Prediction: 2010 will be the year Apple and Google have a cage fight

The pre- match slanging is pretty much over and the location of the fight has been chosen. 2010 is going to be the year Apple and Google finally stop dancing around and actually get in the ring. Unlike a nice clean refereed boxing match (Apple V Microsoft) this is going to be a dirty underground cage fight complete with barbed-wire wrapped gloves - expect to see a lot of blood on the floor - and fanbois rucking in the concourses.

The ground is, of course, Mobile and the massive dominance both organisations have taken in this space over the last 12 months. Mobile is still a fast growing area of communications but smartphones is where it's at. There's no question Apple ignited the world's imagination of what is possible in the mobile space and capitalising on the fact that the fashionability of a phone is important in a way that RIM and Microsoft just didn't get.

Google have taken that to a whole different level with Android which just "gets" what it is to be a data capable and Internet connected phone. Couple this with some fashionability and the stage is set for an almighty fight.

Looking through the AdMob report for November, it's astonishing to see how fast Android has grown in the last 2 months (doubled on traffic requests through their network) but more importantly was the launch of the Motorola Droid and the whole Droid Does campaign. The Droid is one of the fastest selling phones of all time almost hitting iPhone 3Gs sales levels (which was working from an installed base upgraded) and is now accounting for about a quarter of Android device share - only behind the G1 which has been out for 18 months - expect to see that change over December.

Now Motorola have entered the fray and with Samsung and Sony Ericsson both scheduling major launches into Q1 2010 the mobile landscape is going to get increasingly messy as the iPhone isn't the only great phone out there. Indeed I think Sony is going to do a Motorola with the Xperia X10 as it is simply stunning and is a big name in the mobile space - especially in Europe. HTC have had a great lead but 2010 will see Motorola and Sony return to some dominance here - and they can fight Apple in the Fashionability stakes.

The biggest challenge for Apple is how to combat Google on the phone itself. Outside of iTunes, Apple has little in the way of first party apps for the iPhone and whilst it has a huge developer network it is definitely alienating them through it's App Store management nightmares. Many developers are developing for both iPhone and Android devices - especially those using Web technologies for building and apps like Phone Gap to cross-package.

A lot of what makes the iPhone really useful are Google applications (native Gmail, Maps and most importantly Search!) - Apple has no way to combat this. Are they going to deny Gmail or Search like they did with Google Voice?

Apps that are available on both platforms and services that are available "in the cloud" eg Maps, Comparison Shopping etc dilutes Apple's position as it's only point of differentiation becomes fashionability and both Sony Ericsson and Motorola have competed for over a decade against Nokia by building highly fashionable phones.

I'm not sure this fight will be a death match but all the signs are there for a battle of epic proportions. Both are likely to be extremely battered by the time they come out the other side and would be wise to hold a little bit in reserve in case Nokia's Maemo platform takes off the way they are expecting it to - at that point things could get really messy.

SPDY could gain acceptence very quickly - with some product innovation

Google have announced some early findings about their research into a faster protocol to reduce latency times due to good old fashioned HTTP. HTTP was designed as a really simple protocol to delivery (primarily) text content over the Internet and thus was born the Web.

One of the problems with HTTP is that it only really allows a single request to be serviced at any one time. The reason this doesn't APPEAR to be the case is because modern browsers create multiple connection threads that connect independently to the server and it gives the appearance of things downloading in parallel. It's a neat hack and works because we have good network speeds and mast processors to manage all this multi-tasking. Go back to a Pentium II with Netscape 2 and you'll watch the glacial procession of elements loading in from the top and goes down the page.

The Google project page talks a lot about why HTTP pipelining doesn't work and some of the technical architecture behind SPDY which I won't cover here other than to say that it's great we are seeing this type of innovation at the protocol level. What's most interesting for me however is how we get it in production.

There is a lot of nay-saying going on around this suggesting that because of the size of the Web you'll never get people to shift to a new protocol HTTP:// won, let's all leave it at that because there are too many web servers and web browsers to convert. This is what I want to address in this post.

Yes - there are fair too many legacy browsers to deal with to make this transition happen. Look how many IE 6 browsers are still in use, but we'd also have to shift all the Mozilla users, Chrome users (easy because of forced update) and Safari users as well. Not to mention all those pesky mobile devices that are springing up.

Dealing with the web servers is a much more straightforward issue. There really aren't that many in the scheme of things. Indeed much of our existing infrastructure runs multiple servers, Apache alongside a lightweight server like nginx and this is increasingly common.

As such there's nothing stopping me dropping in a SPDY server alongside my existing infrastructure for those users that can directly access it (Chrome 4, Firefox 5, Safari 6 and IE 10 for example).

But let's not stop there. A network admin could create a software appliance at the Firewall or Internet Gateway level for the corporate network that took HTTP requests, turns them into SPDY requests and then proxies these back. Now I have doubly fast Internet connectivity without upgrading my connection. For the price of a box that is well worth it.

For home users we could do the same thing. This protocol is software - it runs on TOP of TCP so because of that a Firmware upgrade of your average Netgear or Linksys home router could get you the same benefits as those above. ISPs could force this remotely on certain systems (Cable for example) or provide info on how to do it such as through a web, phone or personal service.

So for all the nay-sayers out there - this is a MASSIVE opportunity to speed up the web and people need to think outside the browser sometimes. QoS was delivered at the router level based on intelligent packet analysis - that speeds up network traffic massively but it's a software change not a hardware one.

I don't think it will be long until we see Netgear and Linsys start promoting this like they did with the WiFi standards and force adoption because it makes a great marketing case to do so.

I'll be trying this out at the rawest state to see if we can make it work and if I can, watch how fast our servers and network gateway get upgraded before I embark on upgrading client machines.

AdMob purchase by google paves way for interesting developer funding

It's just been announced that Google is set to buy AdMob for $750M in an all-stock deal. This is the third biggest purchase Google has ever made (the only two bigger are YouTube and DoubleClick).

AdMob started in 2006 so they have capitalised very well for a 3 year old business. Indeed they've been cash positive for a while now so this is a great acquisition by Google. The full gory details of the deal can be found here and a press site by google here

We know this is all aligned to Google's interest and in particular their big appetite presently for anything Mobile. However this also opens up some enormous opportunities for developers.

This acquisition brings with it some great opportunities for in-application display advertising that is delivered contextually but also based on Google AdWords auctioning technology. Along side this I can then use the same advertising account to drive ads on my mobile website that compliments my application and then use standard ads on my main website that provides additional information / community support etc.

All of a sudden a possible revenue opportunity opens up that was kind of there previously but wasn't very smart. Over the last 18 months in particular we've been watching the rise of free-ad-supported applications as well as paid-no-ad versions of the same application. I would expect to see a lot more of the ad-supported apps once this deal goes through.

The reason for this is twofold:

1. As a developer I can manage all of my advertising spaces with one vendor. I don't really want to have to deal with all these businesses I just want to get some beer money for my app that I'm spending my non-work hours producing.

2. With contextual ad serving, I can make certain elements of data within the application available and use that to generate calls to the Ad Server - much the same way AdWords works with a web page or in Gmail. This means the ads that are served will be more relevant to the content which should lead to higher Click Through which then leads to potentially more revenue for me (see note above about beer money)

This makes a lot of sense for an advertiser as well. Certain applications have huge amounts of uptake - twitterific on iPhone or Twidroid on Android for example. Imagine having contextual ads served based on the content of your twitter stream. Twitter might resist it but it could make some serious cash for the app developers.

Overall I think this will really blow the top of mobile advertising. Advertisers who have been a little shy in the mobile space will be comforted by the fact it's Google doing it. App and mobile site developers stand to gain some good funding from it and it be relevant for their audiences and as the world goes increasingly smartphone mobile mad over the next 18 months this will be worth serious $Billions in the next 5 years or so.

Cross posted to Citrus Agency Blog

An unofficial endorsement of the Android platform?

As TechCrunch reported: Pigs Fly as Facebook and Google work together on an Android App - there's been a few indicators that this might be happening, particularly with some random mentions here and there on Twitter but no one was really expecting anything to occur given the competitiveness between the two businesses.

What's most interesting about this (particularly from my standpoint as an Android user) is that it will be the only other official mobile client besides iPhone; which really endorses the Android platform as the second runner to iPhone. And in acknowledging that, it also indicates that Facebook are considering that Android will have substantial traction in the coming year - not least when you consider there are two dozen Android based phones slated to hit the market in the rest of the year which could make a serious dent in iPhone's penetration.

iPhone launching with the Facebook client has been largely cited as one of the big levers in it's sales. Smart phones have been around for a decade and there have been sleek devices previously (Nokia 7710 for example was just one big touch screen 3 years before the iPhone launched) but the mind of the consumer wasn't fired by the opportunities it could provide to them. You only had to look at the marketing by the telco's around the iPhone launch to see that the Facebook client was the Killer App for the smart phone in terms of hooking people in. It gave them a very tangible benefit to owning what would have been the most expensive handset they'd have bought to date - "I can keep in touch with my friends besides calling them..."

With an official Facebook client for Android, the same endorsement has been conferred and one of the key marketing differentiators has been removed. I'm tipping late 2010 to be an interesting time as Apple and Google really go toe to toe and start slugging it out - which will be fantastic for innovation in this space.

Bye bye OpenMoko

Google announced today that they would be partnering up with a load of other companies including Samsung, Motorola and LG to produce a new phone "software stack". For those of us in teh technology game this basically means Google plans to release mobile phone operating system to rival that of Microsoft, Symbian and the various Linux flavours out there already.

What I find most annoying about this is that Google has for years now feasted upon the fruits of the Open Source Community, using many of their projects to enable additional features and indeed their core search facilities to work. While it may be argued that the Summer of Code gives back to that community, there is a sense that rather than sponsoring an existing project like openMoko (a Linux based, open source version of what Google has announced) they've decided to go out on their own and start from scratch.

Given Google's tremendous resources it won't be long before we see the platform hit the market.

Within the commercial market there is already Maemo (nokia's Internet Tablet platform which they actually open sourced) and QTopia, a commercial package available on the GreenPhone which is a development kit and is mostly open source too.

My guess as to why Google didn't run with any of these options is that there are already thriving communities surrounding them and trying to work with these existing communities makes it difficult for the Google techies to throw their weight around.

Hey ho. As a developer, mobile development is already a nightmare having to support various versions of Symbian, MS Windows Mobile, BlackBerry as well as smaller (but vocal) numbers os Maemo users we are now having to think about iPhone from Apple so adding "Google Phone OS" isn't that much more work.

For me, having had a mobile phone for the better part of 15 years and having had a data capable phone for nearly 10 years I've watches OSes come and go, killer apps be talked about every 6 months and watching the market mature the only two things ever to take off properly on a mobile was SMS and now e-mail.

I've got an E65 nokia and it is the best phone I've ever owned. Why? Because the web browser works seamlessly on standard web sites and the email is easy to use, even without a full keyboard. Oh, and it doesn't crash as do most of the rest.

Spending all this time and money in my opinion by Google is absolute folly, but then they have virtually limitless cash reserves and they have a staff of many thousands across the world that they have to retain doing something - they may as well be making a phone OS as anything else.

Who knows this might end speculation that we are about to have Google OS on our desktop next year as well.