4 ms·

How about, say, the location services apis, aren't they kind of needed for most apps?

by nodata 13y ago

stusmall 13y ago
You are thinking of Android as just an OS for consumer mobile phones. You don't always need Facebook to run on it for it to be useful. It is a great polished Linux distro that can find a lot of uses. Think of it as a specialized Linux without the GNU user space. It has a full rich and powerful API without relying on google. Also device integrators are free to fork away from the base APIs to add their own functionality in the same way google has. If an app wants to be portable, they shouldn't build against these proprietary APIs. This isn't a unique problem to android and doesn't make the source any less open. What I love so much about open source is that once a project is out there it can take on a life of its own. People can/have/will start cramming Android in places Google would have never expected. It makes a great base for POS systems, high end touch screen vending machines, in flight entertainment consoles, and any number of other things I can't think of but I'm sure the community will.
blinkingled 13y ago
Yes but the APIS themselves are open. It is possible to yank out the Google implementation of the location services and instead use a 3rd party implementation. The OS was designed to make something like this possible. Nokia could plug in their location services trivially for example if MSFT goes Android. (Not that I think it's a good idea but it's doable.) There are other ways too - Sky hook for example seems to offer location services SDK http://www.skyhookwireless.com/location-technology/sdk.php http://www.skyhookwireless.com/location-technology/sdk.php for the Kindle Fire which doesn't ship with GApps.
- scholia 13y ago
  Good point, but does this actually solve the "shortage of apps" problem if you don't have access to GMS and Google Play? All this came up because of a couple of articles that said Microsoft should dump Windows Phone and do Android phones instead. So, would Microsoft have more problems getting developers to write for Windows Phone (and Windows 8 Metro) or for a forked version of Android? Also, technically, you don't need an Android phone or tablet (or Linux) to run Andoid apps, since Bluestacks does this... though you might run into the same problem with GMS.
  - blinkingled 13y ago
    Amazon solved the lack of Google Play problem but their circumstances were very different.. Microsoft could technically do the same and they might have better app situation. Developer's problem with WP is that it is yet another platform to port their app to without any guarantee of returns given the platform's numbers. If MSFT went with their own Android store developers would just need minor changes to their Play Store version to gain yet another entry point. If it doesn't work out no big deal. Problem is just going Android without great differentiation is almost a guaranteed failure for Microsoft. And at this stage in the game coming up with great differentiation is going to be very hard. But if they do something like put out great Nokia handset with great camera, guaranteed OS updates, a tiles based launcher an thriving alternate app store, more focus on privacy of the user and great Microsoft services and apps - that could work well. I am not sure about the practicaility of all that and if it will mean significantly more revenue for Microsoft. Besides, by all accounts Microsoft is still badly bullyish on the Windows everywhere strategy so to change course with Ballmer being the biggest share holder and Gates doing product advisor role it's just not easy. On top of that the market is just too irrational and hyper competitive for them to feel confident about doing something this drastic.
  - sirkneeland 13y ago
    I used to work in Nokia's developer relations group. For a lot of developers, the following requirements are all hurdles that make WP more trouble than its worth: - Learn a new language (C# is awesome but odds are the dev you are talking to already knows Java or ObjC. Telling an Android dev to learn C# is more work than telling him/her to tweak his/her Android app) - Get Windows (a huge number of mobile devs are on MacBooks. Getting Windows costs some combination of time, money, and precious SSD space) - Get Windows 8 (a lot people who are on Windows are on Windows 7 and have no desire to go to Windows 8) bottom line: telling devs to tweak their Android apps for some kind of "MSMS" over GMS would represent a whole lot of lower barriers to entry.
    - tmzt 13y ago
      Possibly, but just saying learn C# so you can program for Windows Phone is the wrong selling point. It should be learn C# so you can develop native-quality apps for all mobile platforms. Microsoft should completely embrace Xamarin. That would solve the OSX problem as well, as developers could use whatever OS and IDE they prefer.

How about, say, the location services apis, aren't they kind of needed for most apps?

by nodata 13y ago

How about, say, the location services apis, aren't they kind of needed for most apps?

You are thinking of Android as just an OS for consumer mobile phones. You don't always need Facebook to run on it for it to be useful. It is a great polished Linux distro that can find a lot of uses. Think of it as a specialized Linux without the GNU user space. It has a full rich and powerful API without relying on google. Also device integrators are free to fork away from the base APIs to add their own functionality in the same way google has. If an app wants to be portable, they shouldn't build against these proprietary APIs. This isn't a unique problem to android and doesn't make the source any less open. What I love so much about open source is that once a project is out there it can take on a life of its own. People can/have/will start cramming Android in places Google would have never expected. It makes a great base for POS systems, high end touch screen vending machines, in flight entertainment consoles, and any number of other things I can't think of but I'm sure the community will.

blinkingled 13y ago

Yes but the APIS themselves are open. It is possible to yank out the Google implementation of the location services and instead use a 3rd party implementation. The OS was designed to make something like this possible. Nokia could plug in their location services trivially for example if MSFT goes Android. (Not that I think it's a good idea but it's doable.) There are other ways too - Sky hook for example seems to offer location services SDK http://www.skyhookwireless.com/location-technology/sdk.php http://www.skyhookwireless.com/location-technology/sdk.php for the Kindle Fire which doesn't ship with GApps.

scholia 13y ago
Good point, but does this actually solve the "shortage of apps" problem if you don't have access to GMS and Google Play? All this came up because of a couple of articles that said Microsoft should dump Windows Phone and do Android phones instead. So, would Microsoft have more problems getting developers to write for Windows Phone (and Windows 8 Metro) or for a forked version of Android? Also, technically, you don't need an Android phone or tablet (or Linux) to run Andoid apps, since Bluestacks does this... though you might run into the same problem with GMS.
- blinkingled 13y ago
  Amazon solved the lack of Google Play problem but their circumstances were very different.. Microsoft could technically do the same and they might have better app situation. Developer's problem with WP is that it is yet another platform to port their app to without any guarantee of returns given the platform's numbers. If MSFT went with their own Android store developers would just need minor changes to their Play Store version to gain yet another entry point. If it doesn't work out no big deal. Problem is just going Android without great differentiation is almost a guaranteed failure for Microsoft. And at this stage in the game coming up with great differentiation is going to be very hard. But if they do something like put out great Nokia handset with great camera, guaranteed OS updates, a tiles based launcher an thriving alternate app store, more focus on privacy of the user and great Microsoft services and apps - that could work well. I am not sure about the practicaility of all that and if it will mean significantly more revenue for Microsoft. Besides, by all accounts Microsoft is still badly bullyish on the Windows everywhere strategy so to change course with Ballmer being the biggest share holder and Gates doing product advisor role it's just not easy. On top of that the market is just too irrational and hyper competitive for them to feel confident about doing something this drastic.
- sirkneeland 13y ago
  I used to work in Nokia's developer relations group. For a lot of developers, the following requirements are all hurdles that make WP more trouble than its worth: - Learn a new language (C# is awesome but odds are the dev you are talking to already knows Java or ObjC. Telling an Android dev to learn C# is more work than telling him/her to tweak his/her Android app) - Get Windows (a huge number of mobile devs are on MacBooks. Getting Windows costs some combination of time, money, and precious SSD space) - Get Windows 8 (a lot people who are on Windows are on Windows 7 and have no desire to go to Windows 8) bottom line: telling devs to tweak their Android apps for some kind of "MSMS" over GMS would represent a whole lot of lower barriers to entry.
  - tmzt 13y ago
    Possibly, but just saying learn C# so you can program for Windows Phone is the wrong selling point. It should be learn C# so you can develop native-quality apps for all mobile platforms. Microsoft should completely embrace Xamarin. That would solve the OSX problem as well, as developers could use whatever OS and IDE they prefer.