Google Finally Has a Unified, Long-Term Roadmap for Android Success

Google Finally Has a Unified, Long-Term Roadmap for Android Success

Can Google's plan for global domination beat out Apple, or is it doomed to fail?

Read Full Article

This can only be good news, even to shock Microsoft out of complacency.

"Android TV" on "Smart TVs" (using "mobile phone tech") is gonna severely shake up the traditional console market long term imo.

think of it as "living room" "MSX for the 21st century"...only with the slightly significant fact that in a few decades time "there won't be a TV that isn't Smart" added into the equation...

publishers/developers simply will not ignore such a ubiquitous "install base"...and many console buyers (such as parents) will see little point in extra boxes costing hundreds of dollars when the latest favourite game can be downloaded onto the TV and played or can somehow be played "over the internet", again, "on the TV"...

as soon as Google unify the Smart TV manufacturers under a common operating system and a set of standards the cat is out the bag...at that point even if Google was somehow to go to the wall sets of standards and platform sharing would probably still be kept as what will emerge now there will be no going back from.

what were seeing here is basically the "surprise" emergence of what will become a very ubiquitous "platform".

and its is a surprisingly good idea for phone tech manufacturers, tv manufactures, goggle and other...software...publishers...lots of people stand to profit from this new, ubiquitous, "platform" they have seemingly stumbled upon creating.

if it hadn't come through goggle it might have came through the open source movement or "an agreement on industry standards" who knows...but imo it would have come somehow anyway...its one of those things that just "all makes sense" when you look at it from a certain pov...

some say "mobile phone tech" will outperform the latest consoles well before the projected end of the this new console generation...and in a TV you can throw in stuff like a mains powers supply and some cheap PC odds and ends like a hard drive.

they are already talking of "console quality" games and with the publics familiarity with "apps" they already have the basis of publicly accepted "steam like drm" in place and ready to go straight off the bat.

it wouldn't surprise me if all a kid really needed to "access" Modern Warfare 25 or something in the future was a cheap 3rd party wireless controller and a credit card...

basically hello surprise "media convergence"...which is actually not that much of a surprise from a certain pov...it was always fairly obvious the humble "TV" itself had gotta be in the running...

Like the author says Google really need to get into the more "traditional" desktops and notebooks if they really plan on dominating everything, Chromebooks are fine for what they do but they are limited. I use them because my notebook needs are very undemanding and infrequent, Chromebooks don't need any maintenance or constant AV care and the update process is painless and unobtrusive.

I used netbooks in the past but having to keep it clean and safe was necessary as a Windows platform, then because I might go a few weeks or more between uses there would be a stack of Windows updates ready every time. For anyone that needs moderate to heavy and completely offline productivity or gaming they are useless, Google will need either a fully fledged Chrome OS or Android if they want to occupy every single market.

As a fan of Android and hater of iStuff... I'm not so convinced. They are branching into things that me and no one I know of really cares about that much.

To me, it seems counter intuitive. We were seemingly heading for one device that does everything, but the strategy is now to have all devices do everything and that information pushed around to different devices. I can't be the only person who recognizes the personal security risks this idea brings, and I always have my smartphone with me. That means I always have my music collection, the internet, my contacts, and my gps with me. I don't even really watch television except for a few shows. I have a Google TV but that is because I wanted to be able to stream to my TV things from my computer and got tired of the limited file format support from my Playstation 3.

I think the watch thing is completely misplaced. For the vast majority of people I know who wear watches, it's a fashion accessory more than a time keeping device. And every "smart watch" I have seen is pretty much completely hideous. And once again, I have my phone with me.

The initiative to put affordable devices in the hands of people in places like India is nice though. Apple tried that with the 5c, but that was horribly done and failed utterly. The variability of the OS to be on a massive range of personal devices is what makes Google/Android the only candidate for success.

possible hundreds of thousands of tvs running the same operating system, is that a security flaw or the worlds largest rick roll i hear?

I won't be buying into it. I like my Android phone and would consider an Android watch/pedometer/health monitor but all I want on my TV is a screen and speakers which will output whatever audio/video content a connected device sends to them. I currently have a dedicated XBMC Linux box which I use to watch recorded and legitimately downloaded media content and I use a GoogleTV (blame me for being bleeding edge) or PS4 to watch Youtube and Netflix content. The other family TV uses a GoogleTV with BluRay to view Netflix content or local media content via the Plex client.

Of course I understand I am on the fringe since most people don't have the know-how to build and setup an XBMC box and a local media server but most of the prepackaged solutions are too limited by supposed user-friendliness for my purposes. I have a large library of DVDs and BluRays and it is extremely convenient to me to be able to rip them and access them from my XBMC box instead of having to change discs all the time. I haven't watched TV broadcast or cable TV in years.

Another part of the convenience of having external units such as GoogleTV, XBox whatever, PS#, or a homebrew HTPC is that when it needs a hardware update or replacement it costs less than replacing a TV with all of that stuff built-in and I have far more flexibilty.

As for games, I prefer gaming on my PC (which can also be connected to the TV) over consoles. And have no interest in a cloud-based OS which is all Google offers in the PC arena.

Ken Sapp:

Another part of the convenience of having external units such as GoogleTV, XBox whatever, PS#, or a homebrew HTPC is that when it needs a hardware update or replacement it costs less than replacing a TV with all of that stuff built-in and I have far more flexibilty.

Well, yes.

However comma, you are, as you say, on the fringe. And one of the things that would set you apart isn't the capacity to build an HTPC. Otherwise, they could just buy an external box. But a lot of people don't.

When I used to work retail, we moved a lot of TV/VCR combos. When DVD became a thing, we moved a lot of TV/DVD combos, as well as TV/VCR combos and VCR/DVD combos. And now, it seems, smart TVs are doing something fairly similar.

The same was (and is) true with HTS and stereos. I myself have a surround sound tuner hooked up to almost all my media devices (PC included), and I'd rather swap out individual components. But those all in one HTS units are still big sellers.

Basically, the issue is that people want a magic box. And all-in-one device. Even with other set-top devices and consoles and whatever else available, people want that all-in-one "convenience."

All that streamlining will make the NSA's work that much easier considering Google works with them.

I'd say Google already has a strong presence in the laptop/desktop area. While I don't use ChromeOS or a chromebook, I still use their services on my desktop all the time, and isn't that what Google actually cares for? It's not hardware sales they aim for, but adoption of their services in as many places as possible. Hardware is just a means to an end for them.

So yeah.. hail Google overlords and so on.

Is it just me or are those apple products in the picture there...?
OT: Little wary of google after how the Moto X turned out. Good phone but no one really cared much for it.

Even as a long time Android (phone) user and amateur developer, I don't see too much success in aiming at all platforms at once. Or if there is success there, I doubt it'll be for the best. Fact is, people use different devices for wholly different purposes. I'm happy to have Android as my phone platform for a long time to come, but nothing can really replace Windows as the desktop workhorse. And I don't see cars benefiting from Google integration either (at least not for anyone with remotely safe driving). What does a car internal system need that standard bluetooth phone integration doesn't already provide? I admit it might be short-sighted to disregard innovations that no one's even dreamed up yet, but some things just shouldn't mesh what is, at its roots, a handheld OS.

Android One on the other hand seems like a smart move. Android is fantastic as a mobile OS, and anything that reinforces that is the direction that's guaranteed to succeed for them.

What surprises me most about this post is that it seems Google thinks there's an actual market for smart tv's. I only know of 1 person with a smart tv myself, and he's only got it "so that he's prepared for when they're a thing".
I.E. he ever uses a single smart-feature and hardly understands the thing :P

Then again, I never would've guessed smartphone-gaming would be as big as it turned out, so I suppose I'm no expert by any accounts.

K-lusive:
What surprises me most about this post is that it seems Google thinks there's an actual market for smart tv's. I only know of 1 person with a smart tv myself, and he's only got it "so that he's prepared for when they're a thing".
I.E. he ever uses a single smart-feature and hardly understands the thing :P

Then again, I never would've guessed smartphone-gaming would be as big as it turned out, so I suppose I'm no expert by any accounts.

the eventual emergence of "Smart TV" as a platform can almost be seen apart from "googles plans".

the amalgamation of technology involved completely makes sense from business/production/development povs both for phone and TV manufacturers (and some companies like sony, who are already "in on this", are even already both).

it will basically just come about through time in much the same manner that you cannot buy a "traditional" CRT TV in a "TV store" atm...i very much doubt there will be some huge consumer rush for "Smart TVs" outside maybe the "keeping up with the Joneses" upper middle classes who can afford to casually splash cash on such things...but there doesn't need to be...as long as they "fade in" to near ubiquity over time...just as "flat screens" have...they'll still become a near ubiquitous platform...over time.

as far as "what the customer wants" goes....i was discussing this subject with my brother the other day and said "soooo...if i was to give you a couple hundred and say 'go buy us a TV' you would search through the stores for the ones that didn't have iplayer or youtube on them ?..."

he said "fuck no, i'd buy one that at least had iplayer on it lol"...to which i said..."well there you go...the truth is you would in fact be looking to buy a proto "Smart TV' as it is...".

there are some things TV manufacturers have infamously tried to sell us quite recently that are arguably stupid (3D and curved TVs for example) but a TV that has all the multimedia/internet capabilities of a modern smart phone...is not one of them.

a TV that has all the multimedia/internet capabilities of a modern smart phone...is, imo, simply what the public will come to expect...

very few, if any, casual consumers are going to go all "hell no ! what i want is less functionality !" :|

Sleekit:

K-lusive:
What surprises me most about this post is that it seems Google thinks there's an actual market for smart tv's. I only know of 1 person with a smart tv myself, and he's only got it "so that he's prepared for when they're a thing".
I.E. he ever uses a single smart-feature and hardly understands the thing :P

Then again, I never would've guessed smartphone-gaming would be as big as it turned out, so I suppose I'm no expert by any accounts.

Snip

very few, if any, casual consumers are going to go all "hell no ! what i want less functionality !" :|

... I feel special now. I long back to the days when MP3 players were just that, devices from which to play music. Preferably with an extended batterylife at that.
Then they brought displays along, and MP4 stuff (because watching your favorite series on a 320x140 screen is.. useful?) and now these things are getting games on them too.

Same thing with phones, really. All these apps and stuff, I can see the appeal, sort of.. But I can do most of these things a lot better/more easily on a desktop PC.

A PC, I might add, that doesn't deplete itself of valuable battery-life by loading Google maps, play store, social hubs, the gallery and everything else I never use but can't remove/disable on boot.

Perhaps I'm just a control freak and mobile OS's are just too watertight (or not modular enough) for my taste. Perhaps I'm crazy for not wanting to put my phone on the charger as part of my daily routine, where my nokia 33-10 went for a week and a half without flinching.

In any case, you're right. Smart TV's will be the future someday, and I won't look extra hard to find a gool ol' dumb TV if the 'smart' ones are cheaper/easier to find. At least I hope they won't *make* me use its features via forced social network integration or something.. One can hope..

funny you should mention the battery life issue tbh because that's one of the big pluses a "static" TV has when you stick "mobile phone tech" in it ie no power problems so the hardware can be allowed to "stretch to legs" in a way it does not often get to when its trapped in a phone and tied to the limited power supply of a battery...basically in theory you should be able to get much more "bang for your buck" out the same, cheap, mass produced hardware just buy giving it a mains power supply and "letting the (power management related) breaks off" :)

"PCs"...on a desk etc...will probably always have their (all singing, all dancing) place imo.

im totally with you there and i actually greatly object to things like ipads being swapped with computers in schools because, basically, "you cannot program an ipad on an ipad"...and objects like it and phones very much lock people in to being "a constrained consumer" of a product rather than being "an unconstrained/creative user" of a tool.

but "the TV"...in the living room...i think most people would agree..."is something else" conceptually for most people :)

"in the living room", just as was always said about consoles, "people just want something that works".

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here