Going all Android

I recently spoke at the AIMIA Digital Summit conference (worth checking out it you missed it) on the state of mobile. I provided some serious future looking and even went to far as to make a few predictions and set a few dates for when things might come to pass. (The future according to me!) The presentation is here if you are interested.

There were a couple of things I said that seemed to get attention and the one I want to have a bit of a look at is my comment that by 2012, Android will be the dominant mobile ecosystem. This has been both challenged by people and supported by some other comments I've seen around. But why might this be true?

I'll start by saying there is a piece worth reading on why iPhone might remain the top dog - and it is an almost religious argument. In fact,this almost exactly mirrors the comments made by people who challenge the view of Android's dominance - even if they don't quite see it in term of 'monotheistic religions' (and these have traditionally rules the world).

Some simple things first: Why did Microsoft grow so dramatically faster than Apple all those years ago when they were competing in the PC space? Fairly simply: because Microsoft made software, which once build, could be replicated indefinitely at a very low cost; and Apple made hardware and software, which was dramatically better integrated for a better experience, but had a high build cost and longer build cycle. This was then added to by the PC platform (dominated by IBM) being relatively 'open' to allow devices to connect and drivers to be created, whereas Apple computers were pretty closed and difficult to get inside of (which did, admittedly, make them much more reliable and resilient). (For a really interesting view of the operating system debate, check out this from Neal Stephenson.)

In mobile, I am not pinning any hopes on Microsoft. Their mobile offering is still firmly based on Windows (note the plural there...) and they need to completely rethink what they are doing. No, we do not want our desktop experience on our mobile - we want a different, connected, browsing experience; not an office, documents, formal experience. Enough said.

Android. Build as a mobile operating ecosystem. Build to integrate some key mobile things like maps, simple email, search, calendar, sharing. Google isn't yet the powerhouse in mobile PC/online, but at least it is starting from the right concept - a mobile only one. The benefit that Microsoft had in being only software will also play into the Android camp. As will the fact that Android is dramatically more open source than just about any other mobile ecosystem (and yes I acknowledge that some of the others are also).

Android will rely on decent handsets to provide a good experience, that's true. But they are taking it carefully and slowly and to date, the hardware is only getting better and their integration is working far better than Microsoft ever achieved in the mobile space. But I am not convinced this is that important - clone hardware made little difference to the uptake of Microsoft - especially when it was cheaper and improved versions more frequently released. While iPhone definitely leads in many ways - they will get caught up on both the price and the speed with which new features are bought to market. Note that the first mobile Augmented reality applications were developed on Android - basically because the handsets has features (in this case a compass) that wasn't (at the time) provided on iPhone. Don't discount the need for compelling new features as part of what drives our mobile selection.

Right now, there is a lot of talk about 85,000 reasons to stay iPhone (the number of apps in the apps store). But big number or not (and we all know how useless a search response of 85,000 can be when we want the single right answer) - how many are really useful and how many actually have longevity. Definitely, all growing apps stores, Nokia's Ovi, Palm's, Microsoft's Blackberry's and Android's, all need more apps and the numbers outside of iTunes are just not there. Yet.

As an iPhone developer, I have to deal with a recalcitrant Apple. They change their mind. They take a long time to approve things. They are not flexible. They are not responsive. They set the rules. They control what they can and try and limit access elsewhere. (Note particularly their constant attempts to stop Palm using their store...) I can't get my applications available until Apple says OK. Sadly, some elements of the SDK also show that Apple is a PC company and not a mobile company (I can't pre-populate the text of an SMS message from within the app in the same way I can an email). I know that much if their control is based on making sure that the experience for iPhone users remains a good one, but still... Why can't I release my untested app with a flash saying this and caveat emptor?

As long as Android (and others) let me build applications using more open tools, let me develop in more common environments, and still provide me with good hardware and great functionality - then I am likely to see these as places to port or develop my apps in. And that won't be good for iPhone's dominance.

Google is a big player. Android already has deals with around 20 handsets from manufacturers such as LG, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, Nvidia (yes, the graphics card people are getting into the mobile game), Samsung and HTC, as well as the Archos tablet (out in the US this year). If Nokia looks closely, they might also jump on the Android bandwagon- and that will really shake up the status quo.

This is a numbers game. But it is unlikely to be won by the closely tied and very closed shop that is iPhone. Regardless of how many apps there are. My predication? While Symbian might remain dominate in numbers (there is such a high installed base, especially in mobile-centric countries), the key mobile ecosystem will be Android, surpassing iPhone, by 2012.