

2011: The Year Android Explodes - dave1619
http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/26/2011-android/

======
mortenjorck
_I can’t help but think sometimes that it looks as if Google actually did the
carriers a huge favor in the long-run because they’ve taken many of the bells
and whistles that drove users to the iPhone in the first place and opened them
up for the carriers to use as glittering lures to rope customers back into
their traps._

Remember the ever-half-joking, half-serious talk of open-source zealots of the
mythical, promised "year of Linux on the desktop"? Strange indeed how the
first truly mass-market Linux distribution ended up skipping the desktop
entirely, and then excelling at _restricting_ users.

~~~
samstokes
_The carriers (again, in the U.S. in particular) are using Android’s openness
to perform many of their same old tricks._

This is just incredibly woolly thinking, if not actually disingenuous.

Carriers have power to influence or dictate handset features because carrier
promotions are the primary means of distribution for handsets, because they
(not the handset manufacturers) own the consumer relationship, and because
carrier subsidies are the only way anyone but power users will buy any but the
cheapest phones. (This is true in the UK, and seems to be even more true in
the US.) They'll exercise that power in some way.

In the case of dumbphones they do so by having their own brand dominate the
manufacturer's, so consumers associate with their carrier instead of their
handset manufacturer.

With "closed" smartphones (whatever "open" and "closed" mean, but let's assume
the iPhone is "closed") they used to do so by only allowing customised and
branded variants of the phones onto their networks. The iPhone was the first
carrier-sold smartphone to take a stand against carrier customisation. This is
one explanation for why the iPhone was so successful: most people's experience
with every previous smartphone was actually of variants loaded with carrier
crapware.

The iPhone is a desirable handset, and Apple has the marketing skills and
brand to reach consumers directly, which takes back some of the bargaining
power from the carriers, but it's hardly out from under their yoke. Most
obvious piece of evidence: AT&T exclusivity in the US. The features you can
use over WLAN but not 3G are also very likely to be carrier-influenced.

So how exactly does the "openness" of Android, whatever that means, _help_ the
carriers? They can read the source code... but why bother when they can
dictate features directly to the handset manufacturers? They can install apps
on the phones, even _write_ custom apps... oh wait, they were doing that
already. It's plausible Android might ship with some nicely documented
compiler flags for carriers to switch off the features they don't want, rather
than their engineers having to actually dive into the source drop they got
from the handset manufacturer and disable the features themselves, but other
smartphone platforms have been doing that for the last ten years - and anyway
nobody is claiming Android is open because of its nicely documented feature
killswitches.

The actual situation is that Android phones are getting loaded with carrier
crapware and nerfs not because they're "open" (whatever that means), but
because that's what's happened to all phones throughout history. The iPhone is
an exception _to some extent_ , not because it's "closed" (whatever that
means), but because of Apple's ingenious strategy of actually giving a shit
about the user experience, not to mention their world-class marketing
department. The only way this ridiculous TechCrunchism makes any sense at all
is if you're not really talking about "closed" vs "open", but "iPhone" vs "not
iPhone".

So although the author protests that he has no skin in the game, this silly
argument is actually yet another instance of the standard fanboy cry: "Why
won't all these other handset companies just admit that Apple has won, and
move into some other industry like flowerpots?" (Which is pretty irritating to
anyone who doesn't think the game is over yet.)

~~~
mortenjorck
My impression of your closing paragraph is that you may be looking a bit too
hard for that sentiment – I've seen it and been annoyed by it too, but I don't
see it in Siegler's post. If anything, it's the opposite, equally annoying
sentiment that the game is over because Android's destiny is now manifest. The
game is far from over, though, and I don't see anyone credibly claiming
otherwise.

~~~
samstokes
I read Siegler's post as basically an attempt by him to reconcile those two
annoying sentiments, both of which I detected in the text. They both share the
misconceptions that this is a two-horse race, and that "winning" is meaningful
in a market which (due to the inertia caused by factors like carrier
behaviour) takes years to evolve.

One interesting point Siegler didn't make is that Google is making some modest
strides toward weakening the carriers' grip on the handset market (e.g.
selling Nexus One unlocked themselves, and Nexus S unlocked through vendors).
Sure, they're niche devices and the Nexus One direct sales model didn't work
out that well, but they're testing the water. I'm pretty sure their goal there
is to increase general consumer acceptance of buying unlocked, carrier-
untouched phones. And that helps every smartphone maker, perhaps especially
Apple (who probably stand the best chance of selling large numbers of $600
handsets without carrier subsidy).

Apple themselves could have made this play, by offering (and promoting) the
iPhone unlocked at launch (or since), but they chose instead to work with the
carriers (a reasonable decision to maximise short-term success).

------
zdw
Forget about the phone market for a second.

What I want is for Android to replace Windows Mobile 5 in all those annoying
Symbol barcode scanner and other data entry devices - ever priced them out?
$1500-2000 for a basic model on a dead-end platform with horrible dev support.

I really want to know where are the industrial portables based on Android or
another unix variant? Imagine being able to write a web app with hooks into
all the data entry bells and whistles that a device like that could have.

~~~
grinich
This is already happening with the iPod Touch.

I'm currently working on a similar project for a large retail company. We're
using the Linea-Pro [1] cradle, which has both a barcode and magnetic strip
reader. (Same device as used in Apple stores.)

[1] <http://www.ipclineapro.com/>

~~~
chime
Wow! That's awesome. Any idea how expensive the cradle is? I hate spending
$1500 for an MC70 with crappy touchscreen.

~~~
michaelbuckbee
I wasn't able to find LineaPro pricing, but Adwords found a competitor:
LightSpeed - <http://www.xsilva.com/en/store.html>

Entry mobile device hardware is $1000.

~~~
grinich
I think the cradle goes for about $500. Add any iPod Touch and you're still
under a grand for each device.

They have a very nice Cocoa API for the device as well. I've had a blast
developing for it.

LightSpeed is actually an entire retail service stack which uses the Linea-Pro
cradle for their mobile platform. Most of the cost is licensing their retail
software. Your $1,000 quote is a bit off...

From the pricing page:

    
    
        In order to purchase a Bundle including the 
        LightSpeed Mobile Hardware Kit, at least 2
        user licenses need to be added to your order. [1]
    

So that's a baseline of $1,823. When you toggle on the "Mobile Hardware Kit"
the price jumps by $549, which sounds about right for the hardware and setup.

I do contract iOS dev work, so feel free to ping me if you're looking into
this sort of thing.

[1] <http://www.xsilva.com/en/store.html>

------
codingthewheel
I recently switched from an iPhone to an Android and haven't looked back, even
though I still see the iPhone as a best-in-class device. The best Android
phones are just a few percentage points shy of the iPhone in usability, and
the availability of Flash for Android alone makes up for that, IMHO. Even
though I have a healthy dislike for Flash.

Add to that the fact that you can get an app written and deployed for Android
in a fraction of the time it would take you on the iPhone...

\- Because you're not required to use horrid tools like Objective C

\- Because there are no imperious App Store overlords deciding the fate of
your app's life or approval

\- Because you don't need to make a several-thousands-of-dollars investment in
Apple hardware and software

...and I think it's likely that Android will eclipse iPhone, not just in
numbers of handsets (many orders of magnitude more coming for Android), but in
mindshare, pop culture relevance, developer sentiment, and every other thing.

The iPhone will always be the phone that launched the smartphone revolution,
and Apple and Steve Jobs have been well rewarded for it. Android to me
represents the democritization of the iPhone, and the democritization of
designer tech has always been the bane of Steve Jobs. Put another way: iOS
devices are going to seem much less compelling when they've been copied,
perfected, rebranded, and sold for half the price. It's Mac vs. PC all over
again.

~~~
codingthewheel
Just a friendly reminder to whoever downvoted me: you're really not supposed
to downvote on HN for differences of opinion. I understand a lot of people
have a lot invested in Apple, but having used and developed for both devices,
this is my best, somewhat educated but possibly incorrect, guess as to the
future of these platforms. And none of this is really new. So rather than
anonymously downvoting, why don't you venture an opinion of your own?

~~~
MrScruff
I didn't downvote you, but having read your comment I imagine some of the
motivations of those who did were:

\- 'Horrid tools like Objective-C' is a value statement made without
justification.

\- 'Imperious App Store overlords' sounds rather like a straw man.

\- 'several-thousands-of-dollars investment in Apple hardware and software' is
inaccurate.

The problem in general with iOS vs Android is that is has indeed become like
Mac vs PC, in that individuals who have decided on their allegiance feel the
need to promote their chosen platform in comments, often through (probably
unintentional) exaggeration. I'm not being patronising here, I'm quite sure I
do the same.

------
trotsky
Wait, is this article about phones or the author? Is it mandatory at tech
crunch now to ensure each feature has the maximum amount of smugness allowed
by law?

------
codelust
By MG's usual standards the post can actually be called borderline reasonable.

The trouble with getting a handle on the mobile phone market is that most
analysts often pick up only the US market or the smart phone market and form
their conclusions based on it.

Another issue is when most of the online discussions on the iPhone/Android
competition turns into an all-out brawl with only the usual talking points
thrown in.

I use a Galaxy S I9000. I like the phone. It is not perfect. I could probably
have aimed for the iPhone, but it was at least $100 more where I live (India).
Keep this price in mind, it is very important.

What is the cheapest iPhone you can get today, without a contract? Most of us
India buy the phones pretty much at the full price. Even if I assume that the
iPhone will be priced at half of what it costs here, it would still be more
expensive than some of the Android phones made by the local manufacturers
here. I don't ever see Apple doing an iPhone Starter Edition.

There were some 100 million-plus mobile phones that were sold in India in
2009. I am sure that 99% of those were not either a Samsung Galaxy S or an
iPhone. Between iOS and Android, the odds are much better on Android to tap
into those potential 99 million sales.

This is the reason why Android will grow even stronger next year. But it won't
be at the cost of the iPhone.

------
blinkingled
I do not get what the problem is with having carrier applications on the
phones. It is non-sensical to argue that things forced on you, the consumer,
by a corporation A are bad but things forced by corporation B on the same
consumer are somehow magical.

Leaving aside everything - let's stick to the case of Android carrier
customizations and their impact on user experience. I have used 2 different
Android smartphones and my wife has used 2. I had a Nexus One and now have a
T-Mobile G2. My wife had a EVO and now has Epic 4G. We never felt like the
carrier customizations (or lack thereof in case of Nexus One) made any
significant negative impact to our user experience. We actually liked some of
the differentiations of both software and hardware (Music/Video player and
physical keyboard on Epic, HTC UI on the EVO etc.). Having a few extra icons
or having the Sprint Navigation app instead of Google Navigation wasn't
actually a big deal in any way.

Plus, for those who prefer close-to-pure-google experience - there is Nexus S
or G2. If you are on VZW and are a bit technical or know someone who is, Droid
Incredible and Cyanogen is another choice. Optimus S is also close to stock
Android and on multiple carriers.

For years Windows computers have shipped with vendor customizations and no one
seems to have cared enough to give Apple the 50% market share. Microsoft had
made some effort recently to work with the vendors to fix the outright
problematic stuff and you can buy a laptop with clean Windows install from
Sony for example.

The problem on Android is not nearly as bad or annoying as Windows bloatware
and there are plenty of choices available that go either way - fully stock to
fully customized. It's not as if the customized phones are bogged down to the
point that they don't function or anything like that. It's just a minor
inconvenience if you want to make it one.

So who is complaining about Android customizations? Technical people with a
certain taste to see uniform world view. The reviewers that measure everything
by Apple standards. Normal users don't seem to be caring - they buy one
Android phone and use it for 2 years - if it doesn't work they are just going
to return it and buy something else and it is very much doubtful that users
are returning Android phones because of the carrier customizations.

On the other hand - if I don't happen to like iTunes on iPhone I have no other
choice in the iPhone land. If I need wireless syncing I need to wait. With
Android I can choose which media player I like - Samsung's or HTCs, which
wireless sync I like - DoubleTwist Airsync or WinAmp etc. So I would argue
that the benefits of Android approach pretty much outweigh the little
consistency issues it poses.

EDIT : I actually went and read the original article and it struck me that the
main point it made was the dawn of ultra cheap ($85 retail) Android dual core
smartphones for the 3rd world! If it does work out well (and I am not sure why
it wouldn't) Nokia and other dumb phone makers are in for huge trouble and we
are going to see Windows vs. Mac all over again with the iPhone finding itself
restricted as a luxury brand at the best and at worse they will see some
erosion even in that category. Apple now a days do most of the things on their
own - including the CPUs. It will be hard for them to keep up with the likes
of Nvidia/Broadcom/Samsung who will bring out dual core CPUs for Android
handsets - not quite PPC vs Intel but sort of.

------
siglesias
I've made three well-meaning attempts at starting this article but I can't get
past its innovative distributed introduction. Someone needs to send MG the
memo that free-writing is only the first step in developing an orgnanized
argument that others can follow.

------
jordanlev
Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers...

I was just thinking that all of these Windows vs. Mac comparisons are focused
on market share and end-user-y things, but what really enabled Windows to
dominate for so long was it's appeal to developers. I have dabbled in iPhone
development, and not done any android development, so I'm not qualified to
judge -- but from the outside it seems that there is a lot more interest in
iPhone than android for developers (based on what I read on HN and elsewhere,
and the kinds of freelance jobs I've been offered over the past year). Also,
seems that it's easier (well, more straightforward anyway) to make money
selling apps on the iPhone vs. android.

I'd love to hear thoughts on this matter from people who have actually
developed for both platforms (or made an informed decision to work with one
over the other).

~~~
bad_user

          what really enabled Windows to dominate for so long 
          was it's appeal to developers
    

This was a chicken-egg situation: Windows appealed to developers because it
was popular. It was popular because it appealed to developers.

It got there through other means, like IBM's endorsement, timing, marketing
and indeed an open SDK (contrary to other alternatives at that time).

About iPhone development: I had to buy a Mac-mini just so I could run XCode.
But all my development for the iPhone starts with PhoneGap (i.e. web apps with
some native functionality exposed). I prefer Android just because I can use my
favorite tools with it.

------
erreon
I wonder if/when Android will make into automobiles. Could be good for Google.
That's a lot of cool analytics and potential eyeballs.

~~~
streeter
I want an Android tablet / embedded computer on my dash with full screen
Google Maps and Navigation. That would be so awesome.

~~~
erreon
Mixed with the rumored gingerbread AR that'd be amazing in a vehicle. Can't
wait to see what Google pulls off with Android.

------
scorpion032
Every December from 1998 to 2009, we have seen "The next year will be the year
of Linux (for the desktop)"

Alas, it never happened.

------
cletus
What really bothers mr is the ad nauseum "Android 4 Eva!!!" [sic] opinions
like this is that they treat Android like an homogenous product when clearly
it isn't. The iPhone is both a brand and a product. Androi ids... A
philosophy.

I've had 3 Android handsets now (HTC Desire, DroidX, Nexus S) and I still find
them frustrating, inconsistent and illogical and not something I'd recommend
to the non-tech savvy.

Many of the pundits don't seem to realize just how myopic their view is.
Example: the ceaseless litany about how crap AT&T is and it is... In NY and SF
where you'll find most of the journalists and pundits. Or just how much the
simple and ubiquitous UI/UX of iOS matters to most users, far more than the
ephemeral notion of an alleged "walled garden" at any rate.

The real story is that one product from one company on only one major carrier
(in the US) at the very top end of the markets competes with Android at all.
Don't underestimate that brand loyalty. There is an awful lot of unsatisfied
demand for the iPhone that won't be realized until other carriers get it
and/or the price comes down (which it slowly will).

The idea that Android allows carriers continue to screw their consumers is
basically wrong. The carriers have far less power than they did 5 years ago
and you can thank Steve Jobs for that. Verizon (in particular) is still
kicking this dead horse but it's still a shadow of it's former self.

Fred Wilson is right: Android is good. It's really best for Google more than
anyone else.

Scoble is wrong: Android won't kill the iPhone, at least not for the
foreseeable future at any rate (but he is right that it is a superior product
IMHO).

Predictably this post doesn't even touch on the biggest competitive
advantages: the iTunes ecosystem and gaming.

So it is good we have Android to keep Apple honest but, to paraphrase, the
news of iPhone's death have been greatly overexaggerated.

~~~
riledhel
You logic is flawed. MacBooks and mac computers have existed far long more
than iPhone and their price isn't getting lower. I fail to see why the iPhone,
another great premium Apple product, will drop it's price in the future.

~~~
cletus
Um yes they have. Today you can buy a pretty good spec MBP for $1500. 4 years
you'd be spending $3-4k+.

The same applies to Windows laptops. I bought a 17" Dell Inspiron 9400 in
2005-06 for A$3k (actually it was a $4k spec where 2 coupons collided bringing
it to about $2.8k). At that time a similar MBP was A$4.5k.

This year I specced a 15" Dell for my sister for $1k. A gaming laptop is under
A$2k. My 2009 13" MBP cost A$1800. The top (base) MBP is <A$3k.

Macs have a gentler slope of price decreases as Apple tends to increase the
(relative) spec ate the same time but it's a complete lie to say they haven't
dropped price.

IMHO the iPhone will be no different.

In fact the first iPod Touches were more expensive than the current batch so
it already has happened.

------
drivebyacct2
Oh Siegler. Where's the real original article instead of this TC shit. I don't
know which is worse, TC's blatant attitude in their posts or Engadget's
terrible perspective on everything.

[http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/12/22/2011-will-be-the-
year...](http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/12/22/2011-will-be-the-year-android-
explodes/?section=magazines_fortune)

~~~
_ques
At least engadget is witty.

------
ergo98
<http://blog.yafla.com/The_Biggest_Lie_That_Ever_Was_Told/>

