Google's Android OS early look SDK now available

Just like the good folks promised, the early look software development kit for Google's soon-to-be huge phone OS has hit the streets... er, internet. From what we can tell, the OS is as comfortable on larger, VGA devices as it is on more traditional smartphone layouts. Oh yeah... and it plays Quake. Here's what we know the software will support out of the box:

• Touchscreen
• 3G
• Webkit-based browser
• Optimized Java runtime layer (known as Dalvik Virtual Machine)
• Threaded text messaging
• MPEG-4, h.264, MP3, and AAC file formats
• Accelerated 3D graphics

Below you can see an alternate fullscreen version of the phone (a hardware reference model, not a device you can expect to buy anytime soon) up and running its browser app. If you really want to get serious, pedal your steam-engine over to the Open Handset Alliance site where you can download the SDK for a variety of platforms. You might want to get cracking on that code, too, as Google has created the Android Developer Challege, a contest meant to spur production on the devices, with a sweet $10 million pot that will be divided amongst winners. If you're not ready to jump into that game just yet, check out the gallery and view some videos after the break -- you'll see and hear more info about Android than you can shake a stick at.

Gallery: Google's Android OS early look SDK now available

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[athousandleaves @ Nov 12th 2007 11:33AM]

ahhhhhhhhhhh exciting!

[applefreak @ Nov 12th 2007 3:22PM]

for those who are board:
try listing to all the vids at once
it sounds very funny

[Max @ Nov 13th 2007 1:09AM]

Haha, I was just thinking that ... if one video is ok, then 5 must be sweet.

--
Max ... Out!
http://www.cmyos.com - free online operating system

[cuccembek @ Nov 17th 2007 10:31PM]

Join the new Google wireless and phone group on facebook
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=9384910015
Invite your friends
The scope is to link people to really sustain the Google bidding. After 1000 the first real idea will be posted.
After 10.000 the second idea and further instruction.
Go COOLinked

[Monty @ Nov 13th 2007 11:23AM]

SDK? For a phone? Weird. Don't mention this in Cupertino.

[Ike Turner @ Nov 12th 2007 11:43AM]

Err looks just like Windows Mobile...
Meh..

[Ike Turner @ Nov 12th 2007 11:43AM]

Seriously WTF? lol
Everything we have seen so far is already availble on Windows Mobile phones since WinMo5.
Microsoft is probably laughing right about now.

[danny @ Nov 12th 2007 11:52AM]

Exactly! At the release of the _BETA_ SDK, we are seeing what has taken Microsoft years to support. Imagine where they can go from this, with all these features (and many, many more I am sure that are built-in) available. And the ability of developers to create the integrate compatibility extremely close to the core elements of the OS.

http://www.androidboards.com

[Jona @ Nov 15th 2007 3:31AM]

I can't imagine Microsoft are laughing - they are probably cranky about the hype given that so far there is nothing really new about the whole thing, except the fact that its free. (I'm not saying that it wont become a wonderful platform which free's us from something-or-other).

[JeffM @ Nov 12th 2007 11:35AM]

Hah, nice Radiohead reference!

[Gav @ Nov 12th 2007 11:37AM]

Ah, but will it play Quake?

Yes, yes it will :]

[Flalex @ Nov 12th 2007 11:56AM]

Will it play doom?

[Panathas17 @ Nov 12th 2007 12:34PM]

Will it BLEND?

[riggs @ Nov 12th 2007 12:51PM]

will you shut up already?

[tanooki2003 @ Nov 12th 2007 1:16PM]

Will it play Counterstrike?

HA!!
couldn't resist

[paul34 @ Nov 12th 2007 2:15PM]

I, for one, welcome our Google-sponsored android overlo...

[paul34 @ Nov 12th 2007 2:16PM]

:is run over by a truck:

[blackberry addict @ Nov 12th 2007 2:49PM]

will it play BrickBreaker?

[nate @ Nov 13th 2007 7:20AM]

"It was funny the first time so it's funny now....right? Part:MCCCXXXVII

[Benji @ Nov 12th 2007 9:43PM]

Holy jesus.

This could be a HUGE impact on apple sales.

I'm an iPhone user and Im looking forward to this. ATT was in right?

[Stan Winstone @ Nov 12th 2007 11:39AM]

Looks fine but nothing like the next generation leap of the iPhone's OS- especially in terms of software/hardware integration. Windows Mobile just got buried as the go to OS but I suspect nobody in Cupertino is too concerned over this one...

[Ellianth @ Nov 12th 2007 12:21PM]

If this OS can copy and paste, then that alone makes it better than the iPhone's os :P.

"In the future people will not copy and paste, they will retype everything on a small software keyboard."

[Dan Gleckler @ Nov 12th 2007 12:46PM]

1.1.3?

nah . . . 1.2!

[Andrew Fong @ Nov 12th 2007 2:27PM]

Last I checked, the iPhone didn't play Quake.

[Guzzie @ Nov 12th 2007 11:40AM]

10 Million dollars!

I don't think as many people will be developing for the iPhone...

[D.L. @ Nov 12th 2007 11:54AM]

I thought Open Source was all about "free"?

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 12th 2007 2:23PM]

Then you don't understand Open Source. Open/Open Source does not necessarily mean free. The general consumer will inevitably pay for support or services. Think of Open source as you would a website. Some of them are free. Others have a team of people working and putting their work out for all to see and learn from including hobbyists that want to further technology rather than horde IP (*cough*MS*cough*). Some even charge for their website or a service that uses web technology. Open Source is kind of like that.

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 12th 2007 2:24PM]

These comments are sucking today...

[D.L. @ Nov 12th 2007 6:52PM]

If the source is freely available then why would you pay for it?

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 13th 2007 5:52AM]

Why do people pay for Fileplanet? It's a website, the source is downloaded to your PC every time you open the page. They provide a service, and customers pay for that service that uses open source HTML.

[Steve @ Nov 12th 2007 11:48AM]

I can't hear what he is saying because I'm mesmerized by his huge head of hair.

As for Android, hopefully having not one but two competing platforms (Android, iPhone) will finally make MS "fix" Windows Mobile and make it customer-centric, not Windows-centric (which sounds like apples and oranges, but really isn't!).

Sorry - I don't consider Palm a viable fourth option given that it hasn't changed in like 8 years :(

[keith @ Nov 12th 2007 11:41AM]

One thing that is unclear to me... since this is an open platform will people be able to build this for existing handsets? Will I one day be able to put android on my t-mobile dash?

[dseaver @ Nov 12th 2007 11:48AM]

I would love to put this on my ATT 8125 someday, so I'm right with you

[EdMercer @ Nov 12th 2007 6:57PM]

Agreed... My old Qtek 9090 could use some Google-Lovin'

[PG @ Nov 12th 2007 11:52AM]

Not a single original idea.

[Addy Osmani @ Nov 12th 2007 11:43AM]

I can't quite tell if I'm impressed with what I've seen of Android yet..

In appearance, it seems to be a cross between Windows Mobile, a generic Cell phone OS and (primarily) Mac OSX for the iPhone.

This isn't a bad thing but I was expecting a little bit more out of the platform. Some of the features that I liked after seeing that video were the Open GL capabilities (demonstrated by the globe) as well as (some) of the interface.

I think I remember seeing an Opera icon on the bottom of the screen but I may be wrong - in any case, I was hoping that this OS would deliver better browsing capabilities than it's competition - something that still appears lacking even in this preview. I'm not sure whether he was really using 3G but did you notice how slow the pictures on that Berkeley page loaded up?. Jeez. I've had GPRS work faster.

I'd like Google to leak out a few more videos of what this platform has to offer - given the wealth of free services that they offer online, I was hoping that they would have a few "mobile" versions of these available that wouldn't require you to use the browser to access them. They seem to have integrated Google Maps in quite well which is good.

From a graphical perspective - I've seen 5 year old PDA's deliver Quake and Tomb Raider rendering at just as impressive speed and quality so Android is going to need to step up the game a little bit - show me something I haven't already seen!.

The one thing that excited me after seeing that video is something I think I heard. Did he say you could develop on it using Delphi?. I haven't known many mobile operating systems to ever offer this but even if it's a small thing, it certainly is interesting.

[Mr. Picklesworth @ Nov 12th 2007 1:55PM]

This isn't all about user interface. User interface can be absurdly unusual (sorry, "intuitive") but that is nothing without integration. Having applications that know how to talk to each-other clobbers the importance of the GUI toolkit.

How to do this? Content types done right, integrated search, standard interfaces for every facet of interaction, consistent and integrated program registration, and good inter-process communication.
All of those in one box, even with the most primitive of user interfaces, would blow the competition out of the water.

That thought smells a bit of Newton, and that thing was by no means a miracle interface for display; it was a miracle interface for knowing what it's doing.

I haven't looked much at the technical details, but some of the examples would suggest that Android has this type of functionality...

A shame about the Java thing, mind. As John Carmack observed quite wisely, it's a great little language: For databases.

[consume @ Nov 12th 2007 11:50AM]

That was awesome.

[matt @ Nov 12th 2007 11:48AM]

google doesnt really look like it does on the picture..

[Magallanes @ Nov 12th 2007 11:50AM]

Google want to achieve the same that Symbian and WindowsCE in just a few years.

And the sdk ONLY support eclipse :-( Damn, eclipse is only good for Java but a burden for other languages, specially c++.

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 12th 2007 2:29PM]

When was the last time you used Eclipse?

[Graham @ Nov 12th 2007 11:52AM]

Man this sounds awesome. I wonder if you would be able to download it and put it on other phones instead of it just coming pre-installed. I mean I have a 3125 from att, windows mobile is pretty sweet, but man what I wouldnt do to have android on it.

[yroc @ Nov 12th 2007 11:57AM]

give that guy some water!!!!

[daaper @ Nov 12th 2007 12:04PM]

thank you! I couldn't even watch the first video because it was driving me nuts listening to him talk...

[mmh @ Nov 12th 2007 11:58AM]

lol it plays quake... classic!

[Joe Stalin @ Nov 12th 2007 12:01PM]

The important thing with android is not that it is somehow lightyears ahead of the iPhone or WinMo, but rather the accessibility and openness of the platform. This is the major advantage. The fact that it has a feature set similar to the other major OS offerings is great. It means you can do similar app development without the barriers (apple) or cost (ms). And it should be very appealing to the HW manufacturers and Mobile Carriers because it may allow them to skip a hefty licensing fee.

This OS may not end up being that 'shiny' for the end-consumer, but it has some real appeal for the industry.

[Joe Stalin @ Nov 12th 2007 1:50PM]

Just a follow up to my previous comment...

After looking at the SDK and other literature briefly, one of the most unique and interesting aspects of android is this:

"Android does not differentiate between the phone's basic and third-party applications -- even the dialer or home screen can be replaced."

This is sssuuuupppppeeeerrrrr unique among phone OS. This level of access and application replacement is what is necessary to truly customize or reskin a phone. I dont know of any other OS that offers this (although I am not an expert). Very interesting.

[willyboy @ Nov 12th 2007 12:08PM]

Should of used an HDRI and a bit more reflection in that render at the top.

[Adam @ Nov 12th 2007 12:01PM]

Seeya WindowsMobile. That shames the iPhone software too.

[abes @ Nov 12th 2007 12:04PM]

It looks potentially very cool. I wonder though how much of the interface is customizable. The interface definitely still needs work. Especially at the beginning of the video, it wasn't clear why the keys had to be used instead of touching the screen.

One of the biggest gripes I can see so far is the reliance on menu. It's one thing that the iPhone manages to get around for the most part (and simply doesn't provide that functionality when it can't...)

The really big win the iPhone still has is that multi-touch is a really big gain. It allows Apple to treat the iPhone as a single surface you can interact with directly. You can used to just flipping through things, sliding things, zooming in, etc. without having to take your eyes away from the screen, or figure out what button to press.

It's certainly to say iPhone is not perfect. Still can't copy and paste with it. But Cocoa is a really great stack to work with. I'm very curious as to how Andriod compares. Is there an emulator for development use? Also, how hard will it be to develop common apps against different HW?