State of Telecom Industry in Pakistan

Google’s model is to build a killer app, then monetize it later – Andy Rubin, Director Of Android.

I would like to present two recent stories about the challenges faced by Google’s Android platform. As I wrote previously, the mobile OS platform war is one of the most important and pivotal for mobile industry and consumers. It reminds me of the browser wars of a few years ago. For Android, there are a few technical challenges but the real critical issues are related to business.

There is competition from Nokia, Apple, BlackBerry and Microsoft. The questions still remains on how applications will be distributed and how developers will earn revenue from them. Then there is the tension over who controls the phone features (Google or manufacturers like Samsung). My conclusion is that despite these initial problems, Android has all the potential to become a breakthrough success.

A few excerpts from this month’s Wired Magazine: Google’s Open Source Android OS Will Free the Wireless Web

The only firm that seemed to be successfully navigating the mobile labyrinth was Microsoft, one of Google’s biggest rivals. The Windows Mobile platform had less than 10 percent of the US smartphone market, but it was growing fast. Microsoft’s system, however, was the ugly stepsister of what Google was proposing: Redmond executives cared less about opening up the Net to mobile users than about tying the mobile operating system into its desktop dominance. A decade ago, Microsoft had underestimated the growth of the Web and then lost control of it to Google. Now it looked like it was Google’s turn to be caught flat-footed.

Windows Mobile is now installed on 140 devices, hosted by 160 carriers around the world. Key to its success was Microsoft’s ability to use its desktop domination as a battering ram.

The Android team had violated an essential tenet of the wireless industry: that users are too dumb and dangerous to be trusted with downloadable software. Engineers who write for just about any mobile operating system today have to spend time and cash obtaining security keys and code-signing certificates. Android would allow any application to be installed and run, no questions asked.

“The handset makers are on a treadmill, trying to turn out hardware every six months that’s innovative and thinner, with bigger displays and lower costs, while having to do the systems integration,” says Andy Rubin, director of mobile platforms at Google. “The net result is no innovation. They don’t have time. You know what? We make really good software. We can take on all that work.”

The second story is from Wall Street Journal (extracts below) and it describes the difficulties and the resulting delay in launch: Google’s Mobile-Handset Plans Are Slowed

Google now says that the handsets won’t arrive until the fourth quarter. And some cellular carriers and makers of programs that work with Android are struggling to meet that schedule, people familiar with the situation say.

T-Mobile USA expects to deliver an Android-powered phone in the fourth period. China Mobile, the largest wireless carrier in the world with nearly 400 million subscriber accounts, had planned to launch an Android phone in the third quarter but it has run into issues that will likely delay the launch until late this year or early 2009, a person familiar with the matter says.

Meanwhile, the Android software has yet to win broad support from large mobile-software developers. While Apple controls most aspects of hardware and software development for the iPhone, Google has to rally many different hardware, service and software providers to support its technology platform.

There is no evidence that Android won’t be able to gain momentum over time. But wireless carriers throughout the industry are confronting challenges as they seek to customize the Android software — which includes an operating system and programs that work with it — to promote their own Internet services. Some handset makers are taking longer than they thought to integrate Android, test it and build custom user interfaces to meet carrier specifications.

Andy Rubin, director of mobile platforms at Google, says managing the software-development effort while giving its partners the opportunity to lobby for new features takes time. “This is where the pain happens,” he says. “We are very, very close.”

One hold-up at Sprint is that the carrier would like to develop its own branded services based on Android, rather than just carry a phone with the built-in features Google plans to offer, the person familiar with the situation says.

Google has provided prototypes for carriers and handset manufacturers, though their final versions are likely to vary greatly. One prototype has a long touch-screen, similar to the Apple iPhone, a swivel-out full keyboard, and a trackball for navigation similar to the kind on some BlackBerrys.

Until recently, wireless carriers have often called the shots on what consumers see on cellphones, taking a cut of revenues from providers of add-on services and software. Google is trying to make the process more open and less expensive. It is making Android available to handset makers for free — hoping the investment will eventually pay off in advertising revenue — and on an open-source basis that makes it easier to add custom programming.

Meanwhile, rivals have a head start. Apple, for example, expects to sell 10 million of its iPhones this year. Research in Motion Ltd., which has roughly 14 million BlackBerry subscriber accounts, recently announced a new BlackBerry device that makes it easier for consumers to download music, watch videos and browse the Web. Microsoft Corp. also has a sizable position in high-end cellphones.

But some developers say it is easier to work with Apple’s programming tools than Google’s because of the familiarity with the company’s Macintosh operating system. As a result, a wide range of software companies have been scrambling to build new iPhone applications.

Apple and RIM “have superseded the excitement and hype” around Android, says Nihal Mehta, co-founder of Buzzd Inc., a location-based city guide and social network. Mr. Mehta says the company prioritized its iPhone application over an Android version because Apple’s guidelines are easier to follow and there aren’t any Android phones in the market to use in testing software.