You hear a chime, see a pop up notification, and feel a buzz. Someone just sent you an email and your phone, computer, and tablet are notifying you. Despite all of our technology, notifications continue to oppress the senses of those who use multiple devices. Sure, it’s great that something like an email will disappear from your notifications once it has been read (thank you, ActiveSync), but that doesn’t stop things like chat notifications or calendar alerts.

To make matters worse, most of the innovation we’ve seen in notifications has been to make notifications more accessible, not devices more aware of the user. We’ve seen devices like the TouchPad and the Pre3 (may they rest in peace) promise to push notifications to each other, but at the end of the day notifications still appeared on both devices. At some point, clearing notifications becomes a new chore, making users feel like their devices are actually hindering them from getting things done. 

In 1997 two college kids started a company based on a pet project of theirs. Larry Page and Sergey Brin had worked together to create a search engine that bested every other competitor in every conceivable way. Their goal was simple: Help regular humans find things easily on the Internet.

As Google began to make money through its innovative advertising system, it began to acquire companies and develop solutions outside of search. Brin and Page, joined by CEO Eric Schmidt, had a vision of the world becoming a better place. Their naive company motto was “Don’t be evil.” 

Recently Andy Rubin said that Google is going to double down on tablets in 2012. While Rubin failed to elaborate on what he meant by double down, we can only assume that Rubin recognizes the truth: Android tablets have failed in the market. According to Google’s own numbers there are 12 million Android tablets in the market to date, versus Apple selling 3 million iPads over the launch weekend of the new iPad.

The reasons for Android’s failure (compared to Apple) in the tablet space is twofold: operating system and applications. I’ve written about this before, but I’ll say it again: Android is a mess on tablets. It is definitely faster on Ice Cream Sandwich compared to Honeycomb, but that doesn’t change the fact that the whole homescreen UI is jumbled and fragmented. Having the app drawer, search, navigation, and notifications/quick settings in four different corners is much less accessible than it could be. Sure, a tablet offers more real estate than a phone, but that doesn’t mean that the UI should be spread all over the screen. 

Last week Motorola went on the record to blame Google’s Nexus program for the delay in software updates on its devices. A device manufacturer trying to explain why software updates are delayed is nothing new, but a device manufacturer that was recently purchased by the its software supplier blaming it’s new owner caught my eye. It’s possible that Motorola was trying to give the impression that things really won’t change much once the purchase is complete or that Motorola wants public pressure to support their devices getting preferential treatment from Google; we’ll never know for sure. Regardless, I think it raised some questions about Google’s Nexus strategy and whether or not it has been good for Android as a whole. 

For the past week I’ve been reviewing the Samsung Focus S. I believe that competition drives innovation, so I love spending time with multiple devices and operating systems to see what works well and what doesn’t. I think most of us have spent some quality time with an iOS device and are aware of the competition it presents, but I’m guessing that most of us haven’t played with Windows Phone very much. So how does Windows Phone 7 stack up against Android?  

For the past week I’ve been spending some quality time with the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. While I like the hardware for the most part and I don’t mind TouchWiz, I’ve been struggling to find a place for the device in my life. While a large part of it is simply that I’m not entirely convinced that a tablet is the best form factor, I keep finding myself disappointed with the app selection and quality. There are some great apps available for Honeycomb and Ice Cream Sandwich, but overall I’ve been disappointed time and time again. 

Netflix and Hulu Plus had limited app rollouts because of it. Eric Schmidt and Matias Duarte say it doesn’t exist. Charlie Kindel says it’s the reason Google will lose control of Android. Jon Evans says it’s the single greatest problem facing Android. Sanjay Jha says that carriers require it and he needs it to make money. It’s a subject that Android supporters are tired of talking about and that Android competitors can’t stop talking about. It was the subject of my first official post here at Droid-Life. Fragmentation is still a serious problem.

Yesterday our fearless leader criticized Nokia’s CEO, Stephen Elop, for bringing up Android fragmentation, saying that fragmentation is no longer an issue. While Kellen made some good points about how far Android has come since 2009, I disagree with his conclusion that Android fragmentation is no longer a problem. Four different types of fragmentation remain problematic for Android users. 

Within the last week the top three Android manufacturers reported their most recent earnings. HTC reported its first quarterly profit decline in two years, Motorola’s sales are expected to be disappointing yet again, and Samsung is doing fairly well (though their earning numbers were boosted by the sale of their hard drive division to Seagate). In short, except for Samsung, the top three Android manufacturers are not doing well.

It’s easy for us to look at market share and assume that because Android is dominating, that means every manufacturer is doing well. That’s simply not the case. So far every manufacturer’s strategy has been to make as many models as they can and hope they sell well. The result is a flood of devices in the market and delayed updates. If you make some really good devices you might be able to avoid financial trouble (Samsung), but if you make terrible devices this strategy is just going to kill you (Motorola). HTC has managed to stay in between these extremes by making some good devices, all of which were very similar to each other.