Google must woo mobile app developers

(continued from previous page)

But beyond the device constraints, applications also have to be tweaked depending on which carrier network the phone is using. "We have to deal with a lot of idiosyncrasies and challenges that carriers place on us," Lollo said. "For instance, some carriers cripple certain functionality on their phones. So we have to re-engineer some parts of the software to accommodate that."

Some mobile application developers argue that Google's Android will only confuse the market further by adding one more operating system that will require support.

"We already have plenty of good options for operating systems," said Sal Dhanani, co-founder and senior director of marketing for Telenav, a maker of GPS systems. "It would be better if the industry could rally around one of the ones we already use instead of adding another one to the mix."

But getting consensus on a single operating system is easier said than done, since the companies that have developed these platforms all have a vested interest in seeing their solution dominate. Alliances have been formed in the past to promote some standardization, but the problem has always been that the companies involved are reluctant to give up control.

Some developers worry the same issues could plague the Open Handset Alliance. While Google has rallied some of largest companies in the mobile ecosystem--including chipmaker Qualcomm; handset makers Samsung Electronics, Motorola, and LG Electronics; and mobile operators T-Mobile, Sprint-Nextel, and Telecom Italia--it is still missing some significant players. For example, U.S. operators Verizon Wireless and AT&T haven't signed on to the alliance, nor has European operator Vodafone. And Nokia, which is the largest handset maker in the world, is also not a part of the alliance.

"Without AT&T and Verizon Wireless, I can't see it working," said Dhanani. "It truly has to be an ecosystem that has everyone involved. Otherwise it just becomes yet another platform that we all have to write to."

Still, some developers think that Google may be just the right company with just the right expertise to finally institute change. While details of the Android platform haven't been made public yet, some believe Google will incorporate its advertising technology into handsets. If it does, mobile advertising could subsidize the cost of the devices and services, providing incentives for carriers to offer Android phones.

"If a carrier can sell a $5-a-month service for an Android phone, how could another carrier offering its own service for $30 a month compete?" Gillott said. "They can't. They'll be forced to offer Android phones too. The economics are what will ultimately drive adoption," he said.

Morgan Slain, CEO of the small mobile-application company Splash Data, agrees. He believes that what makes Google's platform attractive is that because the operating system is free and will likely have advertising built into it, it could bring rich applications to mass market mobile devices at very low prices. These feature phones are often the most difficult to write applications for because they all have different capabilities and use different versions of Java.

But Slain believes that a truly open platform on these lower-end devices could expand the market for companies such as his that are too small to afford to develop applications for the wide array of lower-end feature phones. Currently, his company focuses on developing applications for smartphones.

"I agree that, initially, Android will be just another platform that we'll all have to support," he said. "But I also think it could really expand the market. And that's a trade-off that is really worth it to us."

[tbrethes]

It will work if Android SDK is Java based

I see 3 options for Android on the table:

Option 1) it comes with a native open source JVM. This is the Blackberry approach and the best scenario. It will enable running existing J2ME applications (thousands exist today) and Google will provide more powerfull APIs for their integrationg with their application suite, like GMail, Google Maps and YouTube. GPS APIs would be great too. They will also provide a custom Java based UI toolkit to make applications consistent with the phone UI. IDEs will be Netbeans and Eclipse. The low level access to the underlying Linux OS would be hidden from the developer.

Option 2) The JVM is not part of Android, but available as a addon. This is Palm approach (IBM provides the JVM for Treos). In this case, Esmertec will likely provide a non open source JVM to run J2ME apps to each phone vendor. This is OK but not very good, as the JVM may or may not be present and they will be no integration with existing app or UI toolkit. Developer will have to code all apps running on Android with C or C++ APIs using Eclipse. the SDK will be very similar to the now defund Palm Foleo or the Nokia Linux Maemo platform.

Option 3) No JVM, but a powerfull mobile Web Browser ala Safari, based on the Safari WebKit, which is open source, to runn local mobile AJAX apps written in Javascript and DHTML. Google would provide in the browser custom APIs as Javascript libraries to integrate with the platform and custon Javacript UI compomenents. This will be similar to the current iPhone development and also like the Google widget developement. This is ambitious and risky and will not work for mutimedia or game apps. This is not GREAT, but this is OK, specially if they can integrate some version of Google Gears, enabling mobile AJAX apps to run offline.
OR ... all 3 options ? Anyway we will know when the SDK is released on Nov 12th 07

Thierry BRETHES
http://www.unyverse.com

[Grumpyz77]

tbrethes is on the right track

This assessment is right on. There are only a few house keeping chores needed.
The OHA must offer their own HSS/HLR to free the end user.
The OHA should be able to offer location, GPS etc.
A generic UDCR (Universal Device Capability Repository) will take care of the physical display and operational differences with the handsets.

These 3 items are outside the OS. There are open standards (OMA) that describe these functions.

[Swampthing18]

Google-must-woo-mobile-app-developers

IMO, one application developer needs Neomedia Technologies.

They need the NeoReader for their new GPhone.

Mobile phone permission based response should be the #1 priority to reach the consumer in one click.

I should be able to click on the physical world around me as I walk down the street, ride the bus, or at home watching T.V.

Consumers should be able to click on logos, trademarks, keywords (which is Google's main soucre of income for their PC software), slogans, billboards, RFID tags, 2D, 1D, QR, data matrix, EAN, UPC, what else m I missing?

Are they thinking outside the box yet?

[Grumpyz77]

Waiting for the Great Un-Lock

While the Open Handset Alliance and Google's efforts may be dubiously noble the single greatest obstacle to success is the locking down and dumbing down of phone. While it is transparent to see why a carrier wants the locked phone having them feel the financial pain of continuing to offer inferior products will be slow in coming to the 2 largest US carriers;Verizon and AT&T. Sprint/Nextel willingness to participate in borne out of financial desperation. T-Mobile may not be in the same dire straights as Sprint but then do seem to have a reputation on a world wide basis of being perceived as being more forward thinking.

On October 29, 2007, Sprint lost a law suit in Califirnia requiring device portability. The next day T-Mobile said they were no longer locking devices. AT&T and Verizon dug n their heels and issued more inferior product. savvy consumers (it doesn't take much to be one either. Just try a different carrier for a month or two and you too can be savvy. One data session on any other network outside of AT&T will make a believer out of you and operating any other phone not on the Verizon network will give you an idea of what you are missing.) Knowing AT&T and Verizon they will have to be forced, state by state to offer unlocked phones. It is said that there are only two true motivators for the human condition; pain and love. US carriers are pretty short on love and it is up to the consumer to deliver the pain necessary to affect change. The OHA, with a bit more maturity may just be capable of saving US mobile consumers from themselves. Google only has to take a slightly different tact on the old 80-20 rule. They are capable of giving a 20% experience that is so freeing that the public will wait for the 80%. The big US carriers are too arrogant to see any reality other than their own. Just wait until cable companies start to offer competing wireless services.

[GuruofGames]

Google ... must ... diversify

Yet another lame brain way of pushing the Google brand up the arses of naive consumers and mentally-incapable investors. A company that literally set its own market cap based on 90's dot-com idiocy isn't 'getting it.' Google, focus on saving yourself and more importantly, stay away from my cell phone!

[oxtail01]

There must be lots of lame brains

Ok genious, so you declare to be the only smart guy since nearly everyone else are "idiots" and "mentally challenged" and "lame brained". Sorry to tell you but thousands of "lame brains" got rich with Google. Do you work for MS? Last time I looked they seemed to be the guys desperately trying to diversify.

[gurfrip]

Mobile App Developers

Dear App Developers:

Avoid Google, Inc right now, they have lost ethical control of their company to banking interest who's only intent is artificial inflation of share price through continual theft of all intellectual property brought to the company to artificially maintain market share.

No Kidding.

Personally having been stuck in the Justice Department going broke for 2 1/2 years while Google, Inc.'s attorneys defer paying me for You Tube, while Goldman Sachs try's to exit the common shares - Then infringing on my gurfrip patent because I refuse to do any more business with them till they pay up.

Would indicate to me that Independent Mobil Developers would be better off working with a less greedy company that does not want to leave any property on the table for real innovators.

Google, Inc. as a company is just too imature to work with outside innovators and developers and until they learn their lesson an pay up.

$1,800,000,000 in CASH not worthless Google, inc shares, then I would personally recommend that every app developer find a different company that has a longer history and more experience in working with outsiders.

A Tech Company with no respect for others intellectual property or rights to the same opportunities its founders [brin & page] were afforded is condemned to failure. Regardless of what Goldman Sachs says - they're just another bank and banks don't create anything.

Microsoft and Apple come to mind as appropriate avenues for new app developers in the business line.

Google, just has to grow up and be trustworthy.

They are not, That simple.

Just ask DOJ.

Sincerely,

jimmy/JAMES - genius
James Reginald Harris, Jr., INVENTOR
You Tube[google infringment], GURFRIP Database & PATENT [google infringment] & Technical Gravity [ask nobel, cern]

[larsenje]

Huh?

Have you considered patenting unintelligible rants?

[webalupagus]

Woo who?

for those unfamiliar with the suite of semi-open source interfaces that Google offers for their products, this article might seem valid. But, for those that are familiar with the ease and popularity of applications and widgets that plugin to iGoogle or Google Enterprise, there's the knowledge that this move opens the floodgates for development, not just for heavily funded software companies, but any geek with a cellphone and a computer.

And that's precisely what Google is trying to do. It doesn't seem they're overly concerned with appealing to the arcane and soon-to -be-obsolete companies that thrive based on niche experience with proprietary software. These guys are soon to be extinct. Google is trying to cater to the upcoming generation of app-developers that want the freedom to create what they want for their own, and their friends devices.

The truth to the matter is that Google doesn't have to woo the mobile app developers, because they're going to open the source for millions more.

[bobatstyletap]

20,000+ applications for Android ?

I totally agree with your point about the problem for application developers due to fragmentation of the cellphone operating system marketplace.

In fact, the mission of StyleTap is to address this very problem by bringing the largest ecosystem of mobile applications (20,000+ originally written for Palm OS(R)) and developers to the other major cellphone/handheld operating systems.

StyleTap currently offers a product for Windows Mobile/CE and has recently demoed the upcoming Symbian version at the Symbian show in London.

While we are not yet ready to commit to a version for Android and depending on whether the upcoming SDK supports native Linux applications, StyleTap could go a long way in helping make Android a success.

For more information on StyleTap, please see www.styletap.com

[frankly0]

Johnny one note becomes Johnny come lately

Google has really done only one thing well, search on the desktop.

It knows it has to expand, so it goes into a growing market, mobile. Problem is, that market is already crowded with far more mature players.

It's hard to see Google's effort as anything more than painting by the numbers. I see no vision here that's going to change the game in any important way. Open source? More ads? What in God's name does any of that do to make smartphones more attractive to the ultimate customer -- the consumer?

Whatever one may say about Apple's effort, they never lost sight of the fact that they had to have something to sell that actual people might have a reason to buy. Who can say that about Google's venture?

[corneliuswillis]

4 Steps to Create a Developer Frenzy Around Alien

1) Friction free distribution- A lot of opportunity for the Google Gorilla to make this better.

2) Permission to believe on distribution- continuing momentum.

3) Killer App(s) - Will you buy an Alien phone as a present? If not, there's probably no killer app(s).


4) The Right Stack- Google is going to get this right.

...more at crowdfluence.com

[.pH]

Are you kidding me?

No offense, but I would expect a little more knowledge from someone reporting on mobile web applications other than:

"Right now, Android just adds to the headache of developing different versions of our applications for different operating systems."

And who are these experts?

"In the end, an application developer must often write dozens of versions of one application to port onto hundreds of handsets. While this is not an impossible task, it's time-consuming and expensive, and many experts say it stifles innovation."

Has anyone on cnet staff heard of or is familiar with .mobi and mTLD?

A guideline and a set of standards is already in place with tons of sites popping up that is supported on any cell phone capable of accessing the web. All phones, all apps, all work with this format. There is no "...headache of developing different versions". It is one site, one version, one set of standards that operate on all OS and phones. And, get this...this is the cool part...it works equally well on the PC!

Just take a look at mTLD.mobi rather than shun this and overlook it. You guys get all the newest and coolest stuff to play with so put it to good use and to the test. Plus, CNET.MOBI is owned by CNET networks. So what are you waiting on? I could be reading this on my Helio Ocean.

Better yet, take a look at some of these sites:

SDCA.mobi San Diego CA complete with surfing conditions
DIR.mobi...a list constantly updated of mobile compliant sites

Bigger known and recognized US and International based companies:

Banking
BofA.mobi (Bank of America)
Deutsche-Bank.mobi
Wachovia.mobi
Barclays.mobi

Insurance
Ing.mobi
StateFarm.mobi
AXA.mobi

Hotels
Marriott.mobi

Car Manufacturers
Ferrari.mobi
BMW.mobi
Rolls-Royce.mobi
FordCA.mobi (Ford Canada)

Transportation
Amtrak.mobi
AAA.mobi (American Automobile Association)

Sports
ESPN.mobi
NBA.mobi
WNBA.mobi

Magazines
Time.mobi (Time Magazine)
BusinessWeek.mobi
CNNMoney.mobi

Internet
MSN.mobi
GoDaddy.mobi / TDNAM.mobi

Technology
Cisco.mobi

News
FoxNews.mobi
AlJazeera.mobi

Newspapers
TheSun.mobi

Guides
Zagat.mobi

Mobile Operators
T-Mobile.mobi
Three.mobi
Vodafone.mobi
TIM.mobi
Orange.mobi

Mobile Manufacturers
Nokia.mobi
SonyEricsson.mobi

Telecommunications
Ericsson.mobi

Weather
Weather.mobi (The Weather Channel)

Cities
Helsinki.mobi

Airlines
SAS.mobi

Clothing
Polo.mobi
Quikstore.mobi (Quiksilver)

Airports
Schiphol.mobi (Amsterdam)

[scottmmmm]

Standards are not always standard

You said "It is one site, one version, one set of standards that operate on all OS and phones" I have become very wary of the word standard. The fact is that standards are not always "standard". Everyone who makes something which complies to a standard does it slightly differently to try to beat their competitors. Anyone who has written HTML code for websites will know this. The simple fact is that diversity is always going to happen, and it is a real pain for software developers since they need to make sure that their product works the same on all the different platforms that it will be used on. This is time consuming and hard.

[JoshuaB86]

Android Developer Community

http://www.ohadev.org Given the recent news of the "g-phone" and the Open Handset Alliance. A new website has been launched to facilitate coordination between developers who intend to use the "Android SDK" from google.

please visit: http://www.ohadev.org

[gaiolas]

The Unofficial OHA's Android Developer Community

News, forums and user downloads will be avaible - Android applications, Tools, SDK - as they start to appear - http://www.ohaandroid.com