Slashdot Mirror


Motorola May Ditch Android, Revive ARM Partnership

siliconbits writes "It looks as if Motorola Mobility could be mulling plans to build an alternative to Google's mobile platform. Several independent sources have confirmed that the mobile phone company is working on a web-based mobile operating system to, as one observer put it, have more control on its own destiny. There's another piece in that puzzle; Motorola Mobility could take even more ownership of its destiny by reviving its ARM license as it depends at the moment on TI and Nvidia to provide the SoCs that power its products; Motorola did produce ARM systems-on-chips in the past."

27 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Either/Or by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there a reason why Motorola can't have both? They aren't a small company, they could have Android & test the waters with their own stuff too. However from previous experience, I think they should stick with Android. I've purchased several Tracfones for my wife & kids over the past years, and Motorla's software was by far the worst compared to Kyocera, LG & Samsung.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Either/Or by bondsbw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Motorola knows how to do hardware. The Droid put Android on the map for everyday users. The RAZR had an almost Apple-quality of hype. But I've never seen them produce new software that made me go "Wow". On the Xoom, they made the best decision they could have made, which was to use unmodified Honeycomb.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    2. Re:Either/Or by yog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is apparently the original article. If you google the headline, you find about 20 copies on various blogs. I don't understand why Slashdot submitters can't at least link to the original, unless they have a stake in the blog.

      I'm with the Motorola-is-stupid crowd on this one. They are a hardware/telecom company, not a software company. They have no demonstrated track record of developing a competent, competitive smartphone OS. Short of buying Palm's WebOS, which maybe they should have done instead of letting HP have it, they don't have much hope of keeping up with the Android and iOS juggernauts. Even Rim, the erstwhile smartphone king, has a teeny little app market compared to the two others, and their market share is shrinking, not growing.

      That said, I wish MOT well because a little competition is good for the consumer. I would prefer that they work on perfecting their tablets and smartphones in the Android space, however. The Xoom is a great first effort. Why not tweak it until it's flawless and best-of-breed? Why not help Google improve Android in the areas where MOT feels it's deficient? For a lot less money and resources than developing their own proprietary crappy OS, they can be very competitive.

      Methinks Motorola is not thinking this through very clearly. Then again, it's just a rumor.

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    3. Re:Either/Or by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But it's still the only platform that seems to be holding up well against iOS...

      WP7 seems to have epicfailed from the get-go (crippled compared to its predecessor with the only thing to offer being a shiny UI, causing former Windows Mobile loyalists to jump ship - many of the hardcore WM owners have gone Android, and in some cases have taken to running Android on their Windows-Mobile targeted hardware.) On top of the above issues, WP7 has had some serious issues (excessive background data usage, numerous firmware updates causing bricking)

      webOS - seems dead from the start to me

      BlackBerry - Hanging in their due to their incredible momentum and entrenchment within the large business connectivity segment

      Motorola has tried (and failed) numerous times to do their own thing. They're idiots if they think they can do it again.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    4. Re:Either/Or by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 5, Informative

      Android has also been losing it's mojo, and is getting legal threats from everywhere.

      If by everywhere, you mean, its competition... yeah... what else is new?
      [ http://www.itworld.com/open-source/140916/android-sued-microsoft-not-linux ]
      And Android, ie, Google isn't being sued, only companies that are involved
      with it. Typical intimidation tactics.

      Furthermore... if Google finds there to be any merit and since they aren't
      being sued (yet), they simply can change whatever is the issue, or license
      it... throw brain cells or money at it and it will go away. Android won't go
      away... but the lawsuits eventually will.

      Lastly... it's piddly things like this:
      Patent # 5,778,372 (July 7, 1998): "Getting remote deployment and management of an electronic document with embedded images." Patent # 6,339,780 (January 15, 2002): "Status of loading in a hypermedia browser having a limited display area on screen."
      Patent # 5,889,522 (March 30, 1999): "A system that provides controls to the derived windows."
      Patent # 6,891,551 (May 10, 2005): "Management selection in editing electronic documents."

      ...that will get the snip of a few lines of code and problem is gone.

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    5. Re:Either/Or by RazzleFrog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would say Android is doing more than "holding up well" against iOS. Isn't it beating it by a handy margin now - even with iPads? If Motorola was smart they back a winning horse. Android is only going to get stronger over time.

    6. Re:Either/Or by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And the linked article which is the source of the rumours makes some really dumb suppositions:

      Drieu left Apple in March 2010, where he was the head of the company's rich media and applications group. After a five month period without employment, he joined Motorola. His work with Web standards groups WhatWG and W3C and his Web-related patents suggest that he would be well-suited to lead an operating system development effort.

      Yeah,. right, that's the ticket. Get "web standards" people to build an operating system. That's got fail written all over it.

      And the reason given?

      Google is shooting itself in the foot," said the person familiar with Motorola's plans, citing what he sees as concerns about Android fragmentation, product differentiation, and issues related to Google's support for its partners.

      So you fix that by ... making a competing platform that nobody's going to write apps for?

      I'm not buying it. And neither will consumers, because there's no App for that.

    7. Re:Either/Or by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

      I think in terms of installed base and sales, iOS is still VERY strong.

      In terms of growth, though - Android is growing rapidly, iOS isn't growing nearly as fast.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    8. Re:Either/Or by Desler · · Score: 2

      In terms of growth, though - Android is growing rapidly, iOS isn't growing nearly as fast.

      Which is clearly to be expected as Apple only releases a new iPhone model about every 2 years whereas there are literally a dozen or more new Android phones EVERY YEAR.

    9. Re:Either/Or by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      This generation of Windows Phone 7 is definitely a Microsoft developers phone

      So that's how you guys are going to spin the market failure?

      That explains all of the "developer tools are rock solid." taglines we're seeing. It's like the whole "Win 7, have you tried it?" mantra all over again.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    10. Re:Either/Or by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I would disagree with them being mostly mature. Both Android and iOS are the phone equivalent of Windows 3.1/ MacOS7 operating systems. They are definitely usable, and seem amazing compared to what came before, but they have just reached the usability for the masses stage. The only reason that they seem 'mature' is because they are compared to the Apple II's and C64's of the phone world. There is a lot of improvement coming to both OSes.

  2. Locking by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They way they keep locking down their phones, perhaps it's for the best.

  3. Prediction by Jawnn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Motorola will make this stab at a segment in which it has nowhere near the level of expertise required to compete, and it will fail miserably. Sell MOT.

    1. Re:Prediction by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, you should have sold MOT a while ago. They were the ones who thought they could outsource all designing, manufacturing, and support out to the lowest bidder(almost always in the 3rd world), and just have management sit back and collect massive rewards. As a result their phones stagnated while the rest of the industry who was more nimble(and probably had less management overhead) sped ahead. THey have been unable to ever get back into the game of actually designing products people want and as a result I don't think they have a very bright future.

  4. They did? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Motorola did produce ARM systems-on-chips in the past

    I thought that Freescale, the company formerly known as Motorola, made ARM SoCs (and still does, by the way). Zombie Motorola - the bit left after they sold off or spun out all of the interesting bits of the company - never did.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  5. I know of a platform by killmenow · · Score: 2

    There's a mobile handset platform, recently downgraded to redheaded step child status and soon to be locked in the basement by the largest cell phone manufacturer in the world. It's a very nice platform. It could use the boost a company like Motorola investing in it and joining up with Intel in supporting it.

    MeeGo.

    Unfortunately, I don't think Motorola has much interest in putting an actual open platform on their phones. Pity.

  6. There's a difference.. by Dynamoo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There's a difference between ditching something and building an alternative. Motorola are a bit unusual in that they are almost 100% committed to Android on smartphones (there are some Enterprise devices that still run Windows 6.5 though). HTC, Samsung, LG and even Nokia have a multi-platform smartphone approach.

    Yes, there are vendors working on their own OSes. BlackBerry has its QNX based OS. HP bought webOS when it acquired Palm. Samsung has Bada. Out of these, Bada has been around the longest and it isn't exactly a roaring success.. I don't think anyone ever has woken up in the morning and decided that they'd go and buy a Bada device because of the platform. QNX and webOS still have the opportunity to fail very hard indeed..

    Still, you don't get anywhere in that business by not making an effort to try new approaches. And at the moment, Moto has pretty much bet the barn on Android which must sometimes be a bit worrying for them.

    --
    Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
  7. Software is hard for hardware manufacturers by recoiledsnake · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yet another Web based operating system? Isn't that was WebOS was supposed to be before it flopped and started allowign native apps? And take a look at the top mobile OSes now, iOS has its roots in NeXT and BSD, which in turn has roots in UNIX philosophy which are really old. Android is based on Linux, which is 20 years old and has it's roots in UNIX which is even older. Windows Phone 7 has it's roots in Windows CE which in turn has it's roots in DOS and Win NT which are really old. Even QNX that Blackberry is moving to has a long history and roots in UNIX and WebOS is based on Linux.

    The point here is that although people think it's easy to build OSes, building one that's full featured and modern is extremely hard and can't be done by just throwing money at people . It takes years for bugs to be found and shaken off. See how Nokia failed inspite of employing tens of thousands of people to work on Symbian and Meego/Maemo. If Motorola is looking to build something from scratch, I am not optimistic.

    On top of that, hardware companies and OEMs seem to universally suck at making software and they don't stop trying. Motorola's skins on Android all lag even on dual cores, OEM software on PC is the worst junk imaginable with crashes, bloat and what not, printer and webcam software is just pathetic. It's like they don't even have a indepented QA team. HTC's Sense UI is appreciated by some, but my experience is that it's laggy and bloated, heavy on features but low on performance. I think part of it is that the OEMs treat software development just like hardware which is a major mistake to make. Software is extremely hard to get right, especially when building OSes, developer APIs etc. which require a LOT of coordination among extremely large number of teams. The competition is no longer about devices or OSes but about platforms, which are extremely hard to build.

    I am sure Motorola doesn't just want to be another Android OEM, but it sure needs to get its act exactly right. Expect multiyear delays and cost overruns. Maybe they can team up with HP on WebOS or Blackberry with QNX.

    --
    This space for rent.
    1. Re:Software is hard for hardware manufacturers by phoenix321 · · Score: 2

      Seconded. Manufacturers of rock solid hardware cannot get even the simplest of software straight.

      How often did we have perfect hardware utterly destroyed by their accompanying drivers? It took GPU manufacturers years, almost decades, to work out issues in their drivers.

      Software delivered by hardware manufacturers is almost always a buggy, laggy, bloated piece of stuff that is usually deactivated, deinstalled, thrown away as soon as possible, unless it's a driver or other absolute neccessity.

    2. Re:Software is hard for hardware manufacturers by Microlith · · Score: 2

      The point here is that although people think it's easy to build OSes, building one that's full featured and modern is extremely hard and can't be done by just throwing money at people . It takes years for bugs to be found and shaken off. See how Nokia failed inspite of employing tens of thousands of people to work on Symbian and Meego/Maemo.

      Actually, Nokia was quite successful with that. Where they failed was internal execution of bringing the various R&D concepts they had developed to market, and doing so in a manner that was economically viable. They also hated the US carriers, and as a result only got low end phones on their networks.

      It's sad, really. The N900 is, thus far, the last of its kind and is far superior to Android, technically, in many ways that would easily given it an edge. Too bad Nokia's management dropped the ball completely.

  8. And another thing.. by Dynamoo · · Score: 3, Interesting
    And another thing.. Moto only bet the barn on Android on the back of some shockingly bad management decisions. For years they just kept recycling the RAZR.. about two dozen times.. until almost all their customer base had vanished. For most of 2009 they didn't announce any new products of not AT ALL until they kicked off with their Android line. By the time they got to making the CLIQ / DEXT, they were drinking in the last chance saloon.

    As a result of this, Moto's presence outside the US is very weak. Probably the most significant partnership they have is with Verizon Wireless, and the new CDMA iPhone is surely going to be hurting sales. Carriers and distributors outside of the US are non enthusiastic when they're already carrying HTC and Samsung Android phones.

    IMO, Moto's Android phones (and I use one everyday) are just as good as the competition. But unfortunately, they're not really BETTER than the competition..

    --
    Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
    1. Re:And another thing.. by timholman · · Score: 2

      And another thing.. Moto only bet the barn on Android on the back of some shockingly bad management decisions. For years they just kept recycling the RAZR.. about two dozen times.. until almost all their customer base had vanished.

      Motorola self-destructed when it hopped onto the "six sigma" bandwagon back in the 80's. Even today, most of the energy of Motorola management is still expended on "improving" internal processes while ignoring the external market and neglecting innovation while entire product lines collapse.

      It is self-destructive navel-gazing, and after so many years it has become so ingrained into the Motorola culture that nothing short of acquisition or bankruptcy will ever change it.

      In short - this new initiative by Motorola will do nothing to save them. They have marginalized themselves in the wireless and smartphone markets, and nothing is going to change that.

  9. pfft motoroloa by spottedkangaroo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I say this is great news. I would never (ever) buy a Motorola android device anyway. They don't get it. If the device is all locked down so you can't swap the firmware, then it isn't an android device in the most meaningful sense (openness). That's not to say that android doesn't have openness problems. You can make an argument about that if you desire. I don't really care. But what I do care about is this locked down DRM code signing BS. If I can't run what I want on the device, you can fucking keep it.

    --
    Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
  10. I don't think so by pem · · Score: 2

    Also, Google could be sued by anyone who created code that Google is using in Honeycomb (Andoid 3) outside the kernel, as they're refusing to release the source for it.

    AFAIK, google's careful to keep the GPL away from any code above the kernel.

  11. Not a smart move by DaMattster · · Score: 2

    The Android train has already left the station and Motorola wants to try and play catch-up with a smartphone OS? One of the most appealing aspect of the Android platform is its very openness. Why would I leave Android for a closed platform when it was such a breath of fresh air to tell Apple and its iPhone to pound sand? Think of Palm's attempt at an Android alternative and the Windows 7 Phone OS is a joke. I should think, Motorola's vast resources would be better spent not trying to re-invent the wheel but to continue to improve it.

  12. Re:Only Seems Fair by mdm-adph · · Score: 2

    No problem at all -- most of my information I get from XDA forums (kinda the Mecca for all hacking and cracking mobile phones): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=996616 Now, I'm am in now way an expert in this stuff, but from what I can gather, you're apparently able to bypass the checks for signed kernels -- I don't think the signing itself is "cracked." "Encrypted bootloaders" work completely differently and on a much lower level -- there's apparently no way to bypass it.

    --
    It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
  13. silly rabbit, chips is for Freescale Semi by swschrad · · Score: 2

    Motorola spun off the semiconductor business over 10 years ago, remember? MotoMo has no fab, no server banks running layout software, no mask making facilities. MIT and UVermont have them lapped ten times before anybody at MotoMo could even think, "gee, could we make our own chips?"

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?