1. Google's competitors are using Android to compete with Google. Look at Samsung and Facebook
2. Google is providing free Android Support to it's competitors because of it's licensing structure.
3. Google is a web company and they are a big supporter of web and web apps.
4. Google is pushing Chrome packaged apps to make them ready for mobile. Dart is there for this reason I believe
5. Chrome OS licensing do not allow abuse like Android
This only deserves comment for being a monument to bad analysis. Let's keep it brief and take only the example of maps. How important is mobile revenue to Google's maps business? This article suggests Apple's flub cost it $1 billion, which Google just snatched up: http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-12-13/finance/35791575_...
> I remember Andy's second point. He argued that if Google did not act, we faced a Draconian future, future where one man, one company, one device, one carrier would be our only choice.
When exactly was this point supposedly made?
"One man, one company, one device..." is presumably a reference to the iPhone. So if Google did not act (by buying Android) then the iPhone would dominate? But Google bought Android before the iPhone was even announced.
Google had Eric Schmidt on Apple's board and knew about iPhone way before it was announced. He used this inside information to benefit Google, for instance buying up Android before iPhone was released.
Let's get the timeline on that quote right. In the linked video it's Vic Gundotra talking about starting work at Google, and the first day he met Andy Rubin at Google. According to his wiki "Gundotra joined Google in June 2007". That was well after iPhone was announced in Jan 07 and at most a month before it was released (also in June 07). As far as explaining the purpose of the Android project, it makes sense. It was the purpose of the project at the time, and not the reason Android was purchased: the "one man/company/device" would've been a legitimate concern at the time Rubin made that statement.
The site this is hosted on is bad enough to affect my reading of the article. Tiny text in a tiny sliver of the window, big glaring ad video up top, terribly broken layout.
On top of that, I doubt they'll stop developing Android any time soon... They have a nice platform that brings a lot of attachment, and huge marketshare.
Fascinating read albeit in a butt ugly environment.
Android makes Google no money and worse empowers companies like Samsung who could soon shut them out. Google has ChromeOS which has none of the baggage Android. Release a ChromeOS phone and see what happens?
for one, they will find it a bit difficult to retain the developers that have finally started taking android as a platform to target (when previously, iphone was king and first priority).
Android basically dominates I/O now. There's no way Google walks away in the near term, especially now that they have a UX team that understands how to build a compelling device. (Pre-FroYo Android was terrible, but from ICS on, it's developed a pretty solid interface.)
I love the idea of the Ubuntu OS for smartphones--more choice and more competition is only a good thing. The only problem I see with it is that the gestures aren't all natural, so it will do way more than most people will know that it can do because they don't know that performing a certain gesture will do something...unless it comes with some sort of instruction manual or tutorial videos in the OS itself.
15 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 47.9 ms ] threadWhen exactly was this point supposedly made?
"One man, one company, one device..." is presumably a reference to the iPhone. So if Google did not act (by buying Android) then the iPhone would dominate? But Google bought Android before the iPhone was even announced.
This sounds like a big retcon to me.
Not much of a heads up.
Vic hosted at Google IO 2010, he made those statements public, perhaps to get the dev audience amped up to the idea of Android vs the establishment.
The first prototype Android is telling, it's said that Eric was given an iPhone prototype. Quick visit to the drawing board?
The crux, Google is about ads, can they monetize Android?
On top of that, I doubt they'll stop developing Android any time soon... They have a nice platform that brings a lot of attachment, and huge marketshare.
And you are welcome. :)
Android makes Google no money and worse empowers companies like Samsung who could soon shut them out. Google has ChromeOS which has none of the baggage Android. Release a ChromeOS phone and see what happens?
Much more interesting than Android from a technical point of view.