Less than a day since the Android announcement, and already the impact Google’s open-source cellphone package might have on stressed IT departments is throwing up disagreements around the internet.  Ken Dulaney, a Gartner analysts, paints a particularly negative picture of inter-handset operability:

“[Applications] will probably run. The question is will they run well … That’s the biggest concern about this effort. There’s not enough control exerted by Google to force this to be consistent across the board”Ken Dulaney, Gartner [via ARN]

Rich Miner, an Android developer and co-founder of the original company Google’s acquired, believes that’s not going to be an issue, however.  Although there’s no contractual guarantee that OHA members won’t develop non-consistent software, each partner has at least paid lip-service to the idea:

“[E]very member of the alliance has agreed to an antifragmentation clause. They’ve basically agreed not to fragment nor do things that would result in different versions of the platform. So we’ve built into the alliance mechanisms so that everyone agrees they won’t support that kind of fragmentation” Rich Miner, Android [via PC World]

It’s likely that the delay before Android-powered cellphones hit the market - estimated at 6 to 12 months - will give developers and the OHA an opportunity to lay the groundwork for consistency and good-practice. 

“Google’s plan has a lot of potential for drawing a critical mass of programmers that could help sidestep some of the fragmentation issue. For one thing, the company has a solid track record of getting programmers all fired up. That includes open-source developers and those building Web-based software that runs atop Google programming foundations, two communities important in the phone market” Stephen Shankland, CNet

The inevitable fact is, if Android-based cellphones hit the market and manage to capture consumer attention, then both individual and corporate users will want to buy them.  As we’ve seen with the iPhone, just because a handset isn’t particularly designed for enterprise use, that doesn’t mean it won’t be asked to cooperate, or coerced into fitting in with corporate IT structure (or, more likely perhaps, corporate IT structure carefully contorted to fit in with the iPhone’s limitations).  The iPhone’s strength, perhaps, was that it is - untampered with, at least - a closed system, and IT admins could be pretty sure users wouldn’t introduce potentially damaging third-party software that might affect the business network.  By adopting Linux and (eventually) opening the SDK up to any interested party, Android runs the risk of causing paranoid admins - amid cautions of potentially malicious softwarefrom security firm F-Secure - to slam shut the doors, fearing the possibility of malware being easily introduced to the ecosystem.