Archives: August 2010

Adobe bet all their chips on success of Android; Oracle gunning to cash in on Android’s success

Two different companies, two different strategies.

Since the Apple slammed the door on letting Flash in on the iPhone party, Adobe are betting all their chips and their mobile strategy for the future on the Android platform. The open approach of the Android platform in contrast to the iPhone lets them develop Flash software to run on Android. Since the introduction of HTML5’s multimedia capabilities may diminish the relevance of Flash, if Adobe want to get a foothold in the mobile space they need to do it now before they’re left behind by HTML5.

Oracle meanwhile are hellbent on cashing in on Android’s runaway success (Android phones are now outselling iPhones in the US). Since Oracle bought Sun and are now owners of the Java platform and it’s patents, trademarks etc, they’re suing Google for infringing on the Java patents by developing the Dalvik Java Virtual Machine which runs on Android devices. If Google had played nice with Sun when developing their Java based solution, they would have paid license fees to Sun to certify their platform with Sun’s TCK (Test Certification Kit), however the option at the time for mobile devices would have been to have developed a version of Java ME, which clearly does not offer the same power as Google’s home-grown Java VM solution which is more feature rich than Java ME, but a slightly slimmed down version of Java SE.

In a sense, Google saw a gap to be filled in the Java ecosysterm and built a new product that filled that gap, something that Sun did not have a solution for. Java ME has for years now been a very limited platform for mobile devices given the processing power smartphones now have. Google’s Android takes everything that Java ME had, throws in Java desktop capabilities and other extensions to make Java on a mobile phone a compelling experience, and now they have a platform that (in the US at least) is outselling even the runaway success of the iPhone.

I imagine Oracle and Google will come to some licensing agreement behind closed doors that lets Oracle eat some of Android’s pie. In a way, Google has fragmented Java by branching and creating their own version of a mobile JVM, but maybe this is what the mobile version of Java really needed. Sun couldn’t do it, so Google did it themselves. Maybe Oracle needs to work out a deal with Google for Android to become the new Java ME … ?

(Page views: 22)

My take on the Google/Verizon not-so-neutral net-neutrality proposal

There’s been a lot of talk about Google and Verizon’s net-neutrality proposal to the FCC. Net-neutrality in concept states that all content should be treated as equal and ISPs should not have the ability to throttle bandwidth depending on content type or origin.

Google and Verizon’s proposal seems to take the same view, EXCEPT that they make an exception for some ‘differentiated’ content to be throttled as providers see fit, and oh yes, none of these rules apply for wireless content.

Quite how this is sold as ‘net neutrality’ is anyone’s guess once you read between the lines and read the exception clauses – the proposal is more like a trojan horse to pave the way to be able to throttle content and offer preferential data rates for any type of content that can be pushed under the banner of ‘differentiated content’, or anything across a wireless connection.

When you think about it, there’s not much money to be made in treating all data and all data types equally. Where the money is to be made is in offering ‘differentiated content’. If you’re offering premium content at a price, of course you want your content to be able to stream to your customer and not be held up by ‘lesser’ or free content. Verizon knows this, Google knows this. What they’re doing is ensuring they have an open door which allows them to offer premium content and make money from these services, paving the way for future business.

If content providers want to offer premium content to consumers then maybe this needs to be provided over a pipe other than the internet – if you want it you pay for it. The rest of the internet should be left alone as it is though – I for one don’t want someone else to tell me that content I’m consuming is less or more important than other content.

(Page views: 29)