Comments on: Q&A: Nicolas Gramlich of anddev.org talks Android, Google’s developer relations, and more http://www.last100.com/2008/07/24/qa-anddevorg-android/ Tracking the digital lifestyle Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:33:41 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Michael Martin http://www.last100.com/2008/07/24/qa-anddevorg-android/#comment-63161 Michael Martin Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:44:23 +0000 http://www.last100.com/?p=2277#comment-63161 Great interview with Nicolas as I had an interview with him as well, I also linked to this page from http://www.googleandblog.com/plusminus-android-developer-nicolas-gramlich/367/ as I really liked the quote of "Android is for the masses, iPhone for the rich“ ,Michael Martin http://www.googleandblog.com/ Great interview with Nicolas as I had an interview with him as well, I also linked to this page from http://www.googleandblog.com/p.....mlich/367/ as I really liked the quote of “Android is for the masses, iPhone for the rich“

,Michael Martin
http://www.googleandblog.com/

]]> By: Ben Werdmuller http://www.last100.com/2008/07/24/qa-anddevorg-android/#comment-62954 Ben Werdmuller Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:52:30 +0000 http://www.last100.com/?p=2277#comment-62954 I think Android has great promise, for exactly the reasons suggested above: it's open source, and can therefore find its way onto a wide variety of devices quickly. In many parts of the world, mobile phones are ubiquitous while Internet is considerably more rare; by bringing good Internet capability to these markets, Google and its partners are putting themselves in front of a new audience. With Elgg, we're working under the assumption that mobile Internet is going to dramatically grow in popularity over the next couple of years. As a result, we've built the ability to host multiple mobile interfaces directly into the core - an Android phone might have different capabilities to an iPhone, which might be different to a Blackberry. I don't think these platforms will reach a state of compatibility for quite some time (look how long it's taken for the desktop web). However, Android may be a great step towards establishing a standard level of functionality. All this said, I worry. Google have flubbed OpenSocial, more than I think many people realise - it's beginning to dawn on people that it was a marketing effort more than anything else. If the SDK for Android is lacking, the Open Handset Alliance is going to lose the support of outside developers. I wonder if the members of the Alliance have better tools internally? I think Android has great promise, for exactly the reasons suggested above: it’s open source, and can therefore find its way onto a wide variety of devices quickly. In many parts of the world, mobile phones are ubiquitous while Internet is considerably more rare; by bringing good Internet capability to these markets, Google and its partners are putting themselves in front of a new audience.

With Elgg, we’re working under the assumption that mobile Internet is going to dramatically grow in popularity over the next couple of years. As a result, we’ve built the ability to host multiple mobile interfaces directly into the core – an Android phone might have different capabilities to an iPhone, which might be different to a Blackberry. I don’t think these platforms will reach a state of compatibility for quite some time (look how long it’s taken for the desktop web). However, Android may be a great step towards establishing a standard level of functionality.

All this said, I worry. Google have flubbed OpenSocial, more than I think many people realise – it’s beginning to dawn on people that it was a marketing effort more than anything else. If the SDK for Android is lacking, the Open Handset Alliance is going to lose the support of outside developers. I wonder if the members of the Alliance have better tools internally?

]]> By: Tom Tolleson http://www.last100.com/2008/07/24/qa-anddevorg-android/#comment-62952 Tom Tolleson Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:37:23 +0000 http://www.last100.com/?p=2277#comment-62952 While there are merits to his argument, android as a product suffers from the same lack of usability that many open-source projects do - It doesn't have a clear starting point for people. If a person asks what an iPhone is, you can place one in their hand. You can't do that with android yet. That's a crucial step in making it a solution for the masses - it has to exist in a simple form. From there, other variations can exist as an option for users who reach a level expertise with android. Many open-source projects that I've been involved with are more successful once they create a simple starting point for new people to get involved. This will be even more important for making an open source project a tool 'for the masses.' I think that creating a physical android phone will be a crucial first step. While there are merits to his argument, android as a product suffers from the same lack of usability that many open-source projects do – It doesn’t have a clear starting point for people. If a person asks what an iPhone is, you can place one in their hand. You can’t do that with android yet. That’s a crucial step in making it a solution for the masses – it has to exist in a simple form. From there, other variations can exist as an option for users who reach a level expertise with android.

Many open-source projects that I’ve been involved with are more successful once they create a simple starting point for new people to get involved. This will be even more important for making an open source project a tool ‘for the masses.’ I think that creating a physical android phone will be a crucial first step.

]]>