"We at Google thank you very much for your free choise!

Having worked at Doubleclick (Google's ad serving engine) I understand better than most the dis-intermediation that Google feeds off of. Google views it's users as grist for its mill. Free in Google speak equates to a customer who has a lifetime value of between $1,600,000 to $8,000,000 - that is what you are worth to Google. In no way will Google allow anyone to poach that golden egg.

Just as the "last mile" was always the challenge in the communication world. The disconnected user was Google's Achilles' heel - in the late 90's they realized that the mobile web would harm the golden egg - thus their benevolence bestowed on the peasants... Android, all in the name of gathering and profiling the user in increasingly intrusive ways.

But the apps are FREE! They help me with my life, now they are with me ALL the time, how can this be bad? Is your Android phone giving you $100,000 worth of value per year? It is to Google.

Google have even changed Andriods strategy based on the dumbing down of the smartphone - the iPhone. The single tasking feature phone introduced by Apple was a game changer. BUT NOT IN A POSITIVE FASHION. One of the least sophisticated mobile countries in the world - the United States of America - who's vast population is so technically backwards and incapable of managing a modern smartphone was ripe for a consumer device that was sufficiently simple to use. Using the super model axiom Apple developed a product that was beautiful, yet not intellectually challenging - and just like a super model it can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

All of Apples devices have only one purpose - defeat the evil Microsoft empire and sell more Mac's. Hence the absolute need to introduce iTunes into your ilife to use the iPhone. Much is written about the iPhone wonderful eco-system. The pundits forget that true smart phones don't need an eco system, they survive and thrive stand alone, connected to the rest of the world via wifi, G3, G4, GX... they provide the user with a converged experience without an umbilical cord.

The iPhone showed Google two things: 1) It had lost control of this entire segment of the population to the "notion of less". Less sophistication, less usability, less freedom (ironic for the company who's iconic moment was the "1984" commercial). 2) Americans are stupid enough to actually pay for applications that should be standard kit on an advanced smartphone. (As an aside I realize that over the entire span of my use of Nokia smartphones I have only bought 3 apps - Wayfinder for my 9300, Profimail for my E71 {pre Nokia Messaging} and Gravity on the N97. Every thing else has been provided by Nokia at no cost as part of my handset purchase.)

So Google has moved to less free apps, simplier UI, more intrusion into the "open source" code based in it's lessons from Apple. The loss of huge swathes of America to the iPhone and the inability to get traction has turned google into a peditor on the ODM scene. Motorola, Dell, HTC, etc... who no longer have the deep pockets of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft to develop and refine mobile OS's are selling their hardware souls to Google in an attempt to stay relavent as handset makers. All these ODM's will learn, as did IBM, Compaq, HP that people use software not hardware and by turning over the reigns of the user experience to Google they will become increasingly irrelevent.

The mobile as a concept was about freedom and the old cliche is that freedom is not free. Of all the mobile platforms Googles is the worst since they lie about the price that you pay for it's use. Apple at least is open about its blatant consumerist bias and control freak nature. Nokia has shown itself to be the most benevolent - Symbian to open source, Maemo, Betalabs all in the name of a better handset experience."

//Google employee