Google is downplaying Android to focus its future on Chrome OS

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 100
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,650member
    I have some issues with the conclusions this editorial (and writer generally) continually leap to — he’s the mirror-universe version of Rob “Apple is doooooomed” Enderle. However, I agree that Google is tired of losing money on Android, and the way its partners pollute the experience (even though, like Microsoft’s Windows, this was a conscious decision on their part to increase adoption).

    The lure of not having to share any of the masses of harvested data from users must be very alluring as well. To the surprise of nobody here, Google appears to be discovering (like Microsoft in recent years) that controlling the entire experience to the best extent possible results in higher profits, a better experience for users (minus the whole data-collecting thing, of course), and generally better overall products.

    Who could have possibly foreseen this? LOL

    As a side note: if future versions of Android do continue to go in the direction of Windows (a mediocre-at-best system that sacrifices quality for the widest possible compatibility), leaving Chrome eventually as the sole “pure” experience, this would delight me no end — as it would really clarify the differences between the Google and Apple platforms to enough of a level that most laymen would finally grasp easily.
    edited October 2018 radarthekatcornchiphammeroftruthChris46palominewatto_cobradocno42jony0
  • Reply 22 of 100
     i could care less about "facts" or "ios is better than android" my point was that i have read a lot of Dilger articles and they all seem to have anger to anything that isnt an iproduct. I have to say i do laugh at his articles a lot. and FYI i aint a fanboy, i have an ipad 2017 edition and a moto g5 plus and my laptop runs linux. and btw i have had more problems with ios than android.
    "I couldn't care less"
    radarthekatbaconstangiqatedorwescornchipcrossladtundraboywatto_cobramicrobedocno42
  • Reply 23 of 100
    Thoughtful article, thank you.

    Google's appropriation of Java does seem to me to be morally, even if not legally, wrong and I respect Oracle for pursuing the case. That said, I'm not sure that (hypothetically) abandoning Android would be an adequate strategy for avoiding any ultimate verdict in Oracle's favour. Any such settlement would likely allow for continuing use of Android through licensing (or whatever) for huge numbers of existing and updatable devices. Unless Google just abandoned the entire user base, which seems unlikely.
    jbdragonwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 24 of 100
    sflocal said:
    MR.Dilger seems to have anger problems towards Android, or anything that isnt apple products for that nature
    You on the other hand seem to have issues with facts, and instead choose to accept "Alternative facts".

    Google founders admitted that when the iPhone was released back in 2007, they had to choose quickly to create a new OS from scratch which would take years, or just hijack Java and essentially worry about the lawsuits later.  That is fact.  You not wanting to accept that does not negate the problem that Google decided to put itself in.

    Couple that with Android being so fragmented (yes, it still is) and the loud silence of it's lack-of-security flaws, it's no wonder that Android is and always will be a huge, steaming pile of crap.  Even Google now wants to put some distance between them and it.

    i could care less about "facts" or "ios is better than android" my point was that i have read a lot of Dilger articles and they all seem to have anger to anything that isnt an iproduct. I have to say i do laugh at his articles a lot. and FYI i aint a fanboy, i have an ipad 2017 edition and a moto g5 plus and my laptop runs linux. and btw i have had more problems with ios than android.

    You've read a lot of DEDs articles and just signed up today?

    Curious, what was your previous troll account that got banned such that you had to create a new one just to tell us this?
    williamlondonjbdragonradarthekatbaconstangRayz2016StrangeDaysrepressthiscornchipwatto_cobradocno42
  • Reply 25 of 100
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,996member
    So what is Made for Google exactly mean? If I bought a product Made for Google, could I assume it will work for both Anroid OS and Chrome OS? 
    cornchip
  • Reply 26 of 100
    Chrome OS is popular in schools and basically they were given out as Netbook for kids. In our school district, iPads were given out to K-2 and Chromebooks are given out for grade 3 to 6. This year my kids were given Lenovo Chrombook 500e with touch screen and stylus.
  • Reply 27 of 100
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,930member
    tzeshan said:
    So what is Made for Google exactly mean? If I bought a product Made for Google, could I assume it will work for both Anroid OS and Chrome OS? 
    https://get.google.com/madefor/
  • Reply 28 of 100
    danR2222danR2222 Posts: 7unconfirmed, member
    I see. The author was wrong 5 years ago:

       thesis: "... I described how Google was distancing itself from Android"

    and now wants to prove he is less wrong now. I won't dispute that Google is/has been  pursuing a Chrome strategy, I will posit that that strategy has involved enough moving of goalposts that it is neither here nor there whether that strategy/those strategies are any longer relevant to the 5-year ago Chrome-component of the author's thesis.
  • Reply 29 of 100
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,117moderator
    Here’s a mind experiment...  if iOS were available to smartphone/tablet manufacturers under similar terms to how Android is available to them, what would the market share split for iOS versus Android look like?  I’d bet most would jump to iOS, leaving Android in the ditch by the side of the road.   
    baconstangStrangeDaysrepressthiscornchipcrossladwatto_cobradocno42jony0
  • Reply 30 of 100
    MR.Dilger seems to have anger problems towards Android, or anything that isnt apple products for that nature
    Youre nuts. DED’s articles are always well-reasoned and explain why Apple is doing fine and others aren’t as rosy as some would have us believe. If you think that’s “anger” then, well, youre nuts.
    edited October 2018 repressthiswilliamlondonjroylostkiwitycho_macuserwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 31 of 100
    Wow someone here is really worried about Google for some reason. Not sure why.
    And boy somebody else is really worried so much so that they routinely troll DED’s opinion column every single week just to say “But you’re wrong!” over and over. Without fail. Compulsively. Without ever tackling the arguments within the piece.
    edited October 2018 Rayz2016tmaywatto_cobradocno42jony0
  • Reply 32 of 100
    gatorguy said:
    Wow someone here is really worried about Google for some reason. Not sure why.
    He used to be obsessed with Microsoft. Now it's Android.  
    He’s not “obsessed”, he’s “employed”. DED is an opinion columnist and this is his beat. Have you ever read a newspaper? If so, you may have noticed the same columnists covering the same topics in your local paper as well. Do you claim they’re “obsessed”? No, because that’s fucking stupid.

    Obsession is being a knockoff cheerleader dropping FUD pellets on an apple site every single day, and apparently without being paid to do so.
    edited October 2018 repressthiswilliamlondoncornchiptycho_macuserpalominewatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 33 of 100
    chasm said:
    I have some issues with the conclusions this editorial (and writer generally) continually leap to — he’s the mirror-universe version of Rob “Apple is doooooomed” Enderle.
    Yeah except one of them is right - and it’s not the one claiming Apple is doomed. Yep, we live in the universe where Apple kills it over and over and nearly all its critics get it wrong. The one were Apple is misguided, hapless, aimless, failing, and dooooomed is the mirror-universe. 
    edited October 2018 Rayz2016cornchipwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 34 of 100
    mrchao said:
    Funny to suggest that Android is on its way out, since 3/4 of the products shown are running variants of Android.

    Cromecast: Android (CastOS)
    Home Hub: Android (CastOS)
    Pixel: Android (Pie)
    Slate: ChromeOS (with Android Play libraries)

    The only other products running Chrome OS or variants are, Pixelbook and WiFi.

    There is no "CastOS." Cast is a Google protocol. And according to Google itself, Cromecast runs "a simplified version of Chrome OS," not Android.

    As the article points out, Chrome OS and Android were developed independently. Not even sure what your point is, just arguing about stuff you don't get for no reason. 
    Sorry, Bruh-

    Not so correct.  The CastOS (we call it that at work) gear runs the Android kernel, has the Android DRM stack, and communicates over ADB.  ...it’s more Android than Chrome OS.

    https://www.computerworld.com/article/2474283/cloud-computing/google-chromecast-hacked--is-it-the-end-for-android--.amp.html

    The point is the premise of the article seems confused since it seems to imply a dwindling number of devices are running Android implies abandonment by Google—but the writer is factually incorrect.

    edited October 2018
  • Reply 35 of 100
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,730member
    Here’s a mind experiment...  if iOS were available to smartphone/tablet manufacturers under similar terms to how Android is available to them, what would the market share split for iOS versus Android look like?  I’d bet most would jump to iOS, leaving Android in the ditch by the side of the road.   
    I reckon the split would be around 50/50 because there would be nothing to differentiate them.

    If Apple offered licensed iOS then they would not be able to take advantages of the same hardware/software integrations that they enjoy today. They would be unable to move the platform forward at their own speed and would always be hampered by the lowest common denominator.  Developers would only have the resources to test for the most popular configurations which means that users of less well-known products would have incompatibility problems. 

    They would need to find other ways of making a profit since the competition from their own partners would cause iPhone sales to tank. That would mean using their users' information for advertising. That would mean scanning emails to inject adverts on the screen.

    Android will always enjoy greater market share, but as we have seen from the struggles of Samsung's mobile division, that doesn't really mean much when compared to profit.

    So, yes, market share for iOS would increase, but profits would vanish overnight.
    edited October 2018 cornchipjellybellywatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingamjony0
  • Reply 36 of 100
    command_f said:
    Thoughtful article, thank you.

    Google's appropriation of Java does seem to me to be morally, even if not legally, wrong and I respect Oracle for pursuing the case. That said, I'm not sure that (hypothetically) abandoning Android would be an adequate strategy for avoiding any ultimate verdict in Oracle's favour. Any such settlement would likely allow for continuing use of Android through licensing (or whatever) for huge numbers of existing and updatable devices. Unless Google just abandoned the entire user base, which seems unlikely.
    1) The Oracle/Google trial affects the Android runtime (which exposes the Java API) - the virtual machine that runs Google Play apps. It does not matter whether this runtime is running on the Android kernel, on Chrome OS or on Fuchsia OS. If Google wanted to avoid the Oracle troubles they would have to abandon their app store. That's not going to happen since it's central to Chrome OS now too. So any switch from Android to Chrome OS to run the Google Play apps is not motivated by this trial.

    2) Whatever happens with the trial it will unlikely affect the current Android runtime. The trial is still about Google's Java API implementation based on the Apache Harmony implementation which Google used until 2016. With Android 7, Google switched to the openJDK version of the Java API which Sun licensed under GPL+classpath exception which essentially is equivalent to the LGPL (which means that apps on the Play Store can be closed source). So whatever happens with the current trial, it will cover damages up to Android 6 which is on the way out. By the time there will be any type of resolution, Oracle might get some damages for past infringement, but this would unlikely extend to any current versions of the Android app runtime.

    3) Google cares about the Google Play apps - this is where all the network effects are. It doesn't matter whether this is running on Android kernel or Chrome OS. So why Chrome OS? First of all, there might be some technical reasons since it's a very secure design. But the main reason might be that Chrome OS cannot be modified by manufacturers: it's meant to be shipped and updated centrally by Google - much like Apple does with iOS. 

    In 2008, when the first Android phones came out, the Android market (precursor of the Play store) had no apps - Google had no bargaining power and had to allow manufacturers to modify the kernel and skin the OS.

    However, now Google built a large app store that can run on any kernel. It makes sense to leverage this by slowing abandoning Android and instead have future versions of Google Play run on Chrome OS and Fuchsia OS where Google controls the user experience completely. Google has enough influence now thanks to the Play store that it can slowly push OEMs to Chrome OS.

    Google has every reason to prefer Chrome OS tablets over Android tablets - there is no fragmentation in Chrome OS, no skins, no pesky Samsungs that duplicate all of Google's services etc.

    Maybe Samsung will soon have to develop Android on its own to keep up with new versions of the Play store - but given Samsung's poor record with software they would probably mess it up, and apps would run unreliably. 


    edited October 2018 avon b7gatorguycommand_fcornchipjellybellyChris46watto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 37 of 100
    techrulestechrules Posts: 53unconfirmed, member
    Think you have completed missed what is going on.  Plus it is happening right in front of us as Google develops in the open on GitHub.  They will move to Fuchsia.  It is not a question of if but rather when.

    It is going to provide a much higher level of security then we have with anything else.  Even higher then ChromeOS.   The iOS, Android (Linux), Windows kernels are all in many millions of lines of code.   Zircon the kernel for Fuchsia is in the the 10s of thousands.   Apple tried to use a micro kernel but failed and had to back track.

    But Apple did it with a different era of silicon.   So it just makes sense to move away from the "Android" brand.  

    We can see on GitHub Android being ported to Fuchsia as a run time. 

    BTW, I just love Google develops in the open like they do.  The only one that does this and it is so cool to watch.  You can see what they focus on from day to day.  You can see place holders to address later.  You can see what the strategy with the kernel is all about.    I have not been excited about anything this much since the development of the Linux kernel.   It is about time we got a completely new kernel.  That has not happen for over 20 years now.  iOS is really the architecture of the previous kernel and was not a fresh sheet effort.
    edited October 2018 williamlondoncornchipjellybelly
  • Reply 38 of 100
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,930member
    Wow someone here is really worried about Google for some reason. Not sure why.
    And boy somebody else is really worried so much so that they routinely troll DED’s opinion column ... Without ever tackling the arguments within the piece.
    https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/207708/googles-pixel-3-is-a-third-strike-for-hapless-htc-and-lg/p1
    As a general rule I avoid commenting on DED opinion pieces anymore. That one was just so factually wrong from the get-go that it needed to be pointed out.       

    Rather than you jumping in to troll me, barfing up only ad-homs, why not consider putting some thought behind "tackling the arguments within the piece and the reply" yourself? 

    Seriously, if you disagree with something that's written just put together a coherent counter argument instead of "yeah I don't care if you're right or wrong, I don't like you".  Heck everyone already knows that. 
    edited October 2018 avon b7jony0
  • Reply 39 of 100
    sflocal said:
    MR.Dilger seems to have anger problems towards Android, or anything that isnt apple products for that nature
    You on the other hand seem to have issues with facts, and instead choose to accept "Alternative facts".

    Google founders admitted that when the iPhone was released back in 2007, they had to choose quickly to create a new OS from scratch which would take years, or just hijack Java and essentially worry about the lawsuits later.  That is fact.  You not wanting to accept that does not negate the problem that Google decided to put itself in.

    Couple that with Android being so fragmented (yes, it still is) and the loud silence of it's lack-of-security flaws, it's no wonder that Android is and always will be a huge, steaming pile of crap.  Even Google now wants to put some distance between them and it.

    i could care less about "facts" or "ios is better than android" my point was that i have read a lot of Dilger articles and they all seem to have anger to anything that isnt an iproduct. I have to say i do laugh at his articles a lot. and FYI i aint a fanboy, i have an ipad 2017 edition and a moto g5 plus and my laptop runs linux. and btw i have had more problems with ios than android.
    Aww gives us a break. There was nothing angry in this article. Dilger offers his opinion that is usually well researched. And the fact that you don’t care about facts doesn’t help your point imho. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 100
    melgross said:
    The main reason why Google is walking away from Android, at least for tablets and notebooks, is because of AOSP. If people don’t know what that is, it’s the actual open software version of Android, which is NOT open software, despite what a lot of people think.

    aosp was intended to be the poor man’s, or poor manufacturer’s version of Android. The idea was that companies selling cheap phones in poor countries would want an OS unencumbeted by the licensing requirements of “real” Android. As people had more money, these companies, and customers, would easily transition to licensed Android devices. Those devices require a much stricter licensing requirement, and can use the official services of Google, such as search, maps, Google Play Store, etc.

    companies using AOSP aren’t allowed to call it Android, and companies making Android devices aren’t allowed to use AOSP.

    but that plan went awry. Instead, Google pulled out of China, leaving the field to Chinese companies backed by the Chinese government. Chinese manufacturers, also backed by the government, began to rise. They had no incentive to move to Android.

    so companies using AOSP began to develop their own services. There were browsers, maps, search engines etc. real Android became less necessary. Google continued to remove more services from AOSP in the hope that it would convince companies to move to Android, but it didn’t work. Now, about 65% of all “Android” phones out there are really AOSP phones, which Google has little control over, and gets nothing from. Instead of being a gateway to Android and Google’s services, it’s become a burden.

    that’s one of the reasons they converted the Chrome browser, to ChromeOS. How successful they will be moving phones to that is hard to say, as they’ve moved Chrome OS to x86 from ARM.
    Thank you for an informative response. Will have to read up about as you called it ‘AOSP’.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.