Google Makes Moves to Close Android’s Open Relationships
Google has reached out to major carriers of Android phones and asked them to stop tweaking the Android software. The company is also ceasing early access to the latest Android release, implementing a new approval process for carriers and developers. Read on for the details and perspective on what is turning into a bloody mobile device war …
A tip of the hat goes to Bloomberg Businessweek for breaking the story, which alleges that Andy Rubin, the head of Google’s Android group, will be the arbiter of all things Android when it comes to disseminating code to big-name vendors. What’s more, there will be no more partnerships “formed outside of Google’s purview.” Sounds like some real cracking down coming from the big brand of openness.
But why? Android initially was alluring because it was “open source.” The promise was that carriers, manufacturers and software development companies could essentially have a field day building on top of Android, instead of building something from the ground up. But in a January 2011 post, I suggested that level of ‘openness’ would essentially create the opposite effect, closing out users as carriers and companies opt to shut off features they deem ‘too open.’ I argued that these companies loved Android for all the opposite reasons users did.
Google has apparently become unnerved by that level of ‘customization.’ In an effort to reign in the free-for-all, Google has found the need to become more discriminating. For good cause, too. I’ve seen too many bad Android devices go out the door with Google’s name on them. That’s bad for consumers and bad for Google’s brand. On the other hand, companies that legitimately want to create Android products, but aren’t part of Google’s inner circle of early code releases, often get shafted when it comes to shipping products with the latest and greatest. Dell has been one such company, evident by its release of the Dell Streak running Android 1.6, already far outdated. This is a problem Google has essentially created for itself. So how can Google fix it?
According to Google’s John Lagerling, director of global Android partnerships at Google, Android needs to reach a “common denominator” experience, and after all the bugs are squashed and the dust is settled, then “the customization can begin.” This explains Google’s delay to release the tablet version of Android — Honeycomb — to the public.
Bloomberg’s bottom line is that Android is still open, just more policed, but I see this as an inevitable trend.
Google, regardless of whether it wants to admit it, really does want a consistent user experience in its operating system. In some small way, yes, that closes Android down. Android, for lack of a better term, is Google’s baby. That doesn’t mean other companies can’t take care of it correctly, but Google’s the parent and likely knows whats best for the child. Bad Android products mean bad press, bad press means less adoption. Less adoption leads to death in the marketplace. Obviously, Google hasn’t gone down that road yet, and clearly has no intention of doing so, based on its latest actions.
If Google took Android up a notch, demanded quality hardware and testing before the latest Android OS could be disseminated to a manufacturer for production, and at least got a cursory glance at the product before it shipped out, we’d see a heck of a lot more robust, shiny, useful and maybe even secure products hit the market. I admit, this kind of kills the whole ‘openness’ idea and leaves Google playing the role of rival Apple. It’s not App Store approval, but it’s hardware approval.
The effect, however, would mean increased consumer happiness, decreased fragmentation and better-quality products. That can only mean good things for Google. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. That’s why I think Apple has the right idea. Google doesn’t have to be as strict as Apple, but like most open relationships, its current strategy sets it up for failure. There need to be guidelines; otherwise, it all could come crumbling down.
Sign up for The VAR Guy’s Weekly Newsletter, Webcasts and Resource Center. Follow The VAR Guy via RSS, Facebook and Twitter. Follow experts at VARtweet. Read The VAR Guy’s editorial disclosures here.
Good blog article. I agree that Google needs to rein-in their OHA partners. One, changing the UI has forced some Android users to run older versions of the OS with known security vulnerabilities since either or both the mfr and carrier have not provided firmware updates/upgrades in a timely manner or not at all. This is bad for the users as it is their data that are vulnerable and Google as its brand is associated with the Android OS. Two, Verizon has placed Bing as the default search engine on some of their smartphones in exchange for money from Microsoft. This directly impacts Google’s bottom-line as they make no money from either the Android OS or the hardware.
Eventually, however, Honeycomb (Android 3.0) source code will be made available to all. At this point, Google loses control. Perhaps, Google can use their trademark and/or logo placed prominently on sanctioned devices to differentiate between their business partner’s devices from everything else that will surely come out. And, also, create a web page that clearly identifies their business partners along with their sanctioned devices. Finally, squeezing some hardware quality control into the mix, as you suggest, would also be a great idea.
And, just for the record, Red Hat limits RHEL beta version availability to its [paid] subscribers. And further limits RHEL release candidate versions to its partners.