5 ms·

I think the writing is on the wall for Google's Android. There is some analysis that Android, from a business perspective, did not work out all that well for Go

I think the writing is on the wall for Google's Android. There is some analysis that Android, from a business perspective, did not work out all that well for Google. My best guess as to the future state of things: 1) Pixels move to Fuchsia, native apps are in Dart/Flutter, compatibility layer for Android. Fuchsia becomes a distinguishing feature of Googles hardware, and allows Google to differentiate vs Android competitors. 2) Google continues to support Android, but only as it affects their business interests (as a funnel for search). 3) Google migrates some service level functionality away from Android and Pixels become a first-class citizen in Google's ecosystem. If you look at Google's moves over the past 5 or so years, you can seem them try to mitigate the fact that Samsung was basically the biggest winner of Google opening up Android (Motorola Mobility acquisition, Pixels, Project Fi). Google sees that voice is unable to be monetized (from an advertising perspective), and is attempting to replicate Apple's strategy by creating a new revenue stream from hardware. This has the added benefit of capturing the most profitable users from Apple. It is a very big bet, and I would not want to be going up against Apple in a mature market. It will be interesting to see how it plays out! Ben Thompson has a pretty great take on these large shifts within Google [0]. [0] - https://stratechery.com/2016/google-and-the-limits-of-strategy/ https://stratechery.com/2016/google-and-the-limits-of-strate...

mankash666 9y ago
For one thing, Google's inability to monetize Android better is it's own bad execution. There's nothing inherently bad about the Android platform, from a monetization standpoint. Google's pixel & nexus phones have never dominated the market - and for good reason - they're not the best. If Google can get their hardware act together, they can see a windfall in revenues/profit.
- ufmace 9y ago
  I think with the Pixels, Google is at least making an effort at having the best hardware. They still have some things to figure out regarding marketing, logistics, keeping design language consistent, etc, but at least for now, they seem to be working on it.
richdougherty 9y ago
Android isn't just about making revenue, it's a hedge against other companies having too much control over a major channel. The same goes for Chrome. Android and Chrome may not make money, or may even cost money, but they're probably better than giving up that control to a third-party like Apple or Microsoft...
kllrnohj 9y ago
> There is some analysis that Android, from a business perspective, did not work out all that well for Google. Google is the default service provider and owner of the world's largest OS and that somehow is something that "didn't work out all that well for Google"? That's a highly flawed analysis to say the least.
jgon 9y ago
I read the Ben Thompson link, and honestly I have to disagree that it offers any insight as to the future of Google or Android. It reads like a just so story, and seems to be crafted according to the following recipe: 1) Talk about a company's previous initiative that was a big deal at the time and which failed, and talk about why it was so obvious to you that it was going to fail. Describe the events surrounding it's failure and why no one but you was able to put the pieces together about why it was doomed from the start. This makes you appear very smart indeed, and makes the author intrigued to read your thoughts. Thompson does this when talking about Android and the turn by turn navigation feature, and in fact, Android itself. 2) Talk about the company's current initiative and why it is a brilliant idea, that avoids the obvious pitfalls that the previous initiative fell into, and why you are optimistic that it will be a great success. This allows you to ingratiate yourself as part of the "move forward" culture of the valley, instead of being some sort of negative nancy who is always being pessimistic. No one likes that guy after all! We're too busy moving fast and breaking things! If you follow the link at the bottom of the article you'll see that the adjacent article has the author writing a large number of words talking about what a great idea Snapchat Spectacles are, why google glass was obviously a terrible idea that only they were smart enough to see beforehand, and why this new wearable is obviously way better. Thompson is optimistic about it succeeding! Obviously we know how that turned out, and comparing the two articles should give one a lot of pause about investing too much faith in his analysis going forward, especially when you look at the structural similarities between the two essays.

mankash666 9y ago

For one thing, Google's inability to monetize Android better is it's own bad execution. There's nothing inherently bad about the Android platform, from a monetization standpoint. Google's pixel & nexus phones have never dominated the market - and for good reason - they're not the best. If Google can get their hardware act together, they can see a windfall in revenues/profit.

ufmace 9y ago
I think with the Pixels, Google is at least making an effort at having the best hardware. They still have some things to figure out regarding marketing, logistics, keeping design language consistent, etc, but at least for now, they seem to be working on it.

richdougherty 9y ago

Android isn't just about making revenue, it's a hedge against other companies having too much control over a major channel. The same goes for Chrome. Android and Chrome may not make money, or may even cost money, but they're probably better than giving up that control to a third-party like Apple or Microsoft...

kllrnohj 9y ago

> There is some analysis that Android, from a business perspective, did not work out all that well for Google. Google is the default service provider and owner of the world's largest OS and that somehow is something that "didn't work out all that well for Google"? That's a highly flawed analysis to say the least.

jgon 9y ago

I read the Ben Thompson link, and honestly I have to disagree that it offers any insight as to the future of Google or Android. It reads like a just so story, and seems to be crafted according to the following recipe: 1) Talk about a company's previous initiative that was a big deal at the time and which failed, and talk about why it was so obvious to you that it was going to fail. Describe the events surrounding it's failure and why no one but you was able to put the pieces together about why it was doomed from the start. This makes you appear very smart indeed, and makes the author intrigued to read your thoughts. Thompson does this when talking about Android and the turn by turn navigation feature, and in fact, Android itself. 2) Talk about the company's current initiative and why it is a brilliant idea, that avoids the obvious pitfalls that the previous initiative fell into, and why you are optimistic that it will be a great success. This allows you to ingratiate yourself as part of the "move forward" culture of the valley, instead of being some sort of negative nancy who is always being pessimistic. No one likes that guy after all! We're too busy moving fast and breaking things! If you follow the link at the bottom of the article you'll see that the adjacent article has the author writing a large number of words talking about what a great idea Snapchat Spectacles are, why google glass was obviously a terrible idea that only they were smart enough to see beforehand, and why this new wearable is obviously way better. Thompson is optimistic about it succeeding! Obviously we know how that turned out, and comparing the two articles should give one a lot of pause about investing too much faith in his analysis going forward, especially when you look at the structural similarities between the two essays.