Newsmaker: From Danger's realm come Android's makers

(continued from previous page)

Q: What other types of devices that aren't exactly cell phones could Android enable or run on?
Rubin: The sky is the limit. This platform has been contemplated in different devices, from car navigation systems to set-top boxes to laptop computers and, of course, cell phones. One of our alliance partners, Intel, has a category device called MID, or Mobile Internet Device, which is somewhere between a cell phone and a PC. It's a large-display device meant to be primarily an Internet access device.

Q: Will Java be the primary foundation for software running Android?
Rubin: Yes.

Q: What are the lessons you learned from Danger?
Rubin: I learned a lot of things.

(The iPhone is) probably the best version 1.0 piece of consumer electronics that I've ever used.

One of the things I learned is it's getting easier and easier for people to build cell phones. In 2009, there will be single-chip cell phones, so you can go to Qualcomm and get basically a cell phone and a chip, or to Broadcom or one of the other alliance partners.

Pretty much anybody now can build a cell phone right, and I mean anybody. The big lesson I learned coming out of Danger is, let's figure out a way to take advantage of that and provide a solution for the hardest part, which is the ever-changing software component.

Q: The Sidekick became a cult hit. What limited its adoption?
Rubin: I don't think it has limited adoptions, but it's probably best to ask the folks at Danger that question. I've been out of the company for about four years now, so I feel like I'm a little out of touch.

Q: How would Android be different if you hadn't sold the company to Google?
Rubin: It would have taken me a lot longer to do what I did as a start-up company. The platform within Google has a broader chance at success. Within Google, I think we have the opportunity to pretty quickly accelerate it and push it into different areas.

Q: How have your visions of cell phones changed since the Sidekick was invented?
Rubin: The cell phone industry has so much legacy software today. One of the great things about starting from scratch is, you get to re-evaluate the importance of the legacy. And you can make decisions about which parts of it you want to support and which parts just don't make sense.

So the part that I think becomes really important is more around the heavy lifting that you can do in the cloud. ("The cloud" refers to data residing on a server on the Internet that anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can access.) Remember, the cloud didn't exist when the Internet didn't exist--when cell phones first were introduced. So that's part of the game that changed.

Q: Do you think the big U.S. carriers--AT&T and Verizon Wireless--will join the Open Handset Alliance?
Rubin: It's certainly possible. The alliance is completely open. It's not a closed thing; it's not a club. We welcome anybody. Members who wish to join the alliance actually have to contribute something, so I encourage people to join and contribute.

Q: When did the work on Android start, and why did it take until now?
Rubin: Why did it take until now? Because it was a ton of work. How often have you seen a completely new operating system come to market? It doesn't happen that often because there's just so much (required) to build an operating system these days.

Remember, Android is not just an operating system. The Alliance put everything on top of the operating system necessary to build a cell phone. We built a Web browser, and we built e-mail applications, and we built a Google Maps application.

Q: How strategically significant is the mobile market for Google?
Rubin: I would say very. There are close to 3 billion cell phones out there today. They are pervasive. They're intimate. You bring your cell phone with you wherever you go. So it has a lot of touch points in your life because it's in your pocket with you most of the time.

That is super important to Google. This is just going to be, for some people, the first way to get access to the Internet. They might not even have a PC. So it is the future.

Q: Which is more important to you: the richness of the platform or the affordability of phones the platform runs on?
Rubin: I would say both are equally important, and that is the reason we made this an open-source project. By having a free and open platform, we're reducing the cost of software, which, in turn, reduces the cost of the cell phone. When we built the platform, we didn't go for the really expensive $600 smartphones. We went for the mid-market.

Q: What do you think of the iPhone?
Rubin: I love it. I use it every day. That's my phone, and I think it's a great product. It's probably the best version 1.0 piece of consumer electronics that I've ever used.

Q: Do you think that the Android devices are going to be competing with the iPhone?
Rubin: No, I do not. I think it's a different business. Apple has a great business in building really, really high-quality consumer products, and the platform that we're building can go into a lot of different products.

Q: What have we not discussed that we should?
Rubin: I'm really proud of the team that came together to create this, both internal to Google and within the alliance. It set a precedent of cooperation.

When you build an alliance of 34 companies in an industry like the mobile industry, and you get them all to work together to produce something as functional and as high-quality as Android, it's a completely new model.

I'm really proud of the way it turned out. I'm really excited about the possibilities that open up in the industry.

 

More Newsmakers

[jeromatron]

Please no more super adjectives

If something is important to Google, just let it be important - none of this - It's super important to Google - stuff.
I've had enough of that with Microsoft, everything is super or "I'm super-enthused about an upcoming product..."
Can't anyone think of better descriptors these days?

[Jacius Ceed]

How about no more useless comments? (after this one)

These TalkBack comments really should be talking about the info given in the interview not how the questions where answered.

Next time think before you post.
That way you may think "Wow this is stupid who cares? Best not to waste time on this." or "I am going to get flamed better save my own ass!"

"Thinking" it makes the internet a better place.

[anspn]

Can operators/handset vendors block APIs ?

The platform is open and so it seems like an operator or handset vendor could control which APIs are accesible to an Apps developer - kind of like done with JSR's today. They could also insist on certification. If this scenario is possible on Android enabled handsets we will still have a highly fragmented market from an App developers point of view.

[cary1]

Thankfully Verizon is not in the alliance

that's the first thing Verizon would do: lock it up so that people can't install anything on it without paying Verizon big bucks

[pugster]

32mb ram and 200mhz processor req?

Why do you need such a high hardware requirements for? Most of the small phones you buy nowadays probably have much smaller memory and lower power powered processor to conserve battery life.

Most people use phones for text messages, photos, mp3's, and maybe a web surfing. They should just make simple OS and simple applications that people can use. Android's Internet explorer and google maps take too much resource.

[emancipated]

32mb + 200 mhz, supports what?

Are 32mb and 200 mhz the minimum platform? Guess I better read sdk stuff.

"Most people use phones for text messages, photos, mp3's, and maybe a web surfing. They should just make simple OS and simple applications that people can use. Android's Internet explorer and google maps take too much resource. "

I want a portable internet device, but it doesn't have to be my phone. I don't listen to MP3's just news.

Think we need to wait for system resources and bandwidth high enough to run the droid s/w. Take a deep breath, it has been a while since this "repeated vision of future reality" will take effect, maybe I'm cynical from waiting.

I love the concept, no doubt, but does everyone has to spend the same amount for a "powerful phone" as they do for a Dell portable, or the laptops we get at Fry's. OK, next, ...

Texting on the numpads wastes my time, ~mpov. I call the person and at the worst leave voice mail? Am I nuts (sometimes yes, mpov) ?

[skrubol]

New Razr has 225-500MHz processor

The V9m has a 225MHz cpu and the V8 and V9 have 500MHz CPU's. Not sure about RAM. The V9 has 45MB memory (flash,) and the V8 has 420MB. The V9m is in between the other 2. I'm guessing none have 32MB of RAM though. Shouldn't be too much trouble to add to a medium to high-end phone, as PDA's have regularly had 64MB of RAM for years (some have 128.)

[cary1]

my two year old SDA has 200 MHz + 64MB

I think these minimum specs for Android phones are very nominal. Hardware with these specs is not very expensive to make and it will be even cheaper when the phones are released in second half of 2008.

if I am not wrong , iPhone has 600MHz processor, and looking at the sleek GUI and things it can do, it's worth it

[Norseman]

So---the design goal is...

...openness???

The OVERWHELMING majority of cell phone customers are non-techies who could give a rat zass if the phone they're using is open, closed, or ajar. All they care is if it looks good and--especially--if it's easy to use. If openness doesn't translate to that, it doesn't mean diddly doo!

[Shannon Michael]

Why Is Google Dangling a Carrot to Move a Cash Cow?

In response to Google's big-money
competition to attract developers
to make apps for Android,
answer me this...

Why Is Google Dangling a carrot to
move a Cash Cow... or is Android
really a donkey?

Why is Google offering financial
incentives in an open source initiative?

Why are they offering to pay for these apps
at such an early stage in the development of Android?

Who... & why would someone put Google into
such a disadvantageous position for negotiating future transactions with software app developers?

Seriously, why write open source apps for free when Google is telling us that there are revenue streams to be tapped?

To further wet your appetite, how does revenue-sharing sound? App developers receive a certain percentage of the revenues generated from the apps they write.

[LA Techie]

Open source doesn't mean free - Patent close doors

As far as I can tell, Openwave, Nokia, Wireless Science,
Motorola, Att and a few others control the bulk of patents
required to build the real "dream" phone - Open source or not.

Maybe Google's dreamed unwalled garden would open a bit
wider if they acquired and included the necessary key licenses
with their, so called, open source.