No "true" Android tablets until mid-2011?

Andy Rubin, the "father" of Android, was interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher at the D: Dive into Mobile conference this evening. After displaying and talking about the Samsung Nexus S, which will be the first mobile phone to ship running Android 2.3, or Gingerbread, Rubin showed a prototype of a Motorola tablet running Android and a new version of Google Maps. Mossberg asked Rubin what version of Android the tablet was running, and he said "This is Honeycomb. And it'll be out sometime next year."

That reply, along with other things that Rubin said, strongly suggest that Honeycomb, not Gingerbread, will be the first "officially sanctioned" version of Android for tablets. Given how long it takes Google's carrier and hardware partners to roll out new versions of Android, that means that we're unlikely to see tablets with Google's full endorsement until mid-2011 at the earliest. By "full support", I mean support of and permission to distribute all of Google's apps, access to the Android Marketplace, and a solid library of third-party apps designed to take advantage of the tablet's screen size. There may be tablets with pre-Gingerbread versions of Android that get "special dispensations" from Google, as Samsung's Galaxy Tab did, but no wide selection of fully-supported Android tablets before Honeycomb.

There will undoubtedly be plenty of tablet prototypes running Gingerbread at the Consumer Electronics Show next month, but it's almost certain that Apple will ship its second generation of tablets before the first Honeycomb tablets ship.

Apple TV won't be another set-top box, it'll be your ONLY set-top box

Steve Jobs was interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher yesterday at the D8 Conference. He was asked about Apple's plans for TV by someone from Hillcrest Labs, and here's what Jobs said (from Engadget's liveblog):

"The problem with innovation in the TV industry is the go to market strategy. The TV industry has a subsidized model that gives everyone a set top box for free. So no one wants to buy a box. Ask TiVo, ask Roku, ask us... ask Google in a few months. So all you can do is ADD a box to the TV. You just end up with a table full of remotes, a cluster of boxes... and that's what we have today. The only way that's going to change is if you tear up the set top box, give it a new UI, and get it in front of consumers in a way they're going to want it. The TV is going to lose in our eyes until there is a better go to market strategy... otherwise you're just making another TiVo."

That quote has been read by some people as a refutation of last week's story that Apple is working on a $99 next-generation Apple TV based on the iPhone OS, but I think that it in fact supports it. Word has been spreading for some time that Apple has been negotiating with broadcast and cable networks to get VOD rights to all their programs (or as many as they have rights to supply.) Apple already sells episodes of many programs in the iTunes store and makes other video content available for free. The twist that has been talked about for this new initiative is that Apple would offer monthly subscriptions in addition to selling individual episodes.

Now, put this together with the $99 Apple TV rumor and what Jobs said about TV last night. Here's what you get: Apple's idea is not to become another set-top box, but to become the only set-top box. With the new Apple TV, you'd cancel your cable TV or satellite subscription because you can get all the shows you want, whenever you want, from Apple. If you're leasing a HD set-top box from your cable operator, you could pay for the Apple TV in less than a year from the savings alone. If you want live events and local news, sports, etc., you can get them over the air or via the Safari browser in the new Apple TV.

I don't think that Apple will announce the new Apple TV until it has all the content partnerships in place to make Jobs' vision workable. He'd rather forgo the set-top box business than launch an add-on device. The next Apple TV might be launched with 80% of the necessary partnerships, on the assumption that customer takeup with drive the remaining 20% of content providers to sign up, but it won't launch if it doesn't have an attractive lineup of content from day one.

Steve Jobs to speak at D8: All Things Digital, not Web 2.0 Expo

Dear John Battelle and Tim O'Reilly,

As you probably know, Kara Swisher announced today that Steve Jobs will be appearing at the D8: All Things Digital Conference in Rancho Palos Verdes in June. Apparently, he won't be attending the Web 2.0 Expo that you tried to get him to attend in San Francisco next month. Far be it from me to suggest that your press release promoting your conference thinly disguised as a call for more openness from Apple didn't have exactly the result you intended. Jobs will be interviewed at a conference...just not by you or at your conference.

As I said in a previous blog post, your open letter would have had a lot more credibility if you had just stuck to pushing Apple to be more forthcoming instead of trying to sell your conference at the same time. It also would also have had more credibility if you had shown the same backbone standing up to Microsoft in the 1990s that you showed in your letter to Apple. But, just like then, this was all about economic self-interest, wasn't it?

Better luck next time.