Google Android: Scrambling to Explain the Future
September 17, 2010
As hard as I try, I can’t escape the mobile search world. When you are my age, looking at tiny screens is work. I like big screens, and I like to control the outputs I see. Not surprisingly, I turn a deaf ear and the goose’s tail to the mewlings of those who explain what US telecommunication companies will or won’t do, what the market for a particular fashion item like a smart phone will be in 2013, or why open source forking will screw up the world of tablets.
These are topics that cannot be tamed in a 300 word column by a “real” journalist or “real” consultant. If these topics could, why are the writers at the race track collecting baskets of cash from their prognostications? The answer is that explaining these three topics is backseat driving by looking in a rear view mirror. Great for Platonists, not so useful to those trying to figure out what is going on in the mobile space.
Let me highlight three examples of fortune telling and offer a different view on the mobile revolution.
The first example is “A Massive War Is Approaching as the Table Market Cannot Sustain Six Platforms.” I agree that six consumer centric operating systems is too many, but on the other hand, maybe it is too few. From the US perspective, the ideal number will be one near monopoly with two thirds of the market and two weak sisters who share another 20 percent of the market. The cats and dogs can fight over the remaining share. Why? This is how the auto industry, the airline industry, and the snack industry works in the US. The problem is that the “winner” in the segments are tough to predict due to the vagaries of management, legal actions, and the whims of the consumer. I don’t think there is a war coming. I think there is a lot of activity and then exogenous events will shape what happens. The problem is that I don’t think the US viewpoint is the one that will carry today. Unthinkable, right? Well, only if you view technology and products from the point of view of a person who looks at mobile in a particularly narrow way. War? Baloney.
The second example is the write up “Entelligence: Will Carriers Destroy the Android Vision?” Once again, the viewpoint strikes me as narrow. The other issue I have is the word “vision.” I am not convinced that Google has an Android vision. I think that Google has entered a new phase in its corporate evolution, but for the life of me, I see many possible visions for Android, not one. The notion of a telecommunications carrier destroying Android strikes me as silly. The “carriers” use what’s available for their advantage. The purpose of US telcos is to return to the pre-Judge Green state of AT&T and absorb the other telcos. If it makes sense for a carrier to use Android, carriers will. If not, carriers won’t. Google had an opportunity to outflank the carriers. Now Google is seeing carriers in a new light. I think there are financial reasons behind this shift at Google, but the carriers are the carriers. Keep in mind the phrase “Bell head.” It is an important concept when thinking about carriers.
The third example is found in the story “Is There Really Any Value to 3-Year Smartphone Forecasts?” I know the answer. The value is to the azure chip consulting firm who gets visibility for making predictions. The purpose of the forecast is to sell consulting and services. The numbers are of secondary importance.
What I see in these three write ups is insight into the turmoil the mobile sector finds itself. The players are not sure themselves about what will happen. Consumers are mostly acting with local knowledge, unaware that their aggregated behavior will have a significant impact on what will happen. The lawyers are flipping over rocks and looking beneath bushes for opportunities to litigate. The companies are trying to make money and consolidate their position to avoid the fate of outright failure or an ignominious acquisitions which puts lots of people out of work.
What I see is rapid change with many of the actions difficult to predict. From some decisions will come unintended consequences. One example I relish is Verizon’s use of the Android operating system but tweaked to use Microsoft Bing.com for the search results. Why take this action? Humans enjoy keeping other humans off balance, on the defense. There are other examples, but none of these is “war”, involve the excitement of the verb “destroy”, or lend themselves to fitting into a azure chip consultant’s Excel spreadsheet. Lots of variables at play in this mobile/mobile search space. It is a big world, not just a US centric world, however.
Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2010
Freebie
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
