or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Motorola hedging Android bet with new web-based OS
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Motorola hedging Android bet with new web-based OS

post #1 of 105
Thread Starter 
Motorola Mobility, which has been Google's only major licensee fully committed to Android, is now working on a new web-based mobile operating system apparently intended to give it more control over its future, enraging Android advocates anew just weeks after Nokia opted against adopting Google's mobile OS.

Word of Motorola's new project was reported by Information Week, which attributed "a source familiar with the matter."

While the company issued an email statement insisting that "Motorola Mobility is committed to Android as an operating system," it did not deny that it was also working on its own competing mobile operating system project.

The report also cited Deutsche Bank analyst Jonathan Goldberg, who said, "I know they're working on it. I think the company recognizes that they need to differentiate and they need options, just in case. Nobody wants to rely on a single supplier."

Goldberg said the company was working to be "financially disciplined" about the new project so as to avoid spooking investors with the idea that the company was "going back to the Motorola of old where they're working on 50 million operating systems at once."

Motorola hiring mobile OS engineers

Motorola has hired developers from Apple and Adobe, including Gilles Drieu, its VP of software engineering, who until last spring headed Apple's rich media and applications group.

The company has also hired Sean Kranzberg, Adobe's former senior manager of Flash engineering, to serve as a director of engineering along with Benoit Marchant, identified a former manager of JavaScript development at Apple.

Motorola formerly worked with the LiMo Foundation (a partnership of companies developing Linux mobile distributions) before abandoning it to back Android. Earlier this year Motorola appears to have acquired Azingo, another LiMo Foundation member company building a Linux-based mobile platform making use of a WebKit browser, a web-based runtime, a Flash runtime, and web development tools.

Motorola's co-chief executive Sanjay Jha also noted last spring during the company's earnings calls that "Ive always felt that owning your OS is important, provided you have an ecosystem, you have all the services and you have an ability and the scale to execute on keeping that OS at the leading edge. And I continue to believe that at some point, if we have all of those attributes, that owning our own OS will be a very important thing."

Who's Xooming whom

The report noted that Motorola's efforts to develop an alternative to Android may relate to the uncertainty of Oracle's ongoing patent and copyright claims against Google's mobile operating system, which is modeled upon aspects of Java ME.

The source behind the news also said "Google is shooting itself in the foot," citing problems related to Android's platform fragmentation, issues with product differentiation among hardware makers, and "issues related to Google's support for its partners."

Google first partnered with HTC to deliver early Android phones before shifting to Motorola to exclusively launch Android 2.0 just as Verizon's "Droid" branded focus on Android phones took off in late 2009. The company then went back to HTC to ship the first Google-branded Nexus One model, then abandoned it to release a Nexus S in partnership with Samsung.

Google has most recently promoted Android 3.0 with Motorola's Xoom, but it is also working to accommodate new tablets from Samsung, Toshiba and Acer, some of which bundle differentiated layers of software to set each makers' tablet products apart.

Everyone's on Plan B

HTC has long supported both Android and Microsoft's Windows Mobile and now Windows Phone 7, and has also launched plans to deliver simpler new BREW-based embedded phones that can undercut the price of Android models. Samsung has also launched its own Bada mobile operating system as an Android hedge.

While most Android licensees are current or former Windows Mobile/WP7 makers, including LG, Samsung and Sony Ericsson, other major companies seeking to expand or solidify their standing in the smartphone market have simply ignored Android to pursue an integrated model more like Apple's iPhone.

That list includes HP, which launched its own webOS smartphones and tablets based on its acquisition of Palm; Nokia, which has closely partnered with Microsoft rather than licensing Android; and RIM, which is rumored to be experimenting with an Android 2.x compatibility layer for its new PlayBook tablet but has actually based it upon its acquisition of QNX rather than standardizing on Android, ostensibly due in part to fears of Oracle's Android claims.

Android enthusiasts commenting on the news expressed bitter disappointment with Motorola, with one complaining, "May they rot with their own OS," while another observed, "if some of these execs knew how stupid they sound to the tech world theyd be embarrassed. Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."
post #2 of 105
Let the fragmentation begin! What is kind of funny is that for decades Apple was the only major hardware reseller owning its own OS. The conventional wisdom has been better to use Microsoft but build your own box. For a while it was looking like Google had supplanted the MS role. Now all of a sudden its hip to have your own OS. If this trend continues Apple's dominance will only grow IMO.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #3 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Motorola Mobility, which has been Google's only major licensee fully committed to Android, is now working on a new web-based mobile operating system apparently intended to give it more control over its future, enraging Android advocates anew just weeks after Nokia opted against adopting Google's mobile OS.

Seriously, how much of an Android fanboi do you have to be to get "enraged" when Motorola develops new hardware for an additional platform? It's not like Google is exactly being monogamous when it comes to their hardware partners: first HTC gets exclusive access, then it's Moto, then back to HTC, now it's Samsung? Moto is just demonstrating to Google that they have options.

Imagine if Dell PCs got first access to Windows 7? With HP, Acer, etc. only getting to ship the same OS weeks or months later?

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #4 of 105
What does the comment about the os they bought is on linux, same as android. I think windows mobile is silverlight on top of windows ce, am I wrong on that?

I know iOS is unix, and android is a vm on top of Linux, and I believe hp web os is Linux based as well though I'm not sure how much Linux actually comes through to the user level.

Of all the major phone operating systems I think iOS is closest to being a unix distribution.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #5 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Android enthusiasts commenting on the news expressed bitter disappointment with Motorola, with one complaining, "May they rot with their own OS," while another observed, "if some of these execs knew how stupid they sound to the tech world theyd be embarrassed. Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."

It just cracks me up when I read arrogant fandroid statements like this. Personally, I think that Motorola has a very steep uphill climb with their ideas.

The reason that iOS is so hugely successful is that it brought computing the the masses in an easy-to-use way, and backed it up with quality hardware.

The reason the XOOM hasn't taken off (i.e. failed), along with the Galaxy is that they marketed it to folks like the fandroid critics above and (once-again) realized in a very painful and expensive way that tech-heads, geeks, and nerds have zero ability (with over-inflated egos) to decide what is best for the consumer.

Android is fragmenting. Get over it. The hardware that's running honeycomb in their production products is still beta to say the least. These wads clamoring about the superiority of XOOM/Honeycomb just has me ROTFL defending hardware that's not even working out of the box, or in the case of the new Samsung "iPad" killer, it's not even a unit that powers on but for some reason, the fandroids are wetting their beds saying how great this vaporware product is.

I give motorola credit for trying to not depend solely on Android. In the end, I think it's futile as it will be yet another OS in what's becoming a crowded market.

I will sit happily on my sofa, eating popcorn in preparation to watch this OS/Hardware battle.
post #6 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Motorola's co-chief executive Sanjay Jha also noted last spring during the company's earnings calls that "Ive always felt that owning your OS is important, provided you have an ecosystem, you have all the services and you have an ability and the scale to execute on keeping that OS at the leading edge. And I continue to believe that at some point, if we have all of those attributes, that owning our own OS will be a very important thing."

Jha's statement is the flip side of the famous Alan Kay line that Steve Jobs sewn into the very heart of Apple at the beginning: People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware. It's fascinated me that more tech companies haven't followed that philosophy over the years rather than taking the Microsoft approach.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Android enthusiasts commenting on the news expressed bitter disappointment with Motorola, with one complaining, "May they rot with their own OS," while another observed, "if some of these execs knew how stupid they sound to the tech world theyd be embarrassed. Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."

I'll assume that "Android enthusiasts commenting on the news" are tech geeks and not average consumers with Android devices who probably don't care that much; they just want products that work reliably. That second Fandroid quote is one of the nerdiest things I've ever read. I can practically see the guy pushing his taped-together glasses back in place while he flips out.

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply
post #7 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

What does the comment about the os they bought is on linux, same as android. I think windows mobile is silverlight on top of windows ce, am I wrong on that?

I know iOS is unix, and android is a vm on top of Linux, and I believe hp web os is Linux based as well though I'm not sure how much Linux actually comes through to the user level.

Of all the major phone operating systems I think iOS is closest to being a unix distribution.

iOS is just OS-X with a few things missing and a different UI on top, and OS-X is Unix so yeah, it's not certified Unix but iOS is indeed Unix.

What I find funny is back in the 90's when people were *predicting* that we'd all be walking around with what were then called "pocket computers," the conventional wisdom was that Unix or a Unix-like system was the only way to go. The same open source weenies that now drool all over Android and maintain that there's nothing better, were at that time telling us that Unix or Linux was the coolest and best approach to making a small portable computer. The reasons they quoted were many and varied and anyone who thought different was shouted down.

Now of course, they somehow think that buggy copy of a Java VM is the cat's pyjamas, and Apple's practically pure Unix OS is somehow junk. :-/
post #8 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

iWhat I find funny is back in the 90's when people were *predicting* that we'd all be walking around with what were then called "pocket computers," the conventional wisdom was that Unix or a Unix-like system was the only way to go. The same open source weenies that now drool all over Android and maintain that there's nothing better, were at that time telling us that Unix or Linux was the coolest and best approach to making a small portable computer.

Android isn't a Linux-based system?
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
post #9 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Android enthusiasts commenting on the news expressed bitter disappointment with Motorola, with one complaining, "May they rot with their own OS," while another observed, "if some of these execs knew how stupid they sound to the tech world they’d be embarrassed. Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."

That made me laugh. The average consumer doesn't care if it's open source or not, they just like for it to work. Also, grasping the concept of open source has nothing to do with anything. It's called having options in case one fails. Like if you're an investor, you want to have a diversified set of investments so that one industry coming down doesn't affect all of your investments, right? I think that's a little more practical than simply yelling "GO OPEN SOURCE" because being open doesn't make it good.

The execs don't sound stupid. They sound perfectly reasonable.
post #10 of 105
What's really funny about this is the fact that it's being reported as news even though the original article was completely opinion based with no confirmed proof whatsoever. The conjecture was based entirely on the fact that Motorola hired a bunch of new programmers and designers. The original author even admitted that his entire premise could be wrong and that it was more than probable that the new programers and designers were actually just working on a better version of their sad Motoblur launcher. Talk about bad reporting. FUD at its best here at AppleInsider.
post #11 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by nubs View Post

The original author even admitted that his entire premise could be wrong and that it was more than probable that the new programers and designers were actually just working on a better version of their sad Motoblur launcher. Talk about bad reporting. FUD at its best here at AppleInsider.

Are you referring to the Information Week article? Or you just trolling? I didn't see at any point in the article the author mention this?
post #12 of 105
I can understand why Motorola would do this. Nowadays you can't earn a decent profit in this industry unless you're vertically integrated and basically have some degree of monopoly power over the consumers. Android is nice in terms of saving costs for these manufacturers, but competition simply wipe out the potential economic profit.
post #13 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by destroyboredom View Post

Are you referring to the Information Week article? Or you just trolling? I didn't see at any point in the article the author mention this?

Didn't you know? Random Fandroid message board poster's speculation is OBVIOUSLY more accurate than the InfoWeek reporter's informed speculation. I mean, as opposed to the Fandroid, who made great efforts to go deep into his emotions to come up with his speculation, all the reporter had was a source in Motorola, and an analyst at Deutsche Bank, who gets paid big bucks simply to follow the company. Clearly the fandroid's guts know far more about Motorola's plans.
post #14 of 105
Smart move by Motorola. The mobile market is relatively young and calling this futile is ridiculous.
No one can predict how the mobile landscape will look like in the next couple of years (unless you are a fan of android coming to the realization that your platform may be in jeopardy as major players defect...).
Unfortunately for Google and their legion of "open source is the only truth" fans, there will be more defections. A company like Motorola (or Sony/Samsung) has ambitions beyond being a simple commodity phone/tablet manufacturer going after low margins.

As Steve Jobs said recently, this post-PC era is not about tech specs. It's about the user experience.

Motorola is taking note
post #15 of 105
"The report noted that Motorola's efforts to develop an alternative to Android may relate to the uncertainty of Oracle's ongoing patent and copyright claims against Google's mobile operating system, which is modeled upon aspects of Java ME."

FUD...
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #16 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post

Android isn't a Linux-based system?

It's Java running on top of Linux. I think only games have access to the Linux core, and even that is a recent development circa 3.0 Honeycomb. Other apps only deal with Java virtual machine from what I am able to understand.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #17 of 105
Any of you remember Rio? The company that made them digital media players. Well they went belly up b/c they couldn't get more market penetration. So I feel Moto is doing this so-called next step to distinguish itself from the deluge of honeycomb bull**** beginning to stank up the market place. C'mon people, you know damn well by xmas 2011 there will be tons of tablets on the market cheap and disposable. Moto knew this was coming.How can you be a premiere brand with a free and ubiquitous OS that is pimped by scorers of OEMS?
It works for the pc but tablets are a different beast. In the end Moto will will be out of the tablet game. They won't get anything of quality, IMHO, out in time with the needed impact to stay in the game.
Coby(tech bottom feeder!) will have their trash piled high in Target for $49.99 in no time. No customer service,no support nada.
post #18 of 105
The first reason is glaringly obvious. The Oracle lawsuit is the death knell for Android. It's an airtight case, with legal precedent and the Android source code itself as evidence. Microsoft already lost their battle to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java. They paid Sun $20 million back in 2001, and were forced to take their JVM off the market.

Now Google will lose that same battle. They have blatantly copied and attempted to profit from the work the Java team has done. Stealing, then giving away software for free isn't "open" in the sense Rubin was hoping to imply.

And there's another reason. Google has Microsoft-like poor taste and judgement when designing user experiences. (Need I mention the short-lived Google TV as an example?) Google, like Microsoft before it, figured that users will put up with terrible UIs and ugly designs, but for very different reasons. Users put up with Windows' hideous convolutions because they had no choice. Corporate IT put the pee cee on their desk at work and said "Our way or the highway."

Now, Android users put up with the generic-aisle look and feel because, oh well, it's free. But the problem runs far deeper than just a cheesy interface. The whole infrastructure is cheesy. The Android market is full of malware and porn, and Google hasn't provided a real alternative to iTunes yet (and likely never will.) Why? Why does Google seemingly not care about the user experience?

The answer is simple. The only user experience Google actually cares about is the AdMob ads delivered to users. Google's real customers are their advertisers. Google makes 96% of their profits from ads. That's why Android is free. To maximize the number of eyeballs on AdMob ads. And that's why Google has promiscuously done deals with every Tom, Dick, and Harry generic hardware maker, including Motorola. To maximize the number of eyeballs on AdMob ads. Let the manufacturers fight over tiny margins. Let them push each other off the low-price cliff. Let them eat cake.

Motorola bought Azingo, but all they get is an OS development team. They'll be bringing a newborn baby OS to a superb user experience plus deep infrastructure fight. Against Apple, a deeply entrenched, fast-moving, hardened veteran and undisputed champ of the user experience battle. Good luck Moto. You're gonna need it.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #19 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Let the fragmentation begin! What is kind of funny is that for decades Apple was the only major hardware reseller owning its own OS. The conventional wisdom has been better to use Microsoft but build your own box. For a while it was looking like Google had supplanted the MS role. Now all of a sudden its hip to have your own OS. If this trend continues Apple's dominance will only grow IMO.

Yea, I'm all for competition, but once you get past 3-4 OSs, it gets a little ridiculous. I guess when all phones did was make calls and play solitaire, it didn't really matter. But smartphones are legitimate softawre platforms now...

It's smart of Motorola to not depend on another company for its business...but still, who's going to buy an OS made by Motorola?!

Good luck to Motorola, Microsoft, HP, Nokia, and the gang.
post #20 of 105
It's hilarious to see these big established tech boys running around like headless chickens now that smartphones and tablets are all the rage. All this will give Apple even more time to continue to succeed through 2011 and 2012. Wish I knew how Steve was really doing though. Without him in five years Apple could be like the rest of these dingbats
post #21 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Android enthusiasts commenting on the news expressed bitter disappointment with Motorola, with one complaining, "May they rot with their own OS," while another observed, "if some of these execs knew how stupid they sound to the tech world theyd be embarrassed. Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."

Sweet, sweet Fandroid tears!
post #22 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaCameron View Post

Jha's statement is the flip side of the famous Alan Kay line that Steve Jobs sewn into the very heart of Apple at the beginning: People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware. It's fascinated me that more tech companies haven't followed that philosophy over the years rather than taking the Microsoft approach.

Palm? Look where they are now.
post #23 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

Smart move by Motorola. The mobile market is relatively young and calling this futile is ridiculous.
No one can predict how the mobile landscape will look like in the next couple of years (unless you are a fan of android coming to the realization that your platform may be in jeopardy as major players defect...).
Unfortunately for Google and their legion of "open source is the only truth" fans, there will be more defections. A company like Motorola (or Sony/Samsung) has ambitions beyond being a simple commodity phone/tablet manufacturer going after low margins.

As Steve Jobs said recently, this post-PC era is not about tech specs. It's about the user experience.

Motorola is taking note

Somebody's got a bad case of Apple envy...and it's Motorola!

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #24 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Motorola's co-chief executive Sanjay Jha also noted last spring during the company's earnings calls that "Ive always felt that owning your OS is important, provided you have an ecosystem, you have all the services and you have an ability and the scale to execute on keeping that OS at the leading edge. And I continue to believe that at some point, if we have all of those attributes, that owning our own OS will be a very important thing."

And that's your cue Google, they all want their own OS, and Motorola is just the start. You're playing Microsoft old trick and you'll be getting the same result.
post #25 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

Sweet, sweet Fandroid tears!

Want to wallow in some more Android fan misery?

HTC locks down Incredible S against custom ROMs too, starts a fight with its best friends

If they weren't such intolerable geeks, I would feel sorry for them. Nah...scratch.

NOTE to self and anyone reading:

The silence from Redmond is deafening (other than a lawsuit or 2)... and also that of HP's WebOS (what's happening and when?) in regards to this typical Google "beta-release" for tablets, marketplace, and phones.

I think they very well could be sitting on the fence and watching with interest how this "open source experiment" and AdMob OS plays out.
  • Moto is starting to get it.
  • HTC (link above) is looking for an answer to control their destiny.
  • RIM is gonna give a try of "straddling the fence the width of of fly-fishing line "... which will literally cut them out of the picture IMHO.

So what's up with out friends up north and on the "other side of the railroad tracks"?

Strategically speaking, and regardless of Apple's lead in the game which isn't going to go away any time soon... my business mind, heavily influenced by chinese warcraft wisdom, says, "...caution and patience. He who reels too fast, may lose big fish... and cry"*.

*OK. Bite Me... I made it up "on the fly".
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #26 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck View Post

Palm? Look where they are now.

Well, that's because Palm had several bad managements who made many poor decisions. Otherwise Palm would have been great now since its expertise is mobile devices..
post #27 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Somebody's got a bad case of Apple envy...and it's Motorola!

It's not just Motorola, but also everybody else in the industry.
post #28 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by acslater017 View Post

Yea, I'm all for competition, but once you get past 3-4 OSs, it gets a little ridiculous. I guess when all phones did was make calls and play solitaire, it didn't really matter. But smartphones are legitimate softawre platforms now...

It's smart of Motorola to not depend on another company for its business...but still, who's going to buy an OS made by Motorola?!

What really ridiculous is if we buy smartphone when all we need is to make calls and play solitaire, a 'dumbphone' should have been enough. But then who knows, perhaps we'll find things we can do more if we bought one.

Why should Motorola sell its own OS? What really important is to have OS that it can fully control, and to differentiate itself from the rest of the competition. Licensing the OS is another headache in the future.
post #29 of 105
What excellent posts today. I have really enjoyed reading this thread. No trolls in sight...
post #30 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Nobody wants to rely on a single supplier."

Well, they certainly don't after seeing what happens with life under a monopoly supplier like Microsoft.

It has been shocking to see the degree to which they all did flock to Android. But then as Asymco said.. a coalition of losers don't get to make perfect choices.
post #31 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon T View Post

It has been shocking to see the degree to which they all did flock to Android.

Not really. Nokia, Motorola and other prominent smartphone companies at that time were caught with their pants down. The iPhone was a game changer and they had to retaliate with something. Hence, most of them jumped on the Android bandwagon as little choice was left, the OS was "free" and offered the closest thing to a contender (obviously since Android was a shameless imitation). With Android, Google basically lowered the barrier to entry and opened the gates to any manufacturer willing to build a device (a blessing for a company like HTC).
post #32 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

"The report noted that Motorola's efforts to develop an alternative to Android may relate to the uncertainty of Oracle's ongoing patent and copyright claims against Google's mobile operating system, which is modeled upon aspects of Java ME."

FUD...

Oh Hai !!! Where've ya been!
post #33 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon T View Post

What excellent posts today. I have really enjoyed reading this thread. No trolls in sight...

Shhhh don't rustle the grass there's one on this thread, lying low at the moment... I think I saw a wabbit
post #34 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

Smart move by Motorola. The mobile market is relatively young and calling this futile is ridiculous.
No one can predict how the mobile landscape will look like in the next couple of years (unless you are a fan of android coming to the realization that your platform may be in jeopardy as major players defect...).
Unfortunately for Google and their legion of "open source is the only truth" fans, there will be more defections. A company like Motorola (or Sony/Samsung) has ambitions beyond being a simple commodity phone/tablet manufacturer going after low margins.

As Steve Jobs said recently, this post-PC era is not about tech specs. It's about the user experience.

Motorola is taking note

Well for developers iOS must be looking more and more attractive as the storm brews on the non-iOS horizon.
post #35 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

The first reason is glaringly obvious. The Oracle lawsuit is the death knell for Android. It's an airtight case, with legal precedent and the Android source code itself as evidence. Microsoft already lost their battle to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java. They paid Sun $20 million back in 2001, and were forced to take their JVM off the market.

Now Google will lose that same battle. They have blatantly copied and attempted to profit from the work the Java team has done. Stealing, then giving away software for free isn't "open" in the sense Rubin was hoping to imply.

And there's another reason. Google has Microsoft-like poor taste and judgement when designing user experiences. (Need I mention the short-lived Google TV as an example?) Google, like Microsoft before it, figured that users will put up with terrible UIs and ugly designs, but for very different reasons. Users put up with Windows' hideous convolutions because they had no choice. Corporate IT put the pee cee on their desk at work and said "Our way or the highway."

Now, Android users put up with the generic-aisle look and feel because, oh well, it's free. But the problem runs far deeper than just a cheesy interface. The whole infrastructure is cheesy. The Android market is full of malware and porn, and Google hasn't provided a real alternative to iTunes yet (and likely never will.) Why? Why does Google seemingly not care about the user experience?

The answer is simple. The only user experience Google actually cares about is the AdMob ads delivered to users. Google's real customers are their advertisers. Google makes 96% of their profits from ads. That's why Android is free. To maximize the number of eyeballs on AdMob ads. And that's why Google has promiscuously done deals with every Tom, Dick, and Harry generic hardware maker, including Motorola. To maximize the number of eyeballs on AdMob ads. Let the manufacturers fight over tiny margins. Let them push each other off the low-price cliff. Let them eat cake.

Motorola bought Azingo, but all they get is an OS development team. They'll be bringing a newborn baby OS to a superb user experience plus deep infrastructure fight. Against Apple, a deeply entrenched, fast-moving, hardened veteran and undisputed champ of the user experience battle. Good luck Moto. You're gonna need it.

Terrific post. Except for one minor quibble: it won't be 'cake' they'll be eating.
post #36 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

What does the comment about the os they bought is on linux, same as android. I think windows mobile is silverlight on top of windows ce, am I wrong on that?

I know iOS is unix, and android is a vm on top of Linux, and I believe hp web os is Linux based as well though I'm not sure how much Linux actually comes through to the user level.

Of all the major phone operating systems I think iOS is closest to being a unix distribution.

Android (and webOS) does use the Linux kernel, but that's about it. What's usually referred to as "Linux distros" are most often "GNU/Linux distros" as they combine the Linux kernel with GNU userland (desktop environment, tools, etc). When it comes to UNIX certification, Linux itself (being just a kernel) can't qualify, though some distributions do get compliance (notably missing are Debian and derivatives - including Ubuntu). I highly doubt Google and HP are going to full POSIX compliance. OS X is compliant (as is QNX, which RIM is now using, but they're probably not worried about breaking compatibility), and it's very likely that iOS is as well (as it only differs from OS X in the GUI layer).

TL;DR - iOS, Android, webOS, and PlayBook are all Unix-derived, but only iOS is definitely compliant to the POSIX standards, PlayBook likely as well, but I don't know the extent of what they've done to QNX.
post #37 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck View Post

Palm? Look where they are now.

Palm made every possible mistake they could have and turned themselves into something very much not like a company that is, really serious about software should make [its] own hardware.

Licensing clones (a mistake that Apple briefly made but fortunately pulled back from), splitting into separate software and hardware companies, and so on. The worst possible decisions on practically everything, Palm killed itself by not following that advice.
post #38 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... Can they not grasp the concept of open source? And then ironically the OS they bought is built on Linux just like Android."

What interest does Google have in open source? More like open source... wink, wink, say no more! \
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #39 of 105
Just because Android is essentially 'free' is no reason to not invest in alternate technology. Its a wise move by motorola to seek out alternatives to Android, if only to differentiate themselves from the multitude of Android clones. Also, who knows what shit google could pull in the future and the backlash that Motorola and others would face due to Googles handling of users information and privacy.
post #40 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

The first reason is glaringly obvious... Good luck Moto. You're gonna need it.

Enjoyed the commentary.

I have a colleague who is so disparaging about the iPad and iOS, which I believe he hasn't yet even tried, that I have thought about buying him an iPad and saying, 'try this, write an honest commentary on it and you can keep it, otherwise give it back'. Either way I cannot lose and who knows, he might just learn something. \ (The risk of course is that his honest commentary might be equally disparaging. That's a risk I'm up for!)
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Motorola hedging Android bet with new web-based OS