Is Apple Letting Android Live?

September 6, 2010 • Mobile, Technology, Thinking About • by
1 Comment

In short, no. Android lives on regardless of Apple.

Earlier today, I actually deleted a potential post about what would have happened if there been a CDMA version of the iPhone. After messing around with it for a while I came to the conclusion it doesn’t really matter, the past is past and who knows what would have really happened.

And then TechCrunch runs the article, “Is Android Only Surging Because Apple Is Letting It?“

Head-smacking ensued.

They don’t take the revisionist history approach I was going for, but they did lightly touch upon some of the areas I wanted to cover. Namely, why do people choose Android and what would have happened had Verizon been able to get their own iPhone? There were more areas for sure, but since I couldn’t get the post to be anywhere near coherent, I gave it a swift death. In retrospect, maybe I should have just slimmed it down like TechCrunch did.

But if you enjoy thinking about these things, here are some of the areas I was thinking about:

  1. How does one explain the growth of Android in non-U.S. markets like China?
  2. Also, if Apple really wanted to win China, should they do a TD-SCDMA version?
  3. Did people really choose Apple over Android or did the strength of each operator’s channel determine the majority of the choices?
  4. If a CDMA version had existed and therefore no exclusivity with ATT, would Android have been used as a pawn by both ATT and Verizon to gain concessions from Apple? You have to admit, their hardware IS expensive. And I’m sure they’ve been eye-balling the App store of Apple for some time…
  5. Apple famously attempts to defend it’s consumer experience, so could they have effectively supported both a VZW and ATT platform? And if not, how would they prioritize without aggravating the other partner?
  6. With CDMA typically being a more expensive technology, would Apple have accepted the margin hit on their hardware?
  7. Is Apple just sticking around at ATT until LTE comes to Verizon?

Obviously, I have my opinion on these questions, but there is no point in going through them. In the end of my now-deleted piece, I couldn’t think of a compelling reason for why Apple would have ever gone to (or will go to) Verizon before LTE. I just wasn’t comfortable enough to say it with confidence. So what am I getting at with all this? Basically…there is a lot at play, especially in the U.S. market and it wouldn’t be wise to try and simplify Android’s growth around only one or two factors.

Wireless and Net Neutrality: Explain to me…

August 12, 2010 • Mobile, Technology • by
0 Comments

I’ve been on the handset side a long time, so I’m not fluent on wireless infrastructure challenges. As I read Engadget’s review of the Google / Verizon Net Neutrality Proposal, one section particularly stood out:

Wireless broadband. Possibly the most important provision of the entire agreement, and the biggest compromise. Under Verizon and Google’s plan, wireless networks would be excused from every provision except the transparency requirement. Why? Because of the “unique technical and operational characteristics of wireless networks,” of course. Or… perhaps because Google has an interest in allowing Verizon to do whatever it wants with traffic on its Android-dominated wireless network. Either way, it’s hard to reconcile the stated need for net neutrality in this agreement with a giant exception for wireless networks, which are quickly becoming the most important networks of all.

I’ve been told many operators have suffered with wireless capacity issues for quite awhile, especially as more users move toward more data-intensive smart phones. So with limited spectrum, they have to be careful so as to maintain a decent level of service for all customers. Some of them will massage certain traffic, like torrent downloads, in favor of others. So in a sense, they are doing the common user a favor by keeping possibly illegal file-sharing and such to a minimum. It really isn’t even about censoring or neutrality, it’s just about keeping the network alive.

So I ask anyone reading this, I beg you to correct my thinking. To me, it seems a reasonable position for some wireless operators to take. However, I’d like to know more about this debate. Educate me please.

One caveat: Give me something better than the “slippery slope” argument.

We Love to Talk

July 12, 2010 • Mobile • by
0 Comments

There’s more to be done with voice.

That was said by Nokia’s former CEO, Jorma Ollila. In 2006.

Apple and HTC+Android are getting steady reminders lately about why they are still called phones, and an even bigger reminder that Americans still love to talk more than anything.

But seriously, did anyone else scratch their heads when Jobs explained the new iPhone antenna? While not an antenna engineer, I still know enough of this black magic to wonder, “What happens when you touch the metal?” Sadly, it appears as though I might have a future in the dark arts. Considering the amount of testing that ATT requires, this must have been a known issue prior to market launch. So what happened?  Was this design taking priority over performance at Apple? Was ATT seeing market pressure from Verizon-Android offerings that pushed them to rush this through? Did Apple just succumb to hitting a date expected by the market?

I’m curious. If anyone has some insider info here, please let me know…