Android Mobiles

“Android” and “open” go together like peanut butter and chocolate, but last year, avid Android followers were reminded that Android might be open, but Google apps for Android? Not so much. Workarounds have allowed use of those applications on phones, but Android’s future is not limited to phones. Manufacturers are testing, announcing, and even releasing Android netbooks, MIDs, and tablets. However, devices in this burgeoning Android market have yet to be certified as “with Google.” While there is no indication that phone sales are better or worse with or without that association, there are several reasons that being “with Google” could be an important distinction for other devices.

GOOGLE APPS
Tablets and netbooks are “connected” devices, but even with robust web applications, native device applications provide several advantages over their web-only counterparts. Features like offline use and cross-app-functionality are two major examples. Android users (or Google app users looking for Android) will expect access to native applications for Google Contacts, Calendar, Gmail, Voice, and Maps, but those native apps are are not part of the “open” Android.

STANDARD USER EXPERIENCE AND ACCESS TO ANDROID UPDATES
Android “fragmentation” comes in several forms, but differing OS versions is arguably the biggest problem for manufacturers, developers, and users. Devices with creative modifications to Android causes more work for manufacturers to keep up with the latest version of Android. Though other mobile platforms may also suffer this problem, Android adoption is vulnerable the longer these “old” operating systems hold onto significant market share. It is nice that Google provides open and updated access to such information (via Android Developers), but manufacturers need to be prepared to keep up with the releases. Developers may already be weary of having to support the “latest and greatest” as well as catering to the larger market segment of older Androids. Though Android 1.6 is still the dominant market release, “with Google” devices could be able to receive such updates in a more timely manner.

ANDROID MARKET
Really, it’s all about the apps. The Android Market is a legitimate marketplace and access to it is critical to the success of any Android device. Device-specific app stores will have a hard time competing with the established Android Market (if they can compete at all). Google and developers will need to work on how to segment applications based on max resolution, but that is not a new problem, even for Android. A soon-to-be-released non-Android tablet has a way to scale apps meant for smaller screens to match larger-screens – something for Google and developers to consider.

GOOGLE HAS THE FINAL SAY
The hurdle to getting Android “with Google” is Google. I expect that manufacturers are interested in selling “certified” devices, but none have yet to surface. The Google blog  announcing Chrome OS acknowledges that “Android was designed from the beginning to work across a variety of devices from phones to set-top boxes to netbooks,” which sounds reasonable. Unfortunately they confuse the tablet / netbook market (manufacturers and consumers alike) in the very next sentence, saying “Google Chrome OS …is being designed to power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems.”

Perhaps Google has a plan. Perhaps Google is quietly working with manufacturers. Perhaps the lines will soon be drawn – touch vs. non-touch, minimum / maximum processing power, or even external device support. Wherever they may be drawn, it is important to do so soon and let the netbook market and, more importantly, the tablet market get moving – “with Google.”

“Android” and “open” go together like peanut butter and chocolate, but last year, avid Android followers were reminded that Android might be open, but Google apps for Android? Not so much. Workarounds have allowed use of those applications on phones, but Android’s future is not limited to phones. Manufacturers are testing, announcing, and even releasing Android netbooks, MIDs, and tablets. However, devices in this burgeoning Android market have yet to be certified as “with Google.” While there is no indication that phone sales are better or worse with or without that association, there are several reasons that being “with Google” could be an important distinction for other devices.

GOOGLE APPS
Tablets and netbooks are “connected” devices, but even with robust web applications, native device applications provide several advantages over their web-only counterparts. Features like offline use and cross-app-functionality are two major examples. Android users (or Google app users looking for Android) will expect access to native applications for Google Contacts, Calendar, Gmail, Voice, and Maps, but those native apps are are not part of the “open” Android.

STANDARD USER EXPERIENCE AND ACCESS TO ANDROID UPDATES
Android “fragmentation” comes in several forms, but differing OS versions is arguably the biggest problem for manufacturers, developers, and users. Devices with creative modifications to Android causes more work for manufacturers to keep up with the latest version of Android. Though other mobile platforms may also suffer this problem, Android adoption is vulnerable the longer these “old” operating systems hold onto significant market share. It is nice that Google provides open and updated access to such information (via Android Developers), but manufacturers need to be prepared to keep up with the releases. Developers may already be weary of having to support the “latest and greatest” as well as catering to the larger market segment of older Androids. Though Android 1.6 is still the dominant market release, “with Google” devices could be able to receive such updates in a more timely manner.

ANDROID MARKET
Really, it’s all about the apps. The Android Market is a legitimate marketplace and access to it is critical to the success of any Android device. Device-specific app stores will have a hard time competing with the established Android Market (if they can compete at all). Google and developers will need to work on how to segment applications based on max resolution, but that is not a new problem, even for Android. A soon-to-be-released non-Android tablet has a way to scale apps meant for smaller screens to match larger-screens – something for Google and developers to consider.

GOOGLE HAS THE FINAL SAY
The hurdle to getting Android “with Google” is Google. I expect that manufacturers are interested in selling “certified” devices, but none have yet to surface. The Google blog  announcing Chrome OS acknowledges that “Android was designed from the beginning to work across a variety of devices from phones to set-top boxes to netbooks,” which sounds reasonable. Unfortunately they confuse the tablet / netbook market (manufacturers and consumers alike) in the very next sentence, saying “Google Chrome OS …is being designed to power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems.”

Perhaps Google has a plan. Perhaps Google is quietly working with manufacturers. Perhaps the lines will soon be drawn – touch vs. non-touch, minimum / maximum processing power, or even external device support. Wherever they may be drawn, it is important to do so soon and let the netbook market and, more importantly, the tablet market get moving – “with Google.”

There has been plenty of spilled ink (and pixels) surrounding products released over the past few years by Google and Apple with both putting   out game changers or a iWhatever killers.  A perceived rift may be becoming a reality.  As both an Apple and Google fanboy, I am saddened by a situation that doesn’t seem as if it will ever get better.

I really like what both companies are doing even if they have their respective issues.  Nobody is perfect. I will list a few of the things I like and don’t, you can perfectly disagree with the following statements and share your point of view in a comment.

• Apple has a great OS: Mac OS X. It can be simple if you don’t want to know how it works but you can also have access to Terminal and the power of Unix.
• Google has a great email service: Either Gmail or with Google Apps (only online and not through pop3 or imap on a client). I think this is the next step of evolution for email: huge storage accessible whatever device you are using, labels and not folders, powerful search.
• Apple is controlling: Apple, or maybe just Steve Jobs, think they know exactly what consumers want and what they don’t need. Apparently, we don’t need Blu-ray drive in high-end computers or camera on a tablet.
• Google is slow: Like any large companies, everything takes time. They have to evaluate everything and this process take time. Sometime I wish they change things as fast as they can give search results. When will we be able to buy Android apps in more countries?

However they share a lots and worked together in the past. Google is still providing web search and maps for Apple products and even if Apple would like to change the situation, it will not be easy and quick.

Now, how can someone can be both an Apple and Google fans. The logic would say that if you own a Mac computer, you will own an iPhone. If you compare Android OS and Mac OS X they have tons of similarity:

-Menu bar in OS X and Notification Bar in Android: You’ll get the time here, your network status, battery status… all in the same place.

-Dock and Slider bar: These are very similar concept, you click or drag and you will see icons of all your apps.

-Terminal/root: On both systems you can use the stock interface as it is or you can customize and improve it. I have Path Finder to replace the Finder on my Mac and a MoDaCo ROM on my HTC Hero.

-WebKit: Safari on OS X and Android browser are based on the same open source engine used to render web pages.

I could add few more but the point is that Mac OS X and Android have a lot more in commun than Mac OS X and the iPhone (or iPad to be trendy). So, for an Apple/Google fanboy the logical choice is to own an Android phone that you will be able to use like you are using you Mac OS X computer. Would you agree?

Search “tablet” within Androidguys and you will find 63 results dating as far back as July 2008. No, the idea of a tablet isn’t new. The biggest question revolving around these devices that fit somewhere between a smart phone and a laptop was, would anyone buy one?

The answer initially was a resounding “not really”.

On paper, the idea of a tablet makes sense. We get our data on our laptops or desktop at home and at work. While we are out we can get the information we need from our phones. The gap in our I.A.A. (Information Access Ability) was our time spent on the couch.

Sure, we could lug the laptop in there with us.  However, after a while the heat would get to us or we would have to find the power cable. In short, the laptop wasn’t really made to lug around from the couch the bathroom and back.  I guess you could use it for that purpose but that’s not what it was built for.  I bet many of you have anyways.

Companies that make their money from consumers accessing information online want to close that I.A.A. gap. Thus, the idea of the tablet was born.

Apple has led the charge before in terms of creating and/or legitimizing devices and is doing it again with this week’’s release of the iPad. The iPad could be viewed as “just another tablet computer”, but it comes from the company with the aforementioned success at creating buzz behind its devices. Going forward, it will be impossible to deny that tablets are now here to stay.

Tech companies have long had followers in the same vein as a Trekkie who would travel to Fresno in June for a sneak Peak at William Shatner as Captain Kirk. When tech companies talk, geeks listen. When Apple talks, Mr. and Mrs. Joe Average listen.  I have no doubt I will be asked tonight at home by my wife and kids about today’s announcement, that’s the power of Apple.

The tablet is now legitimized.

What makes today’s release unique is that Apple isn’t introducing anything necessarily revolutionary. As mentioned earlier, tablets have been done before. The bar is raised by the iPad, but not to the degree that it will take years before we see alternatives worthy of it like it took for a device to seriously compete with the iPhone.  What remains to be seen now is which hardware maker will meet the challenge to build a better tablet.

With the Nexus One Google has shown a willingness to step up to the plate and out-Apple Apple. Their announcement of the N1 was done in a way modeled by Apple. Doesn’t it makes sense that Google explores the possibility of raising the bar on the tablet computer next?

All the screenshots of the iPad remind me of Android 2.0 in that it could also make for the basis of  a great tablet. All Google needs is a hardware manufacturer and some additions to its software. An improved music player and an ebook option should be enough to match the functionality of iPad. Find someone to build a thin device with at least a 10 inch screen and the bar is raised again, only this time by Google and Android.

I bet we see the “iPad killer” sometime during the Summer, possibly from Google. Thanks to Apple for raising the bar and legitimizing these devices. Their stay at the top of the tablet hill will not be as long as their stay on the smart phone hill was.  I guarantee it.