If it's being straight with me, then I see the following: an open platform, which for me is accessible and familiar - I run on a solid open source stack already; straight forward functionality that replicates what I'm already familiar with; based on open toolsets that I'm already familiar with.
Frankly I'm having a hard time understanding the negativity. It does appear that it's a result of simply not pandering to the audience of Scobles etc. I'm sitting 6000 miles away, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm sure there are many others like me.
Mr Speaker
· 2 years ago
Developers don't need (or want) over the top videos telling us how awesome-super-cool and XTREME-industry-changing a product is.
You shouldn't need a visionary and a marketing company to get you excited about a platform!
RJ
· 2 years ago
I am guessing, and it is a guess, that you didn't bother watching the architecture videos, or the HOWTO video? If you had you would have seen the potential of the platform and what you can do with the frameworks.
In fact I know you didn't watch the arch videos, because you didn't mention one of the most relevant and interesting points - you might write code in Java, but it runs on Google's own in-house VM and NOT on J2ME.
Maybe you should get your developer friends to watch more than the demos?
Porta
· 2 years ago
Sorry, but you're ignoring the fact that the iphone will never be available in some places (I live in Argentina) and my options are: Find somebody in the US that buys me a iphone, hack it and use it with any carrier here. Perhaps I'll brick it on the process... right? Or: Wait, buy any phone I want that has android on it and do a legal activation with my current carrier.
Steve S.
· 2 years ago
You are well off the mark here.
First, understand Googles target audience with this announcement. Heres a hint - its not hi-profile tech-savy bloggers like yourself, or end customers, duh!. Btw, I don't work in tech or phones, and these videos from google were more exciting to me that any of your recent videos. Their targets are developers and phone manufacturers. And developers don't want atomic videos, they want documents and specifications and this is what they've got. Imagine a developer saying "How do I implent feature x?, s**t theirs no atomic video describing the API, now I'm screwed".... yeah, right!
And all this crap about how you haven't seen it, its vapourware, etc, well boo-hoo - if you look at all the release info some of the google devs have been using android on mobile devices for 6 months! Note that android is based on technically the best software stack you could conceive - i.e. a linux core with Java apps - both established, open and proven technologies in the mobile world. This approach takes care automatically of perhaps the biggest problem the iphone is encountering in allowing 3rd party apps, namely security. Additionally, realise that due to this approach, it would be easy to mix in non-java code in the future.
As to the multiple interface control options - you're again missing the point. They are talking about the capabilities of an operating system, not a single device. Phone manufacturers can expose control options as they choose in order to make a coherent interface. They point is *they have choice*.
As to the $10 million prize for apps, yes google are buying developers to write apps, yes they are seemingly a little late to the game, and yes this shows that they are bloody serious about android. Ultimately what your observations of the iphone hacking scence should have taught you is that a key reason people buy 'smartphones' is for 3rd party apps. So how successfully do you think a financially incentivised open source mobile operating system designed for 3rd party applications will be? Don't be stupid, this is going to be huge.
Your blog post reads very much as a "give mes one of your new toys to play with or I'll trash it for no good reason".
Shajith
· 2 years ago
Scoble: It is not a phone! It's a framework, with an SDK available for Windows, OS X(Intel), and Linux, which allows developers to write applications in Java and test them in an emulator. There is complete and excellent documentation of the very extensive API, and an emerging support community. What you saw in the videos was very likely an early hardware prototype, and not representative of any final incarnation of the Android platform on a device.
That should put the whole iPhone comparison thing to rest.
In terms of the SDK, Android is indeed pretty exciting, due to the sheer breadth of libraries available (OpenGL ES, XMPP, full phone stack/contacts access, etc) and the elegance of the API (it's NOT another version of J2ME, please at least look at the sample code).
It's hardly vapourware from the point of view of a developer. You can, today, download the SDK and start writing applications which have access to nearly everything on the phone. Sure, OpenMoko would be even cooler, with the hardware accessible now, but Android is by no means a certain dud.
Vanchi
· 2 years ago
Wow. You missed the point. Do realize this is not a phone, but a phone platform. And that too a free and open one.
Ben
· 2 years ago
Speaking as a developer, I can't remember the last time a platform has excited me as much as the iPhone. I know many developers are, like me, already hacking away at apps on jailbreaked iPhones in preparation for the official SDK. Its capabilities are simply awesome. Developing for it is a joy, even without any official tools; it's OS X, after all. If Apple plays their cards right, we'll see many revolutionary, killer apps to emerge on the iPhone well before any Android device has even seen the light of day. No bribe from Apple required. I'd even be worried if I were Nintendo -- iPhone will be the dominant platform for the next generation of mobile gaming, mark my words.
Android? It feels like Symbian all over again. I'm very underwhelmed.
Hendrik
· 2 years ago
Well I for one welcome the android too. Android doesn’t compete with the iPhone, but it seems to deliver a stable, well integrated development platform for the mobile, so it’s competing directly with Windows Mobile and Symbian. It hits the soft spot of those by giving us a tightly integrated mobile experience, something that’s never been achieved by Windows Mobile, Symbian or even Pam OS.
iPhone is still only 1.5 million phones on 2 billion. Google is doing a Microsoft here. By 2010 we’ll have 5% iPhones and 95% phones running on an (open) OS that’s easy to develop for. And add Opensocial to the equation and suddenly all mobile apps will behave like a blackberry behaves for email on a mobile device.
The only thing I don’t like about the announcement is the price contest. Seems to me not the best way to stimulate innovation and creativity. They should also not make the mistake that Microsoft made and only embrace the developers, they should embrace open source psychologists, graphic designers, usability engineers and antropologists as well
scott
· 2 years ago
This is a ridiculous post. I built my first Android app yesterday in about 15 minutes using the handset simulator. The SDK is exactly what I am looking for. The platform looks very solid. As a long time Apple developer I know better than to invest resources to support proprietary Apple technology again. Jobs does not care about developers. Google obviously does. Thank you Android team!
Gregor
· 2 years ago
I can just laugh at you. I mean... whats your education? Who are you all of the sudden to judge things that analytics reviewed so many times with developers that you can't even imagine?
Get yourself some good faculty diploma, then you can discuss things like that, but before that... you're just one of the bloggers who wants to get hit with visits.
did you ever checked SDK in eclipse? did you checked their documentation? no? did your programmers friends? i don't think so.
Attention whore!
Fred Grott
· 2 years ago
I guess I should clue some in that Google does have sort of a competitor fast approaching..
Just imagine a Mobile ajax runtime that allows the Mobile User to create Mobile widgets using html,css, and javascfipt its called MobileY! and currently is development in far away lab
ipHone succeed because it went after Mobile Users..
Another term for MobileY! is a Social Mobile Browser for every mobile user..
I am taking a huge risk here in getting into trouble with my top bosses..
Lets just say I am kicking Purple Dinosaurs through the SF49ers Uprights..
Videos for Mobile Users Coming soon :)
Ian Betteridge
· 2 years ago
So the iPhone SDK is "well thought-out" is it? That's interesting - because as far as I know, neither you nor anyone else has seen it.
You're happy to talk about the iPhone SDK as if it were god's gift to mobile developers, while complaining that the Google SDK, which is here, now, is vapourware?
nkt
· 2 years ago
I think that Android will benefit in the short term iPhone, Windows Mobiles devices and Symbian devices. Seems 'paradoxical' but Google will make the Mobile Market more dynamic but benefits others vendors instead of Google itself. And even Android is far from the developers side without offering a C/C++ way to develop native applications.
Steve
· 2 years ago
I think Andriod is a step in the right direction, which is allowing the "public" develop the apps that will be useful in everyday life, but has a ways to go.
harrison
· 2 years ago
Hmm... The demo doesn't look half bad. I would much rather get this phone than an overpriced GPS system.
David
· 2 years ago
Wow. It's the old Scoble! The magic of text! I hope he stays around, I miss this guy. :)
Tom
· 2 years ago
Heh! Do you really believe Scoble, that Apple's developer's SDK would be as flexible/powerful as Google's OS. Apple never gives power to developers. Face it.
exapted
· 2 years ago
Android is not a copy of the iPhone, and the iPhone is hardly perfect. In fact, from the demo video, Android looks a lot better than the iPhone. At least I can chat and receive notifications while I am doing something such a browsing. Woo... The iPhone has it's work cut out for it in terms of integrating actual application communication with their pretty "perfect" UI. Ugh...
exapted
· 2 years ago
People who want push email, people who like to chat, people who want enterprise applications on their phone.... should definitely prefer Android to the iPhone. Not everyone puts a beautiful UI at the top of their list... and that Android prototype UI certainly looks better than every mobile OS other than iPhone.
And lets not forget that menus are still being implemented if I am not mistaken.
kvp
· 2 years ago
I downloaded the sdk and tested it. The gui is nice, it can be used almost the same way as my old and long ago replaced ericsson t20, even the placement of the menus are the same. The touchscreen is not really needed, you can get by only using the arrow keys and the yes/no menu/back buttons, very handy for one handed operation.
The emulator is trickier. It runs a computer with qemu, that uses a linux kernel, a boot ramdisk and two disk images. The images contain linux filesystems with the binary programs (like an sql server) that is needed for linux to work. The gui's bottom part is binary and written in c++, but the windowing system runs is java. The runtime is a modified java vm, much like the one used on some sony-ericsson phones.
The main difference between this and the apple iphone is that this environment theoretically allows the use of home made hardware, but it contains a few non open source kernel and software components. I hope they can be replaced with standard open source code. It would be possible to write c++ applications that tie into the gui and can be controlled from the java side windowing system. (like windowing and menus in java, 3d rendering in c++, just like on certain mri kits)
My conclusion is that this sdk is mostly the hardware developers sdk, mainly aimed at getting the environment up and running on an actual hardware, but it got tailored for running demos. Imho if we could find the source or at least the apis for the proprietary modules, it would be possible to get the whole system up and running on any hardware, including running it natively on anything that can run linux. I like this approach better, because this way I could use it with my own home made gsm hardware (via nano+gsm module+touch lcd+battery), or even install the android environment as an application under openmoko. The only thing preventing people from building linux based phones is the lack of gsm services (like sms and mms handing in thunderbird or a dialer with proper contact lists).
They could only blow their chance is by keeping the runtime environment closed and only licensing it to device manufacturers. I don't know if they open up these subsystem too, but the current sdk doesn't have them in source form.
mark
· 2 years ago
Ryan (comment 14) has it exactly right. This is Apple vs. EverybodyElse all over again. Apple goes first, big hype, and the trendy types all buy. But in the end it is the less fancy, more open platforms that win.
Might not be perfect, but many developers will see this as an opportunity, and much more innovation will come from Android than the iPhone. One caveat, we have to see it running on some real hardware.
Andrew Venegas
· 2 years ago
I think that they're doing what Microsoft did with the Zune. Everyone knew that Apple had a corner on the mp3 player market with the ipod. Microsoft was just looking to dent its market share and really expand in other avenues. I'm guessing Google is doing much of the same. Let's face it, the iPhone is the only really game out there, and everyone knows it.
esmith
· 2 years ago
Holy cow... Talk about rushing to judgement.
dc crowley
· 2 years ago
Hey Robert! Android does not have to beat the iPhone. I don't find it earth moving... but we are spoilt brats. Android offers lots of possibilities to easily develop new stuff. I was disappointed with Google last week when they announced this. All the hype about a gPhone and we end up with a platform. But Google are being clever offering $10M in prizes. This could lift the level of android applications very quickly.
I don't have an iPhone, I'm not in a 'state' to get a phone that has Android. But it might change. I think the biggest problem will be the greedy telco's.
callingshotgun
· 2 years ago
I call no-fair:D
Comparing Android to the Iphone- Isn't that a little like comparing Winamp to the Zune?
It's not fair to judge a software platform by the interface of the hardware it's running on.
There are several reasons I'd take an Android-Powered mobile over an iPhone-
1) The SDK - That "don't believe it till you see it" think mentioned above goes both ways. Apple promised an SDK for the iphone a long time ago, and waffled with "web sites are your SDK." They're not. They might do it again, too. And even if Apple produces one next year, it'll be from all the pressure they've received, not from a genuine attitude of thinking of their device as a platform to allow others to build on.
2) I'm a developer. I understand that puts me in the "not normal" set of consumers, but honestly, from a programming perspective, Android looks like a playground I can carry around in my pocket. And I really love Google API's- The documentation may not be an exhilerating read, but be serious. It's an API. And in Google's case, as a general rule, you can create wonders with them.
3)Choice (that seperation between phone & platform comes in, here). If I want an Android-powered phone on a 3G network, I pick a provider with a 3G network, and a model that supports it. If I want an Android phone with GPS, I pick a model with GPS. If I want an iPhone with 3G, I wait. If I want GPS, I either risk bricking the iPhone to install something that fakes GPS based on celltower location, or I wait.
4)Developer community- The barrier of entry into developing for the iPhone is vastly larger than for Android, so naturally, I think more people are going to develop for Android. More developers -> more software -> greater presence in developer forums/communities -> better software. That's just how I see it rollin'.
-Alex
trademark registration
· 2 years ago
Sure, the video was unimpressive, but I think you should hold off judgment until the thing is actually released. Who knows--maybe they'll catch on to your opinions (and those of many others around the internet) and make appropriate changes.
Chad W Smith
· 2 years ago
#1 To be a success, Android does not have to kill the iPhone. #2 I doubt much of anything is going to get people who already have an iPhone to give up their iPhone - Two Year Contracts tend to have that affect on people. #3 If I just spent $300 - $600 on a phone, I'm not even going to bother looking at other phones for a while, regardless of contracts or not. #4 You are comparing something that is software only (Android) to a software/hardware package (iPhone). I'm sure there will be a good number of phones that run Android that will be utter crap. And, then there will be some phones that run Android that will kick the iPhone's butt. It's like comparing a Mac and Windows. You don't compare the operating system to the computer. (Mac comes with iLife and a built-in camera and bluetooth - Windows comes with a DVD.) No, you compare a given Mac (MacBook Pro 15") with a given laptop running Windows (Dell XPS with Windows Vista Ultimate, or whatever). Trying to compare what is, in practical terms, vaporware (not that it doesn't exist, but the final product does not yet exist) to the hold-it-in-your-hands iPhone - is not only unfair - it's pointless.
Steve Ballmer
· 2 years ago
"Rhuggle is a bunch of boy scouts with no den-master! They are just a bunch of spoiled rich kids on a perpetual holiday, no order or discipline. They only exist in that I allow it, I find them amusing, it's like watching a house on fire or some other tragedy, you know it's repulsive but you just can't look away!" The reporters were taking in my words like Saki, they just couldn't get enough! So I decided to throw them one more bone! "I have to go now, but since I'm on Rhuggle, let me say this about this 'Android" thing they announced: It is just like the rest of Google ..ahem, I mean Rhuggle, IT ONLY EXIST ON PAPER! Don't fall for this vaporware, rumors, fake-half-baked hype that they peddle!"
Victor
· 2 years ago
Have you noticed how google android looks like iPhone operational system? Compare the functions shown in the videos below: weshow.com/us/p/23362/google_android_demo weshow.com/us/p/18795/iphone_home_made_review What do you think? Will google bring iPhone power to everyone who can't afford apple products? That would be great :D
Roshuan
· 2 years ago
God I love the myopic Apple fanatic world view. Anything anyone does that is not exactly the same as what Apple does automatically sucks, and anything that might remotely resemble something that Apple does is a blatant copy. You folks really need to get some perspective.
Robuka Kenderle
· 2 years ago
>It was released without a personal approach.
Did you want Sergei to give you a handjob?
>If you want my support for your platform I need to be >able to use it and show it to my friends.
Of course. Because that's what tech is all about, making some geek look cool with his other geek friends.
>The UI looks confused.
You means all phones on the Android platform will look like this?
>Heck, I don’t know of a single developer who >has had his/her hands on Android.
Wait, Android is not a platform? Its the name of a phone? Developers on the other hand have their hands on the SDK. What's that you say?
>Google needs to get atomic videos. You dont like the editing of the video?
>Google’s PR comes across as “only caring about big >bangs. Yes, Apple and Microsoft's PR is understated.
>They also kept me from using my video camera during >the press call Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!! Waaaaaaaaaaah!! I need my mommy.... When Apple does one of these they have no rules whatsoever. None.
>It looks too much like a poor copy of the iPhone. The main reason they should never have used a demo. Some lame brained writers might think THIS is the phone instead of a platform on which different companies will be able to build different models of phone.
>But what do I know
From the look of it, very little.
More like the judgement and reasoning of my 12 year old nieces who like things that look cool.
#20 is right on the money: >Saying your not going to switch from the iPhone to >Android is like saying your not trading in your BMW >for a Z Platform. Product != platform.
T-r-y t-o c-o-m-p-r-e-h-e-n-d t-h-i-s.
RK
craigbbaker
· 2 years ago
You could be very wrong this time Robert. What Google has presented so far is a very impressive mobile platform. Yes betamax won out against VHS, but the innovation that has gone in to Android from what I've seen makes me think this thing could have legs. I'm a developer, I enjoyed the videos, I wanted longer videos and more information.
Muchacho
· 2 years ago
You are all a bunch of stupids that just blog first before understand what is going on.
Andriod SDK is mean for Developers not for end users.
The demos and videos are just for demostration for DEVELOPERS of what kind of things the platform can do. As we have a compass, GPS, USB, 3D hardware graphics acceleration, Touching, keyboard and much more.
The real phones and marketing, that will depend of Operators and device manufacturers as Motorola, AT&t so on.
Google just gives the Software stack for get one and only one universal platform for mobile devices.
Google what gets from this?, this platform runs webkit and is very integrated with internet features so Google will continue doing what they do best ADS as we can find now in a desktop PC. Google win money with ADS and advertsiments in the internet.
Google doesnt win money with Andriod directly, the device manfucaturers and operators are the winners of what they will build with this Software Stack called Andriod.
Henry S.
· 2 years ago
"They didn’t talk about ONE thing that the iPhone doesn’t do."
Well google.com didn't do anything that yahoo.com didn't do...it didn't even do a fraction of what it did. I don't think anyone would of predicted the success of Google if they had seen an early version of it (they would of just compared features).
In general, it is actually very difficult to predict the success of disruptive technologies. Your way of comparing feature-for-feature is the non-disruptive way. Apple may be happy having 5% of a market (due to wanting to control everything), but someobody has to do something about the other 95%.
Daniel Kvasnicka
· 2 years ago
I'm fascinated. How can you ciriticize something, that has JUST been released? And what's more, released only for developers?
You know what? Let's talk about this in spring 2008...
bobo moreno
· 2 years ago
Author is so not getting it; this will bring all the OTHER phones up to par with the iPhone... consumer wins
Computer Consulting Kit
· 2 years ago
It may be too early to call Google a dud in this area.
In 18 years in the IT industry, mostly on the SMB business development side, the one thing I've learned: Never bet against the 800-pound gorilla.
Of course over time, 800-pound gorillas in an industry can turn into 800mg mouses (remember when IBM dominated the PC World, when HP basically owned the laser printer market, when Lotus 123 ruled the finance World, etc.).
But I still wouldn't count Google "out" at this point.
They have a VERY large installed user "base".
mikep
· 2 years ago
I agree with Robert, but from a more technical analysis. If I put together a bunch of engineers and asked them to put spec a new OS (of sorts) utilizing mostly open source components, this is what I would expect. Choosing a variant of embedded Linux is straightforward, since it is open source and the alternative is a commercial RTOS. The VM/core library approach is also nice, as it delivers somewhat of a Hardware Abstraction Layer for developers to "write once, run on any Android" handset. But the numerous managers, layers, not to mention the general approach to handling GUI API which looks like the original (if not current) OS X and Windows graphics system shows little vision towards a "next gen" embedded device. The eventual iPhone SDK may allow some innovation in an app's GUI, but it goes without saying that the user interaction/ interface will be limited in some ways to Apple's "Look and Feel." This is a good thing, and why Apple products are generally easy to use. The Android approach seems to invite all forms of GUI which will drive cell phone users crazy. It also ignores the value of 'branding' by cell phone manufacturers and service providers. By placing a simple abstraction layer in the architecture, any app could fit in with, say, a Nokia phone using T-Mobile versus a Sony phone from Verizon, and it could all be done dynamically under the covers without requirements on writing apps themselves. But the main point is that this looks like a desktop OS - out of the chute it is already too large and multi-layered. We are talking about embedded devices, even allowing for some level of scaling up to ultra portable computing devices. Since we are talking Google, they will get some manufacturers to dip their toes in the water, and probably some of the cell carriers. But even if Google can get this OS to perform adequately on a mobile device, I would conjecture that by the time the manufacturers and carriers are done paring it down, it will not be as much of a 'platform' as Google would like to think.
Jim
· 2 years ago
Has anyone thought about Google's larger plan, and its big brother effect? I see 2 key strategies they're probably considering:
1. Get google's javascript on as many web sites and web interactions as possible. cookie everything. Know what the world is doing. Know what you are doing. Think about the whole point of adsense, gmail, google reader, and web analytics (look for urchin mention in view source of many websites). "Just paste this tiny bit of javascript into your site.." Doubleclick would bring way to much power to extend what they've already done.
2. Get folks to use the google phone and use speech recognition to know what folks are talking about. insert relevant advertisements at the end of the call. Notice how well their 411Goog works? Remember that old search speech recognition tool they once had up?
The possibilities are getting a bit scary, no?
Lyle
· 2 years ago
I have been playing with it and have applied for a job with a company that is planning on using the platform. It's real and it's out there.
Swaroop
· 2 years ago
Just wait and see how the Android is going to be a killer app for Mobiles. Open Handset Alliance is not a kitty party !
Quoting Sergey Brin.. "The best applications are yet to be made".
milan
· 2 years ago
I like your videos and opinions, but you are too negative now. Maybe you've traveled too much with the bus lately? "Ok that was just mean, but it had to be said." Just tell me, who is giving developers (free) platform to make applications for phones (not some sexy reservoir iPhone land), I mean phones for normal people? Ok, this video is boring, but video on OHA with childrens is not boring. Maybe you didn't get it - it's freedom. I've asked my children and my wife what would be their magic phone like and they gave me some crazy use cases. I've looked at android apis and you know what - it's possible to do it. You are just too negative...
Max
· 2 years ago
Google is making some big moves with Android ( http://www.androidapps.org ), OpenSocial, bidding on the wireless spectrum, etc. It will be interesting to see if the could succeed in these areas the way they did with search.
trinest
· 1 year ago
Normal people don't use the iPhone idoits do.
davodd
· 1 year ago
In the late 1980s, I remember emailing to Linus and his frustration that people weren't taking his new Linus project seriously.
They couldn't understand why anyone would move from Unix or MS-DOS to use such a clunky operating system, even if it was open source.
And in the mid-1990s, people pooh-poohed the idea of Java.
The key is that this new Android platform is just starting. We need to avoid the pitfall of presupposing what an open-source software's future will be by how it works at this very moment.
Odds are the Android of the future will not resemble even remotely what is in the above video. And, odds are, it's child or one of its children will be on almost all of our phones within 5-10 years in some form.
Utterly furious
· 1 year ago
hmmmm
Utterly furious
· 1 year ago
In the video the speaker says that the ui will be replaced completely. Please watch the video and then make a comment about something that you don't know about. To all people that make ui comments: Are you 5 year old kids that when they read a book, they look for the pictures. and when they don't find any pictures, they say the book "sucks"? (when i say a book, i don't mean a comic book.)
any person that has any computer science education at all can tell you that anything that is still in the development process doesn't have a good ui. so respect that. and don't go blobing around like a mad monkey that sdk is bad untill you actually installed it and created a simple program with it. and i don't mean hello world.
To all people that say: "i am not gonna touch it until it comes out on a real device..." - Be my guest! from my experience it is better to learn the break-through technologies fast to stay ahead of gray faceless mob. so meanwhile you sit and wait, i will be learning. when finally it will strike you and gphone will be handed to you on the silver plater, i will be the one reading your resume. You say you don't believe it is not going to work? Why not???!!! What is so unbelievably difficult to understand that an open mobile platform gives you a chance to make the transition into the wireless age of small factor devices? Do you think google will just let that one slide through if it fails the first time? Do you think it will just say: "No, after buying a company and waisting 10000000 for android challenge and making fools out of ourselves we will just create an ugly, un-functional, featureless device because we are not really a mobile company. we are just a search engine that does doodles every christmas..." Yeah right...
Also to a guy that thinks Sergey Brin needs a haircut and a speech coach... First Sergey is probably sorry he assaulted your royal ears. Second, it is not about wearing a suite like a lot of corporate monkeys out there. i wonder what you would look like if you had a multi-billion dollar business? Oh i am sorry you don't have one, so i guess we will never know.
bdjnk
· 1 year ago
Horrible video, I agree. Seems like Google is just bad at PR.
On the other hand, I don't think Google should be the ones doing the publicizing for android. Rather, it should be done by the phone manufacturers and service providers, as they have more experience and a better infrastructure in this regard.
And that leads me to the point of this post. Google was advertising to developers. Those people who are going to make android in to a viable competitor in terms of functionality.
There is time enough later for promotional stunts and gimmicks. What needed to get done asap was the developer involvement. And in this respect Google succeeded.
Robert
· 1 year ago
I think the iPhone can credit much of it's success to the massive following that Apple seem to have at the moment. It borders on a cult following at this time.
Google are going to have to work very hard to try and compete with that. That said I believe that Google are really going to do a Microsoft on this one. No doubt they will release the software with bugs and we'll have folk calling Android the next Vista. :P
SEO Training
· 1 year ago
I suspect the big news will be when Android is ported to small notebook computers like the ASUS Eee PC. Imagine an Eee PC with a 10 inch high-resolution touch screen and 3G mobile phone capabilities and include a Bluetooth headset. What an awesome combination! Great for the business traveler on the road.
I'm really looking forward to Google getting some success with the Android platform so as to create a bit of competition with Apple's iPhone. I really hope Android plays avi and other video format files including Flash.
Wrenchy
· 5 months ago
Hey Scoble, don't you look like a clown! Look where Android is now and where they're heading. It's a pity an iTard fanboi like yourself has no vision. Maybe you should just stay at home wanking off to your precious Ifone playing World of Warcraft with your ibuddies.
All Comments
I think that the set vendors are more worried about android then they are about the iPhone overhere in Europe, regardless of the developer support.
Google doesn't need to pitch to the end customers, the handset makers will take care of this. And as you point out correctly, after the customers will come the developers...
Just look at the development section of nokia, most of it is wide in the open and how many developers use it.... And the market share of nokia is a lot higher than apples iPhone.
I think you are beating up on it a little too early out of the gate.
Also may I add that I can see the Gphone OS on several phones and the iPhone os on .. the iPhone. I think developing on a platform far and wide might make more sense than just on the iPhone. So, yes an SDK is coming for the iPhone...it still only runs on the iPhone once you make the app.
Now, was it a Dry video presentation...Oh yea, I am with you there.
Let me add...I do enjoy your insight and opinions on things like this.
Ok that was just mean, but it had to be said.
It's about an open mobile platform where the developer is free to imagine, create, and build killer apps that are deeply integrated with the phone and other apps on the device.
It has nothing to do with the iPhone. It's about creating a technology stack that allows for kick ass mobile applications from third party devlopers, letting manufacturers build cool devices, and having these devices run on any network/provider.
You are right on one thing... the make/break is going to be if we see lots of devices with the Android stack.
BTW, my favorite mobile stack right NOW is Windows Mobile.. go Russians :)
For now, I'm very impressed with the HTC TyTN II (The AT&T Tilt) - which packs everything in - touch screen, good music/video, 3 Mega pixel camera (and a second camera for video calls), GPS, HSDPA/3G, WiFi, Video Calling and a slide out keyboard. Admittidly, Windows Mobile isn't nearly as pretty as the iPhone (although it is more producive), but HTC did a good job with building the Touch Flo interface over the top.
For me, the only reason I'd switch to an iPhone or to an Android phone would be if they took all the useful features I have on my tilt and did something better on top.
A spinning globe is no more an indication that "spinning a globe is all you can do with this phone" than a spinning cube screensaver is an indication that that's all the Windows drawing routines can do. It's a demo.
Google has actually never had good marketing. They have cool, interesting apps and alot of fanboys.
How about putting a cell phone in a vacuum cleaner? What would you do if you could do that? How about putting one onto a sign on a street corner? How about one in your dashboard? How about a dockable cell that could do better sync with your PC? Instead we get a Google Maps commercial. Yawn. I already have that on my iPhone AND my Nokia!
If you look at the iPhone, I think it will follow the same arc as the Apple computer. Incredibly innovative, but eventually Apple's insistence on controlling every millimeter of the platform will relegate it to a niche market.
For example, the Macintosh is gorgeous. I drool on the anti-aliasing and wide screen monitors every time I go to the Apple store. but I use a PC because every application I need runs better on a PC. I think it is because Windows is more developer friendly. The best applications for the Mac were developed by Apple.
Any idea if this thing is going to have Flash?
That would be one thing the iPhone can't (currently) do.
Well... Normal people don't use the iPhone, do they? No, they use all the other phones that are out there. The videos appealed to me, but then you're not a developer, are you.
The markets Google and Apple are targeting are entirely different, so comparing their initiatives on the mobile front is like comparing apples and oranges.
There is no reason iPhones can't run Android applications. Android is designed in such a way that it would be easy for Apple (or Motorola or Palm) to make products that support Android apps?
Why would they want to do that? Because there is going to be a massive community of developers out there building awesome cross-platform applications.
The iPhone is nice, but more a toy, Blackberry, full-sized QWERTY keyboarders and PDA phones far more productive, though not as much fun. But sadly iPhone is saddled with AT&T's EDGE 2g inferior network. But with hacks, it's good, and 1.1.2 was hosed almost in minutes.
With Voyager on 3g EV-DO, with the best of iPhone and QWERTY's and then a slew of new Sony Ericsson's and Nokia's (Haptikos) and Sidekick LX and on and on and on, a Googleish API Phone is a joke at best.
I like Apple and I could afford the iPhone but I don't like robbery.
If Apple had shown the iPhone at the initial stages and demoed the accelerometer and multi-touch screen APIs, people would probably have fallen asleep in the audience. It wasn't until Steve rotated the phone and it switched to landscape mode and showed off the "pinch" that people went "wow." But the former had to happen before the latter.
Personally, I don't want to be excited about slick apps at the start of a project; I want to be excited about an architecture. If the architecture sucks, it's going to be a tangled, nasty mess and ultimately a poor user experience. You may be able to graft some slick apps on top of a crappy architecture, but ultimately things will fall apart. See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_OS
And yet, even this statement is missing the point. Developers are users too, they just think slightly differently. ;-)
The problem lies in the fact that you have to make a developer want the device for themselves, and then to have the [coinciding] desire to write their code/application for that device.
There is a less-common desire to write your code/application for a device others use but you don't; which while entirely true in some cases, does *only* follow end-users and even then not always, and is much more infrequent than the first case.
Dumbest statement. Ever. Hate to break it to you Robert, but there aren't that many iPhone users out there. It is a very, very small market. Anybody just going for that market would be setting their sights low. Now of course Apple is hoping to expand that market rapidly, which is why they dropped the price by 33% just a few moths after the highly touted debut.
Further, it is silly to compare some prototypes to a polished retail product. The real success of the Android platform will be how many phones are built with it. Now you can definitely compare those phones to the iPhone. That would be a true apple-to-Apple comparison...
Meanwhile as others have pointed out, this is a huge difference maker for developers. Mobile device development is so fragmented and painful right now. This is not just an SDK, it is an SDK that provides access to phone hardware that is rarely accessible to most developers. Plus it runs Java, so one can imagine that many Java based apps and games are already going to work on this thing. That should be no surprise since Google Mail, Talk, and Maps are all Java apps.
But let's wait and see. I think that if developers start working on the Android OS we might get a few surprises after all.
Like that article said, check with your friends Dave Winer or Om Malik first. At least people listen to them.
Normal people won't buy the iPhone! :)
As for other phones -- it'll be cheap. The iPhone has been out what, a few months and yes it's a great status quo. But if you compare what Android does vs pretty much any other phone, it starts looking pretty competitive I reckon.
If the OHA is successful, people are going to throw this post back in your face just like people did with the posts of all of the haters when Apple announced V1.0 of the iPod.
In my opinion, and I don't pretend to be some grand wizard of technology like you do - apparently without any justification whatsoever, I might add - there is clearly a movement toward more open standards in technology and Apple, regardless of the gee-whiz technology they've included in the iPhone, is making the same mistake they made with the Macintosh platform back in the 80s. There's a reason Apple only has 6% of the home computer market. And don't tell me that finally releasing an SDK - while still controlling what applications are available via iTunes - is really making the iPhone "open." More open, yes, but truly open as it appears the OHA handsets will be, not a chance.
Also, the iPhone's features - while they may have been difficult to envision in the first place - are not difficult to copy. And the iPhone is merely going to set the benchmark for successful mobiles in the future - including any OHA mobiles that want to be successful.
I guess you post junk like this just to stir up a controversy and thereby boost your page views, but it's frankly insulting to you readers and should be beneath you.
Is this really the best you can come up with Scoble?
I have to say I'm a little nonplussed at your derision of the video. I'm a developer who writes desktop apps for a living and is starting to hack web stuff in my spare time. I live in Europe. I don't care that Steve Jobs gives great presentations (I won't be there), or that TechCrunch weren't invited. I don't care whether it looks like a copy of an iPhone - I've never seen an iPhone.
The video is ok (and it's video that matters, not whether some gadget blowhards are getting advance previews - not directed at you btw), and it's reasonably effective. If it's being straight with me, then I see the following: an open platform, which for me is accessible and familiar - I run on a solid open source stack already; straight forward functionality that replicates what I'm already familiar with; based on open toolsets that I'm already familiar with.
Frankly I'm having a hard time understanding the negativity. It does appear that it's a result of simply not pandering to the audience of Scobles etc. I'm sitting 6000 miles away, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm sure there are many others like me.
You shouldn't need a visionary and a marketing company to get you excited about a platform!
In fact I know you didn't watch the arch videos, because you didn't mention one of the most relevant and interesting points - you might write code in Java, but it runs on Google's own in-house VM and NOT on J2ME.
Maybe you should get your developer friends to watch more than the demos?
Find somebody in the US that buys me a iphone, hack it and use it with any carrier here. Perhaps I'll brick it on the process... right?
Or:
Wait, buy any phone I want that has android on it and do a legal activation with my current carrier.
First, understand Googles target audience with this announcement. Heres a hint - its not hi-profile tech-savy bloggers like yourself, or end customers, duh!. Btw, I don't work in tech or phones, and these videos from google were more exciting to me that any of your recent videos. Their targets are developers and phone manufacturers. And developers don't want atomic videos, they want documents and specifications and this is what they've got. Imagine a developer saying "How do I implent feature x?, s**t theirs no atomic video describing the API, now I'm screwed".... yeah, right!
And all this crap about how you haven't seen it, its vapourware, etc, well boo-hoo - if you look at all the release info some of the google devs have been using android on mobile devices for 6 months! Note that android is based on technically the best software stack you could conceive - i.e. a linux core with Java apps - both established, open and proven technologies in the mobile world. This approach takes care automatically of perhaps the biggest problem the iphone is encountering in allowing 3rd party apps, namely security. Additionally, realise that due to this approach, it would be easy to mix in non-java code in the future.
As to the multiple interface control options - you're again missing the point. They are talking about the capabilities of an operating system, not a single device. Phone manufacturers can expose control options as they choose in order to make a coherent interface. They point is *they have choice*.
As to the $10 million prize for apps, yes google are buying developers to write apps, yes they are seemingly a little late to the game, and yes this shows that they are bloody serious about android. Ultimately what your observations of the iphone hacking scence should have taught you is that a key reason people buy 'smartphones' is for 3rd party apps. So how successfully do you think a financially incentivised open source mobile operating system designed for 3rd party applications will be? Don't be stupid, this is going to be huge.
Your blog post reads very much as a "give mes one of your new toys to play with or I'll trash it for no good reason".
That should put the whole iPhone comparison thing to rest.
In terms of the SDK, Android is indeed pretty exciting, due to the sheer breadth of libraries available (OpenGL ES, XMPP, full phone stack/contacts access, etc) and the elegance of the API (it's NOT another version of J2ME, please at least look at the sample code).
It's hardly vapourware from the point of view of a developer. You can, today, download the SDK and start writing applications which have access to nearly everything on the phone. Sure, OpenMoko would be even cooler, with the hardware accessible now, but Android is by no means a certain dud.
Do realize this is not a phone, but a phone platform. And that too a free and open one.
Android? It feels like Symbian all over again. I'm very underwhelmed.
iPhone is still only 1.5 million phones on 2 billion. Google is doing a Microsoft here. By 2010 we’ll have 5% iPhones and 95% phones running on an (open) OS that’s easy to develop for. And add Opensocial to the equation and suddenly all mobile apps will behave like a blackberry behaves for email on a mobile device.
The only thing I don’t like about the announcement is the price contest. Seems to me not the best way to stimulate innovation and creativity. They should also not make the mistake that Microsoft made and only embrace the developers, they should embrace open source psychologists, graphic designers, usability engineers and antropologists as well
Get yourself some good faculty diploma, then you can discuss things like that, but before that... you're just one of the bloggers who wants to get hit with visits.
did you ever checked SDK in eclipse? did you checked their documentation? no? did your programmers friends? i don't think so.
Attention whore!
Just imagine a Mobile ajax runtime that allows the Mobile User to create Mobile widgets using html,css, and javascfipt its called MobileY! and currently is development in far away lab
ipHone succeed because it went after Mobile Users..
Another term for MobileY! is a Social Mobile Browser for every mobile user..
I am taking a huge risk here in getting into trouble with my top bosses..
Lets just say I am kicking Purple Dinosaurs through the SF49ers Uprights..
Videos for Mobile Users Coming soon :)
You're happy to talk about the iPhone SDK as if it were god's gift to mobile developers, while complaining that the Google SDK, which is here, now, is vapourware?
Seems 'paradoxical' but Google will make the Mobile Market more dynamic but benefits others vendors instead of Google itself.
And even Android is far from the developers side without offering a C/C++ way to develop native applications.
And lets not forget that menus are still being implemented if I am not mistaken.
The emulator is trickier. It runs a computer with qemu, that uses a linux kernel, a boot ramdisk and two disk images. The images contain linux filesystems with the binary programs (like an sql server) that is needed for linux to work. The gui's bottom part is binary and written in c++, but the windowing system runs is java. The runtime is a modified java vm, much like the one used on some sony-ericsson phones.
The main difference between this and the apple iphone is that this environment theoretically allows the use of home made hardware, but it contains a few non open source kernel and software components. I hope they can be replaced with standard open source code. It would be possible to write c++ applications that tie into the gui and can be controlled from the java side windowing system. (like windowing and menus in java, 3d rendering in c++, just like on certain mri kits)
My conclusion is that this sdk is mostly the hardware developers sdk, mainly aimed at getting the environment up and running on an actual hardware, but it got tailored for running demos. Imho if we could find the source or at least the apis for the proprietary modules, it would be possible to get the whole system up and running on any hardware, including running it natively on anything that can run linux. I like this approach better, because this way I could use it with my own home made gsm hardware (via nano+gsm module+touch lcd+battery), or even install the android environment as an application under openmoko. The only thing preventing people from building linux based phones is the lack of gsm services (like sms and mms handing in thunderbird or a dialer with proper contact lists).
They could only blow their chance is by keeping the runtime environment closed and only licensing it to device manufacturers. I don't know if they open up these subsystem too, but the current sdk doesn't have them in source form.
Might not be perfect, but many developers will see this as an opportunity, and much more innovation will come from Android than the iPhone. One caveat, we have to see it running on some real hardware.
I don't have an iPhone, I'm not in a 'state' to get a phone that has Android. But it might change. I think the biggest problem will be the greedy telco's.
Comparing Android to the Iphone- Isn't that a little like comparing Winamp to the Zune?
It's not fair to judge a software platform by the interface of the hardware it's running on.
There are several reasons I'd take an Android-Powered mobile over an iPhone-
1) The SDK - That "don't believe it till you see it" think mentioned above goes both ways. Apple promised an SDK for the iphone a long time ago, and waffled with "web sites are your SDK." They're not. They might do it again, too. And even if Apple produces one next year, it'll be from all the pressure they've received, not from a genuine attitude of thinking of their device as a platform to allow others to build on.
2) I'm a developer. I understand that puts me in the "not normal" set of consumers, but honestly, from a programming perspective, Android looks like a playground I can carry around in my pocket. And I really love Google API's- The documentation may not be an exhilerating read, but be serious. It's an API. And in Google's case, as a general rule, you can create wonders with them.
3)Choice (that seperation between phone & platform comes in, here). If I want an Android-powered phone on a 3G network, I pick a provider with a 3G network, and a model that supports it. If I want an Android phone with GPS, I pick a model with GPS. If I want an iPhone with 3G, I wait. If I want GPS, I either risk bricking the iPhone to install something that fakes GPS based on celltower location, or I wait.
4)Developer community- The barrier of entry into developing for the iPhone is vastly larger than for Android, so naturally, I think more people are going to develop for Android. More developers -> more software -> greater presence in developer forums/communities -> better software. That's just how I see it rollin'.
-Alex
#2 I doubt much of anything is going to get people who already have an iPhone to give up their iPhone - Two Year Contracts tend to have that affect on people.
#3 If I just spent $300 - $600 on a phone, I'm not even going to bother looking at other phones for a while, regardless of contracts or not.
#4 You are comparing something that is software only (Android) to a software/hardware package (iPhone). I'm sure there will be a good number of phones that run Android that will be utter crap. And, then there will be some phones that run Android that will kick the iPhone's butt. It's like comparing a Mac and Windows. You don't compare the operating system to the computer. (Mac comes with iLife and a built-in camera and bluetooth - Windows comes with a DVD.) No, you compare a given Mac (MacBook Pro 15") with a given laptop running Windows (Dell XPS with Windows Vista Ultimate, or whatever). Trying to compare what is, in practical terms, vaporware (not that it doesn't exist, but the final product does not yet exist) to the hold-it-in-your-hands iPhone - is not only unfair - it's pointless.
a bunch of spoiled rich kids on a perpetual holiday, no order or
discipline. They only exist in that I allow it, I find them amusing, it's
like watching a house on fire or some other tragedy, you know it's
repulsive but you just can't look away!"
The reporters were taking in my words like Saki, they just couldn't
get enough! So I decided to throw them one more bone!
"I have to go now, but since I'm on Rhuggle, let me say this about
this 'Android" thing they announced: It is just like the rest of Google
..ahem, I mean Rhuggle, IT ONLY EXIST ON PAPER! Don't fall for this
vaporware, rumors, fake-half-baked hype that they peddle!"
Compare the functions shown in the videos below:
weshow.com/us/p/23362/google_android_demo
weshow.com/us/p/18795/iphone_home_made_review
What do you think? Will google bring iPhone power to everyone who can't afford apple products? That would be great :D
Did you want Sergei to give you a handjob?
>If you want my support for your platform I need to be >able to use it and show it to my friends.
Of course. Because that's what tech is all about, making some geek look cool with his other geek friends.
>The UI looks confused.
You means all phones on the Android platform will look like this?
>Heck, I don’t know of a single developer who
>has had his/her hands on Android.
Wait, Android is not a platform? Its the name of a phone?
Developers on the other hand have their hands on the SDK.
What's that you say?
>Google needs to get atomic videos.
You dont like the editing of the video?
>Google’s PR comes across as “only caring about big >bangs.
Yes, Apple and Microsoft's PR is understated.
>They also kept me from using my video camera during >the press call
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!!
Waaaaaaaaaaah!! I need my mommy....
When Apple does one of these they have no rules whatsoever. None.
>It looks too much like a poor copy of the iPhone.
The main reason they should never have used a demo.
Some lame brained writers might think THIS is the phone instead of a platform on which different companies will be able to build different models of phone.
>But what do I know
From the look of it, very little.
More like the judgement and reasoning of my 12 year old nieces who like things that look cool.
#20 is right on the money:
>Saying your not going to switch from the iPhone to >Android is like saying your not trading in your BMW >for a Z Platform. Product != platform.
T-r-y t-o c-o-m-p-r-e-h-e-n-d t-h-i-s.
RK
What Google has presented so far is a very impressive mobile platform. Yes betamax won out against VHS, but the innovation that has gone in to Android from what I've seen makes me think this thing could have legs.
I'm a developer, I enjoyed the videos, I wanted longer videos and more information.
Andriod SDK is mean for Developers not for end users.
The demos and videos are just for demostration for DEVELOPERS of what kind of things the platform can do. As we have a compass, GPS, USB, 3D hardware graphics acceleration, Touching, keyboard and much more.
The real phones and marketing, that will depend of Operators and device manufacturers as Motorola, AT&t so on.
Google just gives the Software stack for get one and only one universal platform for mobile devices.
Google what gets from this?, this platform runs webkit and is very integrated with internet features so Google will continue doing what they do best ADS as we can find now in a desktop PC. Google win money with ADS and advertsiments in the internet.
Google doesnt win money with Andriod directly, the device manfucaturers and operators are the winners of what they will build with this Software Stack called Andriod.
Well google.com didn't do anything that yahoo.com didn't do...it didn't even do a fraction of what it did. I don't think anyone would of predicted the success of Google if they had seen an early version of it (they would of just compared features).
In general, it is actually very difficult to predict the success of disruptive technologies. Your way of comparing feature-for-feature is the non-disruptive way. Apple may be happy having 5% of a market (due to wanting to control everything), but someobody has to do something about the other 95%.
You know what? Let's talk about this in spring 2008...
In 18 years in the IT industry, mostly on the SMB business development side, the one thing I've learned: Never bet against the 800-pound gorilla.
Of course over time, 800-pound gorillas in an industry can turn into 800mg mouses (remember when IBM dominated the PC World, when HP basically owned the laser printer market, when Lotus 123 ruled the finance World, etc.).
But I still wouldn't count Google "out" at this point.
They have a VERY large installed user "base".
But the main point is that this looks like a desktop OS - out of the chute it is already too large and multi-layered. We are talking about embedded devices, even allowing for some level of scaling up to ultra portable computing devices. Since we are talking Google, they will get some manufacturers to dip their toes in the water, and probably some of the cell carriers. But even if Google can get this OS to perform adequately on a mobile device, I would conjecture that by the time the manufacturers and carriers are done paring it down, it will not be as much of a 'platform' as Google would like to think.
1. Get google's javascript on as many web sites and web interactions as possible. cookie everything. Know what the world is doing. Know what you are doing. Think about the whole point of adsense, gmail, google reader, and web analytics (look for urchin mention in view source of many websites). "Just paste this tiny bit of javascript into your site.." Doubleclick would bring way to much power to extend what they've already done.
2. Get folks to use the google phone and use speech recognition to know what folks are talking about. insert relevant advertisements at the end of the call. Notice how well their 411Goog works? Remember that old search speech recognition tool they once had up?
The possibilities are getting a bit scary, no?
Open Handset Alliance is not a kitty party !
Quoting Sergey Brin.. "The best applications are yet to be made".
Just tell me, who is giving developers (free) platform to make applications for phones (not some sexy reservoir iPhone land), I mean phones for normal people? Ok, this video is boring, but video on OHA with childrens is not boring. Maybe you didn't get it - it's freedom. I've asked my children and my wife what would be their magic phone like and they gave me some crazy use cases. I've looked at android apis and you know what - it's possible to do it. You are just too negative...
They couldn't understand why anyone would move from Unix or MS-DOS to use such a clunky operating system, even if it was open source.
And in the mid-1990s, people pooh-poohed the idea of Java.
The key is that this new Android platform is just starting. We need to avoid the pitfall of presupposing what an open-source software's future will be by how it works at this very moment.
Odds are the Android of the future will not resemble even remotely what is in the above video. And, odds are, it's child or one of its children will be on almost all of our phones within 5-10 years in some form.
To all people that make ui comments:
Are you 5 year old kids that when they read a book, they look for the pictures. and when they don't find any pictures, they say the book "sucks"?
(when i say a book, i don't mean a comic book.)
any person that has any computer science education at all can tell you that anything that is still in the development process doesn't have a good ui. so respect that. and don't go blobing around like a mad monkey that sdk is bad untill you actually installed it and created a simple program with it. and i don't mean hello world.
To all people that say: "i am not gonna touch it until it comes out on a real device..." - Be my guest! from my experience it is better to learn the break-through technologies fast to stay ahead of gray faceless mob. so meanwhile you sit and wait, i will be learning. when finally it will strike you and gphone will be handed to you on the silver plater, i will be the one reading your resume.
You say you don't believe it is not going to work? Why not???!!! What is so unbelievably difficult to understand that an open mobile platform gives you a chance to make the transition into the wireless age of small factor devices? Do you think google will just let that one slide through if it fails the first time? Do you think it will just say: "No, after buying a company and waisting 10000000 for android challenge and making fools out of ourselves we will just create an ugly, un-functional, featureless device because we are not really a mobile company. we are just a search engine that does doodles every christmas..." Yeah right...
Also to a guy that thinks Sergey Brin needs a haircut and a speech coach...
First Sergey is probably sorry he assaulted your royal ears.
Second, it is not about wearing a suite like a lot of corporate monkeys out there. i wonder what you would look like if you had a multi-billion dollar business? Oh i am sorry you don't have one, so i guess we will never know.
On the other hand, I don't think Google should be the ones doing the publicizing for android. Rather, it should be done by the phone manufacturers and service providers, as they have more experience and a better infrastructure in this regard.
And that leads me to the point of this post. Google was advertising to developers. Those people who are going to make android in to a viable competitor in terms of functionality.
There is time enough later for promotional stunts and gimmicks. What needed to get done asap was the developer involvement. And in this respect Google succeeded.
Google are going to have to work very hard to try and compete with that. That said I believe that Google are really going to do a Microsoft on this one. No doubt they will release the software with bugs and we'll have folk calling Android the next Vista. :P
I'm really looking forward to Google getting some success with the Android platform so as to create a bit of competition with Apple's iPhone. I really hope Android plays avi and other video format files including Flash.
It's a pity an iTard fanboi like yourself has no vision. Maybe you should just stay at home wanking off to your precious Ifone playing World of Warcraft with your ibuddies.