Android will get its BEHIND handed to itself by iOS if Google doesn't get it together

[_Aurel_]

I don't want to give anything away, but lets just say I work for a certain company who's main source of revenue and subscribers for the past year were entirely dependent on the little green guy. I troubleshoot, and I sell a majority of phones with Android, so I got to see first hand how customers interact with and feel about using this OS.

Based on feedback and the predictions that may come true next week I believe Android's growth is on very tenuous grounds. I would say that despite the high sales that Android has experienced due to its monopoly on this carrier, many of the people who bought one don't really hold a strong loyalty to the platform or due to their experience may even switch to an iPhone due to it's perceived 'bug-free' experience.

Google has taken the skyrocketing growth for Android for granted, as evidenced by its lax attitude towards vender's increasingly awful UI schemes for Android, or outright stupidity in allowing certain devices to take away customer's ability to use certain functions (i.e. fascinate is forced to use bing, even though most people want to use Google) yet still somehow allow the the company to have access to Google specific apps. Let me emphasize this: as a ad-based revenue/services company, Google allowed a manufacture and a carrier to route all search queries to their rival (Bing), but yet still still GAVE THEM ACCESS TO THE MARKET AND APPS. So tell me again how they will make their revenue off that?

First, in order to foster loyalty and growth with its userbase, Google needs to understand that having a evolving UI instead of having a multitude of confusing and often inferior UI's (which can even be outdated) helps build a sense of familiarity with user base, and encourages them to want to continue upgrading to the next version. This kind of strategy worked well for Microsoft, where they allowed manufactures to have some flexibility when it comes to customizing windows pc's, but the core look pretty much stayed the same no matter the hardware. With Android, its the extreme opposite. When you basically force customers to learn a new UI every time they upgrade, they're just as likely to go to the competing OS as they are to the next Android phone. Even outside of just simply keeping things familiar, having a multitude of UI's = having a multitude of headaches. Manufactures often introduce their own bugs into the system that otherwise wouldn't happen. Was GPS a problem with Android phones as a whole? No, but you can thank Samsung and their Galaxy S phones for building that perception.

The second point is how Google pretty much let themselves get jerked around by manufactures and carriers, and often ignore the consequences that their decisions shape for customers. Case in point: Fascinate. I've made this phone the biggest target because IMO it has the most headaches out of any phone out there. It's GPS is shobby, the UI (despite being a 1 Ghz with a dedicated chip) sometimes locks up and can still feel just as laggy as the original droid. And most annoying for the customer as a whole, it comes with a multitude of crapware that cannot be removed, and often interferes with the basic functions of the phone. The phone also comes with 2/3 the ram that most high-end android phones come with (384 instead of 512). It's basically crippled, slow, and at times unusable. Yet Google still gave it their blessing and allowed access to Google services even though all the voice search and browser search queries were routed to bing. I've had customers constantly ask me how do I remove this or change that with this phone, and I had to tell them that it's either uninstallable or unchangeable. If a customer has a negative experience with phones like these, how likely do you think they'll jump ship to the 'bug-free' experience on the iPhone?

For Android to succeed Google needs to fix these mistakes and build a strong platform Identity. Google should take another page from Microsoft's playbook and launch their own commercials about Android that tells that customer about the strengths of Android (diversity in hardware, open os, etc...) so that its ingrained in their head that when they pick up a Droid or a G2, they're using an 'Android' OS and not just another droid or HTC. Don't let carriers and manufactures hi-jack the brand image. At the same time, Google also needs to set terms to manufactures which phones get their blessing and which do not. This 'With Google' branding behind some of the phones is often contrived because the experience can vary widely due to manufacture customizations. One of the things they can do is limit UI customization and carrier meddling on phones that are blessed with 'With Google' but as a consolation allow them to tweak some settings outside of the UI such as custom widgets, hardware differentiation, and shortcuts (Motorola does this with Motorola-specific Widgets as well as HTC). By keeping the main OS look and feel the same, users will be more apt to migrate from one Android to the next because the experience won't be so bewildering. Basically, Google needs to travel a path that's closer to - but not necessarily exactly like - Microsoft's model with WP7.

2011 is going to be a make-or-break year for Android. I think that despite its market size, Android is in a very unstable position as an OS, but if they take the steps to solidify that with brand recognition and (some) conformity with how users experience their OS, they can maintain their growth and not lose customers to iOS. If they don't, then we pretty much know the reasons why. I'm a huge fan of Android, and I'd rather have a future where I'm given the choice of picking the hardware configuration for my phone instead of having one company decide for me. But I can also see how bewildering it is for customers, and that my experience with the platform may not necessarily mirror that of the average joe or jane. I hope that Google figures this out.


No profanity in thread titles. I edited "ass" to "BEHIND"
AT Mod
Gillbot

 

[zerocool84]

So what you're saying is you want Android to turn into Apple and lock down the OS and force manufacturers to do things??? You talk about the "open-ness" of Android yet want them to lock it down??? So you want Android to stop being Android. We have choices. If someone doesn't like Android they can go to Apple or Symbian or Windows Phone 7. People say Android sucks yet it's HUGE. People say iPhone sucks yet it's HUGE as well. There's room for all of them in the mobile space. Android and the way it works isn't going anywhere.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

So what you're saying is you want Android to turn into Apple and lock down the OS and force manufacturers to do things??? You talk about the "open-ness" of Android yet want them to lock it down??? So you want Android to stop being Android. We have choices. If someone doesn't like Android they can go to Apple or Symbian or Windows Phone 7. People say Android sucks yet it's HUGE. People say iPhone sucks yet it's HUGE as well. There's room for all of them in the mobile space. Android and the way it works isn't going anywhere.

I think his first point has merit. It's not unreasonable for an open-source UI to be coordinated and uniform across applications (though doing it across platforms where vendors want something to differentiate their product might be harder) - both KDE and Gnome manage it.

Yet Google still gave it their blessing and allowed access to Google services even though all the voice search and browser search queries were routed to bing. I've had customers constantly ask me how do I remove this or change that with this phone, and I had to tell them that it's either uninstallable or unchangeable. If a customer has a negative experience with phones like these, how likely do you think they'll jump ship to the 'bug-free' experience on the iPhone?

The way I see it, the onus is upon the buyer to do the research. That's what I've always done, and the times when I haven't got my facts correct because I didn't know enough about what I was buying it was my fault, and my fault alone. Despite what many think, Apple does not provide anywhere near a 'bug-free' experience for its products, and many people have complaints about it. In fact, I would count the platform's variety a blessing - there is much more choice to cater for different niche markets with very similar products.

 

[Monster_Munch]

Google allowed a manufacture and a carrier to route all search queries to their rival (Bing), but yet still still GAVE THEM ACCESS TO THE MARKET AND APPS. So tell me again how they will make their revenue off that?

Google takes 30% of every app sold on the market, plus they own admob which is the largest in-app advertising network on android. I really don't think they're worried about how to make money from it.

 

[gsaldivar]

While I have respect for the OP being "in the trenches" and dealing first-hand with some of the platform's shortcomings, I don't think the answer to this is for Google to micromanage how the platform is implemented. A large part of the success of Android comes from the freedom the platform offers - the freedom for users to choose what device, what network, etc meets their specific needs. But also for device manufacturers and carriers, to choose what version of Android to load on their devices, and to what degree the OS is integrated with the device.

Google doesn't, and shouldn't, have control over some of the implementation issues that have plagued Samsung phones. Consumers will gradually realize that certain brands are less reliable than others, and that really isn't a reflection on Android as a software manufacturer. The Android OS is open-source, making it open for manufacturers to modify and implement as they see fit.

Maybe the day will come when Google is no longer the driving force for the platform that it is today... the open-source nature of this OS ensures that any company that wants to, can fork it and move forward with it. This is huge, and virtually guarantees that Android will be around in some form or another, long after "legacy" OSs (PalmOS, Blackberry OS...) have become obsolete and are abandoned...

 

[gsaldivar]

Google should take another page from Microsoft's playbook and launch their own commercials about Android that tells that customer about the strengths of Android (diversity in hardware, open os, etc...) so that its ingrained in their head that when they pick up a Droid or a G2, they're using an 'Android' OS and not just another droid or HTC.

I think overemphasizing the Google brand is a mistake. Apple did this because they want to vertically control (and profit from) all stages of the user experience. Rather than focus on mass adoption of their platform, Apple's objective is to maximize their share of the premium market segment only. This comes from their Mac/PC days when maximizing every amount of profit from a tiny market share was essential to the company's survival. So their brand identity is a central part of everything Apple does, their App Store, devices, websites, etc. Apple has succeeded in creating an army of loyal premium users that have an Apple logo ingrained in their mind when anyone mentions something that an Apple product can do. Great consumer loyalty, but market share... not so much.

Likewise I think overinforming the consumer is a mistake. Microsoft does this with many of their products because they consistently overestimate the degree that consumers care about the nuances of their business. Instead of releasing one version of Windows, we get five. Instead of one smartphone platform, we get two. For some reason they seem to think that burying consumers in unnecessary choices is the way to maximize profit.

Last year's Bing lock-in agreements are probably the closest threat to the platform's growth that exist today. Basically Microsoft wanted Verizon to agree to preload and lock all phones with Bing search, even those that run non-Microsoft OSs. I would gamble that Google came the closest to locking down their platform when this arrangement was revealed, because it directly threatens their revenue stream by co-opting search engine hits being generated by Android users.

While there wasn't much press about it, Verizon seems to have softened their stance and is no longer locking the search but simply making it a default. Because of this consolation, and the fact that Microsoft doesn't really have a clue what they are doing in the search engine market space to begin with, is probably why we saw no retaliatory action from Google.

Don't get me started on Microsoft's commercials... Honestly, the best Ballmer can do for Microsoft at this point is to retire. They are lost with him at the helm.

 

[MrX8503]

I think the problem is that every manufacturer wants their own identity away from vanilla Android. The problem with that is that the consumer ends up never getting updates. I think cell phone manufacturers need to get away from creating 15 devices.

Does HTC really need 10 devices running snap dragon?
Did samsung really need to release 3 different galaxy s models?

 

[sswingle]

who's main source of revenue and subscribers for the past year were entirely dependent on the little green guy ... due to its monopoly on this carrier

Does RIM not exist anymore? You just don't see them in your little microcosm since businesses usually get their phones direct.

 

[gsaldivar]

I think the problem is that every manufacturer wants their own identity away from vanilla Android. The problem with that is that the consumer ends up never getting updates. I think cell phone manufacturers need to get away from creating 15 devices.

Carriers will always seek to differentiate their products from those of their competitors. Custom UI overlays are part of that strategy. Carriers often commission these customizations, so that while a single model is available from different carriers, they may not be functionally identical. Device availability is ultimately the prerogative of the carrier, who has the final say over whether or not a device will be permitted to operate on their network.

Additionally, it is not always in the carriers' best interest to provide continuous, timely updates to embedded phone software. Not only does it reduce consumer demand for new phones, it often introduces changes to phones such as changes in features, functionality, speed, etc - these changes are not always positive, and more importantly, continuous updates are not always perceived by consumers as positive.

 

[MrX8503]

Carriers will always seek to differentiate their products from those of their competitors. Custom UI overlays are part of that strategy. Carriers often commission these customizations, so that while a single model is available from different carriers, they may not be functionally identical. Device availability is ultimately the prerogative of the carrier, who has the final say over whether or not a device will be permitted to operate on their network.

Thats fine if they want a custom UI, but they're shooting themselves in the foot by releasing 10 of the same smartphones. Another thing is that if they want to differentiate themselves, they can just run stock Android, considering none of them run it except the Nexus.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Does RIM not exist anymore? You just don't see them in your little microcosm since businesses usually get their phones direct.

Good point. There are three major players in this game, and if you put each under the microscope all have flaws, but put them all together in one market and consumers win, through extensive choice.

 

[gsaldivar]

Thats fine if they want a custom UI, but they're shooting themselves in the foot by releasing 10 of the same smartphones.

To some degree, each new generation smartphone is being engineered with "obsolescence" in mind. No carrier wants to sell a device that can be continuously updated with the latest features. Where this obsolescence might not come about naturally due to product evolution, it can be enforced artificially through technological means (locked firmware, denial of embedded software updates to older devices...)

Another thing is that if they want to differentiate themselves, they can just run stock Android, considering none of them run it except the Nexus.

I can't say I disagree with this. If enough consumers demand it, maybe they will decide to offer it. However, they will need to come up with different excuses as to why software updates won't be released for older stock Android phones...

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Thats fine if they want a custom UI, but they're shooting themselves in the foot by releasing 10 of the same smartphones. Another thing is that if they want to differentiate themselves, they can just run stock Android, considering none of them run it except the Nexus.

How is getting more choice into the market shooting themselves in the foot? Sure they may only differ marginally, but that difference can get them a sale over competing smartphones.

 

[MrX8503]

To some degree, each new generation smartphone is being engineered with "obsolescence" in mind. No carrier wants to sell a device that can be continuously updated with the latest features. Where this obsolescence might not come about naturally due to product evolution, it can be enforced artificially through technological means (locked firmware, denial of embedded software updates to older devices...)

That is true, but if Apple can survive off of updating their phones once per year, I think HTC or Motorola can too.

How is getting more choice into the market shooting themselves in the foot? Sure they may only differ marginally, but that difference can get them a sale over competing smartphones.

Its easier for a manufacturer to maintain/update/fix problems on 2 phones vs. the 10 phones they release. You really think Samsung gives a crap about fixing the Galaxy S series or updating it? No, they are thinking about what the next 5 devices they'll be releasing next.

All they care about is making money by releasing minor incremental upgrades of new smartphones. Once its released, you're stuck on it with little support because they are worried about their next new device.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Um just as a heads up - Android 2.3 does away with the goofy custom skins like Sense UI and Motoblur.

 

[SunnyD]

_Aurel_
Junior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1

I don't want to give anything away, but lets just say I work for a certain company

Uh huh. I can do this too... I work for a certain company which depends on subscriber revenue that comes from... home grown applications which have no bearing on mobile devices. Here's a hint though, odds are that within the next two years we will be developing our apps for these platforms. Which platform will get the nod? My guess is... BOTH.

Android is in good shape, and being adopted far faster than iOS. Why? Because Google doesn't want to iron fist it, and let manufacturers and more importantly the community drive the innovation of the OS. There's a real benefit to doing it this way, rather than handcuffing end-users into a static and immutable platform that only gets minor updates year on year simply to drive revenue. iOS is the one that needs to be worried.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

That is true, but if Apple can survive off of updating their phones once per year, I think HTC or Motorola can too.

The problem with Android is that they are competing with each other, so they have to continually update.

 

[Brian Stirling]

There are problem inherent with the free and open approach Google has taken with Android and these are problems that Apple does not have, or at least not nearly as much. I keep repeating myself on this but for me the biggest problem Android has is the legacy of freeness.

From it's very inception Google did not understand that others owned the IP to things they thought they could reproduce for free. Remember when they started scanning in lots of books and making them available for free even though the authors and publishers never gave them permission to do so? This is a mindset that comes from college kids that downloaded music without regard for the IP and have developed a mindset that makes them default to the idea that they can do whatever they wish.

The ongoing consequence of this is that too many Android users believe that everything is or should be free and that puts app developers in a bind. Either the devs offer the app for free or they get no takers! Sooner or later the devs will walk away from there apps because they have to earn a living. Devoting 100's and 1000's of hours to apps that pay them nothing is not a long term strategy for success or even survival.

Google and the Android user base is going to have to come to terms with this fact or Android will wither away, not because Google can't write good code but because the app developers will have moved on to platforms they can earn a living at. In the end Android will be left with the crap that kids just starting out make and trial junk from other devs.


Brian

 

[Raduque]

Um just as a heads up - Android 2.3 does away with the goofy custom skins like Sense UI and Motoblur.

You wish. Stock 2.3 is just as ugly as stock 2.2, just in a different color. The Atrix runs Blur and will get a 2.3 update. Manufacturer customizations are not going away.

Now, if Google gets their shit together and can make 3.0's interface work on smaller-screen devices, that MIGHT do away with making manufacturer customizations required, but they'll still be there to differentiate devices.

 

[Medu]

iOS isn't really a threat to Android. People buy what they are given in the tech world and right now Motorola, HTC, Samsung, SE etc are giving us Android by the truck load. Not everyone wants an Apple, nor can everyone afford the premium, just like not everyone wants the same brand of car or TV, even though usually 1-2 brands are clearly better.

 

[litttlechica]

I wish google would get it together because I recently got an android phone which I'll say I love all the google sync options EXCEPT... contacts. One of the basic functions of a phone is to be able to call people but if you add someone to your contacts, the contact is added and syncs with google but it disappears off your phone till you go onto the internet and find the contacts using search and add it to the proper group. You cannot fix the groups from the phone - I've even tried to log on using the browser and opting out of the mobile view but it STILL doesn't show me the full pc view so I can change the groups that way from my phone.

I've tried finding fixes for this but it sounds like there isn't one.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Um just as a heads up - Android 2.3 does away with the goofy custom skins like Sense UI and Motoblur.

No it doesn't. An interview with one of the guys working on honeycomb said that they do not intend to do away with manufacturer skins because they want the freedom to let manufacturers do anything they want with Android

 

[shortylickens]

WWYBYWB?
:awe:

 

[MrX8503]

How can people say that people buy Android because its open? People buy it because its the only thing available. Most consumers don't know what the hell "open" means, its only important to geeks.

I would reserve judgement until a Verizon iPhone is released.

 

[Gamingphreek]

No it doesn't. An interview with one of the guys working on honeycomb said that they do not intend to do away with manufacturer skins because they want the freedom to let manufacturers do anything they want with Android

Android 2.3 is Gingerbread and it absolutely removes the ability to use Sense UI and Motoblur. Google did this in an effort to stop manufacturers from lingering around on older platforms and complicating the effort to get the OS pushed out to its phones.

Now you can still write Custom UI Themes and apply them.

-Kevin