Android Phones Delayed 167
CommanderData writes "PC World reports that Google's Android phone rollout is facing delays. Originally expected to have handsets on the market and in consumers' hands this summer, it appears that Q4 2008 or even sometime in 2009 is more likely. Software developers are also complaining that programming is difficult on the Android platform due to regular changes being made by Google." Update 21:14 GMT by SM: Google has (via Google Watch) refuted widespread claims that Android will be late, so I guess only time will tell.
Huge shocker (Score:5, Insightful)
Disorganization?
Everything tagged "beta?"
Welcome to Google.
Have you released a product today?
News flash (Score:3, Insightful)
Large companies tire quickly of trying to hit a constantly moving target which breaks applications every time they get a new build.
In other news, developers still prefer to deal with the mess that is Win32 rather than constantly changing interfaces of open source software. Shocking youtube video at 11.
Theres a reason companies don't all jump on the open source bandwagon ... its too much damn effort to support and maintain when none of the core developers give a damn about keeping things compatible. Spend countless man hours supporting every revision of open source software, and pay no up front licensing cost, but a fortune in support ... or ... pay a large up front chunk of change, write it once, and know it will work for several years assuming you followed the spec properly and didn't do anything blatently against the API documentation. Try them both, see which one is more profitable and less nerve racking.
Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Because Apple's products always ship on time, and developers have no complaints whatsoever about the iPhone API.
Re:News flash (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't write successful software, do you?
Reverse "Win32" and "open source software" in your post, and it will get more accurate... You'll still need to throw things like .NET, and JDK, and POSIX in there to get an even more accurate picture, but it'll be an improvement.
Companies that develop for open source platforms don't spend effort on supporting "every revision". They do, however, enjoy selling into a market with less worry about being embraced and extended by one of the handful of successful Windows development companies, freedom from waiting for their for-pay support contacts to get back to them with answers about why the API doesn't work as documented, the ability to define their own support matrix instead of having it dictated by Microsoft patch releases, and the ability to keep a much larger portion of their revenue.
I've tried them both. It's easier and more enjoyable to make a living writing commercial software for open-source platforms. By far. No contest. Everybody I know who has tried both agrees. People who say otherwise are usually trolls, or MSCEs who are afraid their certs won't be tickets for a ride on the gravy train much longer.
Similar to Apple and iPhone (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this was why Apple wouldn't allow programs on their iPhone. They were updating the core too often after release and they knew it would likely break most third party code. Now that their core is stable, they'll release the 2.0 version with an SDK.
Android could've gone the same route: released, but not allowed 3rd party apps until stable. But I think that would be as frustrating as it was for iPhone users.
News flash: "open source" != anarchy (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. GNOME has been kept backwards-compatible for years now (the last platform ABI break was generally at 2.0). Same for KDE, at least they don't break compatibility inside stable branches. Now take X.org, Apache, Eclipse, or just about any open source project with a sizable third-party developer base, and you'll see they take great care in maintaining backward compatibility.
AND....... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am also bewildered by the supposed reports of a schedule slip. Shoddy reporting.
As far as "difficult to develop for?"...
Well, let's start with the fact that the SDK will have been out in some form for nearly a year before we even see the OS released on consumer hardware...as opposed to one year AFTER the iPhone was released. Considering that fact, any comment on maturity seems overly harsh. BTW, this SDK runs on just about anything...also unlike the iPhone SDK...assuming that you received a blessing from Cupertino to get a copy.
Let's also consider that an OS like Android is going to have to be far more robust and flexible than the iPhone OS. The iPhone, like the MacOS/Leopard/Snow Bunny OSes, has the convenience of running on only a small number of device architectures. Those architectures are finite and well-known by Apple. In contrast, Android must be an OS that supports a wide range of ever-evolving architectures and feature sets...or lack thereof.
This complexity extends from the OS to the application development environment. When you write an application for the iPhone, you know the exact screen size and available resources. Not so for Adroid. Your UI must scale...or be lowest common denominator. You may leverage supporting peripherals like a camera, GPS, trackball, physical keyboard, SD card slot...but then again, you better be prepared for them not to be there. Processor? Memory size? There may be min specs, but having to build an OS that runs on the expected range of offerings is not trivial.
Masking some of this complexity is a task for the Android OS developers...which is why it is inherently more complex than an OS for a finite set of devices...but it is worth it...at least to the consumer...by fostering an environment that motivates hardware innovation by a range of competing vendors.
Seriously folks, let's not be disingenuous and just pretend that the only difference between the iPhone and Android (or the MacOS and Windows) is Apple's genius.
Re:Google Andriod is about to be hit by a steamrol (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yeah. That will matter.
I'm not putting any bets on that. Nokia's name isn't meaningful (at least here in the US). The name Qt is completely meaningless to a consumer. I'm not going to pick a phone because it has Nokia software on it. I don't think most Americans would. Google is different. Google is a big brand here. People know Google. They like Google. That has sales power. Nokia may have more mindshare in Europe, but I'd imagine that Google still has a very strong brand there, so things may be more equal.
Of the two, I'd put far more stake in Google's effort. Is Nokia trying to get other cell phone companies on board?
Now I think the iPhone will kick both of them. I hope Google does good, but I frankly doubt it. The carriers are far too corrupt. Read the WSJ article that this story is based on. They talk about Sprint's problems integrating and branding all their stuff in, T-Mobile's problems, etc. In other words all the carriers are taking the software that exists and trying to turn it into their normal drivel that they sell. Apple stood up to that. The iPhone isn't covered in bad AT&T interface. Yet an Android phone will either be "Googly" or look quite a bit like any other Verizon phone.
Every story about the iPhone since first word last year has been "Wait for OpenMoko", "Wait for Qtopia", "Wait for Android". Apple is out there doing it. It may not be fully open, but it's there and it's rather open (in how easy it is to get an application up, compared to what you have to do with normal carriers and normal phones).
Google talks a nice game (and I trust them), but they are still up against the carriers who will have enough freedom to crush their ideals on every "Android" phone they release.
OpenMoko doesn't have the push either the iPhone or Android have. Qtopia may end up just another platform (like Symbian or Windows Mobile) that fails to take over the mobile phone world.
All in all, I don't care. I don't trust the phone companies. I love the iPhone interface (and will be buying the next version mostly because of it). But if the iPhone and others (like Android) can push the phone companies to better interfaces, I'm all for it. Just about every phone I've touched has a poor to horrid interface. The Samsung Instinct seems to have an improved interface, until you get to web surfing where it's just as bad as just about every phone released in the last couple of years.
Re:Google Andriod is about to be hit by a steamrol (Score:3, Insightful)
The Greenphone was ditched in favor of better options. The current development platform of choice is the Neo1973 [wikipedia.org], the same platform used by the OpenMoko folks. Nokia hasn't yet announced a new development platform (i.e. one that they actually make) for Qtopia Phone Edition.
As to portability, that's one of Qtopia's biggest merits. It was so extreme that before the Greenphone was nixed, people were finding better support on other platforms (since Trolltech had no idea of how to design cellphone hardware). The only reason they even made the Greenphone was to jump-start the Qtopia Phone development community and (probably) as the second big step to position themselves for a buyout by either Motorola or Nokia. (The first step was the IPO [trolltech.com] in Norway.)
Re:Huge shocker (Score:5, Insightful)
bad strategy (Score:2, Insightful)
I think Google should have focused first on getting something out quickly: partner with just HTC and T-Mobile, for example, and get a single model out. That would have built buzz and given developers something to work with.
Re:Huge shocker (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, then, you're quite lucky. My phone right now is the only one I can even stand, but even I wouldn't say it does everything I want it to do already.
I'm glad you're happy with your phone, and since you feel so special, I'll even give you a cookie. Now shut up while the rest of us hold out hope we won't get shitty phone after shitty phone from shitty telcoms who only want to make a quick buck or ... 1000 off of us.