Last Call!

The Android 3.0 event just started and Andy Rubin is on the stage!
http://www.youtube.com/android

The agenda in brief:
- Xoom demo
- New app market features
- more!

Enjoy!

He was showing Fruit Ninja running perfectly on the Tab, despite being coded for a 'phone'.

Now showing UI 'fragments' for supporting multiple screen sizes in a single app. He just hinted that Honeycomb is going to be on phones..

It actually looks really good.

youtube.com/android

He's just shown 'Renderscript' !!

It's really quite versatile, handling everything from 'video walls' to page flipping.

I'd love to see the syntax.

youtube.com/android

The new Android market looks HAWT!

http://market.android.com/

youtube.com/android

No Google Music? That's disappointing. Or did I miss that part? Loved the android market online to device synching. Was sure we would get something similar for music. Actually we saw that last year at another Google event if my memory serves me correctly.

Well, that was entertaining.

The Market

I'm really liking the new market, as it not only looks slick, but is web enabled to bring it to many different devices. The layout and design is very clean, organized, and provides ample information. I really like the in-page videos as well as the user reviews. Bravo.

Adding to the market facade is rich functionality. The ability to install an app to any of your devices with a simple click is priceless. It's this type of simple interaction that takes a platform to the next level.

In addition, the in-app purchases is a feature that is long overdue. This should enable developers to further monetize their apps, and dramatically simplify the purchasing functionality. The Tabs Kobo, Zinio, Kindle store, Media Hub, etc, would benefit tremendously from this; rather than having to enter your credentials for each app, simply use the market functionality.

Honeycomb

I've got to say that the Honeycomb interface has really grown on me. I'm sure with customizations it can be made to be beautiful, but the feel of it seems to be just right.

I really appreciate the context sensitive 'action bar' at the top of each app. It's not static, which is great considering that it will change depending on what you're doing on-screen. It's a really slick and flexible construct that lends itself really well to applications.

The bottom bar is also a very smart addition. Having notifications appear in a single place is very useful, and being able to interact with running apps is really simple. I love that this bar is 'programmable' such that users/applications can include their own functionality.

But why is it so ugly?! They should have gotten the Gmail team to design the interface, as the Gmail UI, while boring, is still clean and pleasant.

I also really like the UI 'fragments'. Fragments are basically panes, but with a special behaviour: they automatically slide to the right as you delve into deeper sub-panes if the screen runs out of width. This means that Honeycomb multi-pane apps will work perfectly on phones the way that current lists are handled. It's a very elegant solution to the multi-screen problem and furthers the one-app, multiple-devices functionality that Android does so well.

I'm also pleased that renderscript is so versatile. While the quantity of examples was sparse, they were unique enough to show the versatility of the system. I expect that forward thinking developers will showcase incredible UI concepts that really start putting pressure on companies like TAT. Who knows, they may start licensing their creations for other app developers to use.

Lastly, GPU acceleration is a BIG boon to the system overall, and should imply much smoother interaction overall. This will add to the quality of Android interactions and should save quite a bit of battery life as well. It's a little thing, but in the end I feel it will have quite an impact on the 'feel' of the system.

Other things:

The system looks incredibly good, and like serious competition to the iPad and to the upcoming playbook. While the UI styling is, IMO, the bottom of the three, the functionality more than makes up for it with smooth interaction, a consistent (in function) and functional UI, plenty of developer tools, and seamless application integration.

One thing that I don't like, is that the home-screen is looks overly complicated. Don't get me wrong, I find it simple enough to navigate, but I know many who will be frustrated with such a system. I would have opted to remove the top bar 'search' and 'apps' buttons and integrated those into the bottom bar. Of course, there may be a purpose for having that bar there.

Overall, I'm pleasantly surprised by the system. It looks really good!

I was looking forward to that as well! Perhaps its not ready yet?

Simplifying the 'streaming' of media will be great for users in general, especially when coupled with a competent client.

Well I finally took the plunge and ordered a Tab!

I know the timing might seem strange with all these new tablets coming out but I have a cunning plan.

I will use the Tab for a few months, then get the Tab 2, then give the Tab 1 to the missus so she can use it to watch BBC iplayer etc.

Arrives tomorrow, can't wait!

Actually, it hasn't gone very far in the last 5 years. In fact, I would easily argue that bandwidth and technology advances were made far more frequently, faster and better in the mid to late 90's when we went from dial-up to DSL to cable. Since the early 2000's, when the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILEC) got their way and government regulated rules about promoting competition were no longer enforced, bandwidth and technology advances have been slow to progress. Near as I can tell, I actually had a FAR, FAR faster connection (about 6mb/s, with NO caps and an ISP that PROMOTED using more bandwidth because it actually HELPED them to promote their backbone to business partners for business-to-customer connections) back in 1999 when I lived in California, than I do now (about 1.5mb/s at best lately, with bandwidth caps and ISP's playing turf-wars and NIMBY games with peering arrangements over streaming services).

Sorry but.. no. This isn't the same as the YouTube issues. Not at all. YouTube arguments were more technical and dealt with how much more people would use bandwidth per second--something progress can overcome with time (and it has). THIS argument is more about hitting artificially mandated bandwidth caps set by individual service providers who want to rape all parties involved (and not involved if they can help it).

I yield, sir..

But I still [not so] secretly think that bandwidth will eventually catch up to onLive's model, despite my invalidated argument.