Add to del.icio.us     Digg this

Aug. 27, 2008

Open source mobile developers received some very unexpected news two days ago when Google actually removed all Bluetooth functionality from its Android mobile development platform.

Google's move has everybody in the Linux community perplexed and many are wondering why it would contemplate such drastic action on a functionality that is today very essential to any mobile device.

As a result, there are many industry analysts and wireless industry observers that have some doubts about the future of Google's mobile operating system.

Google went and removed the Bluetooth API (application programming interface) from its first version of the mobile phone's operating system, Android 1.0.

While analysts agree the move is very surprising and totally unexpected, it could just be the first of many disappointments for those looking forward to the initial batch of Android-based phones.

Some are questioning, is Android Google’s weapon against Microsoft?

In a blog posting yesterday, Android engineers cited time constraints as the primary reason the Bluetooth API was scrapped. Nick Pelly, the Android engineer in charge of the Bluetooth API, said the software developer’s kit (SDK) would not include Bluetooth capabilities until the company was able to settle on an API interface that would future proof the Bluetooth application.

Pelly actually wrote “the Android Bluetooth API was pretty far along, but needs some clean-up before we can commit to it for the SDK. Keep in mind that putting it in the 1.0 SDK would have locked us into that API for years to come.”

Lately, there's been a lot of testing done on the Android platform in the open source community. Despite the lack of full support for developers though, Google confirmed that Android 1.0 will offer some limited support for Bluetooth headsets. How much support can one expect? Nobody seems to know for sure.

Gartner analyst Ken Dulaney called the absence of a Bluetooth API a very serious omission, but said Android’s partial support for headsets would alleviate some concerns, albeit Google still needs to provide Android with Bluetooth functionality nevertheless.

According to Dulaney, one of the major side effects of the missing Bluetooth API is that the Android-based handhelds will suffer from serious fragmentation across the various vendors using the platform.

The open source SDK, he said, means that handheld makers will create their own different Bluetooth capabilities, and as a result, complicate the development process in an industry that is growing rapidly by leaps and bounds.

Dulaney added “that is all that’s really required. While the other profiles would be nice, having headset support was essential.”

“That means Android won’t be one flavor, it will be many, making it more difficult for software developers to write code once and run it everywhere,” Dulaney added.

Besides Bluetooth connectivity, Google will also have to work out other key issues that are often found in first generation handheld devices. Jack Gold, an independent technology analyst based in Northborough, Mass., said the usability of the platform’s Web browser as well as its ability to sync up with Microsoft Exchange will be crucial to Android’s success.

“The whole notion of how really secure the wireless phone will be is also very important,” Gold said. “Is it encrypted? Can it be locked down? How really safe is it to use?”

Gold added that even though the phone is initially going to be targeted at the consumer crowd, the operating system will still need to demonstrate its applicability to the enterprise environment.

“Today, consumers are also enterprise users, so if you’re building a high-end feature phone you better be able to make it fit into an enterprise environment,” Gold said. “It’ll be about both manageability and proven security.”

Whether or not Android will fully address these issues still remains to be seen, as Google has kept many of the specifics around the platform under wraps.

The secrecy has even put off some of Android’s development community, which has questioned Google’s true commitment to open standards and its inherent support (or lack thereof) to the overall Linux community.

Rob Enderle, principal analyst at The Enderle Group, said that as long as Google is working to create a highly useable and reliable mobile operating system, keeping Android close to its vest is a wise move.

He added “remember a while back that Apple didn’t actually open up the iPhone to developers during the first year."

"The phone’s got to work as a phone first, because if it breaks or is unreliable, then you might not get a second chance.”

Enderle added, “just about everything hinges on the real finished product with Google’s Android. Nothing that Apple did on the iPhone mattered until people could buy and try out the phone.”

“There will surely be some things missing from Android that you would expect from a mature operating system,” Enderle said. “I think it’s going to take the traditional two or three years to mature. That’s true with any operating system anyway. Just look at the early versions of Windows that Microsoft put out many years ago.”

However, despite the rumours and all the hype, Dulaney reminded users that operating systems are the most difficult lines of code to write of any software product out there, simply because there are so many things that can (and usually do) go wrong.

He advised potential buyers to be patient with the first generation Android devices.

Add to del.icio.us     Digg this

    This article was featured on Business 5.0.

Source: Google.