Can't move seamlessly between devices for apps that we use everyday. Is this a Fundamental flaw?

[niiti]

Apps are now the content provider for all devices a user owns, be it mobile devices
like smartphones, devices for home like TVs/laptops or for automobiles like Car stereo. However, there is a fundamental flaw around the way content is presented over these devices through apps. They are not connected, not intuitive and present quality issues: A user would have to connect his/her smartphone and TV via streaming sticks/dongles (like Chromecast Dongle) - additional hardware and low quality, OR through bluetooth/cables to connect smartphone and car stereo to continue playing his/her music from one device to the other. So here are some questions:

1. If the apps are the same, then why do the apps/devices need additional hardware to allow a user to play and move music from one device to the other?
2. Is it not more efficient for the users to have apps on different devices to interact with each other seamlessly irrespective of the platform they were built on (Android/iOS/Windows)?
3. Will this not benefit companies from being independent of Android/iOS?
4. Will this not help app developers provide a better quality content to their users and to penetrate newer device markets?

In an ideal scenario where human insight works best, music provided through a smartphone app, should continue playing on smart TV app and car stereo app, without the need for additional hardware or without being on the same platform or without loosing the quality of listening to music. This flow looks logical, doesn't it?

 

[B. Diddy]

Welcome to Android Central! In your use case scenario of a car, it would not necessarily be prudent nor safe to have a phone connect seamlessly with the car system, such that you'd be interacting with the car system in exactly the same way you do on the phone itself. The distraction would be very dangerous. This is why Android Auto (and CarPlay) were developed, designed to allow the user to access only certain apps that would be important or helpful when driving, and in a safe way.

As for other scenarios, one huge obstacle is that all of these devices are being developed in a largely capitalistic market, which means not much is open source. With all of the intellectual property that is protected more closely than government secrets, I wouldn't expect there to be widespread compatibility between platforms. That would require tons of negotiations and agreements the size of a congressional budget act.

But you're correct, in an ideal world, all tech would work together, and things would be seamless. Can we get there? That'd take a lot of work and cooperation.:-\

 

[niiti]

Thank you so much B.Diddy and thank you for a warm welcome!
Your comment on safety or distracted driving is very valid. The use case however is not to assume a provision of same interface, but a specific one which is device specific, in this case car stereo app. Ex: GM introduced it's platform for developers to develop apps for car stereos. Thus, making it easy to launch car apps keeping the distraction and safety factors in mind. So in an ideal world, a music app on Android smartphone should allow users to continue listening to their music when a user walks into his/her car.

As for your 2nd input, yes device manufactures keep their secrets well guarded behind closed doors, however, the intent here is to build the continuity and not dig out intellectual property or change operating systems.

So what if we told you that we've built a solution that is scalable to all devices that have apps, without the need for being dependent on platforms specific to each device?

Would you still agree that current app connectivity between devices needs a change? Would you be a user who would pick this solution over current continuity capability of apps on different devices?

 

[niiti]

Do you agree that continuity of content between devices supporting same apps is not efficient?

Instant continuity of content is not available through apps on different devices. Instant continuity is availability and use of a content supplied by an app when a user moves from one device to the other. The availability should be supported by immediate access when users switch between devices, instead of having users to look for the content every time the user moves between devices. Do you agree that its inefficient today?

A perfect continuity scenario between, lets say, Smartphone, TV & Car stereo rendering the same music app is:
As I listen to music on my smartphone and I walk into my living room, the music should be ready to be continued on my TV when I switch it on OR when I step into my car, my car stereo should be smart enough to pick up the music.

 

[ManiacJoe]

Re: Do you agree that continuity of content between devices supporting same apps is not efficient?

I agree that you should be able to pick up where you left off when changing devices. 30 seconds on each side of the data sync would be reasonable, after the new device is turned on.

The level of seamless pass-over like you are talking about is a cool thing but is very much years away.

 

[B. Diddy]

I merged your similar threads.

 

[orangecroc]

It's a strange one. Some apps have nailed it, like Spotify. On that, all I have to do is press available devices and I can move the playback between any that have the Spotify app.
Many other apps do sync pretty seamlessly, but I think parity between platforms is something that is improving all the time.