The world – OK, just a group of phone geeks – is waiting for the launch of the Android phone aka the T-Mobile Dream tomorrow with bated breath. CG will be at the event in force with a liveblog and images but before we walk to the well of hype and drink deep and hearty droughts of orgasmic praise, let’s talk about what Android is and isn’t.
The casual smartphone user is a growing demographic that T-Mobile has consistently strived to serve. From the tween-friendly Sidekick to the entry level Windows Mobile phones like the Wing and the Dash, T-Mobile’s goal has always been to serve the masses and, barring that, sell expensive data plans. It is a noble goal and one I’ve consistently praised them for over the years. The ideal consumer is a smartphone-toting hockey mom who needs to organize her life and Windows Mobile has historically been the OS of choice for entry level phones with some degree of smarts.
The Dream is an excellent move for T-Mobile simply because it removes the Microsoft, Symbian, and Apple taxes from the equation. Instead of creating a whole new operating system for every feature phone – essentially any phone without an operating system a la the LG Vu and the Voyager – that comes down the pike. By saying “We support Android, so feel free to build out your phones on that platform, they are getting a solid base for expansion and allow manufacturers the freedom to avoid phone OS R&D completely and instead focus on hardware and UI.
Just as OS X is based on BSD, Android is based on Linux. This distinction means that both Apple and Google are able to foist the heavy lifting on a band of unpaid volunteers while focusing on usability.
I, unlike the inestimable Sascha Segan, believe that Android is a smartphone play. While most users just want to make calls and take pictures, T-Mobile has proven that the average consumer wouldn’t mind mobile email and Internet when the possibility arises. My hope is that Android eclipses Windows Mobile as the default operating system for higher-end feature phones and, like Symbian, brings email options to lower end phones without adding digits to the price.
Android is also a branding play. By becoming part of the mobile Internet backbone, Android will grab eyeballs for Google services. Adding advertising is trivial and presumably Google has some ability to track what Android users are looking at and doing. While this functionality should worry privacy advocates, most folks are willing to pay $50 for a smartphone that phones home than $299 for one that is fairly staid in its squealing.
It isn’t an iPhone beater, that much is clear. It is a solid operating system onto which manufacturers can hitch their proprietary applications. It is an exciting development simply because it adds another player to a tight and highly competitive market.
Cellphone operating systems are hard. Just ask everyone who is trying to beat the iPhone. Google has the time, the money, and the talent to get Android right. Here’s hoping the hype matches reality tomorrow at 10:30 Eastern.
I’m waiting…
I love Android and I don’t even know what it is. Good job to Google Marketing.
yeah I’m pretty excited about this — I hope it really hits strong. any idea if it will sync with Exchange, or did I miss that in the article?
is that really the hardware we’re getting? that ugly mess that’s been shown in the spy pics?
“It isn’t an iPhone beater” – ummmm…how do you know? I love “crunch facts”, lets just make up generalities and pass them off as fact.
@Mark
Well it’s not really going after exactly the same market as the iPhone.
I don’t think it will be an iPhone beater either… The Apple OS is too consumer friendly. You don’t have to be a nerd to operate one and you still get essentially all the same features. I think Android will be amazing, but I don’t think nearly as many people will appreciate it when comparing it to the iPhone
@james – I have no idea whether Android phones will compete with, or even beat iPhones. I really don’t care either. My issue is that many crunch posts often make statements that sound like fact, instead of the opinion that they are.
oh yeah !
I’ve been counting nano seconds to this day for about 10 years (yes, i’m very old….) it IS an iPHEWone killer solely for the fact that geeks like me, who’ll never touch a trendy cr$%p with corporate restrictions are bursting with cellphone programming energy like a teenager before prom.
Look at the internet evolution, you’ll see how everything boils down to information ease of access. And the only way to accomplish that is to let users dictate GUI, flow, apps and data storage scheme (through statistics of what they actually use).
I can compare this launch to the Firefox launch date. The first browser which actually placed app control in the hands of the “people” and broke M$ stronghold over browser market.
Give it 6 month and see how the cellular map completely shifts. Finally I can write my own smartphone-email-calendar-app browsing and navigation scheme and adapt it to my crazy niche needs. And publish it and have many other people enjoy it !
And if you say, hey, google is the mother of all evil which is a corporation – you are right. Just give me this OS to place on a hardware I can manufacture in China for dimes on a dollar, I’ll do it myself.
I’m tingly all over.
[ oh, and it's only my distorted perseption of reality, no ironclad guarantee for future ... don't want to upset no one ... ]
Really annoying things that you can’t do on the iPhone without having to unlock it:
1) Use a service besides AT&T
2) Replace SMS (a.k.a. one of the biggest rackets going) with an always on IM client.
3) Use the phone as a bluetooth modem that can get your laptop on the internet without even taking it out of your pocket.
4) Easily access the phone’s filesystem from your computer and on the phone (Datacase is OK, but I would prefer this functionality built into the phone).
5) Broadcast live video (e.g. Qik).
I’m sure there are plenty more, but I think the list is enough to make my point. The tight grip Apple is keeping on iPhone development may give Android an advantage.
Hate to be that guy, but ….
“essentially any phone without an operating system a la the LG Vu and the Voyager”
They do have operating systems, just proprietary ones. I believe they’re linux-based, but unsure. Can’t wait for G-day
Those phones aren’t “supposed” to have operating systems. Maybe that should be operating systems that you can interact with in the way you’d interact with a Windows Mobile or Symbian phone i.e. a layer for complete control over the OS.
Does anyone else see this as a sequel to a competitor that the founder previously started?!
It is unique that a “one hit wonder” (Danger’s hip top now owned by Microsoft) product is now head-to-head with the new Android (that now Google owns).
It confirms the adage (for me anyway), “the more things change, the more things stay the same”… meaning they are both on T-mobile and have limitations because of the carrier agreements.
The thing is, its NOT just a phone… its an operating system, and until people understand this, its true potential will not be revealed…
If it hits well with the developer community, I expect it to realy improve our mobile we experience…
http://the-anti-google-baloney.blogspot.com/2008/09/one-person-does-get-it-its-not-phone.html