Thank you for taking the time to do all this research and share it with us.

While the overall mobile search numbers are very high, there is definitely evidence that the Android users use the web less than iPhone/iPad users, especially to shop and otherwise generate revenue. See http://visual.ly/mobile-traffic-statistics for example. And Google should not be complacent that so much of its mobile search traffic is coming from major competitors like Apple or Amazon.

Please remember I’m not saying that “Google has failed.” The question I ask is “Has Google Android’s open source business model failed?” We’ll have to see over time, most importantly by what Google does with Android vs the other hardware makers.

Thanks again for the feedback.

How about another number: $50 million. That’s how much Google payed to acquire Android, Inc. in 2005. Do we need more numbers still?

How about $20 billion. That’s how much ad revenue Google has brought in worldwide this year so far, more than the entire US print media combined.

And one final number: 51%. Do you know what that number is for? The percentage of mobile phone web traffic that is driven by Android.

Let’s review shall we? And I’ll even give you some absurd assumptions to help out. We’ll assume that while Google paid $50 million for Android, it was a black hole of money and Android cost them another $450 million in further costs to bring out, even though there is absolutely no evidence of this whatsoever (much like your claims of Google not generating web traffic!)

Total Android development cost: $500 million
Total Google mobile ad revenue in 2012: $8 billion

This is all of course acknowledging that Google mobile ad revenue is not coming just from Android devices, something you didn’t address at all. Apple doesn’t “own” traffic, even traffic that goes through Safari. What search engine do you think everyone is using on their iPhones and iPads? Last time I checked Apple makes exactly ZERO dollars through web traffic so how you are possibly construing web traffic and advertising numbers to be a losing game for Google but a winning game for Apple (who isn’t even in that business) is beyond the realm of understanding of what was clearly many people who read this post.

Getting into hardware manufacturing has always been Google’s goal, it’s not some last desperate measure they have taken because Android hasn’t worked out so far for them. Its success is one of many factors that allowed them to acquire Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion.

http://www.businessinsider.com/googles-mobile-revenues-2012-10
http://www.statista.com/topics/1001/google/chart/709/google-s-ad-revenue-since-2004/
http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/17/android-smartphones-now-have-majority-mobile-web-traffic-share/

Yes, Android has always had impressive market share numbers, but if they aren’t generating web traffic, then they aren’t making Google money. This is the really important idea: the key for Google is web traffic, not handset market share. A business strategy which costs Google to develop Android but only makes money for Samsung (handsets), AT&T (service contracts), not to mention competitors like Amazon, is a failure.

Sure, if you have other numbers please share them with us.

First of all you’re conflating a statistic that deals specifically with tablet traffic, and secondly you are using that tablet traffic statistic to declare Android a failed Google strategy in terms of mobile devices generally. You confuse things further by stating that Android was to “slay Apple’s mighty iPhone.” Seems like a good point to share some market share information for smartphones, no? The rest of the article seems to be speculation based upon poorly conceived and forgone conclusions.

Android is a mobile operating system, furthermore, mobile device traffic is not exclusively from tablet computers. In fact, smartphones account for 70% of all mobile devices in the U.S. Android enjoys a 75% smartphone market share worldwide and 54% in the U.S.

Google’s dominance in the software and advertising arena is what has allowed them to make the leap to hardware. How one can conflate this as a failed “mobile devices” open source strategy while citing a single statistic on tablet traffic alone boggles the mind.

Please do not presume to be an expert on open source strategies if you can’t even distinguish mobile device usage numbers.

if user-agent contains “Safari” then count 1 for iPAD
else if user-agent contains “Chrome” then count 1 for Android\
else …

Number don’t lie (unless you got them wrong…)