4 ms·

But the reality is surely that Google and its partners don't want smaller name manufacturers eating into their tablet sales. Or perhaps they don't want larger n

by trotsky 16y ago

But the reality is surely that Google and its partners don't want smaller name manufacturers eating into their tablet sales. Or perhaps they don't want larger names nabbing pieces of code for their own tablet OSes. Why would they be worried about this? Isn't the purpose of Android* to increase global pageviews and sell more (local) ads? Don't 2nd tier OEMs and competing platforms further these goals? While I am not sure if you can take google at face value in terms of their reasons, the author's conclusions seem wildly unsourced. Unless someone would like to expand on his reasoning?

gnaffle 16y ago
One example: RIM wants to ship their Playbook with support for Android apps. They probably need the Android source code in order to do this. They've annouced that Playbook will only support Gingerbread Android apps. With the Honeycomb source code they might be able to support apps that work better on tablets.
- evangineer 16y ago
  That's an interesting point. It seems to me however as an Android watcher, that when Google developed Honeycomb in parallel to Gingerbread, they created an internal fork of Android to specifically support tablets. What needs to be done and it seems what they intend to do is heal the fork, so they have a single codebase again. The real issue is whether they manage to do that in time for Ice Cream.
isleyaardvark 16y ago
I think the key phrase is "and its partners". Google can't increase global pageviews without partners and they can't step on their partners' toes too much.
- trotsky 16y ago
  Aren't these the same partners that compete in the 2.x smartphone space? In a world where damn decent android phones like the LG optimus are pushing the edge of the $100 barrier while "high end" phones continue to come out and stay in the $500 range it doesn't seem to me like they're too upset. Perhaps a notable partner or two did a lot more work on honeycomb than anyone did on previous versions? I think I'd lend more credence to the theory that google wants to make sure that the early releases are all of particularly high quality so that's the reputation google tablets get. That would seem to encourage a short term embargo. They got beat up a lot on the reputation of the 2nd/3rd tier chinese oem 2.x tablets. Then again, the worst android phone I've personally used was a samsung.
willifred 16y ago
I agree that the author's points are purely speculative, but the situation kind of demands speculation, since the official answer was very unsatisfying. The tablet market somehow seems more competitive than mobile is currently, and third parties like Amazon could rebrand/white label Honeycomb for complete rival tablet platforms, forgoing the 'with Google' label, services, ad platform, etc. Tablets are general computing platforms and not locked down like the carrier dominated mobile market; Google would have a tougher time controlling this kind of thing than they do with mobile phones.
- trotsky 16y ago
  Seems like that's what was done with the Nook, no? While I can see your point, I guess I'm just not convinced that google sees projects like that as hurting them. Surely a traditional vendor would seek lock in and revile such a use, but isn't the whole point of android open source that google's platform is their web applications/ad platform and that's where they seek to stymie competition?

by trotsky 16y ago

gnaffle 16y ago

One example: RIM wants to ship their Playbook with support for Android apps. They probably need the Android source code in order to do this. They've annouced that Playbook will only support Gingerbread Android apps. With the Honeycomb source code they might be able to support apps that work better on tablets.

evangineer 16y ago
That's an interesting point. It seems to me however as an Android watcher, that when Google developed Honeycomb in parallel to Gingerbread, they created an internal fork of Android to specifically support tablets. What needs to be done and it seems what they intend to do is heal the fork, so they have a single codebase again. The real issue is whether they manage to do that in time for Ice Cream.

isleyaardvark 16y ago

I think the key phrase is "and its partners". Google can't increase global pageviews without partners and they can't step on their partners' toes too much.

trotsky 16y ago
Aren't these the same partners that compete in the 2.x smartphone space? In a world where damn decent android phones like the LG optimus are pushing the edge of the $100 barrier while "high end" phones continue to come out and stay in the $500 range it doesn't seem to me like they're too upset. Perhaps a notable partner or two did a lot more work on honeycomb than anyone did on previous versions? I think I'd lend more credence to the theory that google wants to make sure that the early releases are all of particularly high quality so that's the reputation google tablets get. That would seem to encourage a short term embargo. They got beat up a lot on the reputation of the 2nd/3rd tier chinese oem 2.x tablets. Then again, the worst android phone I've personally used was a samsung.

willifred 16y ago

I agree that the author's points are purely speculative, but the situation kind of demands speculation, since the official answer was very unsatisfying. The tablet market somehow seems more competitive than mobile is currently, and third parties like Amazon could rebrand/white label Honeycomb for complete rival tablet platforms, forgoing the 'with Google' label, services, ad platform, etc. Tablets are general computing platforms and not locked down like the carrier dominated mobile market; Google would have a tougher time controlling this kind of thing than they do with mobile phones.

trotsky 16y ago
Seems like that's what was done with the Nook, no? While I can see your point, I guess I'm just not convinced that google sees projects like that as hurting them. Surely a traditional vendor would seek lock in and revile such a use, but isn't the whole point of android open source that google's platform is their web applications/ad platform and that's where they seek to stymie competition?