Google and the death of beta testing

In the last week, there have been not one, but two exploits that could give a malicious individual access to your Google Wallet mobile payment app on Android. While the first is a root-only hack that Google couldn’t really be expected to plan for, the second affects all Android users and is simple to do. Google has just worked out a fix, but was forced to disable new pre-paid cards while it was being developed. So how did Google put this service out to the general public without catching these flaws? It might actually be an institutional problem with the way Google delivers and tests its products.

In a post-Google world, “beta” doesn’t mean what it used to mean. A Google beta is a nearly finished product, and the search giant lets a lot of people use it. That’s great, right? Well, it is when the product is something like Google Voice or Gmail. When Google stumbles, though, it stumbles big, and Google Wallet is only the most recent example of Google rolling an unfinished and untested product out to users.

Google Wave was a massively ambitious idea that Googlers on the inside were apparently quite excited about. Multitudes of users were invited to participate in the beta, and eventually it was opened to everyone. Wave’s complicated interface and severe bugs were its undoing as users failed to embrace it.

Whereas Wave was just an annoyance to be forgiven, Google Buzz showed a troubling lack of understanding from Mountain View. Buzz was rolled out to all Gmail users without sufficient testing or input from regular people. Sure, Googlers loved it, but all the common folk got was a disturbing invasion of privacy that exposed Gmail contact lists. For many of us, an email contact list is sacrosanct and should never be made public. Despite a quick fix, Buzz could never recover from that black mark.

There was a good deal of hype surrounding Google TV prior to launch, but the devices were over priced, and the software far from done. Anyone that bought a $300 Logitech Revue was really just a guinea pig for Google. It wasn’t until nearly a year later that the software was updated, and vital features added. The second generation devices should have been the first ones sold to consumers. Google TV is another product that should have been left in the oven longer before it was sold to the masses.

Even Android, which has become quite successful, was released too soon. The first Android phones were nearly unusable with poor battery life and substantial bugs. Consumers bought these devices expecting a finished product, but they got a beta without the label. Even Google’s Android head Andy Rubin said as much when he called Android 1.0 more of a “0.8” at best.

There is just no such thing as a real beta at Google. A product is either tested internally by Googlers, or it’s blasted out to large numbers of users. This is great when you want to get immediate access to an awesome new service, but when that service leaks your email contacts, or allows crooks to get at your pre-paid credit cards, it’s a disaster. In the wake of the Google Wallet hacks, it might be time to give up on democratizing the beta, and give these experiments (whether they’re labeled as betas or not) the time to mature before foisting them on regular users.

Read more at Ars Technica

Source

How Google will control OEMs with Chrome for Android

Google’s Chrome browser has finally arrived on Android in beta form, and it’s really rather good. It’s really only a beta in the way Google understands “beta.” Chrome for Android is stable, feature-rich, and blazing fast. This is definitely a new reason for Android users to start pestering device makers about an update to Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich (ICS) — and that might be just the start of Google’s real agenda for Chrome on Android.

Chrome on the desktop has gained some real attention, even surpassing Firefox to become the second-place browser with 25.7% usage share according to StatCounter. Google is backing that name up with its borderline-magical cloud services. In the new Chrome for Android beta, all your tabs, bookmarks, omnibox entries, and passwords just show up on the phone with no configuration. It is a very compelling experience to say the least.

Chrome for Android is going to eventually become the default browser for most Android users, but it’s going to come in the form of another Google app like Gmail or Market. OEMs will have to be certified to have it on the phone, and that means a Google inspection. Chromium will be the fully open source version of the browser on Android, just like it is on the desktop. All the fancy cloud features that make Chrome so interesting will be kept in the official Chrome build.

As Google seeks to subtly nudge OEMs in the right direction, Chrome for Android is going to give Mountain View a powerful new lever. Since Google only allows the closed apps to be loaded on approved devices, it has all the power. The Chrome name and features will sweeten the pot for device makers, and could get Google more compliance as it makes requests. With better Google apps, maybe that anti-fragmentation initiative has another shot at becoming a reality.

Google knows that it needs to keep innovating with its Android app package because that’s essentially the only method they have of controlling the platform. The Kindle Fire might not be the fastest devicerunning Android, but it’s one of the most successful. As much as Google would like to applaud Amazon’s efforts publicly, it definitely needs to work behind the scenes to make sure top-tier Android OEMs don’t get any similar ideas about forking the platform. Chrome and its cloud services can help Google do that.

Google might also be able to hand out a little tough love to AndroidOEMs if its position is strengthened. HTC has been sticking to its gimmicky device strategy (LTE, 3D), and in recent quarters that hasn’t been working for them. HTC needs to change things up, and Google might be able to give it the gentle guidance it needs. More robust Google apps could be just the thing to get HTC to listen; after all, it will want Google certification more than ever before with Chrome on board.

While Chromium will be available to non-certified devices, we can safely say that OEMs and users will be clamoring for Chrome. The cloud syncing features take it from being a good browser to an essential part of the phone. Chrome-starved users may be able to shame OEMs into updating more phones to ICS, and manufacturers will be even more beholden to Google. This is the power Chrome is likely to wield as Google seeks to keep its platform together.

Download Chrome Beta for Android

Source

Google Drive: Dropbox killer or mediocre also-ran?

It’s one of Silicon Valley’s greatest pink elephants: Why doesn’t Google offer a cloud storage service to rival Dropbox, Box.net, or Microsoft’s SkyDrive? Google has the most internet-connected servers in the world, the largest combined storage of any web company, and already offers photo storage (Picasa), document storage (Docs), music storage (Music), but for some reason it has never offered a unified Google Drive. According to people familiar with the matter, however, our wait is almost over: Google’s Hard Drive In The Sky is coming soon, possibly “within weeks.” (paywalled)

Feature-wise, it sounds like Google Drive will be comparable to Dropbox, with free basic storage (5GB?) and additional space for a yearly fee. Presumably, Google Drive will show you a directory view of all the files you have stored on Google’s servers (pictured right), from photos to music to email attachments — kind of like a revamped and omnipresent Google Docs. It is possible that Google’s revised privacy policy, which comes into effect at the beginning of March, makes this kind of unification possible. This will be a useful addition to Google’s web services, but hardly a killer feature — until you look at the pricing for additional space.

You might not be aware of this, but Google already offers additional storage space for Docs, Gmail, and Picasa at very competitive prices, starting at $5 per year for 20GB, or $20 per year for 80GB. In comparison, Dropbox is $9.99 per month for 50GB, SugarSync is $4.99 per month for 30GB, and Box.net is $9.99 per month for just 25GB. In short, Google is 10 times cheaper than the competition. There’s no confirmation that Google Drive will use the same pricing structure, but in all likelihood it will.

Being cheaper than the competition is only part of the equation, though. To really succeed, Google would need mobile and desktop apps to rival Dropbox or SugarSync — and with Android in its pocket, this is where Google Drive could really shine. As it stands, Google really doesn’t have anything that’s comparable to the autonomous simplicity ofiCloud — but with Google Drive, that could all change. We have already seen a hint of this with Google+ for Android, which lets you automatically upload photos — but only to Google+. If Google Drive can bring the same functionality to mail, docs, music, and so on, then Google could be onto a winner. It’s also worth noting that Google Drive also could be integrated into Chrome — and Chrome OS, of course.

At this point, most tech sites would usually sign off with some pandering adoration for Google’s awesome tech-savviness. Instead, we feel obliged to point out Microsoft’s SkyDrive, poor little No Geek Cred SkyDrive. Microsoft’s cloud storage service gives you 25GB for free! It works really well with Windows 7 and Windows Phone 7 — and comeWindows 8 and WP8 (and Xbox 720?) it will bebaked right into the OS, like iOS’s iCloud but better. The web interface is excellent, too, and ties in nicely with Office Web Apps (pictured right), which are generally a lot better than Google Docs.

Ultimately, then, Google Drive needs to be awesome to stick out from the crowd — and that’s probably why Google has waited so long to bring out a service that it really should’ve launched years ago, before Dropbox or SkyDrive. It’s a little bit odd, really: With its arsenal of web services, Android, and Chrome OS, Google should be leading the cloud storage pack; instead, we’re waiting to see if Google Drive is comparable to little ol’ Dropbox.

[Image credit: Johannes Wigand]

Source