Second, the software development environment isn’t very good. He claims people said the initial Software Development Kit (SDK) wasn’t great, and that the new SDK doesn’t really have any game-changing features.

Basically i thought you were righting off android thanks

When I wrote "He claims", that was referring to Sascha Segan. I haven't used anything related to Android, so I have no opinion on the quality of the SDK.

I just thought the article was interesting, so I posted about it. If you want to dispute the claims, I suggest responding to the author in the discussion thread at PC Magazine.

Steve

Steve

I am commenting on this not your answer thanks

Posted by Steve Mueller on April 28, 2009 – 4:12 amComments

Frank posted about 1 million T-Mobile G1s being sold, but Sascha Segan at PC Magazine is beginning to worry whether Android is already a failure. He bases his claims on a couple of Android_Failurepoints.

First, there are only two Android phones available — the T-Mobile G1 and the HTC Magic (which is similar to the G1 without a keyboard). That’s not a great variety for a platform touted as being so flexible. Sure, various hardware OEMs (like Motorola) have said they’d be dev eloping Android phones, but nobody has any to show yet.

Second, the software development environment isn’t very good. He claims people said the initial Software Development Kit (SDK) wasn’t great, and that the new SDK doesn’t really have any game-changing features.

Also, if you look at sales, T-Mobile has sold 1 million Android phones, but the iPhone sold almost 3.7 million units in its first six months. That’s a huge difference.

Granted, the iPhone may be a special case, but Android hasn’t seemed to have gotten a lot of play at Mobile World Congress or CTIA. Maybe I’m too focused on Windows Mobile, but have I missed much?

Personally, I think that it’s too early to write Android off. Google has deep pockets and great talent, so I’m sure they can make a great product. However, there’s also a lot of competition out there from a newly revitalized Windows Mobile, the Palm Pre, BlackBerry and, of course, the iPhone. What do you think

I knew what you were commenting on. What you might not know is that I'm the person that wrote the article you quoted. (You never need to quote the full article, by the way; just quote the piece(s) you disagree with.)

However, my conclusion was that I thought it was too early to write Android off, which seems to be your comment, too. So, again, what part of my article were you disagreeing with?

Steve

I dont agree with your comments as there is the htc hero which has nearly caught up with the iphone if you read reviews on www.cnet.com, anyone can make an app for android can the same be said for the iphone., in addition to this imho they will be billions of apps for this phone when people get round to making them i think the future is android .

I'll bite. What comment of mine in an almost-four-month-old article don't you agree with? The only real comment that I made said, "Personally, I think that it’s too early to write Android off." Your comment actually seems to agree with mine, so I'm confused.

Steve

Hi steve

I am commenting on the article above your comment and not your thanks

kind regards

Ian mccully

Don't think the android is a failure. Maybe some people would like it would be a failure, but the reality is that android has the problems of a young thing on the market. The software is at this being delevoped, and great phones are coming with it. HTC hero was only presented few days ago and just look about the feedback of ppl all around the world. The future will have his word...

I think they're idiots for not including enough features, and for offering it through a cell company. sell it for a crapload of cash, and have their own -free- services, like txt and call and (of course) net.

Catchy title, stupid article.

the iphone and android OS are competitors? NO! Not according to their shared board member.

Palm Pre will take on the Iphone while android is allowed to mature. T-mobile is happy..so will be motorolla and now samsung.

It was never meant to compete with the likes of apple hardware and OS.

Apple and even Palm can take all the high end user(guys and gals who buy mac books) Google want everybody else and 2010 they will be closer to world domination...hehehe

I mean really blackberry not doing well.. neither is palm..hell even the iphone did not hit its expect marks this year.

Android is right where Google wants it.

By the way look at all the job posting for android developers

Considering Android is FREE!!! Yes it is absolutely a failure. Almost every phone maker talked about Android then they decided to spend money (In a Recession!) elsewhere. Nuff Said.

@fForge42:

Android is only available on 2 phones, with more in the pipeline. So, that means that right now, I can get android on precisely twice as many phones as the iPhone OS... or I guess you could argue its availabe on the same number of phones if you count iPhone and iPhone 3g as two distinct devices.

I think you have to count the iPhone and iPhone 3g as different devices, and you may even have to count the models (different amounts of flash, like 4 GB and 8 GB on the original iPhone) as different devices.

Also, to some degree, you need to look at the carriers that support the devices (especially if they have different branding). If you do that, the iPhone has many more devices, because it's available on many more carriers.

In the Windows Mobile world, should we count the HTC Touch Pro (unlocked) as a different phone from the AT&T Fuze? I can argue either way. I think you certainly have to count the Verizon Touch Pro as a different phone due to the different cellular radio (although that argument obviously doesn't apply to the iPhone or Android as neither are available on CDMA systems yet).

@ctitanic:

3 devices. Today Samsung already announced the I7600 using Android.

Cool. Thanks for pointing that out.

@doog:

My guess is that G1 sales have met or exceeded expectations so far. Apple hoped and expected to sell lots of iPhones, and they have; I suspect T-Mobile and Google had lower expectations. Non-story.

I hardly think your comment proves it's a non-story. The article cited addressed more than just sales; device availability and software development were also addressed.

T-Mobile may be happy, but is Google really satisfied?

@T1000:

If we start to whole-heartedly accept Android as being superior to everything and ignore or give excuses for its faults, then Android will fail. I guarantee you that.

I suspect there are a lot of iPhone fanboys that who would argue that. :D The iPhone was lacking many basic features expected in today's phones and media devices, yet it is doing very well.

I agree with your premise, though. Letting faults sit by ignoring them leads to stagnation.

Steve

And don't forget about the iPod Touch - different models still running that OS. :-)

The real problem is that Google's business model isn't about making good technology.

Google makes money from selling advertising space. The Mobile market is important as an ad platform, but since they gather no real revenue from the sale of each individual product, they end up with an arms length relationship with the technology.

If you look though Google's technology offerings, you'll see one simple theme: Make products that are clever, but don't worry about the fit and finish.

Google is counting on other companies like HTC to do the hard work of building a polished product, and that's a completely different world than the one we see from Apple.

It's not that it's bad. It's just that it ain't nothing special and offers little more than any other platform such as WinMo or Symbian or WebOS is offering. It might take some better hardware to get people to start using it in really large numbers. Maybe Motorola might get real lucky with some neat model. But noting Motorola's crappy past performance, it seems like a longshot. Meanwhile the BlackBerry and iPhone will keep rolling along unchallenged in the smartphone market.

I think that Android, even though it has it's good points, won't be either compelling enough to match the Pre, or the next iPhone.

Google will really have to up the ante if it wish's to make a big splash in the market. Of course, as you stated, they have deep pockets and great talent.

Apple has even more talent and money, so in the end, Apple is going to make it tough for Android and everyone else!

It's all interesting. I wouldn't tag Android as a success or a failure yet. There are more handsets and Cupcake yet to come.

True - the SDK hasn't lived up to everyone's desires, and although T-Mobile has expressed satisfaction with G1 sales, it's also true that depite the release of the G1 in October, T-Mo's U.S. subscriber growth rate has actually slowed to about half of what it was a year ago. That's got to be a little bit of a concern.

So Android - so far - isn't a failure, but it also isn't the success that I think advocates of open-source hoped it would be. The jury's still out on this one.

I don't understand why most of us Android fans have a inferiority complex when it comes to the iPhone. It's just another phone, besides, there's Blackberry, Palm Pre, Windows Mobile, Symbian, etc. The competition is tough for everybody. If this article mentioned Blackberry sales instead of the iPhone, the response would be different.

See, I can anger people just by typing, "The iPhone is popular." Now watch, somebody will come in here raging angry and totally twist my words.

I don't buy the "If Android was marketed like Apple sales would be better" excuse. I don't think Google or any of the other 47 firms in the Open Handset Alliance would struggle to fund an ad campaign. If it were that simple, don't you think they'd go on an ad blitz? Besides, Android has been hyped up in its own way- there was so much buzz about the google phone and there is a strong and loyal fan base with open source advocates and developers. This is simple business- you have a product, you market it. Don't blame Apple for the lack of Android ads. It's Google's/T-mobile's fault.

Secondly, read an article before you come to the conclusion that it is a pro-iPhone/Anti-Android article. If you read this article, you'll see it mentions iPhone in sales only, that's it. It doesn't say that the iPhone is superior or that the App Store trumps the Marketplace, or anything like that.

The article it references to- Is Android a Failure has a very critical view of Android, and it only mentions the iPhone once and I quote, "This summer, mobile market watchers will be focusing on the Palm Pre, the new iPhone, and potentially some new BlackBerrys." That's it. I don't understand how this is making Android inferior to the iPhone and jumping up and down about it. If anything, it is saying that Window Mobile is superior by saying, " But to actually build devices, you need a solid SDK, a clear idea of Google's role, and a development ecosystem that's at least as cozy as Windows Mobile's."

I'm all for Android, but it hasn't blinded me with its reality distortion field. Android has lots of great potential, it's got a lot of things going for it. But, let's face it- it's not perfect and there are a lot of things that can improve it. If we start to whole-heartedly accept Android as being superior to everything and ignore or give excuses for its faults, then Android will fail. I guarantee you that.

Be critical of Android, look for faults and improve on them.

My guess is that G1 sales have met or exceeded expectations so far. Apple hoped and expected to sell lots of iPhones, and they have; I suspect T-Mobile and Google had lower expectations. Non-story.

3 devices. Today Samsung already announced the I7600 using Android.

http://mobilitysite.com/2009/04/samsung-i7500-u...

I can't comment on the SDK issue as I have no experience with it. However, the other two points (especially taken together) seem like weak sauce to me.

Lets start with #3, the G1 isn't selling at the same clip as the iPhone. Ok, granted. The iPhone was, without a doubt, a game-changer and probably should serve as a fair benchmark for phone sales. Having said that, selling at 25% of the iPhone pace is still fairly decent, especially for a phone that had nowhere near the ad blitz or pop culture aspect going for it.

But, now, lets look at argument #1: Android is only available on 2 phones, with more in the pipeline. So, that means that right now, I can get android on precisely twice as many phones as the iPhone OS... or I guess you could argue its availabe on the same number of phones if you count iPhone and iPhone 3g as two distinct devices.

These kinds of articles frustrate me. They could save a lot of time writing by just saying "This phone is not the iPhone. Therefore, it is a failure." It's like they (other phone manufacturers) are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Find a way to improve on the iPhone, and they somehow spin it into a negative. Find a way to actually be inferior to the iPhone and they jump up and down about it.