Android's Limits

Android is a lot more free than iOS, but there are limits. We need to break through those.

At its birth, Android was the horizontal and open solution to the problem of Apple's vertical and closed silo. On Android, hardware makers and software writers could build devices and apps, free to operate outside the walls of any vendor's closed garden.

This was fine, as long as we ignored the closed and vertical natures of three controlling forces in Android's market space: 1) mobile-phone companies; 2) Google's main business, which is advertising; and 3) every e-commerce vendor, each operating its own silo. So let's visit those, in order.

Mobile-Phone Companies

Before Android standardized a single popular platform for smart mobile devices, the phones we got were co-silo'd by partnerships between phone makers and phone companies. Back in the early 2000s, I sat in a meeting where a parade of software developers presented ground-breaking ideas to Nokia, which had invested in a number of those same developers. At the end, one of the Nokia people explained that these were all interesting ideas, but that the company already had worked out plans for features to be rolled out during the next several years on the company's phones, in partnership with the carriers. This explained why, for example, my Nokia E62 lacked the Wi-Fi capability of the otherwise identical Nokia E61 ( The E62 was built for carriers in the US, while the E61 was built for various European carriers. If AT&T didn't want Wi-Fi on the E62, it wouldn't be there.

We can thank Apple for driving a much harder and better bargain with AT&T than any other mobile-phone maker ever did. And we can thank Google for making sure that the smart mobile device market had a white-box operating system, so its hardware base could be as broad and generative as possible.

But those moves did not change the nature of phone companies, or our dependency on them. Back when JP Rangaswami was Chief Scientist at BT (and I worked for him there as a consultant), he observed that the core competence of phone companies is billing, not telephony. This is the biggest reason (among many others) why no phone company ever would have welcomed, much less created, the Internet. After all, there is nothing in the Net's protocols that welcomes, much less creates, billing opportunities. But today most of the data paths between mobile devices and the rest of the Internet go through phone company connections, and those connections are built for billing. This is done through "plans" for data usage. In some cases (for example, Sprint in the US), there are plans that allow unlimited usage. But in most cases, customers take a plan that obligates them to pay for some number of MB or GB per month, with additional charges for going over "caps". While phone companies need to make money by charging for services, it's an open question whether charging for data usage is the best, or the only, billing choice. It's just one that comes easily to a business that's already built to charge for minutes and text messages (the latter of which cost nothing on the open Internet).

Mobile phone systems are also walled in other ways the open Internet is not. For example, most data plans work only in the country where they are bought. Cross a national border and you risk "bill shock" for data use, which is charged at a much higher rate, even if you use the same company's wireless connections. While this looks like a bug to customers, it looks like a feature to the phone companies—and also to governments that enjoy getting a slice of the action and never liked the borderless Internet anyway.

Then there is the video issue. According to Lowell McAdam, CEO and Chairman of Verizon, video already makes up for half the data traffic on his company's wireless network, and will reach two-thirds by 2017. Thus, the Internet is being turned into a distribution system for "content". In terms of market power, content producers and distributors are sure to bias the growth paths of developers and their offerings, including Google and Android.

Google's Business

Back when Google began, in the late 1990s, advertising was barely imagined as a business model. In fact, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Google's founders, initially were opposed to advertising. But since then, Google has become the largest company in the on-line advertising business, and advertising is the largest percentage of Google's revenue base.

Most of that advertising is not of the old Madison Avenue kind, which mostly sent brand messages out over print and broadcast media. Most of on-line advertising today, including Google's, is descended from direct marketing, which is descended from direct mail. It is meant to be personal, and it is guided by data provided through personal use, whether those persons like it or not. While Android does provide choices about privacy protection with each app one installs, users have little if any control over what happens to personal data that gets passed on to third parties, such as data brokers and analytics firms.

Lately the tide has been turning against privacy compromises and abuses by the on-line advertising business and the apps and services supported by it. Although Google takes a stronger moral stance on behalf of personal privacy than do many other on-line advertising companies, the fact remains that most users of Android phones and tablets are Google's consumers rather than its customers, which means those consumers are the product being sold to Google's actual customers, which are advertisers. From Steven Levy's book In the Plex: "We don't monetize the thing we create", Andy Rubin says. "We monetize the people that use it. The more people that use our products, the more opportunity we have to advertise to them."

Android phones also come defaulted with a pile of Google apps, placed in privileged positions in the phone's app directory. This does not sit well with Google's competitors. On April 9, 2013, Fairsearch, a coalition that includes Microsoft, Nokia and Oracle, filed a complaint with the European Commission against what it called "Google's anti-competitive strategy to dominate the mobile marketplace and cement its control over consumer Internet data for on-line advertising as usage shifts to mobile", adding "Google is using its Android mobile operating system as a 'Trojan Horse' to deceive partners, monopolize the mobile marketplace, and control consumer data". That's a bit hyperbolic, but I believe they have a case.

For our purposes in the Linux community, the main thing at issue is bias in the evolution of Android and the apps that run on it. As long as advertising remains Google's main business, and Android remains a Google project, it will be hard to keep a bias toward advertising's imperatives from having an influence.


In 1995, my wife asked a question so profound that it has haunted me ever since: "Why can't I take my shopping cart from one site to another?" The answer is that every e-commerce site is a silo with its own shopping cart, its own cookies for visitors, its own pile of visitor data, and its own silo'd relationships with visitors and customers. Nearly two decades have passed since then, and the situation hasn't changed. In fact, it is now much worse. All of us doing business on the Net need to maintain up to hundreds of different login/password combinations, and our relationships with vendors are as silo'd as they ever were. The off-line world also is infected by the same urge to entrap visitors and customers, which is why it's no coincidence that "loyalty programs" requiring that we carry around separate cards and key tags for every store chain, also began to take off in the mid-1990s.

The problem here is summed up by one of my favorite slides, by Phil Windley. It says this:

History of E-Commerce

1995: Invention of the cookie.

The End.

Cookies are a convention of client-server computing. While client-server has proven to be a handy way to build the on-line world, it forecloses countless opportunities that can be seen only from the client's side—when the person there isn't being a client. We still don't have the shopping cart we can take from site to site because we can't imagine doing that inside a world where we're always the submissive party and never the dominant one. Or even an equal. Sure, we are free to run our own servers if we like, but that answer doesn't help. In the world of e-commerce, we are merely clients, rather than human beings.

Far more can be done when we are free and independent than when we are captive and dependent. And that's the rub here. In spite of all the good Android has done for us as developers and users, too much of what we can do is still trapped inside the walls of captors on which we depend, starting with Google.

We need to start thinking and working outside the boxes that phone companies, Google and client-server-based e-commerce have built around us. Can we break out of those boxes and still be on Android? I don't have the answer, but I am working on it. Hope you are too.


Doc Searls is the Editor in Chief of Linux Journal


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Google Nexus 7 2013 2

Forklift Training's picture

Hi All,

I read this article and have several android devices myself. S2, S3 and N8000 tablet.

I am wondering if anyone has a Galaxy Nexus 7 version 2 ?

If so what is it like and how much better is it that the first version.

Great website and article, saved in my favourtites.

I uses my android devices to run my forklift training business. I would be lost without them.



unless the android

buxle's picture

unless the android applications are usable on internet (browser based such as on online games) I find them useless and limited


mensagens para celular's picture

Well, for Android, there is the advantage to beam your buzz with Cyanogenmod, which not alone gives you added features, but aswell allows you to not install the Google Apps (which, admittedly, can advance to some antecedent problems).
Sms Torpedos Gratis | Frases De Amor | mensagem de aniversario
I replaced the accepted browser with Firefox, and never anytime use Google's Play Store to install apps - relying on F-Droid. It ability be a bit aberrant and complete alarming to re-flash your mobile, but if you are anxious about abstracts privacy, it's apparently the best affair to do.

The E62 was engineered for

Anthony Sanchez's picture

The E62 was engineered for carriers within the United States of America, whereas the E61 was engineered for numerous European carriers. If AT&T did not need Wi-Fi on the E62, it would not be there

What AT&T wanted

Doc Searls's picture

AT&T chose to cripple what could be done with the phone. There was no user need for a crippled phone. That's my point.

Doc Searls is the Editor in Chief of Linux Journal

Can these be also strengths?

Avinash Birnale's picture

A good article but can be viewed from different perspective as well. Essentially these are the problems of Fragmentation which i tend to think as blessings. It gives users a newness with every phone manufacturer and ability to choose anything that suits their pocket and liking. The OS has definitely evolved to deal with this fragmentation as well. At Endeavour we have developed number of application where we deal with these problems often. But with the APIs and scalable design, we are able to deliver great applications to our customers. The only Achilles' hill is security when it comes to enterprise apps. We end up writing little more code than any other OS :)

Settling the Wild West

Anonymous's picture

In America, the internet was often compared to "the wild west". Often this analogy was used to describe the "lawlessness" of the internet in that institutional control was absent and the individual had to watch out for themselves. But there was another side to the analogy, an open space in which those who wanted to take the risk could if not make fortunes (although there was that too) could improve their economic lot.

The American "West" is today as institutional as the East although there is still a belief in the value of "rugged individualism" and "freedom" which is more nostalgia than reality.

The human behavior that transformed and settled the American west is the same at work today. At the start, the territory ahead is wide and open, full of promise. Over time, this becomes less the case.

If this commentary does nothing else, it provides further evidence that the promises which seemed almost palpable in the early days have failed to materialize as both economic and government interests dominate.

I am sympathetic but resigned to the inevitable. All revolutions eat their young and those that don't get eaten, rule under different principles.


Andreas S's picture

Well, for Android, there is the option to flash your phone with Cyanogenmod, which not only gives you additional features, but also allows you to not install the Google Apps (which, admittedly, can lead to some initial problems).
I replaced the standard browser with Firefox, and never ever use Google's Play Store to install apps - relying on F-Droid. It might be a bit geeky and sound scary to re-flash your mobile, but if you are concerned about data privacy, it's probably the best thing to do.

Android has been dominating

Thelma Ames's picture

Android has been dominating the current market of mobile phone. I am afraid if it grabs the OS of our PC. Soon it might be installed in our PCs

on the path to understanding

LPPrice's picture

This article presents the start of understanding some challenging business issues in the technology communications industries.
I feel it misrepresents stateless computing as client/server computing.
When do we start recognizing that the cellular companies are supposed to be utilities?

Reply to comment | Linux Journal

my website's picture

Every important aspects or services from a fields have their own kinds and classification, and the
financial industry is not excluded in this case my website your inital reaction could possibly be
to look at advice off their associates, maybe even friends
- this might amount to thousands.

Android's Limits

Samuel Anderson's picture

From what I understand, it's an update to the existing app that's resetting all of the tokens. That means you'll have be to act quick on both the update and sign in to get a token, though if most of the existing tokens were inactive or pirates, I imagine most will be able to get in through legit means. For more interesting information click here.

How Nokia screwed up

Jeremy's picture

Awesome article. I finally learned what happened to Nokia and how they've screwed up. lol
When will they ever learn. :D

Good Article

Vikram 's picture



opickaza's picture

we will under estimated about android that android is veri good in design more black berry in my country there is many people used it in their life may be if android limited edition can get the finally about that a href="" target="_blank">cari uang lewat,cari uang lewat,cari uang lewat,cari uang lewat

[url=]cari uang lewat[/url]

War between silo keepers?

Cactus FlapJack's picture

Good article (as usual from Doc Searls) but I am surprised that it never mentions the main reason all businesses are obsessed with creating silos/walled gardens: On the Internet, ideas cost zero to duplicate.

Whenever one has a successful idea, it will be immediately swamped by hundreds of copycats who will undercut the original author. The original author was supposed to be protected from this by the patent system. As we all know, the patent system not only doesn't do that, it has been perverted into a racketeering tool.

Google's search business has not been duplicated because it requires a large infrastructure, and all those data centers don't have zero cost to build and run.