Google’s Android Marketplace to unleash a wrath on Apple’s iPhone

All hail king Android

Early in the mid-70’s the first Apple computer was nothing more than a motherboard designed by co-founder Steve Wozniak. Hardly a personal computer. Apple was a rising underdog competing against IBM in the personal computing market. How times have changed!

Remembering Apple’s 1984 TV commercial. Apple was always anti-establishment struggling to bring down Big Brother (Big Blue) and spread originality of thought and defy the computing conformity.

How far the apple has fallen from the tree! The roles are now reversed and it’s Google that is the underdog trying to break Apple’s Big Brotheresque dominion over the mobile computing industry.

Steve Jobs’ business tactics are “Machiavellian” in nature. A leaked legal document distributed by the digital freedom crusaders EFF, discovered the legal red tape (pdf link) Apple binds its iPhone developers by. Truly draconian in nature the contractual documentation that Apple uses with developers for its systems allows it to reject any application developed even if the application meets the iPhone’s requirements.

“You may not issue any press releases or make any other public statements regarding this Agreement, its terms and conditions, or the relationship of the parties without Apple’s express prior written approval, which may be withheld at Apple’s discretion.”

Absolutely no reverse engineering for the iPhone’s operating system, nor any reverse engineering for the iPhone software development kit is permitted. Apple can also cease to support your application at anytime from their App Store for no reason whatsoever.

It’s no prophetic revelation that Apple’s upcoming iPad, current iPhone and iPod Touch, are what is referred to as closed systems, in which programming routines are kept secret from third party developers. Apple’s legal contracts with developers proves how closed those systems are. In fact Apple is so petrified of unauthorized code running on its iPhone (referred to as jail-breaking) that it has notified the US copyright office that jail-breaking should be illegal and consequences need be put in to place for it. What an assault on the open source community.

However, this is in stark contrast to Google’s App Marketplace which is supported by cloud computing architecture – a simply amazing idea, where developers are encouraged to create applications for Google’s products and unleash them on the community, a much more democratic process. Allowing the end-user to decide. Developers pay a flat one hundred dollar fee to write an application for the marketplace, in exchange they get 25 % revenue on sales for each application sold, and access to it’s 25 million user-base.

It’s really that simple. Create an application, send it on to the marketplace, once approved buyers can add them to their Google accounts. All these great applications can be triggered and started within your e-mail, like YouTube videos or even payroll software because they are all embedded within your mail, accessible in the cloud’s immense pool of resources. Google is offering developers the chance to set apps to be triggered by certain emails, events, or specific types of content.

While Apple emanates the Roman Empire. Rome started to decline as soon as it refused help from Germanic mercenaries. Which led to the mercenaries revolting and deposing Emperor Augustus. Apple may find that the developers may revolt and stop developing for their products by becoming more Google-centric.

Google may find itself building an Empire from Apple’s ashes. History is full of examples of proud computing companies that fell and are no more, just like IBM’s personal computing division once was mighty but now humbled. But with Apple’s current marketshare and customer loyalty, it’s a far fetched scenario that would make for a dream in Android-land.


Posted in: Uncategorized

10 Comments

  1. vox says:

    @skippy: “Be sure to remind the cyanogenmod developer about how open and democratic Android development is. He’s the guy that received the *cease and desist* letter from Google’s lawyers for reverse engineering the Android phone.” Ahem, he didn’t reverse engineer it, he was distributing Google binaries with his ROM, and any other company would have sent the same C&D. So tell me, where’s Apple’s version of “AOSP”? Nowhere, that’s where.

    @MLPrice: “HTC phones chocked full of Windows Malware” Wow, great FUD. So, you’ve proven you read Slashdot, but maybe RTFA. Then you’d know ONE phone was affected, and there wasn’t malware ON it, but on the SDcard (and the vector was probably not HTC). Nice try, though.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

  2. V G H says:

    Apple’s customer loyalty is no to be sneered at. Their developers for the most part are loyal too since many make a great living easily developing applications for Apple.

    Google’s Android has serious loyalty problems that should concern all. First their are Android developers who are bailing because they simply are not making any money compared to what they got with Apple. Others are frustrated with the fragmentation of the Android line and all the extra work it entails to try to support existing customers with different Androids.

    Finally Google gave Android away for free after spending money to develop it based on the understanding they would reap huge cash returns from controlling the search and adverting revenues. But there is a loyalty problem there too. Manufacturers and carriers are pulling all reference to Google by issuing hot online updates to the OS that replace Google services with Yahoo or Bing!and keeping the cash revenue for themselves. This adds another unexpected layer of frustration and fragmentation with Android.

    Can they legally do that? Yes Google gave the OS away as Open Source and they can do anything they want to with the system. How long are stockholders going to let Google fund a money losing OS like Android during a global recession?

    Lack of loyalty is what is going to kill Android sooner rather than later.

  3. anne says:

    I finally dumped my geriatric iPhone for the Nexus. I’ve read enough news regarding the HTC lawsuit and have to say that most analysts are saying that Apple is scared because Androids are making superior phones and are making impressive gains in market share, while RIM and Apple have stagnated. Apple is no longer a manufacturer of innovative products—look at the iPad. Unless you consider marketing products aimed solely at adults aged 60+ INNOVATIVE.

  4. Ratnok says:

    Wow. Attack of the Apple fanboys….

    I could dismantle every ridiculous statement mentioned above, but I’m too busy downloading free music while surfing the web and playing chess on my Nexus One. Whoops! It’s my move, gotta go!

  5. Rofiee Harun says:

    Article quote: “Early in the mid-70’s the first Apple computer was nothing more than a motherboard designed by co-founder Steve Wozniack”.

    The co-founder’s name is Steve Wozniak (not Wozniack). I’m sure this was a typographical error.

    Article quote: “first Apple computer was nothing more than a motherboard”

    What is the difference between the overall designs of personal computer today? Today’s design is more so “a motherboard” than it was in the past. What used to be separate systems like graphics card, sound card, Ethernet card, and drive controller cards are now all integrated into a single motherboard. In 1977, Apple II computer was hardly a single motherboard design. VLSI (Very Large Scale Integration) circuits were still at its infancy. Apple-II had other daughter boards plugged into it to make a complete personal computer.

    Article quote: “Hardly a personal computer”.
    I disagree completely with the above statement. The first Apple computer defined the first Personal Computer because it was a complete system unlike anything we ever had before. Since 1975, microcomputers like the Altair had no keyboard, and no monitor. It had a bunch of switches and LED lights that served as a binary output. Most of them came in a kit format rather than fully assembled.

    Apple broke that barrier and hence came out with the first Personal Computer. It came with full QWERTY keyboard, a monitor, a command-line Operating System, a built-in computer language (BASIC interpreter), and a cassette tape drive to store programs. Steve Wozniak later designs the 5.25 inch floppy drive for the Apple-II. Today’s personal computer still follow this basic system, that is an input system (keyboard, mouse), an output system (the monitor), and an I/O storage system (the hard drive).

    Article quote: “Apple was a rising underdog competing against IBM in the personal computing market”.

    It was the other way round. Apple became the underdog later. IBM was the underdog when it first came out with the IBM-PC in 1981. Apple had a head start when it came out with their first personal computer in 1977. I remember this clearly because I was using an Apple-II and was eagerly waiting for IBM to come out with their first personal computer. Everyone into technology was anxiously waiting because IBM had a recognized brand name for large business mainframe computers. Back then just about everything computing had to be done on a mainframe computer. I was totally disappointed when IBM came out with their first personal computer. With all the research money and mainframe knowledge they had, IBM PC was a total disappointment because it was nothing more than just another Apple-II in its basic core design. There was nothing innovative in its design, nothing significant. IBM can’t even develop their own OS for the PC but had to hunt around for CP/M people to develop it for them. It was only when that faltered that they approached Microsoft who hired someone with CP/M background to develop their MS-DOS. That was the reason why MS-DOS commands was so similar to the CP/M operating system.

    The introduction of Apple Lisa in 1983 and Apple Macintosh in 1984 leap frog everyone else with radical departure from how we communicate with computers. Apple introduce the first GUI (Graphical User Interface; overlapping windowing environment using a mouse) operating system that was copied from Xerox PARC research center.

    What breaks Apple’s domination and made them the underdog was the Phoenix BIOS. This allows other hardware manufacturer to make IBM compatible/clones without breaking IBM’s patent. Since IBM did not own the rights to DOS, Microsoft was free to sell MS-DOS to any IBM clones out there. IBM did not create an open system by choice. They made a mistake by not taking ownership of MS-DOS. Microsoft made out big time on this, first with DOS, and then with Windows. That is how Windows dominate the market share and left Apple’s Macintosh worldwide market share to dip below the 10% mark consistently.

    This history lesson here is very important because we are about to see another revolution. Google made Android an open source by choice. This allows hardware manufacturers to compete. That competition has already paid off. Hardware manufacturers are competing with one other to build a better Android phones. Within a short time period, we now have Android Smartphones that have better hardware and features than the iPhone. The numbers of these high-end smartphones are growing in numbers. Many industry analysts have already predicted that Android will dominate the Smartphone market in 2 to 3 years if not sooner. Will it able to dominate like IBM clone once did? I seriously think so, only time will tell. Already I’m seeing people building Android devices in unexpected places like in kitchen appliance. I came across this interesting site if anyone is interested with Android’s history and progress: http://androidcompare.com/time-l.html

  6. Bob says:

    Hey dipshits, it’s business.

    Name a company that doesn’t protect it’s interests, and I bet it’s not on the top few of Forbes companies for 3 years in a row.

  7. MLPrice says:

    Oh look, Apple is selling 25,000 iPads an hour and they’re still just pre-orders.

  8. MLPrice says:

    And yet we love the iPhone and although they are respectable attempts, the Android phones remain mostly imitations.

    Like most things “open source” the Android will flounder. The different devices are a fragmented mess, some with one version of the OS, others with another. Some software will install on one phone but not on another.

    As if created to explain why Apple is so heavy handed with the App store, news of security problems with Android surface weekly. The latest, ( HTC phones chocked full of Windows Malware ) illustrates the kind of world Android users will be accustomed to. Developers “unleashing” things on the community is a very good way to put it.

    And then there’s the issue of Apple’s 20 patent law suit. It only takes one to muck up the works and pretty much every patent attorney that’s taken a look says Apple’s cases are strong.

    I see Android users marching in the future. Those with brains marching to the iPhone with their heads down and tails tucked under, and those with no brains, just zealot boy hatred of Apple, marching to Microsoft for their Zune phones.

  9. Latinist says:

    Wow, holy generalization on the fall of the Roman Empire, Batman. Here’s a hint: whenever you find yourself longing to draw an analogy with something to the fall of Rome, stop, take a deep breath, and do something else.

  10. Skippy says:

    - “Absolutely no reverse engineering for the iPhone’s operating system, nor any reverse engineering for the iPhone software development kit is permitted.”

    Be sure to remind the cyanogenmod developer about how open and democratic Android development is. He’s the guy that received the *cease and desist* letter from Google’s lawyers for reverse engineering the Android phone.

    The only parts of Android that are “open” are the parts and pieces that Google claims are open – everything else is locked down.

    And it’s only “open and free” to the companies and devices that Google decides to license it to.

Leave a Comment