Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1.    #1  
    I'll admit that Google's announcement of the Android Platform had its intended effect on me: I saw the list of folks on board, I heard that an 'early SDK' is coming on Monday, and I believed that not only was Android not vaporware, but it was something pretty significant. Today things look a little shakier - Who's in control of what parts? Just how locked-down will some of these things be? What guarantee will there be than an app will work on disparate versions of Android (hello Symbian)?

    Basically: Are there too many chefs in the Android kitchen?

    Microsoft has a different take than I do, and it's a shrug of the shoulders:

    “It really sounds that they are getting a whole bunch of people together to build a phone and that's something we've been doing for five years,” said Scott Horn, general manager of marketing at Microsoft's Windows Mobile business. “I don't understand the impact that they are going to have.”Microsoft has forecast that more than 20 million handsets running Windows Mobile software will be sold in the business year to June 2008, nearly double the amount sold last year.
    Read: Rivals dismiss threat of Google mobile platform | Reuters

    Now, I strongly suspect that there are GoogleFanBoys out there to rival AppleFanBoys and they're currently bookmarking the above article to better make Microsoft eat their words someday. At the present moment, though, “I don't understand” actually isn't all that bad of a reaction - it feels like we barely know more about Android than we did on Sunday.

    Read more at http://www.wmexperts.com/articles/ed...o_android.html
  2. #2  
    Seriously, intomobile is right on this one (link very slightly nsfw - language)
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by WMExperts Articles View Post
    Basically: Are there too many chefs in the Android kitchen?
    That's what I'm concerned about.

    I realized that phrases like "open source", "completely open" etc. are great buzz words, but until the networks themselves become more "open" I'm not sure how Android fits in to that model.

    Granted, Sprint seems more keen on the idea, especially with Wimax reportedly being open to non-Sprint devices, but to what extent will carriers and hardware manufactures over-configure the devices, to the detriment of the entire concept of Android?

    Much too early to say either way, but until we see some devices floating around, 3rd party software available and compatibility, we just won't know. But looking at the current state of things in the mobile industry, there is often way too much bureaucracy already in just one company, never mind 32.

    Right now everyone can project their mobile fantasies onto Adroid since it doesn't exist in a usable device yet. It'll be interesting to see how it progresses.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  4. Souljer's Avatar
    Posts
    134 Posts
    Global Posts
    136 Global Posts
    #4  
    But isn't that the point of going open source? To have many chefs developing mobile applications that we (user community) can decide best suits our needs?
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Souljer View Post
    But isn't that the point of going open source? To have many chefs developing mobile applications that we (user community) can decide best suits our needs?
    In theory, yes.

    In reality, who knows. I don't recall something like this occurring before in the mobile industry, so we don't have much to go on, historically speaking. That's why it'll be interesting to see how it actually pans out.

    Also, it seems open source, but sort of 1-way:
    --It's built around a Linux implementation called Android. Android will be free of charge and open source, licensed under terms that allow companies to use it in products without contributing back any of their own code to the public.
    (link)

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  6. #6  
    If this didn't already exist from a bunch of other companies that have a singular vision, I'd be more excited about it. Maybe when 2.0 comes around, I'll care. Or maybe when they ship something besides an SDK. Until then, I think it's basically vaporware.
  7. #7  
    If there is one smartphone platform holder (palmOS/BB/WM/UIQ/s60) that should worry, that would be windows mobile.

    In my mind I imagine these WM guys exclaiming "meh" and sh!tting their pants at the same time.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by whatever7 View Post
    If there is one smartphone platform holder (palmOS/BB/WM/UIQ/s60) that should worry, that would be windows mobile.

    In my mind I imagine these WM guys exclaiming "meh" and sh!tting their pants at the same time.
    I guess it depends on how much Android infiltrates enterprise, which is the main point of WM.

    Since MS provides the device OS as well as service side applications and distribution, I really can't see Android making a dent in that business for a long time (if at all). It's why RIM need not worry too much either.

    But, what it may do is under cut both companies current attempts to enter the consumer market. That would be MS and RIMs vulnerability.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  9. #9  
    WM phones are much more consumer oriented than BB. Most WM phone owners I know actually paid for their phones. Both BB and Palm make money on both hardware and software. If their software is not good enough, they (especially in Palm's case) have hardware to fall back on. Not so with WM, Microsoft only make money with the software, and this is exactly what google is targeting right now.

    Also, a mobile OS is just a few step away from a desktop OS. If the android is successful, MS should be very fearful of google's inevitable free desktop OS.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by whatever7 View Post
    WM phones are much more consumer oriented than BB. Most WM phone owners I know actually paid for their phones.
    True, but you cannot deny that RIM is heading that direction. They've added cameras, multimedia including streaming video and mp3 and their designs have become a lot more flashy and slick from the old wide days. BES plans are dropping very quickly on most carriers. I mean, they are not there yet, but I think they'd like to get into that market.

    WM is a bit better, no argument there. But devices like the Moto Q9M are pretty sad attempts, imo.

    But bread and butter for both OSs is enterprise and that is their focus. For MS, if OEMs want to make flashy consumer devices, that's there choice and MS doesn't care, but a lot of the changes in WM6 were for enterprise, not consumers.

    WM6 was codenamed "Crossbow" as a play off of "taking aim at RIM". There's a lot of money in selling Exchange/WM systems to companies.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  11. #11  
    Well BB sells a complete hardware/software solution and its a relatively closed system. So it would be less likely to be affected by direct competition. Maybe your argument will just prove that both BB and MS should be pissing their pants right now. To be honest with you I am very indifferent to BB so I don't care about the life and dead of the BB flatform.

    WM platform, however, I care. It's part of MS's classical "use the OS to control everything" philosophy. I think the android is part of google's continous movement to the OS-less world. And I personally agree the theory that there will be no "OS" to suceed Windows. In the future there will be various hardware configuration to run on the OS-less (maybe browser-base) environment.
    Last edited by whatever7; 11/08/2007 at 05:26 PM.

Posting Permissions