Andy Rubin is wrong, and a thousand dollar challenge

At Google I/O 201o last week, Andy Rubin said on the subject of fragmentation:

Some of the press has called this "fragmentation," and that's probably the wrong word for this. The better word for it is "legacy." These phones and devices ... the iteration ... is incredibly fast.

If this was accurate, I'd be fine with it. But it's not, and it reminds me of how Frank Lutz, a political operative, recommended that republicans refer to Global Warming as Climate Change because it sounds more palatable.

Andy's statement completely misunderstands (or misrepresents) what fragmentation is. Fragmentation is NOT different operating systems all over the place - though that can be part of it. Fragmentation is when the same application has an inconsistent user experience depending on the device it's running on. (See let's define the fragmentation problem)

Let's take one example. Navigating the user to turn on GPS from within an application on the HTC Incredible works differently than navigating the user to turn on GPS from within an application on the Motorola Droid.

Both of these phones are running OS 2.1. The difference is that the HTC Droid Incredible uses the sense UI which causes some behaviors that developers need to know about. This is just one of many examples of what I've seen.

In another instance, a developer had a problem with their application, not on a legacy operating system, but on the newest 2.1. OS on the Motorola Droid.

So, I'd like to make a friendly challenge to Mr. Rubin.

If Andy Rubin can show me 5 applications that have an identical user experience across at least 5 devices running a particular Operating System, Duarlander will make a $1,000 donation to a charity of his choice. If he can't, he just has to admit that there is indeed an inconsistent user experience at times.

Here are the rules:

* Andy can pick whatever OS he likes. (If he chooses 2.2 we'll have to wait a little while for 5 phones to be running it)

* At least two apps must use the accelerometer

* At least two apps must use GPS

* The applications cannot be Google Applications.

That's it - those are all the rules. If Andy Rubin is right, then he should simply be able to pick an OS and 5 random applications, and he'll make a charity $1,000 richer.

Of course, I don't think it's going to be that easy.

So Mr. Rubin, what do you say? Do you take me up on my friendly challenge?

Fragmentation with the Sense UI

Here's an example of how navigating a user to turn on their GPS works differently on the sense UI. If you're a developer and your app navigates a user to turn on GPS, you'll likely need to modify your app if you want it to work correctly on the latest and greatest Android phone - the Droid Incredible.

Fragmentation Continued

I mentioned on Friday that I was working with a developer to test a game named Rolly. Here's an update on that and a continued example of the fragmentation issue for this game.

Nasty fragmentation example

Mike Harris, the developer of Rolly, a game created for the Android OS asked me to test out his app on a few phones. It works great on almost all of them. Except for the Droid - one of the most popular Android phones available. If this isn't fragmentation I don't know what is.

Becoming the other

If you look at major brands, very often you'll notice that there are two titans in an industry. Think Coke and Pepsi, Nike and Reebok, Apple and Microsoft, Kellogg's and General Mills. What I think is so impressive with Android is how quickly it's become "the other" choice for consumers looking for a smartphone. Obviously there is still blackberry, but that's primarily in the enterprise.

If you're a college freshman looking for a new phone, it's iPhone or Android right?

This isn't to say that being "the other" is Google's end goal, but it's pretty impressive how quickly the decision for so many people is going to be "should I get an iPhone or should I get an Android phone?"

I think there's a huge lesson for hardware manufacturers here.

If one of them could become the other option to the iPad, I think they'd be sitting in a really good spot. I continue to believe that if Motorola stripped Android down to the browser and put it on a slim respectable device there would be a huge market for it.

Becoming the other may not be the ultimate goal, but it's certainly a great milestone to reach.

What's behind Apple suing HTC?

We learned yesterday that Apple has sued HTC for infringing on multiple patents. By way of John Gruber, here's a full breakdown of the patents that Apple is suing HTC over.

Like most things, this event should not be viewed just as a singular event. Instead, today's news needs to be viewed alongside other recent headlines. Specifically, with Google's recent patent award for location based advertising, and maybe less obviously, the discussion over Apple's billion dollar datacenter.

In this context, it's clear that this isn't about HTC, and it's even larger than Android vs. the iPhone OS - though that's of course part of it. This is Apple vs. Google in the mobile advertising space, and the stakes are enormous.

I mention Apple's datacenter in the context of all this because it remindes us that Apple is a company that loves control. This belief, no doubt, comes from decades of experience working with a variety suppliers. If any company understands the importance of a good supplier, and the havoc that bad ones can wreak, it's Apple.

This lawsuit is all about Apple suing Google's best supplier because they know the achilles heel of Android is that Google doesn't control the distribution of it.

Please tell me, in what world is HTC infringing on Apple's patents but Motorola and Samsung are not?

Disrupt the best supplier, disrupt Google, disrupt distribution of the mobile advertising platform known as Android.

And HTC's 2009 net profit by the way was $440 Million. Apple turns that profit in about three weeks. It is far easier for Apple to disrupt HTC than it is for them to disrupt Google with their annual profit of $6.5 Billion.

What's going on, I believe, is that this is just a small battle over the huge war over the mobile advertising landscape.

I think this is also about whether Google will go on the offensive over the patent rights that were recently awarded for geo-based advertising services. The physical phones and the revenue they make up are significant, but they're pocket change compared to what the global market for geo based advertising services is going to be worth.

This lawsuit is Apple creating a bargaining chip over the real prize.

Have no doubt, Steve Jobs understands how much money is up for grabs in the local, mobile advertising space. If this settles out of court, I will be stunned if somehow Google's geo-based advertising patent isn't part of the overall deal. Who knows, if Apple wants to be aggressive enough, Google may even be forced to decide whether to watch their best supplier suffocate under the burden of defending a lawsuit, or buy and protect them.

Guess what happens then? Everything's on the negotiating table and Google decides if they want to play ball on the geo-advertising patent.

The bummer about all this though is that it means Apple has hit a horrible turning point. They are now spending at least some of their time, effort, money, and CEO's attention on preventing others from advancing forward.

When companies start doing this, it's almost never good. And the history of companies ranging from IBM to Motorola to Dell to the New York Times shows us that when you begin focusing on protecting your turf, more than you're focusing on finding the new turf, you've opened the door to trouble.

People have been wondering, what's Apple going to do what that $40 Billion in cash? What are they going make? Who will they buy?

Now we know they're going to spend at least a portion of it trying to tie up smaller companies in the legal process. It won't all be used to create and innovate, it's also going to be used to stifle creativity by competitors. It's going to go to lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, and who knows what else.

That's what makes me the most sad about all of this.

This is what fragmentation looks like

Here is one small example of what I consider to be fragmentation. On the app we made, GoFind!, the first thing a user does is enter in the name or number of the person they want to find.

Here's what it's supposed to look like - via the myTouch:



See how the options a user selects become available above the keyboard? That's so a user can press on their contact and continue with the flow. Makes sense, right?

Now, let's take a look at this same application on the Motorola Droid:



Look closely; do you see what's wrong? See that sliver of white space above the keyboard?

The names to choose from drop down behind the keyboard, rendering it impossible for a user to actually select the name of the person. If you have a Droid, you have to open the keyboard at this point to continue on with the flow. This doesn't happen on every phone with a keyboard though. Maybe it's the OS? Maybe the phone? Who knows. Either way, it's the kind of error that as a developer you at least want to know about.

We should fix this, and we will at some point, but it's a great example of how a small difference in the way the app works on different phones can impact the user experience.

This is what I consider fragmentation, and it's the reason Duarlander was started. If you're an Android developer, or have an Android phone, come check out our community, we'd love to have you join us.

If you don't consider this an issue, then you and I don't have the same standards for what the user experience on a mobile device should be.