June, 2009
Next up in the series is Google Android. Built on a Linux kernel and distributed on a device called the G1, Android is Google’s answer to the iPhone. My experience with Android as a platform is much more limited so forgive any misconceptions I might have - I’ll come back and edit this post as I learn more.
From an end user perspective, it appears that Google has done a very nice job. Nothing as revolutionary as the iPhone, but a clean functional interface, a full QWERTY hardware keyboard, great integration between applications (maps, email, contact, etc), and search as a first class citizen. The user interface makes good use of rounded edges, transparency, animation and other visual cues to aid getting things done on the device. Although Android can’t match the sheer number of applications available to the iPhone, it seems like there aren’t as many restrictions and you have the ability to choose your own media player, web browser, etc without being locked into any vendor specific applications. The included web browser seems to be top notch by all reports and it is built on the same technology that backs the iPhone’s (webkit). The release of this device (like almost all the vendors) follows on the heels of the iPhone hype and will always be compared and contrasted with the Apple Hardware/Software combination. The major plus for the end user here is that Android looks like it is going to be licensed in a way that any number of manufactures can build Android devices with custom hardware and software to suit any number of business needs. Although the uptake of manufactures actually building these devices is slow, the capabilities are there and this will eventually be a large benefit to the end user. Android also allows manufactures to heavily customize the software on their devices to provide a variety of user experiences for different markets. This is essential as there are so many different types of users that have different requirements from their devices and different understandings of how mobile software should work.
The downside of Android is in its status as a new player that stacks up well, but doesn’t stand out and shock. It needs time to ramp up and appear on a larger number of devices and the application ecosystem needs more developers and more time to mature. Device manufactures seem to be hesitant to move quickly in its direction probably in part based on resources they’ve dedicated toward their existing software platforms. Another issue with Android is that everyone knows that Google is only really interested in steering more people to the web to search and drive ad revenue. Android isn’t making Google any money and unless a few big manufactures really jump on board and create stellar iPhone competing experiences on the platform – the adoption rates just aren’t going to be very high. Android also suffers from being one more user experience paradigm that people have to learn. It’s not Windows, it’s not Blackberry, and it’s not a Mac. That’s ok, but people have to really be compelled to make the switch. From an enterprise end user perspective, it isn’t really enterprise ready and doesn’t fit in with the Blackberry wearing CEO – either culturally or technically. It also isn’t fit for the mobile field worker using his mobile device to get his job done because the only devices being built are consumer focused.
Overall I see a lot of potential here, but we’ll just have to wait and see if the end user falls in love and starts looking for more Android devices.
And then there’s Microsoft…
