Google Android flaws pushing software firms towards iPhone
Although Google is positioning its new Android platform as freeing cellphone software developers, the search engine giant's attempt to favor certain developers, technical issues, and shaky commercial appeal are reportedly driving would-be partners to iPhone.
Google has been accused by at least some developers of making assumptions about the appeal of Android to programming teams, who with the open-source platform can write virtually any app for Android-based devices by getting direct access to code that governs even basic hardware functions.
The issue is largely known to have come to a head in mid-July, when Google unintentionally revealed that it has been favoring the winners of a developers' contest with advance releases of Android's Software Developer Kit, exposing them to newer features and bug fixes ahead of the general community. Those outside the privileged circle, both then and now, have expressed frustration that the company is in effect cherry-picking the teams it wants to succeed on launch day.
Without this equal treatment, Google is not only perceived as driving developers away but of violating the open-source mantra it took on by creating a mobile operating system, shutting out many who could contribute to the development process. Some of these have since switched or expressed a desire to switch to iPhone development in retaliation for the seeming bias on Google's part.
"The idea with open source software is to allow early adopters access to the buggier pieces of code so they can help fix them or let people who want to wait for a solid release the ability to do that," says developer Casey Borders. "The key is choice, and Google has taken away that choice and is developing Android like every other piece of closed software."
Even carriers and hardware manufacturers are believed to be encountering technical problems regardless of their access to code. Cellular provider China Mobile, which hopes to have Android devices in its home country, was recently described as having language translation problems with software, while Google's emphasis on an anticipated T-Mobile USA debut may have crowded out Sprint's attempts to get help for its own launch.
For those without the early access, the most recent software kit for Android was last released in early March, or over five months before press time.
In stark contrast is Apple, which has imposed tighter restrictions on what apps can be developed but has given third-parties frequent, equal access to updated versions of its own iPhone SDK -- in some cases, seeding new releases just days apart and opening up new features at the same time.
And for some developers, the incentive to write iPhone software may simply be material: Apple, even in its relative inexperience with phones, is seen as more of a veteran in the mobile space than Google. The latter has yet to see Android on a shipping product and doesn't have the practical experience of producing devices like the iPod to develop a strong user base and sell more third-party apps.
"At the end of the day, developers want to make money," says analyst Rob Enderle, who himself was recently hired by Dell to ease its return into portable devices. "So they're going to develop on a platform and put resources on a platform that will make them money."
Recognizing this, Google has been showcasing Android builds with an integrated software store, much like Apple's App Store, which would centralize downloads and give developers more publicity than if they offered software by themselves.
Apple's insistence on control at most stages of development has kept many Android developers onboard and in some cases may goad developers to write apps for both Android and iPhone handsets, freeing them to experiment with the new platform while clinging to the one that promises them financial success. Without catering to those most eager to write for Android, however, Google is thought by at least one developer as potentially sabotaging its carefully-managed launch by alienating those outside a special group.
"Developers are the driving force behind Android applications, so without them it would be very hard for Android to have a stance in the market," says developer Mike Nowak.
Google has been accused by at least some developers of making assumptions about the appeal of Android to programming teams, who with the open-source platform can write virtually any app for Android-based devices by getting direct access to code that governs even basic hardware functions.
The issue is largely known to have come to a head in mid-July, when Google unintentionally revealed that it has been favoring the winners of a developers' contest with advance releases of Android's Software Developer Kit, exposing them to newer features and bug fixes ahead of the general community. Those outside the privileged circle, both then and now, have expressed frustration that the company is in effect cherry-picking the teams it wants to succeed on launch day.
Without this equal treatment, Google is not only perceived as driving developers away but of violating the open-source mantra it took on by creating a mobile operating system, shutting out many who could contribute to the development process. Some of these have since switched or expressed a desire to switch to iPhone development in retaliation for the seeming bias on Google's part.
"The idea with open source software is to allow early adopters access to the buggier pieces of code so they can help fix them or let people who want to wait for a solid release the ability to do that," says developer Casey Borders. "The key is choice, and Google has taken away that choice and is developing Android like every other piece of closed software."
Even carriers and hardware manufacturers are believed to be encountering technical problems regardless of their access to code. Cellular provider China Mobile, which hopes to have Android devices in its home country, was recently described as having language translation problems with software, while Google's emphasis on an anticipated T-Mobile USA debut may have crowded out Sprint's attempts to get help for its own launch.
For those without the early access, the most recent software kit for Android was last released in early March, or over five months before press time.
In stark contrast is Apple, which has imposed tighter restrictions on what apps can be developed but has given third-parties frequent, equal access to updated versions of its own iPhone SDK -- in some cases, seeding new releases just days apart and opening up new features at the same time.
And for some developers, the incentive to write iPhone software may simply be material: Apple, even in its relative inexperience with phones, is seen as more of a veteran in the mobile space than Google. The latter has yet to see Android on a shipping product and doesn't have the practical experience of producing devices like the iPod to develop a strong user base and sell more third-party apps.
"At the end of the day, developers want to make money," says analyst Rob Enderle, who himself was recently hired by Dell to ease its return into portable devices. "So they're going to develop on a platform and put resources on a platform that will make them money."
Recognizing this, Google has been showcasing Android builds with an integrated software store, much like Apple's App Store, which would centralize downloads and give developers more publicity than if they offered software by themselves.
Apple's insistence on control at most stages of development has kept many Android developers onboard and in some cases may goad developers to write apps for both Android and iPhone handsets, freeing them to experiment with the new platform while clinging to the one that promises them financial success. Without catering to those most eager to write for Android, however, Google is thought by at least one developer as potentially sabotaging its carefully-managed launch by alienating those outside a special group.
"Developers are the driving force behind Android applications, so without them it would be very hard for Android to have a stance in the market," says developer Mike Nowak.
Comments
...I can confirm first hand that Google are doing themselves no favors. I have attended several Android developer meetups and none of us have been shown a prototype to inspire us. As a software designer with 20 years experience and some ideas, this is rediculous. In particular as I can walk into any O2 or Carphone Warehouse store here in rainy England and be inspired by the iPhone - despite it's flaws.
Inspired? That looks like a cringeworthy use of the word. What is the result of the inspiration? Did you make a really nice piece of art or product? Or did it just make you happy like a drug might and not propel you into actually doing anything?
Wasn't Apple also favoring some developers over others? Granted, Apple has no pretension of openness, but I recall some devs getting favorable treatment. I think that's all over now, but that happens, I think because of the beta state of the project.
Inspired? That looks like a cringeworthy use of the word. What is the result of the inspiration? Did you make a really nice piece of art or product? Or did it just make you happy like a drug might and not propel you into actually doing anything?
Some developers still get pre-release iPhone OS builds before others. The big difference, I think, is that Apple's launch day is far behind them. So even though Apple did (and does) exactly the same thing as Google is doing, they already have millions of downloads under their belt and developers can keep making progress even without the new builds. (In fact, you can't sell apps built against the beta versions of the iPhone SDK, so most developers aren't installing it on any primary development box.)
In addition, Apple never made any pretenses to being open, transparent, and developer-friendly, so there were no expectations to violate. The fact that the iPhone SDK is a great piece of work (despite my personal dislike of XCode in general) helps them be a lot more developer-friendly than they could have been.
With access to all parts of the phone's hardware I would worry about applications messing up the phone. Apple's tighter control seems wiser.
It's worked so well for the 3G iPhone with it's release of Mobile Me, Dropped Calls possibly due to a Chip Set, iTunes 7.7.1 and Firmware 2.0 & 2.01.
My iPhone is as unstable as any Windows Mobile phone on the market and I'm tired of Apple not giving statements.
Steve's paranoia and no specs until the phone is released as well as grandstanding every event is the cause of the problems and he's doing nothing to step to the plate and address the problems that are now world wide.
In addition, Apple never made any pretenses to being open, transparent, and developer-friendly, so there were no expectations to violate. The fact that the iPhone SDK is a great piece of work (despite my personal dislike of XCode in general) helps them be a lot more developer-friendly than they could have been.
Yeah I said this months ago. As Google began to add more restrictions to the Android SDK that there would be some backlash because it was touted as being so open in contrast to Apple being so closed.
It was clear Google wants the outcome to be similar to Apple so they've had to close some of the openness. While Apple began more closed and has slowly opened.
Some developers still get pre-release iPhone OS builds before others. The big difference, I think, is that Apple's launch day is far behind them. So even though Apple did (and does) exactly the same thing as Google is doing, they already have millions of downloads under their belt and developers can keep making progress even without the new builds. (In fact, you can't sell apps built against the beta versions of the iPhone SDK, so most developers aren't installing it on any primary development box.)
In addition, Apple never made any pretenses to being open, transparent, and developer-friendly, so there were no expectations to violate. The fact that the iPhone SDK is a great piece of work (despite my personal dislike of XCode in general) helps them be a lot more developer-friendly than they could have been.
There are differenes. In other articles, developers complained that the 50 or so developers who did get a build (months ago, which is one of the problems), were told not to tell anyone else that they had gotten the build. In other words, it was in secret. This as well after everyone knew about Android.
Apple did that with a few developers in the very beginning, BEFORE they admitted to the public at large that they had a product under development. This is normal.
But once they presented the new software, and phone, in a public forum, that stopped, and everyone could get it.
Android is having other problems as well. One is that there is no phone standard. Developers are wary that their software will perform improperly on some models, or not work at all.
The one phone due for T-Mobile has now been delayed twice, and is expected to be months behind schedule. This is due to both hardware and software problems. This is also dismaying developers, who aren't sure anymore when a launch will take place, or even if it will take place.
...I can confirm first hand that Google are doing themselves no favors. I have attended several Android developer meetups and none of us have been shown a prototype to inspire us. As a software designer with 20 years experience and some ideas, this is rediculous. In particular as I can walk into any O2 or Carphone Warehouse store here in rainy England and be inspired by the iPhone - despite it's flaws.
Inspired? That looks like a cringeworthy use of the word. What is the result of the inspiration? Did you make a really nice piece of art or product? Or did it just make you happy like a drug might and not propel you into actually doing anything?
Wonderkid - I'm inspired by JeffDM's comment to welcome you to AppleInsider! I think we knew what you meant (but I'm not sure what JeffDM's point was).
Inspired? That looks like a cringeworthy use of the word. What is the result of the inspiration? Did you make a really nice piece of art or product? Or did it just make you happy like a drug might and not propel you into actually doing anything?
Not sure what he means either, but I will say that the word "inspired" does not commonly have the New Agey/motivational/self-help connotations in rainy old England that it has recently acquired in the US - it's possibly those connotations that are setting your teeth on edge?
He may just mean he is excited. You know, stoked.
Or is that the wrong word?
I guess I'm also inspired by the number of developers for the iPhone. Makes me want to join in.
OK, back to work.
Wasn't Apple also favoring some developers over others? Granted, Apple has no pretension of openness, but I recall some devs getting favorable treatment. I think that's all over now, but that happens, I think because of the beta state of the project.
Inspired? That looks like a cringeworthy use of the word. What is the result of the inspiration? Did you make a really nice piece of art or product? Or did it just make you happy like a drug might and not propel you into actually doing anything?
With access to all parts of the phone's hardware I would worry about applications messing up the phone. Apple's tighter control seems wiser.
I'm still not convinced about this argument.
I mean, I'd be a heck of a lot angrier if I downloaded an app which messed up my $3000 Mac Pro than my $199 iPhone. Yet it's possible to do just that with no restrictions on desktop/laptop apps. So why the restrictions on mobile apps?
The only argument which sorta makes sense is that a malicious app could try to use the GPS without asking permission and potentially allow someone to secretly track people and/or use the phone without asking and potentially rack up a massive phone bill.
However, a malicious desktop/laptop app could use your internet connection to distribute child pornography, launch DoS attacks, and/or illegally hack into other computers. So the risks are just as great there.
Really, once you start to look at the iPhone as an ultra portable computer with a modem and an internal mobile data chipset, it becomes more clear that the restrictions placed on it are artificial.
I'm not a fanboy of the Android platform by any stretch of the imagination, just trying to cut to the core of the matter here.
I'm still not convinced about this argument.
I mean, I'd be a heck of a lot angrier if I downloaded an app which messed up my $3000 Mac Pro than my $199 iPhone. Yet it's possible to do just that with no restrictions on desktop/laptop apps. So why the restrictions on mobile apps?
I don't think the main concern is with an app causing damage to the phone. The challenge and concern is being able to run multiple apps without any one app taxing the phones extremely limited resources and using most of its battery power.
And as that consumer I now feel myself rooting for Android to deliver a fantastic option. I don't fear iPhone going away, so favor strong competition to keep propelling wireless devices forward. Been waiting for these last 18 months of breakthroughs since 1992.
I'm curious, though, and thus posting these sentiments, to know if that consumer-view resonates with folks working on one or both platforms? Rubbish? Valid? Do you work on both or focus on one? Do you feel like there is room for both to be wildly successful or is this a race with only one gold medal? Just curious.
(And yes, I know I'm a professed T-Mobile fan over at&t, which may shape viewpoint; but I think I'd feel this way no matter what device/carrier I was customer of)
I'm curious, though, and thus posting these sentiments, to know if that consumer-view resonates with folks working on one or both platforms? Rubbish? Valid? Do you work on both or focus on one? Do you feel like there is room for both to be wildly successful or is this a race with only one gold medal? Just curious.
The handsets are prototypes and the OS isn't finished yet. I think the prototype handsets are just "placeholders", not meant to define the aesthetics of the device, because that is up to the device maker. I haven't seen any final designs announced yet either.
I also don't think consumers have been handed these things except under a good amount of secrecy.
I'm curious, though, and thus posting these sentiments, to know if that consumer-view resonates with folks working on one or both platforms?
There is a big difference between Android and the iPhone.
Android is not a phone. (obviously)
So the "user experience" is going to depend a lot on the hardware.
People buy different hardware for different reasons.
Some because "this one has a better camera than that one" and some because "I like the feel of the buttons on this one more than that one".
The people building the software for the Android platform of a given carrier and a given model or set of models, will be aiming at a variety of user experiences across those options.
With the iPhone, it is what it is. (few differences between 1.0 and 2.0)
This means the developer has a much narrower 'user experience' to manage on the iPhone.
This doesn't make it better, but if you are trying to make your wiz-bang software work across some handsets that do and don't have accelerometers, GPS, or the screen size is different, or if the screen were to switch modes like the iPhone.... well the more variable handset configurations you're aiming at the more issues you have to consider because of the hardware. (and I realize some are going to say the first Android implementors will aim at one configuration but that kind of ignores the "open platform", "software is available on lots of handsets" mindset that the original Android launch focused on)
Arguably, in the mobile realm (at this stage at least) it's about raising the bar since there are plenty of crappy to pretty good phone options out there. Hence, if you want to tip the needle, you need to dazzle users, which suggests providing a more managed experience from a UI, usability and workflow perspective, which implies deeper integration across device, software and service layer.
That may change as best practices get fully baked, and the anti-Apple keiretsu mobilizes, but for now, HCD is better than LCD, something I ruminate on in the post:
Pursue the Highest Common Denominator
http://thenetworkgarden.com/weblog/2...-the-high.html
Check it out if interested.
Cheers,
Mark
In selling MobileMe, Apple positioned it as "Exchange for the rest of us." I would go so far as to say that Android will likely become "iPhone for the rest of us".
I have purchased and configured 4 3g iPhones (and ps. have had to exchange two of them as defective) so am definitely a fan of the product. Think about the Gphone in the context of the rest of the world though.
The Gphone: Is open to All carriers and All hardware manufacturers and All developers. Will be available on a number of different hardware platforms at various price points. Has an open source SDK. Will likely feature not just one but likely multiple "App Stores" managed by several vendors. Will likely offer Apps outside of an App Store environment. Will be tightly integrated with other familiar Google products and services. Will not be hamstrung by an exclusive agreement with AT&T for another two years. Most importantly... The Gphone WILL BE CHEAP.
The iPhone is a tremendous product.... I'm just not sure though that Apple will fully realize its market penetration goals for iPhone when the competition amounts to the rest of the world and free.
Oddly, even though I wish I had focused on the iPhone earlier, I don't think Apple has that much of a better reputation among developers. And Apple's strategy regarding Java is perplexing. They could effectively kill the weakened Android off completely by opening up the use of Java on the iPhone. All those Android developers could more easily jump to the iPhone now and not feel their previous efforts wasted. The same goes for the Symbian and JME developers using Java... Apple could gather that flock too. Very short-sightedness on Apple's part.
Must be his reward for all the Apple bashing he's done over the years.
If Google ever gets its collective act together on Android, look out. I'm no Google fanboy but the possibilities and implications of the Gphone are pretty awesome.
In selling MobileMe, Apple positioned it as "Exchange for the rest of us." I would go so far as to say that Android will likely become "iPhone for the rest of us".
The Gphone: Is open to All carriers and All hardware manufacturers and All developers. Will be available on a number of different hardware platforms at various price points. Has an open source SDK. Will likely feature not just one but likely multiple "App Stores" managed by several vendors. Will likely offer Apps outside of an App Store environment. Will be tightly integrated with other familiar Google products and services. Will not be hamstrung by an exclusive agreement with AT&T for another two years. Most importantly... The Gphone WILL BE CHEAP.
Android promises all of this, but actually delivering it isn't easy. Which is what this story is about. Google is having some stumbles and problems actually delivering on these promises.
The iPhone is a tremendous product.... I'm just not sure though that Apple will fully realize its market penetration goals for iPhone when the competition amounts to the rest of the world and free.
Well what is the more realistic model. Starting small and building a new platform over time. Or attempting to launch a widely ubiquitous platform from the beginning.