If once they have decided to put Android as open source, then why dont they want to put it open space now? Is it that Android is "THE" operating system for smartphones and other upcoming gadgets and keep the technology with them as far as they can..
I agree with Luis. Google must have some reasons (waiting for Apple iPad 2 to iron out and getting feedback from the market) why it is not releasing Honeycomb. Business value is usually about "speed to market" yet open source means that everyone can cook in the kitchen. I am also cognisant of selinz's comments...UI design should consider dual functionality so that multiple devices can successfully run tablet-friendly programs. I'm sure the two borrow from each other. However, how is tablet design different from tablet PC? The lines are going to get blurred and at some point, interchangeability for speed to market will be needed.
I don't think Google is helping any tablet makers by actually delaying the release of Honeycomb. This could actually give HP and Blackberry to release their tablets with altogether different operating system and can eat the pie of delayed Android tablets.
And, of course, there is the likelihood that iPad2 provided enough advancement that Honeycomb needs to be refined to attempt to catch up. The first one to market (especially when it is Apple) gets to set the target for the next guy who should be trying to do something better, whether technologically, pricing, or what.
I can only believe that this is a tactical strategy by Google to delay "showing their cards". I would fully suspect they have a couple of 'new features' not found in other smartphones. By delaying the release far enough into their competitors product cycle, it has the potential to put them ahead of their competitors for up to 18 months while the rest play catch up.
Corporate open source brings its own set of issues. With more conventional open source, the target audience tends to understand what they are getting into. They tend to be the sort that can evaluate an update, decide if it's necessary and take the steps to implement it. They also tend to be the types that can deal with update schedules all over the map, from frequent to sporadic.
In standard open source, the quality is only as good as the community supporting it. In general, the results are quite good, but still rarely polished enough for the masses. And therein lies the problem for corporate open source like Android.
Google obviously wants to deliver a product that is world-class in functionality and in useability. They want it to be secure and reliable and worthy of the Google name.
Once released into open source, a certain amount of the control that is needed to keep it a mass-appeal product can be lost. Either they're looking for a way to open source it and still keep enough of that control or they're deciding whether or not to even open source it.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.