7 ms·

There is no Pokémon Go for Windows Phone. I think that is the definitive sign that it has definitely lost the war. This is largely irrelevant. The ART runtime

There is no Pokémon Go for Windows Phone. I think that is the definitive sign that it has definitely lost the war. This is largely irrelevant. The ART runtime is open, the class libraries are open. So, it is not very hard to add support for Android applications to another system. In fact, that is what Microsoft did with the canceled Astoria project[1], as well as Blackberry before. Of course, you need to build workarounds for Google Play Services, but that is a solvable problem. The real reason why Windows Phone with Astoria would fail, is that the platform only provides marginal benefits for most consumers (if any). Add to that uncertainty created by exceptionally bad management (two OS rebases in just a few years) and you have a dying platform. That said, I think the real danger for Android comes from within: Chinese OEMs providing Android without Google Play Services and/or Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. [1] Some people were running Android apps using a leaked build.

niftich 10y ago
Astoria was always a gamble because Google is in a rather advantageous position to change Android and Google Play Services whenever they want. Amazon, with their FireOS Android flavor, decided not to provide a shim for Google Play Services and instead asks developers to recompile for their specific APIs [1]. [1] https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/submitting-your-app/tech-docs/updating-your-android-app-for-fire-tablets https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/submitting-your-... Furthermore, running unmodified Android apps on Windows Phone would have conceded the developer share further. Sure, it would've gotten holdout apps on WP at the very least, but the experience would have been subpar, and WP owners would have been reminded daily with bad UX, and the whole thing would be a tacit endorsement that their platform is second-rate, practically running an emulator of someone else's platform. Instead, Microsoft decided to bite the bullet, scrap Astoria, roll out (the same) Windows 10 to as many desktops as they can and see if that changes the app equation. So far, it hasn't yet, but after years of screwups and scrapping platforms they finally have a strategy, and some leverage. Google knows this all too well, which is why they finally brought Android apps to Chromebooks. If Google brings Android apps onto Chrome on Windows 10 or macOS, it's over, everyone else has lost.
- paulryanrogers 10y ago
  > If Google brings Android apps onto Chrome on Windows 10 or macOS, it's over, everyone else has lost. Having tried BlueStacks repeatedly I wouldn't say that's game over. Unless Google pulls off the most seamless emulation ever.
pjmlp 10y ago
> Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. It would be nice to see Google having a taste of their own medicine by having forked Java in first place.
- geodel 10y ago
  I think Samsung tried a few times in various form like Tizen or competitor of Google play services. Besides huge cost sink and already precarious situation of their premium smartphones they are hardly in position to challenge Google in consumer software. The only thing that can pose challenge now is Geopolitical entities like China or Europe etc start putting increasing restrictions on Google/Android etc It is nice to see though Oracle with all their money and ambition and Java ownership could not make an Android competitor / compatible system. I think meagre relief from courts of law has dampened their enthusiasm about anything beyond enterprise market.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Sure I don't have any hopes for Tizen, specially since its application model already went through 3 rewrites since it is under Samsung control. No sane app developer would invest into it. I was just thinking of Android itself. Samsung already has quite a few extensions. http://developer.samsung.com/galaxy http://developer.samsung.com/galaxy
- bitmapbrother 10y ago
  Likewise, it would be nice to see Samsung commit commercial suicide and have Google phones and other OEM's take their place.
- Oletros 10y ago
  Google didn't forked Java
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Sure they did. Currently Android Java is a mixture of Java 6, 7 and 8, doesn't implement 100% of any of those versions, which fails the Java TCK with a glorious score. Both runtimes (Dalvik/ART) are still slower than industrial Java Embedded JDKs like J9 or PTC. All for not paying licensing fees to Sun.
jmfayard 10y ago
> Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. Samsung already maintains a (bad) fork(s?) of Android, as Android Devs who have have been fixing Samsung-specific bugs for years know very well.
exDM69 10y ago
> This is largely irrelevant. The ART runtime is open, the class libraries are open. So, it is not very hard to add support for Android applications to another system. This is only true in theory, it's much more difficult in practice. Look at the Jolla phones for example, they have a non-Android OS (called Sailfish) but it "can run" Android apps (without Google services, IIRC). However, the quality is lacking. Not all apps work, many have annoying glitches and it's just not as good as advertised. Also, I wouldn't exactly call Android "open". The source is available, but the development and the decisions are taken behind closed doors. Things can and have changed without advance warning. It takes a great amount of effort, time and money to maintain a non-Google Android version like the Chinese Androids.
bitmapbrother 10y ago
The list of companies that thought they could co-opt the Android runtime and compete with Google all have one thing in common - failure. Blackberry's system has always been plagued with compatibility and performance issues. >The real reason why Windows Phone with Astoria would fail, is that the platform only provides marginal benefits for most consumers (if any). Add to that uncertainty created by exceptionally bad management (two OS rebases in just a few years) and you have a dying platform. It's already a dead platform. They simply cut their losses and pressed the eject button because they suddenly realized their implementation would have been fraught with endless problems. So they decided to go with Project Islandwood to make the process of porting iOS apps to Windows Phone easier. Unfortunately, this too has been a failure as no iOS developer is going to waste their time porting to a platform with a market share that is hovering at about 0.05% and gradually declining by the quarter. >That said, I think the real danger for Android comes from within: Chinese OEMs providing Android without Google Play Services and/or Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. I really think you underestimate the power of the Google ecosystem and Play services. Selling an Android phone outside of China without Google Play Services is just a recipe for failure.

niftich 10y ago

Astoria was always a gamble because Google is in a rather advantageous position to change Android and Google Play Services whenever they want. Amazon, with their FireOS Android flavor, decided not to provide a shim for Google Play Services and instead asks developers to recompile for their specific APIs [1]. [1] https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/submitting-your-app/tech-docs/updating-your-android-app-for-fire-tablets https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/submitting-your-... Furthermore, running unmodified Android apps on Windows Phone would have conceded the developer share further. Sure, it would've gotten holdout apps on WP at the very least, but the experience would have been subpar, and WP owners would have been reminded daily with bad UX, and the whole thing would be a tacit endorsement that their platform is second-rate, practically running an emulator of someone else's platform. Instead, Microsoft decided to bite the bullet, scrap Astoria, roll out (the same) Windows 10 to as many desktops as they can and see if that changes the app equation. So far, it hasn't yet, but after years of screwups and scrapping platforms they finally have a strategy, and some leverage. Google knows this all too well, which is why they finally brought Android apps to Chromebooks. If Google brings Android apps onto Chrome on Windows 10 or macOS, it's over, everyone else has lost.

paulryanrogers 10y ago
> If Google brings Android apps onto Chrome on Windows 10 or macOS, it's over, everyone else has lost. Having tried BlueStacks repeatedly I wouldn't say that's game over. Unless Google pulls off the most seamless emulation ever.

pjmlp 10y ago

> Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. It would be nice to see Google having a taste of their own medicine by having forked Java in first place.

geodel 10y ago
I think Samsung tried a few times in various form like Tizen or competitor of Google play services. Besides huge cost sink and already precarious situation of their premium smartphones they are hardly in position to challenge Google in consumer software. The only thing that can pose challenge now is Geopolitical entities like China or Europe etc start putting increasing restrictions on Google/Android etc It is nice to see though Oracle with all their money and ambition and Java ownership could not make an Android competitor / compatible system. I think meagre relief from courts of law has dampened their enthusiasm about anything beyond enterprise market.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Sure I don't have any hopes for Tizen, specially since its application model already went through 3 rewrites since it is under Samsung control. No sane app developer would invest into it. I was just thinking of Android itself. Samsung already has quite a few extensions. http://developer.samsung.com/galaxy http://developer.samsung.com/galaxy
bitmapbrother 10y ago
Likewise, it would be nice to see Samsung commit commercial suicide and have Google phones and other OEM's take their place.
Oletros 10y ago
Google didn't forked Java
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Sure they did. Currently Android Java is a mixture of Java 6, 7 and 8, doesn't implement 100% of any of those versions, which fails the Java TCK with a glorious score. Both runtimes (Dalvik/ART) are still slower than industrial Java Embedded JDKs like J9 or PTC. All for not paying licensing fees to Sun.

jmfayard 10y ago

> Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. Samsung already maintains a (bad) fork(s?) of Android, as Android Devs who have have been fixing Samsung-specific bugs for years know very well.

exDM69 10y ago

> This is largely irrelevant. The ART runtime is open, the class libraries are open. So, it is not very hard to add support for Android applications to another system. This is only true in theory, it's much more difficult in practice. Look at the Jolla phones for example, they have a non-Android OS (called Sailfish) but it "can run" Android apps (without Google services, IIRC). However, the quality is lacking. Not all apps work, many have annoying glitches and it's just not as good as advertised. Also, I wouldn't exactly call Android "open". The source is available, but the development and the decisions are taken behind closed doors. Things can and have changed without advance warning. It takes a great amount of effort, time and money to maintain a non-Google Android version like the Chinese Androids.

bitmapbrother 10y ago

The list of companies that thought they could co-opt the Android runtime and compete with Google all have one thing in common - failure. Blackberry's system has always been plagued with compatibility and performance issues. >The real reason why Windows Phone with Astoria would fail, is that the platform only provides marginal benefits for most consumers (if any). Add to that uncertainty created by exceptionally bad management (two OS rebases in just a few years) and you have a dying platform. It's already a dead platform. They simply cut their losses and pressed the eject button because they suddenly realized their implementation would have been fraught with endless problems. So they decided to go with Project Islandwood to make the process of porting iOS apps to Windows Phone easier. Unfortunately, this too has been a failure as no iOS developer is going to waste their time porting to a platform with a market share that is hovering at about 0.05% and gradually declining by the quarter. >That said, I think the real danger for Android comes from within: Chinese OEMs providing Android without Google Play Services and/or Samsung being so powerful that it could fork Android. I really think you underestimate the power of the Google ecosystem and Play services. Selling an Android phone outside of China without Google Play Services is just a recipe for failure.