By 
Eric Schmidt – writing as a guest contributor in the Harvard Business Review – talked about Google’s strategic initiatives in 2011, and one interesting, but not-so-surprising point was brought up: all of it is mobile. If it’s not Android phones or tablets, then it’s pushing NFC using Android. And even if it isn’t Android, it’s about offering innovative products for those who live their lives on the go.
It makes sense: Google has already put quite the sizable stamp on the desktop market. The harsh reality is that people aren’t tethered to their laptops and desktops 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you were to ask anyone – from a high school student to a business professional – what they’re connected to more in a day, I can almost guarantee a majority would say their phones.
All of Google’s plans – whether it be through the apps, through the hardware, or through everything else that makes up the experience they strive to provide – have a place in mobile, and I believe it will remain the most important sector of this ecosystem throughout the decade.
Life is now about converging, simplifying, and living better, and in more ways than one, Google helps make that happen – mostly through Android and the mobile web. Now that we know where their focus is for sure, let’s look forward to another exciting year. If you want to read more of Schmidt’s entry, look no further. [via ReadWriteWeb]
no…now that there focus is on mobile, they need to do something about fragmentation!
i wasnt but in light of recent events…im nervous about that area.
I realise that RWW only published this today, but this ‘news’ is weeks old. I read a lot of Google’s own blogs and subscribe to their YouTube channels, too. Honestly guys, if I knew about this, it’s your job to have to known about it and published it before.
@1 It’s not their problem and you know it. You’re just pissed because your phone isn’t running 2.2 or 2.3. Android wouldn’t be open and freely-available in the same way if Google managed all updates. Deal with it or buy a good phone like the Nexus One(cheap on eBay, I’d imagine) or the Nexus S. Pure Google is the only way to go.
people spend 5 hours in front of tv everyday on an average
@Khalid we don’t follow the Harvard Business Review, nor do a lot of other people in this line of work. Sometimes, old news is still new news.
@Khalid
No it’s not their job to know every news on android ever. Do you see that button in the menu above? Yes it says Tip us meaning that YOU had the possibility to tell about this whenever you heard of it.
On the subject, I believe it’s the right area to focus on, as it’s a market in huge progress.
This is fantastic. I can’t wait for more native Google apps, and a push for NFC.
That’s a good point, MP. If anyone ever comes across something we haven’t covered that you think would be newsworthy, please don’t be afraid to use that Tip Us link at the top of the page. We don’t like being late for the sake of being late.
@6 and Quentyn. I don’t send Phandroid tips because honestly I assume you guys follow all the blogs, twitter accounts and watch all the YouTube videos I do and then some. I sometimes forget that(and this is a statement of fact, not me being arrogant or ‘big headed’) some people don’t watch the hour(or sometimes 2) long Google videos, like the one where Schmidt was interviewed and mentioned his Harvard Business Review paper. I know some people do only read this blog for Android news, but I just assumed that even if the Phandroid people hadn’t seen something, someone else would’ve provided a link.
IMO, Google is on the path, but needs to focus a little bit more on user experience with what it’s already got in the stable. Hopefully, Matias will help in that area too (i.e., take the Honeycomb ethos enterprise-wide.)
To me, Google’s biggest pro is that you can access information across a wide range of devices and from multiple locations. The biggest con is that each method is just different enough to be annoying (i.e., editing a spreadsheet across Android, desktop, iPad, etc.) I would rather the experience be as seamless as possible.
For me, Chrome OS is not a part of the equation. I travel too much to have my laptop become worthless as soon as the cabin door is closed. And on planes with WiFi, I’d feel like I was being charged rent to use my own device. No thanks. Mobile means mobile.
@ Khalid. i have a droid x.
ass-u-ming.
google just needs to become a cell provider, i bet they would get millions in a second to join their network, but hopefully they will test it out to the fullest extent by making sure all android phones on there network will never see bogged down speeds like at&t
@10 But in order to have all of the options and accessibility of your data, you need an internet connection. Google is a cloud company; every product they have uses an internet connection in some way, or needs an internet connection to get the most out of it. It’s not possible for you to magically get all of your Google Docs files and save your edits, collaborate in real-time etc without connecting to the internet. If Wi-Fi isn’t included in the price of your plane ticket, that’s not Google’s fault. Read a book or something. Also, plenty of their products have(or will soon have) some sort of off-line storage. However, you still need internet access to make the best use of them.
Mobile is nothing if you’ve not got your own data. If you want to play games and don’t care about accessing your documents, email, text messages(Google Voice) and things like that, then fine. But if you want all of your data to be mobile, you need an internet connection. It’s not any data provider’s problem if you aren’t willing to pay for that.
Regarding different methods of accessing your data, well that’s not entirely Google’s fault, really. They don’t own the iPad, so they had to just make it as good as possible to access and edit documents, send emails etc. On most Android devices to date the screen is too small to be ideal, but it’s a phone so again, they’ve done the best they can. Having good quality speech recognition helps a great deal in that regard, though.
@11 Oh, how cute, you’ve decided to try and be clever and insult me by separating a word into three parts, attempting to call me an ass in the process.
Regardless of my assumption, my point is still valid. Yes, you have a decent phone(in regard to updates, which some are not so fortunate to have) but it’s still unreasonable to expect Google to manage every single update for well over 100 different phone models globally. That would cost a lot of money, time and effort for them. Given that they give Android freely to anyone who wants it, why should they be responsible for updating it?
@12 I imagine that cell networks do not scale as easily or as cheaply as database solutions like BigTable. In order to not lose carrier support(which they need in order for Android to continue to do well) they’d need to replace every carrier in every major country. That means spending billions in a dozen countries.
Alas, there are some things that even Google cannot do.
@Kahlid: I understand your points, but I think that you’re missing mine. Google is an advertising company and they make their money by people using their services. Not everyone wants to use Android. In my opinion, if Google wants to make money off those people, they need to offer the experience across a wide range of platforms. With regard to data connections (a separate point), I very well can (and do) edit my documents without a data connection on my Android phone, on my iPad, and on my laptop. *All* of my devices are useful without an active data connection. A Chrome laptop is a brick without an active data connection. The article was about the mobile experience, and I see this as a major mobility flaw of Chrome.
def called u an ass.
The thing is Google only owns Android. They also predominantly produce web-based products. It would be ridiculous for them to have to release(and keep up-to-date) an iPhone(and perhaps in some cases a separate iPad) application for every single service they offer. Not only that but there would have to be a Windows Phone 7 native application, a Windows Vista & 7 application and a Windows XP and Mac version, too. It’s much, much better to use the web, especially given that iOs devices have a browser that supports HTML 5.
In regards to Chrome OS, as I said off-line support for many of their products(via HTML 5) is here or coming soon. It’s up to third party web application creators to do this too.
I can see why you’d want everything to work perfectly without a network connection, but the thing is that the Chrome OS machines are designed to be very, very cheap and secure. They can only be cheap because they don’t need a huge hard drive and the majority of processing for services is handed-off to server farms. Also, if you add complexity to the operating system you’d soon reach a point where the secure boot(I forget the technical term) method couldn’t be used, making the machines useless to people who want a secure experience(like enterprises, for example)
I’m the opposite of you it seems in that I’m interested in doing everything I can in the cloud. I edit my documents through Google, have no desktop software for email or photo editing or most other services. Once I’m competent enough to code in my chosen language, I’m only interested in doing that in a browser, too. The only software I use on my computer on a regular basis that isn’t Chrome is Skype and Steam. Playing high-quality video games in a browser won’t realistically happen for a while, but I use the audio and video chat options in Gmail as much as I can and Skype is said to be working on a web-based version of their service.
Ultimately, a truly-mobile laptop(to me) means utilising the power of those millions of servers around the world. The cheaper and more portable a laptop or netbook can become because of that, the better.
fragmentation is not google’s problem and it never will be as long as it is open source, android does not “belong” to anybody google just simply provides the vast majority of contributed code, they are simply making it better and better and putting it out there on the table for us to use as soon as they make it, UNLIKE apple who makes it and then sits on it for 9 months so that they can seem “unfragmented” by only giving you anual updates, do you know how far iOS could be if they actually tried and making it better? stop complaining to google because you don’t have the latest and greatest, start complaining to the MANUFACTURER who is DECIDING not to put it on your phone, google makes the code and gives it to the world, the manufactures are the ones deciding not to put it on phones
Just beat the crap out of APPLE in the Mobile Industry that’s all I care right now.