What Happens When It’s Google/Android Vs. Amazon/Android? | Hacker News Reader

Android?

techcrunch.com

45 pointsssclafani33 comments

This article fails by not mentioning all the Google Apps that Amazon would have to replace. They have a Market replacement but they would also have to have replacements for Maps and YouTube. The tight integration with Gmail, Contacts, Calendar, voice searching and Google Voice would also be missed, though maybe less so in a tablet. Presumably a partnership with Microsoft could provide replacements for most of these except YouTube (also Google's trump card with Apple), but that is pure speculation at this point.

From the article:

>This means they’ll have the games and Google’s own Android Market will not (at first). That’s huge. And you can expect more of those types of deals.

Is it, and are you, saying that if I have Android from Amazon it's locked in some way and I can only install apps sourced from Amazon. That seems pretty crazy.

Surely I'd install apps from Google and from Amazon?

Google's apps won't be pre-installed on the device and they won't be available on Amazon's "appstore". You could probably get Google's apps somewhere on the internet and side load them, but that's not a very good user experience.

An Amazon tablet/phone wouldn't have the Google Market. Not because it's locked; because Google charges for it and has certain requirements the manufacturer has to agree to; requirements Amazon probably wouldn't meet.

Well, Google does have licensing requirements, which aren't completely public, and the payment arrangements aren't entirely public either. But I have seen reports that the payments don't all go one way --- that, for instance, carriers get some share of Android Market purchases made on their networks.

As to whether Amazon would want to meet Google's requirements, that's a business decision on their part. Barnes and Noble hasn't for the Nook, at least so far --- but that's in part based around a strategy of marketing the Nook entirely as a niche device (a Kindle work-alike with a better web browser). It may depend on how many of the most popular apps show up in the Amazon Appstore when they get close to launch.

So for all intents and purposes it is locked. If as a user of an Amazon sold Android based device I can't get the Google Market because of something Amazon failed to do then that's as good as the device being locked.

So if I have a HTC device do HTC have a further app store?

Apple have a lot to answer for!

But to install apps from Google, you have to license the Google Apps from them.

The thing is, I don't understand a scenario where Google would, in good faith, refuse to license those apps. They've been very up front, that if you pass their compatibility tests, they will more or less give you the apps for free.

Android without the Google Experience is a lot less compelling proposition to lots of folks, and for quite a few it would be a showstopper.

Microsoft would welcome Amazon as another partner in its anti-Google alliance, even if they were using Android.

I think if Amazon wants to form an assault on Google/Apple, they'll have to go it alone for the most part. Partnering with Microsoft means jumping in bed with someone who has their own competing platform. There's no way in hell that MS execs would watch as Amazon/Android platform move ahead of WP7 without doing something stupid to try and impede their growth.

I think Amazon is the kind of company who could put together a good competitor to the Google Apps product. The only area I don't see them coming out on top is search. Although, we shouldn't forget about A9. Amazon has some tremendous strategic advantages in that they own the largest online retail presence in the world. I use the hell out of their shopping and comparison apps.

Keep in mind that your Average Joe cares about a radically different set of problems than you and I. They're less concerned with "checking in" and more concerned with getting the best deal through the easiest possible method for the things they buy day-to-day. Apple understands this. That's why SJ pushed so hard for the $0.99 price point for music in the iTMS, and why Apple licensed Amazon's "1-click" patent.

For the huge number of consumers that are still using feature phones, an Amazon offer with tightly integrated retail tools is a very attractive proposition.

Youtube can be accessed via Flash/HTML5 and I imagine most Google Android apps will be heading in that direction (well, more the web/HTML5 route than Flash) where possible in future.

I don't think lack of apps, from Google or 3rd parties, is that big a deal generally once you've got the basics covered and a good web browser. And that seems to be the internet consensus now that Apple is on the brink of losing that particular stat comparison.

> except YouTube (also Google's trump card with Apple)

Is that true? I have honestly never used the YouTube app on any of my iDevices. This might be because YouTube plays natively in HTML5.

I like how MG somehow turns the biggest online retailer going Android into a negative for Google. Guess what? Google does believe in this "open" nonsense. That is the whole idea. How is Amazon/Android vs. Google/Android any different than the current state of Motorola/Android vs. Samsung/Android vs. Google/Android vs. HTC/Android vs. etc? Google's whole plan is stay above the fray and just being the default operating system. Sure, Amazon have an app store, but Google is in the driver's seat here. They run the platform. If Amazon steps out of line (goes Bing, whatever) Google has plenty of tools to slap them on the wrist. Fork the platform in a new direction that renders Amazon's devices useless, and that is just off the top of my head. They have shown they can do this in the past by forcing with Samsung and Motorola going away from Skyhook. Of course, this will be portrayed in the Apple pundit media as an affront to openness, but Google is smart. They know that there is a way to be open and successful and a way to be open and be used.

As someone who just got a chinese brand android derivative for experimentation, curiosity and comparison I can assure you that if Amazon decides to differentiate heavily across brand they will efficiently partition the android universe. The difference between Hardware/Android and Amazon/Android is that Amazon is not hardware but ecosystem.

Here is a key why. The market place. Not having an integrated google calendering or maps or email system is okay, the android browser is great with html5 and youtube support. If they do not use the browser it makes things much worse but still bearable - I am sure suitable alternatives will turn up. But the marketplace is not freely available. You will not find it in any legal channels (you can find the amazon store though).

And then all those sites with links, QR codes etc will be broken. All those apps people speak of and the instructions to get them will not be readily matched. I know why this is, but people whose main interests lie outside tech will think android doesn't work - if the marketing places emphasis on the fact that the devices run android. Only those who know how to root, sideload and know where to find apk files will be able to get some access to the Google universe - for example google docs is not on the Amazon app store. That is, until the stores reach some level of parity in terms of alternatives and due to the fact that configuring for two stores is not such a biggy as things go. And then the division as partitioned by average experiences/expectations due to defaults will be complete.

For what its worth I much prefer the amazon app store in terms of functionality, search and recommendations. Based on appstore I suspect the amazon devices will only be available in the US first.

You do realize that you started out saying Google believes in the "open" nonsense and then went on to say how it could slap Amazon's wrist and how it did a similar thing to Samsung and Motorola.

I don't get how the meaning of open somehow got turned into you have to let competition run all over you. Leveraging your work may not be in the sunshine feel good happiness part of open, but it certainly isn't closed. Motorola/Samsung were able to use Skyhook if they wanted to, Google just put themselves in a position where Motorola/Samsung had to choose between who was the more important partner. I have no doubt Google can do the same with Amazon.

> I have no doubt Google can do the same with Amazon.

Except, not. The way they strong-armed the Skyhook issue was by saying they would restrict access to the Android App Store if they used Skyhook. Obviously that strategy won't work on Amazon.

Google only supports the "openness" of Android insomuch as it includes the use of Google services, which is where they make their money. An Amazon Android could completely eliminate all Google services, thus becoming a threat. Amazon has their own app store, their own music service, can use Bing for maps, etc.

Because open is such a stupid word that means different things to different people.

Amazon, amongst Google's Android partners, strikes me as the greatest threat to direct competition with Google's expanding efforts to become... Well... Amazon.

"Fork the platform in a new direction that renders Amazon's devices useless..."

Large portions of Android are open source. The top layer -- the "Google" layers -- belong to Google, but Amazon has the option to fork Android as well.

Amazon is an online retailer and an infrastructure company. They've got a ton of brilliant engineers that understand software. One could argue that Google has more "product" people, but one could also argue that their product people don't have that much of a lead on Amazon.

I'm not saying this is a walk-on win for Amazon, but I see the next 10 years shaping up to make the old IBM vs MS vs Apple battle look like an undercard fight.

They don't mention the possibility that Google and Amazon strike an agreement. One knows how to do online data mining, the other knows how to do retail online; it might be worth for each of them to join force by givin up the domain in which they don't shine: they don't need an Android inner fight in which they're likely to both lose to Apple.

I am sure Amazon are pretty good at mining data.

I am sure Amazon are pretty good at mining _their own_ data.

When it comes to mining the open, unstructured and uncontrolled mess that is the Internet, I believe they're no match to Google. Which is OK: it isn't part of their core business.

This is a nonexistent battle as a developer, isn't it? Applications that sell on one platform will sell on the other, and Amazon's licensing agreement is non-exclusive. This is like Coke vs. Pepsi and we're selling the ice cubes.

What is interesting about the potential squareoff is the huge advantage that Amazon has in the slate form factor: ~$120 for a Kindle which is designed for the killer slate app - reading [edit: of which web surfing is often just a part]. Not only has Amazon already stolen a march exactly where Google is most vulnerable with there advertising subsidized models, their current advertising model has much greater potential to extend the content of periodicals than the keyword driven highest bidder (aka frequently both irritating and irrelevant) model upon which Google relies. Finally, the lion's share of Amazon's revenue model in the slate market is based on providing consumers exactly what they ask for (books and slates) rather than primarily providing what third parties (advertisers) are willing to pay for.

There are sound available alternatives to Google's Gmail, Maps, and Search from which Amazon may choose. Google does not have a similar alternative to Amazon's primary asset of reputation for quality and service among consumers.

I don't have an Android device, can someone explain how Google earns money from Android now? To me this article doesn't make any sense, Android is free for everyone after all. So why would Google care about an expanding ecosystem?

The official line is that Google makes money from people using the web, and therefore looking at their ads. Anything that makes people use the web more is good for Google, including carrying little 3G-connected computers with them everywhere they go to use as "phones".

So they don't care about an expanding ecosystem as they'll get money out of it anyway, even if it's iPhone or other non-Android platforms that's getting people on the web.

But everything in tech journalism gets looked at through Apple-tinted glasses these days and Apple would detest an iPhone fork, if that was even possible, so therefore Google must be assumed to fear it too.

Yes. A market with 1 billion Google Android phones and 1 billion Amazon Android phones is better than a market with 2 billion Symbian phones.

Most people (IMO correctly) assume that the point of Android is to make Google the default search on mobile phones. As more and more people use mobile devices to search, and search is after all Google's core business, it has an enormous interest in tapping into the mobile search market. And I'm guessing many users will choose to use the default search provider the phone uses.

So the theoretical threat is that Amazon/Apple will negotiate a deal with Microsoft to use Bing as the default search on their phones, thus losing Google a lot of customers.

More about their Android strategy here: http://abovethecrowd.com/2011/03/24/freight-train-that-is-an....

A deal with Microsoft wouldn't make sense and Amazon would shoot itself in the foot if it did that, simply because most users are expecting to see Google's logo and when searches won't work so well on Bing, they'll assume that's because they are using a Google-clone (regardless of the technical merits of Bing versus Google).

I'm seeing a company like Amazon switching to Microsoft alternatives only in the case of a total war, in which Amazon would want to hurt Google by any means necessary, even if it compromises their own products.

I'm pretty sure Apple thought about replacing Google's services by now, switching to Microsoft. There have been rumors about it too. They haven't done so yet, even though they are pretty upset about the existence of Android. Google's lock-in is better than one would think.

IMHO, I'm seeing Amazon approaching Google in the interest of collaboration, especially since they can complement each-other nicely.

A number of reasons

1 - Google make money from sales in the Android Market

2 - Google makes money from adverts and charges in their own applications + services running under Android

3 - Google makes money selling adverts in other applications running under Android

4 - Google learns a lot about mobile usage from Android

5 - Google can charge manufacturers for the ability to pre-install Google applications

All of these are either impossible or harder under the iPhone, which at the time of the Android launch, was looking like gaining a dominant market share on smart phones, and Apple had already started to "abuse" or take advantage of this market share by cutting out competitors.

I would guess that the cut google takes from market app sales is significant, so, Amazon running an alternative market is somewhat of a threat.

Not necessarily. Many reports on the Android Market revenue split say that Google shares most (if not all) of the 30% side of the Market split with the wireless carriers. This is not as surprising as it sounds when you realize that Google has been making a big push for carrier billing, but it does mean that Google is less threatened (on a revenue side) from an Amazon app store than it might seem at first glance.

May the best Android win.

Currently, I use the Amazon marketplace instead of Google because the Google marketplace doesn't support my device (Pocket Edge upgraded to 2.2).

However, there's no reason (other than policy) that a device couldn't access both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com