Tag Archives: Google

Android Platform Versions (2012)

Posted on by

Below is a snapshot of the Android platform distribution, as of September 2012.

Android Platforms Sept 2012

As you can see, the majority of the devices out there, close to 60%, are still 2.3 (Gingerbread). This is followed by ICS with close to 21%. Froyo 2.2 is 14%.

I hope that by March (but more likely, summertime or later) of 2013, that by then the majority of the Android devices out there are 4.0+. This would make the Android app developer’s life in general much simpler — by (1) minimizing the number of major Android platforms to deal with, and (2) making it easier/cheaper to implement (or move up to) the recommended Android design guidelines. The result of this includes (1) cheaper to develop/maintain apps, (2) consistent apps per developer, and (3) consistent look/feel/behavior across the app market.

For this to happen, device manufacturers and operators must help transform the above piechart to be mostly 4.0+ Android devices. They can help by literally selling less (and even better, stop selling) Gingerbread/2.3 and older devices. If you look around you will see that operators are still selling Gingerbread devices. And we need Google to have more cojones with respect to this and stimulate, if you will, both the device manufacturers and operators to move forward — this transition is taking forever! (Note: Gingerbread was introduced on December 6, 2010.)

Some customers may leave feedback as “why the app does not follow the Android UI guidelines”, or “why the app doesn’t support the ICS UI paradigm” — but again, 4.0+ is just a smaller fraction of what is out there!

In the meantime, there is the Android Support (Compatibility) library. Also, see Backwards Compatibility (Android Design Patterns).

ceo

On SmartTVs: The Vizio Co-Star (2012)

Posted on by

Vizio Co-Star is NO-GO.

Part of creating a product is providing proper customer support throughout its life-cycle. A product life-cycle begins with product envisioning, followed by definition, followed by create/build, followed by going to market (which on itself consists of different aspects including customer support).

Vizio has failed to deliver my product. And has failed to make *me* a satisfied customer — after waiting for almost a month for the delivery/return-process to work itself out, they could have sent me the package again, perhaps with rush delivery for all the troubles I have been through. But they claim they cannot do that (I don’t believe them); they should take a lesson from Zappo’s book. Instead they will refund me and I have to reorder. But I won’t reorder. Maybe their Co-Star is a kickass product, maybe it is not; the only way I am reviewing the Co-Star is if they send me one. In the meantime, I will continue using my Android tablet for Netflix streaming and apps on my TV. I will wait for a competing Android TV product, and maybe I will end up buying an Apple TV.

Read more on the comments section.

I will categorize this one under “#FAIL”.

I believe SmartTVs will open new/great opps for content/developers; and this will be especially true when intersecting this w/ Mobile.

So, to begin researching this in more detail, I’ve ordered Vizio’s Co-Star. Based on Google TV (click on the previous hyperlink to see the specs) it has everything needed to play/hack-away.

Crafted by VIZIO’s years of entertainment expertise, Co-Star packs the powerful features of Google TV into a sleek, intuitive interface. Combining live TV, the Web and apps into one experience, it allows you to search and access content from all of them without interrupting your viewing.

Of special interest to me is the combined experience across TV & apps that the Co-Star supports; think about it, your app overlaid on top of the video stream — if this plays out as I hope, this is very, very, very powerful, and is what I’ve been waiting for:

  • Merges live TV, web, and apps into one interface
  • Search across live TV, web and apps – simultaneously
  • Picture-In-Picture – Apps & Live TV

Price: $99 — great price.

So stay tuned; I will report back…

ceo

Google I/O Extended Austin (2012)

Posted on by

While the major Google I/O fun is happening in San Francisco on June 27-29, some of us will stay behind and run/participate at the Extended version of Google I/O — in my case, Google I/O Extended Austin.

You can sign up for Google I/O Extended Austin — for registration and information visit https://sites.google.com/site/austinioextended/.

We expect close to 50 people and we will have 3-5 speakers on June 27; yours truly included. I will cover “Security on (Android) Mobile Applications”.

Related to this see Countdown to Google I/O: Diverse perspectives.

ceo

APIs and Copyrights (Oracle vs. Google)

Posted on by

The Oracle vs. Google case on Java is such a precedence case that any ruling on APIs vs. copyright might open a can of worms. The outcome of this ruling literally will affect any software company and developers designing APIs (and protecting those as Intellectual Property).

(I personally believe programming languages and its APIs should not merit copyright protection — languages are the means of unique expression, not the expression itself).

In the meantime, Europe courts just ruled on this exact matter (SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Ltd) against copyright.

A couple of key quotes from the article Oracle V. Google Jury Deadlocked? (Information Week):

“Google’s position is that APIs, like computer languages, cannot be copyrighted; Oracle disagrees.”

“…if the jury finds that Google infringed and that Google’s actions don’t qualify as fair use, then the copyrightability of APIs comes into play.”

“The primary issue that might be made moot is whether Oracle can even make a copyright claim. The judge has made clear that he reserves the right to rule on whether APIs can be copyrighted under the law. But presumably, he’d rather not if there are other means to resolve Oracle’s claim. If Google is found not to have infringed, he doesn’t need to rule on the copyrightability of APIs. If Google is found to have infringed, but to have done so as permitted under the fair use doctrine, he also doesn’t need to rule on whether APIs can be protected.”

Above: note how the judge is trying to avoid having to deliberate on APIs and Copyright; trying to stay away of such “debacle” and its consequences.

On Thursday, that very question was resolved in Europe: The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in a similar case, SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Ltd, that neither the functionality of computer program nor the format of its data files are expressive enough to merit copyright protection.

Read the whole article Oracle V. Google Jury Deadlocked at Information Week.

ceo
(Happy Cinco de Mayo)

Oracle vs. Google on Java (2012)

Posted on by

Some background: I spent many years as an individual contributor to a number of J2ME expert groups including MIDP 2.0, MIDP 3.0 and a number of J2ME APIs ~ around 10 different JSRs over 8+ years. I was a huge proponent of Java for mobile and still am.

In the next couple of days, the jury will decide in the trial of Oracle vs. Google on Java.

The Google vs. Oracle Java debacle is in my opinion, for the most part, the result of how Sun left behind a loosely defined and ambiguous Java, from the perspective of open source software (OSS).

To attract developers and win the community, Sun played the OSS “game”; but did it partially. I recall Schwartz claiming Java as open source, then trying to understand GPL classpath exceptions and whatnot.

Then Google started Android with Java, and Android became very successful.

As Sun shopped themselves around, Oracle, a coined-operated company, clearly understood the monetization opportunity that presented itself with Java and its state.

And here we are today.

Everyone in the business of SW knows that 3rd party SW must be licensed. The questions are “what is SW?”, “what requires a license?” and “what is up for fair use?” Is it the Java Programming language and related core APIs? The Virtual Machine and related bytecode? What about all the APIs developed by the Java Community and led by other companies such as Nokia and Motorola and others? All the above?

Google made a bet and decided to take risks — perhaps based on Schwartz’s OSS claims or the claims from the JCP vs. “fair use”.

But soon the court will decide, and all this will be over. Google may have to pay a lot of money for using Java, or maybe not, or maybe some kind of IP + $ arrangement is done between the companies, or maybe Google ends up using a different programming language on top of their VM.

ceo

On Google’s Moto Mobility Group Acquisition

Posted on by

The latest big news on Android is Google’s acquisition of Motorola’s Mobility group.

And I have to say, I wasn’t expecting that one.

The main arguments floating around on the acquisition are:

  • Patent play, driven by the patent war including the recent Nortel patent acquisition by Google’ competitors
  • Hardware play, which better positions Google against Apple

My thoughts

  1. It is a patent play
  2. TBD is the impact of this on Google/Android partners — this is huge with respect to Android partners, creates a love-hate relationship, and definitely will have a negative impact on their partners, their growth, their confidence, and as a consequence, will affect Android’s growth; it is the way things work. While Android’s global growth was leveraging big manufacturers such as HTC and Samsung, now, unless some kind of awesome agreement is done with the partners (see last bullet), Android’s success has now reverted mainly onto Google’s shoulders
  3. Google must to decide very fast what they want to be: a SW or HW-or both kind of company
  4. Google *must* keep the IP for the patent wars, and spinoff Motorola as a subsidiary — running a HW company is just a different kind of beast.
  5. While maintaining ownership of the new IP, Google shall give royalty-free access of the Motorola patent portfolio to Open Handset Alliance (OHA). This will 1) provide incentives to existing OHA partners, 2) provide incentives for new partners to join OHA, and 3) allow OHA and Android to continue its growth path and benefits to OHA partners

Pretty unexpected, but very interesting move by Google indeed. We are witnessing a major reshape of the mobile industry from software to hardware; from Nokia and Microsoft, to Goggle, Motorola, the impact on APAC-based device manufacturers, the operators, Apple, and so on.

This counter-offensive by Google will or should help battle the potential new costs to consumers due to patents wars. As a side note, now imagine how much innovation (and quality of innovation) would be possible if instead of having to spend so much cash on patents, instead it is invested on people, their research-and-ideas, and thus true innovation.

Update Aug 16, 1:30pm: Android partners “welcome” Google’s Motorola Mobility buy (VentureBeat). Very interesting to see Android partners are welcoming this. Maybe they were consulted? (unlikely). But it means that today they see the ROI and are so committed to Android that as long as Android itself is less risky (due to more IP protection), then they are OK with some competition. And/or maybe they don’t see Motorola itself as a real threat. If the latter changes where Motorola becomes a threat, we obviously will see a change of heart.

Update Aug 16, 2:30pm: Google: We Bought Motorola To “Protect” The Android Ecosystem (Business Insider)

Update Aug 22: Android vs Windows Phone 7: At least one handset maker thinking about it (GigaOM)

ceo

On “Japan as the (mobile) leader, USA as the laggard, Nokia in between” and developers, developers, developers, developers

Posted on by

As discussions and opinions continue at Forxum Oxford on the topic of mobile leadership and Nokia and so forth, the following statement was made by Tomi Ahonen, for which I responded as follows.

Why I am writing about this? Because it is important to understand some of the reasons why some are leaders or are perceived as leaders, or are laggards or are in between….

Tomi Ahonen said:

… that its Japan which is the leader, USA is the laggard – still today – and that Nokia is in between, and in many cases Nokia has led, but Apple does not…”

For which my response was:

Amazing how perception can change everything and even bring a whole global company to the brink of death…

While Japan has indeed been a mobile tech leader, they have remained, in my opinion, very localized geographically. As a consequence, Japan’s global impact has been minute when compared to what Apple, Google and Nokia have all accomplished.

I really don’t get how Apple cannot be seen as a leader in mobile. Apple has definitely led, by taking all the pieces (yes, they learned from others) and creating a new, unique mobile design package like NO other before it. Apple raised the bar for mobile OSes. Gave new meaning to (mobile) web. It gave new meaning to mobile apps. It removed the operator controlled deck. It gave new meaning to developers and ecosystems. It created a new economy for mobile and developers like no other before it. Apple not only brought to market a mobile HW-and-SW package like no other before it, but also changed the playground and the playing rules; the operator is no longer at the center, the ecosystem is. Software (and developers) drive this new mobile economy. And Apple (even if by accident) was the one who figured it out first. If you ask me, Apple was the liberator for mobile developers and the ecosystem. The beneficiaries? The regular user/subscriber.

And there is no turning back. Google, Nokia, Samsung, Palm/HP, Dell, others all understand that it is about the software and the developer ecosystem. Even Ballmer got this right when going Developers, developers, developers, developers crazy:

(for a second I thought he was going into cardiac arrest)

But I digress…

I continued:

Apple introduced its iPhone around 2007. Android ~2008. That is 2-3 years ago! And yet today Nokia has not been able to produce a true match.

The Nokia machine has all the needed parts, but its leadership failed. Today Nokia is struggling for its survival. But Nokia is not dead and will (should) not die; a major reality check this whole experience has been.

Mobile is still a young industry, and anything can happen.

Bonus

Don’t miss the track by Smixx titled Developers (feat. Steve Ballmer):

Smixx – Developers (feat. Steve Ballmer) by Smixx

ceo