Does Android Compete with iPhone?

The race is on, Android sales are catching up with iPhone, and we all know a race implies a winner. The question that's not as widely considered is how much these products actually compete?  First, Android is an operating system used by multiple vendors, so we need to consider Apple's iOS eco-system and what these respective products bring to the market.

If you are a cell phone maker looking for a low cost licensable OS, Android is a clear winner.  If you're a cell phone carrier looking to offer a family of attractive "smart phones" you can customize to add "carrier value", again Android is a winner.  But what do these respective products offer to the people who actually buy and use them?

Android

- A cell phone available on multiple carriers.

- A flexible Internet communication device that offers mobile Web, Email, Maps, navigation, social networking, and the ability to run 3rd party apps.

- Lower cost in some cases but not others.

Android is a remarkable product, and if it weren't for the iPhone, it would be far ahead of anything else in its field, but the iPhone and iOS mobile platform arrived first.

iPhone/iOS

- A cell phone currently available through some carriers.

- A flexible Internet communication device that offers mobile Web, Email, Maps, navigation, social networking, and the ability to run 3rd party apps.

- A best in class App store available in 60 countries.

- A best in class portable music platform (iPod).

- A best in class mobile gaming platform (iPod Touch).

- A best in class mobile tablet (iPad) that serves as a book reader, electronic publishing channel, and is well suited to other business applications.

- Best in class battery life.

- Best in class retail product support.

- A consistent user experience that is always responsive and not bogged down by crapware.

- A restrained design that does not overwhelm new users with all the things it can do before they experience finding and downloading software from the App Store.

- A vast eco-system of product accessories.

- A consistent upgrade path.

- A broadly supported mobile computing platform that offers a consistent target for mobile application developers.

The next question one might reasonably ask is which of these differences are sustainable?  The surprising answer is most of them.  Some are based on long term investments which cannot be easily replicated (iTunes + iTMS, over 300 Apple retail stores, Mac desktop, Xcode developer tool chain). Another big factor is profitability to sustain ongoing development and innovation.  Apple's vertically integrated business model has proven to be highly profitable at almost every level.  In contrast, Android development is largely funded by Google's Search business. Whether this business model can expand to support an iOS like eco-system is an interesting question.

Today, both Android and iPhone/iOS are clearly successful.  It is not my intention to predict a winner, but to point out how these products address very different market needs with relatively modest overlap. Both products have enormous growth potential. Android offers a powerful Internet enabled smartphone that is not locked down by a single vendor. iPhone/iOS offers a powerful, easy to use mobile computing platform that was not previously available.

As a smartphone OS, Android is a huge success. As a mobile platform OS, iOS has more developers and more software which is attracting ever increasing investment. When it comes to mobile touch screen tablets, there is only one well stocked App store with software designed specifically for the tablet format. If Android fails to attract significant tablet software over the next year, while Apple remains on track to sell over 40 million iPads, the difference will become more apparent.

Why Do Companies Release Products Before They Are Ready?

In his Personal Tech column for 16-Sep-2010, New York Times columnist David Pogue asks:

"Why do companies bring products to market that they know and even admit aren't ready?"

Having worked at one such company, I became all too familiar with the pattern. At most companies, managers are judged on their ability to deliver on schedule, yet it's not until you actually start using the product that you discover many of the things that don't work right or need to be improved.  The pressure is to follow the schedule and make the best of it.  Nobody wants to be a complainer.

At Apple, senior management uses the product on a daily basis until they are confident customers will say wow! The rule at Apple is it doesn't ship it until users say wow!  Apple still makes mistakes and discovers problems after a product has shipped, but for the most part their stuff works from the users point of view. If Apple does discover a problem, they have resources in place to upgrade or replace defective units in the field.

The key difference in thinking is actually revealed in the question itself. The management at most technology companies believe they are selling a "product" that meets a set of previously agreed upon specifications.  It must do A, B, and C, and the sooner we can ship it the better.  Apple believes they are selling a "User Experience". The hardware is a vehicle for delivering a great user experience, not an end in itself.

Apple still cares about schedules, but they recognize that the most important learning occurs after they begin using the product internally, and that providing a great user experience is a much bigger competitive advantage than being first to market or having the lowest price.

For years analysts questioned why Apple's didn't have a Netbook strategy. With the introduction of the iPad, we see that while other manufacturers were producing stripped down lower cost notebooks, Apple was doing the real work of thinking about what makes for a great mobile computing experience and what can be left out.

Apple's focus on the user experience also clarifies why Apple insists on greater control over the software that runs on their mobile iOS products. Apple is not merely selling a mobile device that runs software and allows you to make phone calls, Apple is selling a user experience that ties in to a global brand image and "digital lifestyle".

Network Neutrality: What Google and Verizon Should Have Said

Google and Verizon recently offered a "compromise" proposal that accepted Network Neutrality for wired networks with limited enforcement, but then carved out exceptions for wireless and premium services. Here are the main points I think Google and Verizon should have acknowledged:

(1) We understand that wireless airwaves and landline right of ways belong to the public.

(2) We understand that we have been granted a license or charter to provide voice and data communication services based on these public resources.

(3) Building and operating the nations communications network gives us a great deal of power. We understand that we have not been granted a charter to give ourselves or anyone else an unfair competitive advantage over any other lawful communication service that runs on top of our network facilities. The public's interest in an open Internet that supports efficient innovation requires this.

Point 3 is the crux of Network Neutrality. Verizon keeps trying to obfuscate the issue by saying they need the ability to offer premium services and manage the network which Network Neutrality would somehow prohibit. I respectfully disagree.  The issue is whether Internet data carriers can grant themselves an unfair competitive advantage by virtue of controlling the pipes.  The answer that best serves the public interest is "no".

Don't Get the iPad? Just wait a little, it will get bigger.

I've noticed a number of online comments and reports from people who say they just don't get the iPad and seem disappointed Apple has sold so many.  Imagine you are back in 1976 and Apple has just released the Apple II, the first off-the-shelf personal computer you don't have assemble from a kit.  Executives at IBM and Digital Equipment Corporation were puzzled what the big deal was.  Why would anyone want a computer at home?  Especially one that does so little?  Yet within less than 15 years, PC software was driving much of the computer industry. Why? People did want affordable personal computers at home, while others recognized the opportunity and wrote gorgeous applications that 10's of millions of users could enjoy.

Back to 2010: Why would anyone want an instant on, easy to use, location aware, Internet capable, easy to carry, mobile computer that does so little?

(1) Because it offers a great user experience that wasn't previously available.  The iPad is an ideal size for reading, allows you to keep the Internet within easy reach, and offers thousands of Apps to support whatever interests you have.

(2) The focus of innovation has shifted.  Some of the best and most creative new software is being written for the iPad.

When I worked at Digital in the 1980's, we had endless debates about the difference between a Personal Computer and a Workstation.  Many at Digital would single out some hardware difference: the larger display, better graphics, built-in networking, or even the price.  They were all wrong.  The real difference that mattered was the software it ran.

When Steve Balmer says "The operating system is called Windows", I think he's making the same mistake.

Don't get the iPad?  Just wait a little, it will get bigger.

Some Common Observations

It doesn't do Adobe Flash

Few mobile computers do because 3 years after the first iPhone, Adobe has yet to deliver a version of Flash that works well on mobile devices.  Some technologies that don't translate well to a mobile environment will be left behind.

It doesn't include a phone

Yes, and it doesn't include a $70/month phone bill and 2 year contract. Voice is not the primary App for the iPad, but you can use Skype or other VoIP services if you wish.

It's just a big iPhone

A swimming pool is just a big bathtub, but we use it for different things. The iPad is a comfortable size for reading.  The responsive touch interface, clever use of panning+zooming, and focus on one task at a time makes the device almost disappear as you become absorbed in the flow of what you are doing.

The landscape keyboard is good enough for lightweight typing, while adding a Bluetooth keyboard accommodates heavy lifting.

It doesn't include a camera

Yes, it's a v1.0 product that starts at $499.

It doesn't do multitasking

I expect we'll see this when iOS4 comes to the iPad later this year.

It doesn't do handwriting recognition

Yes, but there are plenty of note taking apps that will record and even recognize your scribbles if you want that. Part of what makes the iPad such a joy to use is that Apple did the hard work of thinking about what is essential to a great mobile experience, and what can be left out. Fumbling for a stylus to do pixel perfect input is not fun when you are mobile. I believe this is one of the key insights behind the iPad's successful user interface (time will tell). A lot of people choose not to carry a pen in their pocket everywhere they go.

It doesn't synch wirelessly to the cloud for stand alone operation

Providing a great user experience for system backup and restore, software update, synchronizing multiple devices, and managing large media collections is hard. Apple still sees the Mac (or PC) as the hub of your digital life style.  Many professionals (like me) are not ready to trust all their personal data to the cloud. Apple's approach feels safe and inspires confidence. If you've ever upgraded from one iPod to another, you know how easy this is.  Over time, I expect we'll see more options that migrate services to the cloud.

A Better Response to Growing Markets

I've written before about AT&T's capped data plans and what I feel is a lame $20/month additional charge for tethering.  Since you are already paying for the amount of data you use, why should you have to pay extra for tethering? I suspect there is some marketeer at AT&T who recognizes there's a strong demand for tethering so they can charge extra, why leave money on the table?

What the wireless carriers are missing is that demand for wireless services is a huge growth market.  By increasing capacity and driving down prices, they could dramatically increase the size of their business.

The PC revolution is going mobile.  We need 10 or 100 times the bandwidth currently available.  If you build it and price it right, you'll attract way more business than by trying to monopolize on the current shortage of supply.

iOS4 vs iPod Touch Battery Life

With the release of iOS4, my iPod Touch (2G) gained the ability to remain connected to Wi-Fi even when locked or in sleep mode to receive push notifications (or VoIP calls in the background).  The implications for battery life however are not immediately apparent.

Having lived with iOS4 on my iPod Touch since WWDC, I was initially caught off guard by the significantly reduced battery life.  Previously my iPod Touch could go about a week without recharging, as I used it mostly for listening to audio an hour or so a day, and occasionally for looking up other information.  After installing iOS4, battery life dropped to a couple days, or even less depending on the application I was in.

It turns out the WWDC application needed to be updated for iOS4 to conserve battery life, but more importantly, it had enabled "Notifications", the 3rd item under Settings.  With notifications enabled, an iPod Touch will stay connected to a Wi-Fi network even while in sleep mode, thus burning through the battery much faster than I had previously experienced.

If you use an iPod Touch mostly as a music player and don't normally need notifications, be sure to leave this turned off in the Settings application, or select Airplane mode when you don't want the radios to remain active.

Enjoy!

- Peter

---

Update 6/28/2010

Several users report their battery is still being drained while their iPod Touch 2G is sleeping.  I believe this means other applications are activating the radio.  Since the iPod Touch 2G doesn't officially get "multi-tasking" even with iOS4, this means one or more of Apple's built-in applications which are authorized to run in the background are implicated.  I see two solutions so far:

(1) Use Airplane mode to explicitly prevent the radios from powering on.

(2) Review your iPod Touch Settings and disable any background network access.

Settings -> Notifications = Off

Settings -> Mail, Contacts, Calendars -> Fetch New Data -> Push = Off

Settings -> Mail, Contacts, Calendars -> Calendars -> New Invitation Alerts = Off

Settings -> WiFi -> Ask to Join Networks = Off

I hope Apple adjusts the default settings or provides an option to restrict network access while the iPod Touch is locked so unsuspecting iPod Touch users are not left to resolve battery life issues on their own.

AT&T's Capped Data Plans

AT&T recently introduced a capped data plan for iPhone, iPad, and other smart phones

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/02/atandt-makes-sweeping-changes-to-data-plans-iphone-tethering-comi/

I see some progress, but also some old thinking. Unlimited data is a thing of the past. Bravo. Everybody knows this was an unrealistic model that is in conflict with the increasing demand for data services. There is a practical limit on how many minutes a person can talk in a month. There's no obvious limit on how much data a person can use. To charge per minute for talk, and offer unlimited data makes no sense.

 

Tethering is $20/mo extra. That's disappointing. Now that you are charging for the amount of data actually used each month, there's no inherent justification to charge extra for tethering. It looks like a money grab.

 

If I want to use tethering to handle my Email a few times a year because I prefer the larger screen and keyboard of my laptop, AT&T says no dice, that will be $20/month extra. That doesn't leave me feeling warm and fuzzy about our relationship. It feels like you are charging extra for something that doesn't cost you any more to provide.

 

If you eat the bread with your left hand, it costs $25 per month.

If you eat the same bread with your right hand, it costs $45/month.

 

Lame.