5 ms·

Did Google Arm Its Own Enemies With Android?

29 points by easyfrag 16y ago

neovive 16y ago
What other options did Google have in this scenario? Being a software and data-focused company, they clearly were not positioned well to build and ship handsets. Google's best option is to ensure to ensure that their services (search, Docs, Maps, etc.) are the best available options. They were able to unseat Yahoo earlier in the decade due to quality of results, they just need to continue innovating and convince users to do the same again.
rbanffy 16y ago
"Google makes money off advertising, not software" AFAIK that's not true. While the core of Android is free as in beer, if you want Gmail and any other Google-branded software on your handsets, you'll have to pay.
- Goronmon 16y ago
  True, but I think when people make that point, they are implying that Google's main focus is making sure they can make good money selling ads, not that they make zero profit on Android. Or in other words, their main goal is to sell ads, not to sell Android, even if they do make some profit selling Android.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    I think the strategic focus of Android is to prevent any vendor from having control of the mobile experience. By providing a free alternative phone makers can use, it creates market fragmentation and no vendor will be able to steer the market in one or other direction.
- blub 16y ago
  That's interesting. Does this mean that Android actually costs as much as WP7 for a manufacturer?
Tyrant505 16y ago
"Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer" seems to fit nicely here.
space-monkey 16y ago
Google would be in a much worse position if Apple had mobile handset hegemony. iAds + native apps isn't something they can break into. Now developers targeting mobile have a much stronger incentive to just develop a web app and cover both platforms when possible. That's a much better situation for Google, even if they don't have default services installed on the handsets.
- sudont 16y ago
  That always seemed like the reason for the initially very limited storage on early Android handsets. The original iPhone was out with 3-15 gigs of storage for apps, while the G1 had around 100mb.
fharper1961 16y ago
I think that now that Google has the manufacturers and networks hooked, they will close the loopholes (e.g. swapping out the search engine) by changing the licensing for newer versions.
- bryanlarsen 16y ago
  Sure they will, if they feel like shooting themselves in the foot. Android would probably survive the accident, but it'd certainly start limping. The open source part of Android created by Google (which is most of Android) uses the Apache Software License (v2.0). If they change any conditions, Android would no longer be open source. The biggest winner would be Nokia, because Meego & Symbian would then become the only viable open phone stacks, although some would defect to Apple, because if you're going to use a non-open phone, you might as well go with Apple.
  - wmf 16y ago
    Realistically, Android without the market and Google apps is not Android and Google can charge whatever they want for those apps. I suspect they're better off giving those apps for free and making money from the ads inside them. Honestly, the whole "OMG they replaced Google with Bing!" story is overblown; there's a lot more to a phone than the Web browser.
ergo98 16y ago
YES! YES THEY DID! This was a no-so-directly stated purpose and intention of Android since day one. That any late to the party analyst looks at the situation and thinks they've discovered a hole in the plot speaks more to how ill informed the field of analysts are than to Google's strategy. Google's intention with Android -- they haven't been quiet about this -- was to create an open, competitive ecosystem that isn't controlled by any one vendor (incl. themselves). If Apple dominated and decided to cut Google out (and smartphones continued their path to dominance), that single point could decimate Google. However if 20 handset makers make Android, and one of them decided to cut Google out, the damage is limited. If Google provides an experience that customers want, they would vote with their wallets because they could. (see the negative reception of Bing on some Verizon handsets)
- blub 16y ago
  I believe their intention was to make sure that they get a piece of the mobile ads pie. There are a lot of clues indicating this and it's the reason that I'm disenchanted by Android. I'd rather use products from someone who's in the business to make money from products: Apple, Nokia, RIM, MS (and Palm I guess).
  - jcl 16y ago
    Apple is also in business to make money from the mobile ad pie (iAd), as is Microsoft and maybe others.
    - blub 16y ago
      There's a huge difference in having ad revenue and being completely dependent on ad revenue. If Google lost ad revenue it would immediately collapse, unlike Apple or MS.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    I believe their intention was to make sure that they get a piece of the mobile ads pie Well sure -- the reason they want you using Google search is so they can advertise to you. And they can get you using Google Voice, and Google Maps, etc. They are less likely to have their products -- which are largely sponsored by ads -- cut out. I'd rather use products from someone who's in the business to make money from products: Apple, Nokia, RIM, MS Apple is a terrible example of that. Aside from the fact that they have a very big advertising initiative, a big part of the iPhone experience is lock-in with various other Apple products and conduits. Want some music? Oh well look, Apple is your conduit, taking their piece of the pie. How about a movie, or a book, or a newspaper? Hi, Apple here, ready to tax you. Nokia...sure. Apple -- absolutely not.
ShabbyDoo 16y ago
What the author did not consider is whether consumers are willing to buy a phone which does not have Google's apps installed or at least available (tight GMail integration, maps, etc.).
- icegreentea 16y ago
  If they're Chinese they are. They kinda get by without most of Google's stuff anyways.
- YooLi 16y ago
  I'd venture to guess most consumers really don't even know about the tight integration of Android and Google apps. They'd probably just want to make sure they can get to Facebook on it.

29 points by easyfrag 16y ago

What other options did Google have in this scenario? Being a software and data-focused company, they clearly were not positioned well to build and ship handsets. Google's best option is to ensure to ensure that their services (search, Docs, Maps, etc.) are the best available options. They were able to unseat Yahoo earlier in the decade due to quality of results, they just need to continue innovating and convince users to do the same again.

rbanffy 16y ago

"Google makes money off advertising, not software" AFAIK that's not true. While the core of Android is free as in beer, if you want Gmail and any other Google-branded software on your handsets, you'll have to pay.

Goronmon 16y ago
True, but I think when people make that point, they are implying that Google's main focus is making sure they can make good money selling ads, not that they make zero profit on Android. Or in other words, their main goal is to sell ads, not to sell Android, even if they do make some profit selling Android.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  I think the strategic focus of Android is to prevent any vendor from having control of the mobile experience. By providing a free alternative phone makers can use, it creates market fragmentation and no vendor will be able to steer the market in one or other direction.
blub 16y ago
That's interesting. Does this mean that Android actually costs as much as WP7 for a manufacturer?

Tyrant505 16y ago

"Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer" seems to fit nicely here.

space-monkey 16y ago

Google would be in a much worse position if Apple had mobile handset hegemony. iAds + native apps isn't something they can break into. Now developers targeting mobile have a much stronger incentive to just develop a web app and cover both platforms when possible. That's a much better situation for Google, even if they don't have default services installed on the handsets.

sudont 16y ago
That always seemed like the reason for the initially very limited storage on early Android handsets. The original iPhone was out with 3-15 gigs of storage for apps, while the G1 had around 100mb.

fharper1961 16y ago

I think that now that Google has the manufacturers and networks hooked, they will close the loopholes (e.g. swapping out the search engine) by changing the licensing for newer versions.

bryanlarsen 16y ago
Sure they will, if they feel like shooting themselves in the foot. Android would probably survive the accident, but it'd certainly start limping. The open source part of Android created by Google (which is most of Android) uses the Apache Software License (v2.0). If they change any conditions, Android would no longer be open source. The biggest winner would be Nokia, because Meego & Symbian would then become the only viable open phone stacks, although some would defect to Apple, because if you're going to use a non-open phone, you might as well go with Apple.
- wmf 16y ago
  Realistically, Android without the market and Google apps is not Android and Google can charge whatever they want for those apps. I suspect they're better off giving those apps for free and making money from the ads inside them. Honestly, the whole "OMG they replaced Google with Bing!" story is overblown; there's a lot more to a phone than the Web browser.

ergo98 16y ago

YES! YES THEY DID! This was a no-so-directly stated purpose and intention of Android since day one. That any late to the party analyst looks at the situation and thinks they've discovered a hole in the plot speaks more to how ill informed the field of analysts are than to Google's strategy. Google's intention with Android -- they haven't been quiet about this -- was to create an open, competitive ecosystem that isn't controlled by any one vendor (incl. themselves). If Apple dominated and decided to cut Google out (and smartphones continued their path to dominance), that single point could decimate Google. However if 20 handset makers make Android, and one of them decided to cut Google out, the damage is limited. If Google provides an experience that customers want, they would vote with their wallets because they could. (see the negative reception of Bing on some Verizon handsets)

blub 16y ago
I believe their intention was to make sure that they get a piece of the mobile ads pie. There are a lot of clues indicating this and it's the reason that I'm disenchanted by Android. I'd rather use products from someone who's in the business to make money from products: Apple, Nokia, RIM, MS (and Palm I guess).
- jcl 16y ago
  Apple is also in business to make money from the mobile ad pie (iAd), as is Microsoft and maybe others.
  - blub 16y ago
    There's a huge difference in having ad revenue and being completely dependent on ad revenue. If Google lost ad revenue it would immediately collapse, unlike Apple or MS.
- ergo98 16y ago
  I believe their intention was to make sure that they get a piece of the mobile ads pie Well sure -- the reason they want you using Google search is so they can advertise to you. And they can get you using Google Voice, and Google Maps, etc. They are less likely to have their products -- which are largely sponsored by ads -- cut out. I'd rather use products from someone who's in the business to make money from products: Apple, Nokia, RIM, MS Apple is a terrible example of that. Aside from the fact that they have a very big advertising initiative, a big part of the iPhone experience is lock-in with various other Apple products and conduits. Want some music? Oh well look, Apple is your conduit, taking their piece of the pie. How about a movie, or a book, or a newspaper? Hi, Apple here, ready to tax you. Nokia...sure. Apple -- absolutely not.

ShabbyDoo 16y ago

What the author did not consider is whether consumers are willing to buy a phone which does not have Google's apps installed or at least available (tight GMail integration, maps, etc.).

icegreentea 16y ago
If they're Chinese they are. They kinda get by without most of Google's stuff anyways.
YooLi 16y ago
I'd venture to guess most consumers really don't even know about the tight integration of Android and Google apps. They'd probably just want to make sure they can get to Facebook on it.