Free Newsletter
Will Android reinvigorate Motorola's device division?
All eyes will be on Motorola next week as the troubled firm's device division prepares to launch its first Android-based device (or devices) at the GigaOm Mobilize 2009 conference in San Francisco.
There's no question that Motorola needs to hit a home run with this announcement. The company desperately needs a big win in the device space to reassure the industry that it is still a formidable player. But is an Android-powered device the answer to Motorola's troubles?
I spoke yesterday with Motorola's Christy Wyatt, vice president of the company's software applications and ecosystem, and expressed my skepticism about Android. It's not that I think Android lacks potential--I just think that it's going to take more time for developers to embrace it. Most of the developers I've spoken with say that they are resistant to investing development dollars in Android until there are more commercial devices and more end users to buy their applications. And without creative applications from talented developers, Android won't live up to the hype.
But Wyatt said that the tide is turning. She thinks mobile developers are embracing Android and seeing the benefits of an open-source world. And she's confident that Android offers developers not only a great technology on which to build apps but also a solid business model for bringing those apps to market. If you want to read more of my interview with Wyatt, click here.
I hope Wyatt is right. Clearly, the wireless consumer is hungry for innovative devices that can deliver a compelling user experience. In the past, Motorola has been able to creatively combine functional features with great form factors in popular devices like the Razr. Will it be able to do that again with Android? I hope so. --Sue
Comments
Let's look at a few points. Moto is super strong in the US where the carriers love them and want them to succeed and the public loves them for the RAZR. They will support Moto so long as Moto comes to market with a strong device.
Will the first Android device save the company? No. However, if it is a texting device that is easy to use and intuitive with a great UI, this will go a long way in Moto's favor.
The problem with Android is not so much the developer's embracing Android as a platform, but more on a monetary level. Currently there just are no sales in the premium Android marketplace. This is largely because the consumer is forced to use Google Checkout, which the average consumer does not have an account and no desire to open one up.
Once Android gets a simple merchant solution, the applications will mimic iTunes. This can not be emphasized enough.
So, will the first device save Moto? No. But it is the right step, and if Android can get the market place solution set, Moto will be in prime position to benefit.
I'm no Google Checkout fanboy, but I can't believe that's the problem. You have to enter your credit card info somehow. Android doesn't need a "simple merchant solution", they need to let people pay for applications on their phone bill (no credit card).
I think Android may be the winner for Motorola. They are the only telecom company which has solely focused on developing a path breaking Android device. CEO Sanjay Jha has been very clear on his Android goal and with a focused aim they can gain what they lost in the last couple of years. They are still way better than Samsung and Sony. I hope Motorola succeeds. Its just too lovable a company to see going down.
How will Motorola differentiate its Android devices?
Brand name? Maybe, but its brand image has taken a big hit in past 18 months. Certainly Apple, Blackberry and Samsung have stronger brand equity for now. Distribution? Two US carriers are not enough. Exclusivity: No. Several other manufacturers have Android devices.Applications: the previous posts outline some of the problems. Manufacturing efficiency...not really. That's Nokia's territory.
So how will Motorola Devices stem the huge operating losses that have dragged down the MOT shares for the past few years? It's not clear.



Comments (4) | Post a comment