The Case Against Android: Page 2

Android isn’t Free Windows

Let’s be clear: Google is providing a good service; it just isn’t what people think it is. For an OEM that wants to have a highly differentiated product Google is putting together a service and a set of technologies to help them down that path but, in the end, it is still a build-it-yourself offering.

The numbers aren’t even really versions, in that 3.0 isn’t a newer version of 2.0, they are more designations for the bundles. And, in this last example, target vastly different bundles. 3.0 is for tablets, 2.0 is for phones, right now.

An increasing number of OEMs are even putting their own UI on the product and, given that it is a bundle, they could easily provide the result with a unique name. But if they should never forget they own the result.

Wrapping Up: Android the Kit Car of Operating Systems

We have been led to believe Android is a product but it really isn’t, it is a bundle of technologies and services provided by Google largely for free in order to give OEMs a fast path to a non-Microsoft Apple competitor. It can do that clearly, but the OEMs still have to do a lot of the work and then have to own the result, all of it.

Not understanding that is probably why so many of them are upset with Google and surprised by the litigation. They expect a Microsoft experience but they aren’t buying Windows. In fact they aren’t buying anything; they are just getting free help from Google, which likely wonders why they complain so much about this free help. At the core of the problem is a basic misunderstanding: Google isn’t funding a free product, just a group of folks who can help OEMs build their own devices.

Once folks understand this I expect the result will improve all around.

ALSO SEE: 50 Android Apps for the Mobile Knowledge Worker

AND: 50 Android Apps for Your Lunch Break