Dell Android Mobile Device Sounds Nice, but Curb Your Enthusiasm
The Wall Street Journal has generated the latest report (paywall) about Dell creating a mobile computing device. The news would seem to substantiate Michael Dell's allusion in March that Dell was "exploring" mobile Internet devices, or MIDs. The key action item in the latest report is that the device is rumored to run on the Google-created Android mobile operating system software. If this is true, it's a bigger piece of news for Google than the T-Mobile G1, the T-Mobile MyTouch 3G, the HTC Hero or any Android smartphone announcements out there. Why? The latest adopter of Android is Dell, a major computer maker. You expect mobile phone makers to build Android phones, which is what Android was originally targeted for. If computer makers see Dell pump out an Android device, they may well follow suit with their own MIDS, smartphones or even netbooks. We've already heard that Nokia is planning to launch an ARM-based netbook that runs Android. Every device launched is a measure of validation for the Android platform, a key new entry point for Google to extend its Web services and online advertising reach. If Android fails to gain traction, it will be a major failure for the company as it seeks to sow new seeds in the computing sector. So in comes TechRepublic Editor in Chief Jason Hiner, who may succeed in curbing your enthusiasm for Android with this piece. If you are an Android fanboy, this will be depressing because it basically blows Android out of the water, turning what Google sees as strengths in its software iteration to damning weaknesses. For example, Hiner notes that while Google's willy-nilly approach to software evolution works for Google's search engine, it won't float Android smartphones. He basically says the G1 and HTC Magic suck, and says Android should have been named "Beta." Ouch. Hiner writes:
It's hard to argue with that. I'd add that while there are certainly merits to platforms based on open standards, it's better to have a more controlled development process for complex tasks such as smartphone software development. Any analyst I've ever talked to who examines the mobile operating system space talks about how difficult it is, how rare a success like Apple's iPhone is in the market and how structured the development process must be for a successful product. We may hate how controlling Apple is with the apps that propel the iPhone, but there is something to be said for having a strong captain to steer the ship. The only resistance I offer to counter Hiner is that it's early days, man! Google can certainly alter its software development process if it feels it needs to (Who knows what your post will trigger?) Note how Google is shuttering certain software projects that aren't working and closing ranks on projects that matter. Google arguably wouldn't have dreamed of this a few years ago when it was more freewheeling, but it's definitely become more corporate, more bureaucratic, more controlled. This philosophy, which comes from CEO Eric Schmidt, could well bleed over to Android, forcing tighter software development by the Android team. That could help iron out the bugs. Hiner also notes another popular argument against Google making smartphone software: that Google doesn't make the hardware along with it!
Touche. Hiner 2, Google and fans, 0. Hiner also takes issues with the notion that Google Apps is enterprise-ready, but he supplies a weaker argument for another post (maybe later this week). For now, I challenge you to refute Hiner's argument about the Android weaknesses. Can you flip these on their ear and make them strengths, or do you agree with me that Google will tighten up the ship going forward? |
Comments (5)
Android - owner's pride - neigbour's envy ( should i say hiner's envy ) ... go buy urself an apple ..
Posted by and | June 30, 2009 3:14 PM
Screw him ! He needs to get another job....
ANDRIOD ROCKS.....
Posted by jay | June 30, 2009 3:27 PM
LOL. This write up is a joke. It's obvious he is not a technical guy and only giving opinion. First off Google did not make a phone. HTC makes the phone. Google has basically created and extended version of the Linux OS and called it Android.
I think what Google is doing is great. There phone was created with Open Source in mind which will make the platform very robust in giving the end user many options for their own phone. This phone OS will take off and every major phone maker will jump on board and begin using this OS as a flag ship OS for their company.
Posted by dbell | June 30, 2009 11:02 PM
I have to disagree with the majority of Hiner's article on Android. Android is an operating system - not the handset. So finding faults with the hardware does not necessarily indicate an issue with the Operating System. HTC makes the hardware on the current "android" phones, so any issues with speed or battery life are primarily issues with the hardware - NOT the operating system.
I've been using a HTC magic for over a month now and I've never experienced any problems with speed. (Battery life is poor however). But the applications, and integration with google "cloud" applications is outstanding. And if you don't want to use Google applications, developers are free to write and sell apps which utilise other services. The android OS is extremely robust - unlike my previous win mobile 6.1 phone which froze up every couple of hours.
Android like any OS for any hardware is not perfect, and could use improvement in certain areas (Bluetooth file sharing for instance!). But it is definitely NOT a beta release.
Clearly Hiner has also left out one of the most important aspects of why the iPhone was so successful - the capability for 3rd party developers to create innovative apps unseen on previous smartphones. This is without a doubt one of androids main strengths!
As a developer for mobile apps, Android is the breath of fresh air we've all been looking for. I no longer have to write code to target specific handsets with specific screen resolutions. I don't have to use lousy minimal Java ME anymore. The SDK is free and run on my PC (so I don't have to buy a mac and pay for the sdk like I would if I was doing iPhone development). And I can program in Dalvik Java which is nearly identical to standard Java. When you consider how many IT professionals have Java skills - developing android applications is a dead easy.
I don't consider myself to be an Android "fanboy" - I'd rather think we're in a bit of a Golden age for smart phones. Both Apple's iPhone and the Palm Pre are fantastic products - and Android is definitely a contender in this area.
Posted by Phil | August 5, 2009 9:01 PM
As for the lowest common denominator argument:
What's wrong with android's lowest common denominator?
Android's lowest common denominator (i.e. vanilla android) is comparable with the iPhone and palm Pre. I personally find android far more intuitive that the iPhone . Why? Android handsets have more than one silly button - i.e. Home, Menu, Back, Search, call, hang up and navigation buttons. If you think about it, it's not too different than using a browser, and it serves it's purpose very well.
When you consider that the majority of apps for smartphones (excuding games) basically involve a thin client model of looking up services, making adjustments to data, and uploading data - it fits extremely well into the "browser" paradigm. Android has nailed this.
So my question to Hiner is - exactly what is lacking in the lowest denominator of Android? Ok. I'll accept multitouch as one of these - but that's more of a legal issue. Exactly what else is so deficient and unintuitive about android from it's percieved lack of hardware/software integration?
This lowest common denominator argument would be valid if vanilla android was lacking as an OS... but I fail to see what is so lacking about it? If HTC has failed to integrate it's hardware with android, then that's the manufacturers fault.
Having an open OS brings flexibility.Flexibility is a double edged sword. It might have negatives in that there MAY be stability issues between hardware/software if the handset manufacturer does a shoddy job - but the trade-off is that the platform is far more customizable. Unlike Apple's one size fits all approach, android handset manufacturers can target there devices to various target markets. For instance motorola is targeting entry level smartphone users. Some other handset manufacturer might develop an android phone which has specific tweaks so it's targeted at business users.
Posted by Phil | August 5, 2009 9:46 PM