There is a story this week that Google is trying to, at long last, crack down on a very serious problem with the open source Android OS platform, and that’s fragmentation. Up till now, handset makers, and even those building would-be iPad killers, felt free to tear out parts of the OS and add their own custom themes, and other elements. As a result, Google faced the highly embarrassing prospect, in the Samsung Fascinate, of witnessing Microsoft’s Bing search engine replace their own.

Since Google offers Android free of charge, and that means no licensing fees, they have to depend on search and other features that deliver targeted ads to earn a profit from this venture.

Reports about efforts to tighten up the Android OS indicate that VP of engineering Andy Rubin, one of the creators of Android — who actually began his carrier as a software engineer at Apple years ago — will have the final say on any alterations to the OS.

This change of tune is understandable. Unfettered, your Android phone may be very different from mine; that is, if I actually had an Android phone of course. The OS theme might be altered, default apps swapped out, and proprietary components added. Certainly customers who hoped for something that was predictable, without unexpected interface traps, would feel cheated. As far as app developers were concerned, all those Android “fixes” meant serious complications in making software compatible with as many smartphones and tablets as possible.

And please don’t get me started about the fact that you can’t even depend on getting a critical software update for your Android device. That’s up to the carrier or manufacturer, and they might have other priorities, such as selling you a new model rather than supporting the old one.

When Steve Jobs complained about the fragmentation in the land of Android, Rubin, in an infamous Tweet, used several command line instructions to illustrate the open and accessible nature of the OS. That, to him, is a good thing, or was, until things changed.

This reported crackdown is only the latest attempt by Google to take control of their OS before it twists and turns in the wind in totally unexpected ways. Just recently, Google announced that they had delayed availability of the source code for Android 3.0. code-named Honeycomb, which made its debut on the Motorola Xoom. This position is understandable, in light of the fact that Samsung and other tech companies opted to build tablets a while back with the smartphone version of Android, regardless of the consequences in performance, and forcing customers (the few that bothered) to cope with an interface designed to work on a smaller gadget. It all seemed a desperate move to have something, anything, to sell, even if the customer was poorly served.

Now Rubin and his bosses at Google have the perfect right to dictate terms for gaining access to their OS, just as they have the right to hold off releasing the source code. At the same time, it’s hard to argue in favor of the openness of the Android platform when Google is now taking it in a different direction.

Certainly, I can understand Google’s dilemma. When it comes to the iPad and iPad 2, customers are still lining up to buy them. Despite reports that Apple is improving the lead times and getting product to market, demand still appears to be exceeding supply. This leaves the rest of the market in a tizzy. There are reports that Motorola, after spending a bundle on those awful Xoom ads, plans to replace it with a new model by June. That’s after just a few months on sale, and clear evidence things aren’t going well. Then again, after the retirement of the legendary StarTAC cell phone, which sort of mimicked the famous Star Trek Communicator, Motorola has not been able to create a worthy successor. I’ll grant the RAZR phone was thin and elegant, but it was otherwise a pedestrian handset.

When it comes to smartphones, sure Android has done very well, reportedly holding a higher market share in the U.S. than Apple’s iOS. But that was before the iPhone arrived at the front doors of Verizon Wireless. It’s a sure thing Verizon is pushing the iPhone at the expense of Android product right now. On the long haul, the departure of T-Mobile as a separate company means there will be lots more potential iPhone customers. There will also be fewer choices, and Android will probably suffer worst.

As for Google, no doubt Andy Rubin and his bosses realized that there would be utter chaos if they didn’t assert greater control over the Android platform. If they are going to offer Android as a brand with a singular identity, they can’t allow every single manufacturer and carrier to dictate the final look and feel of their gadgets. Just saying a smartphone comes “with Google” doesn’t actually deliver a strong image to the customer. I mean, people know when they have an iPhone with the iOS. When it comes to Android, other than power users who are up on all that minutiae, how many regular users understand — or even care — what the Android OS is all about? I don’t think the percentages would be very high. Google has to be worried.

On the surface, Apple is very similar to other high-tech companies. They build and sell hardware and software and, they hope and expect, make profits from them. That ought to be sufficient, and it is for most companies. But Apple, by word and deed, seems to have a far more expansive purpose. You can say, “change the world,” without being patronizing about it. But it’s true that many of their products become cultural icons. Can you say that about Dell or HP, or even Samsung?

You can easily witness Apple’s game plan in their ads, not to mention the way their products are presented during their special media events. Whether CEO Steve Jobs, or a member of the company’s executive team, the demonstrations and the classy ads all attempt to explain what Apple’s gear can deliver to your digital lifestyle.

Take that AT&T spot for the iPhone. A man receives a call from his wife, who subtly reminds him about their anniversary. Of course he didn’t forget! Sure, right, but he uses his iPhone to get something for his wife to prove that he remembered. Not only did AT&T demonstrate their main advantage over Verizon Wireless, which is the ability to talk and access data services at the same time, but you saw someone dealing with a practical problem about one’s relationship with one’s spouse that can happen to everyone.

When you see an Apple product on a TV show or in a movie, they are often used to get something done, not just hang back as part of the scenery. As some of you recall, a 1990s Mac PowerBook was used to save the world in “Independence Day,” by “beaming” a computer virus to the alien computers. All right, it’s highly implausible, but the key point is that you don’t buy an Apple product on specs alone. You buy Apple gear based on what they can accomplish for you, for your business.

Those amazingly popular iPad TV ads are devilishly simple. They show someone paging through different apps on the iconic gadget to play music, read a newspaper, play an action game, accomplish all sorts of neat stuff. After all, the iPad is nothing without the apps with which to accomplish something. But this is lost of most of the competition.

Now Microsoft, in their pathetic round of Windows 7 spots, appears to be making a lame attempt to demonstrate what you can accomplish. But they end up looking foolish.

So we have someone bragging about being able to pin document windows on the sides of the screen. To convey the impression modest features of this sort are something customers actually clamored for, you’ll often hear someone announce, “I invented it.” There’s another ad touting cloud-based services, as if this is something altogether original and unique in Windows.

Those awful Motorola Xoom ads, however, show where the rest of the tech industry is truly out of touch. You have this science fiction themed atmosphere, where someone takes the Xoom tablet, shakes it, and implies that’s something unique, impressive. Yes, I suppose you shake a tablet to play a game, but what purpose does the Xoom truly serve? That’s a difficult question to answer, with only a few dozen Android 3.0 Honeycomb tablet-optimized taps available so far.

Motorola, however, hasn’t figured out that you can’t sell specs with a lifestyle product. You have to make it crystal clear, in those precious 30 seconds, what real people can do. They failed there just as Verizon Wireless failed with those “Droid Does” promotions. Does what? I’m not altogether sure watching those ads, which also espouse a robotic theme that might have also been lifted from a science fiction film.

Yes, they want us to believe we do live in a science fiction world, surrounded by robots, spaceships, dark skies and lightning. But what are those Droids and Xooms used for anyway? Why can’t they answer the question, rather than pretend to be special effects wizards?

This doesn’t mean you can’t accomplish useful tasks with Android tablets, Windows PCs, or smartphones featuring an assortment of operating systems. Unfortunately, the people who run the companies who build that gear have serious problems getting a credible, compelling message across to their target audience.

In contrast, Apple’s announcements are simple, direct, understandable. They are also relatively free of loud histrionics designed to divert your attention from the product that’s being sold.

As I’ve said before, I’m quite certain Microsoft, Motorola and all these other tech companies are peopled with brilliant designers and engineers. If they were allowed to express their creativity with few restrictions, you mind find a whole assortment of innovative products, rather than cheap imitations of someone else’s gear. I wouldn’t presume to offer any “business school” advice, since I am not an MBA, nor do I play one on TV. But it would seem to me that they’d fare far better if they would actually try to build a better mousetrap, rather than imitate someone else’s.

I realize that the iPad 2 remains a huge sellout around the globe. Of course there have been concerns that the earthquake in Japan is disrupting the manufacturing process, because of the impending parts shortages. With most consumer electronics gear these days, parts and assembly equipment are sourced from a number of countries. Japan is a key player.

On the other hand, it may take weeks for the shortages to be felt. In the meantime, I can’t believe that Apple didn’t anticipate potential disruptions and make alternate arrangements in case of an emergency. COO Tim Cook is too smart an operations person to make that mistake when so much is dependent on building as many units as possible.

Regardless of where iPad 2 sales stand, and the potential pitfalls in ramping up production, I lucked out. I was able to get a review unit from Apple. Sure, I don’t qualify for “A-list” status, in the fashion of The New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal, but I don’t think this preliminary look is that far behind the curve, and I hope you readers will agree.

Having previously reviewed an iPad, original edition, the setup process was pretty straightforward, little different from an iPhone. In fact, the backup copy of my original settings from last year transferred without a hitch, after which iTunes offered to download and install the 4.3.1 update.

I did run into a fairly common problem, though, when it came to charging the unit. Now unlike other tech companies, Apple seems to care about delivering a product that will run as soon as you turn it on, and not after spending a few hours for the initial charging process. So in this case, this iPad 2 arrived with the battery sitting at 75% of capacity, although you will still want to go through the standard process of conditioning the battery after the initial setup is finished. That means going to 100%, letting the unit’s battery peter out with regular use, then recharging it again. Supposedly if you do this every month or two or three, you’ll get the maximum life from the built-in lithium-ion battery.

As to that problem: Well, the iPad 2 requires more USB juice than many other gadgets. Normally any direct USB 2.0 port on a Mac or PC will be sufficient. You’ll run into trouble, however, if you use a keyboard port (which means unpowered), or one from a USB hub. The hub I have is powered. I have to plug the AC adapter into the wall socket, but it wasn’t sufficient for the iPad 2, as the battery life prompt kept saying “Not charging.”

After a little port swapping on my 27-inch iMac, I was able to get a direct connection to the iPad 2, which proceeded to replenish the battery without further incident.

Now if you’ve already used an iPad, switching to the iPad 2 will be a no brainer. Everything is pretty much the same as far as the simple, elegant interface is concerned. This is where Apple’s competition can’t compete, since they’re selling hardware, not a classy OS and loads of apps. Even when iOS versions are upgraded, the fundamentals are the same, despite refinements and new features. As the ad used to say, “You already know how to use it.”

But there is a distinct difference. Games and other apps that tax the CPU and graphics are noticeably snappier, smoother. The published benchmarks reveal far higher frame rates, and I can believe them. This is precisely what the hardware improvements were meant to deliver.

The real differences, however, stem from the new form factor. It’s slimmer, somewhat lighter, and that means that one-handed use is going to be more practical. But this is something the Mrs. and I will have to determine over the next few weeks. My preliminary evaluation is that anything over a pound will tend to wear on your wrists after a while, but Apple is getting better.

The screen is also somewhat nicer, with a wider viewing angle, although you’ll be watching it straight on most times, so don’t expect a significant change. While it might be nice to have that rumored double-resolution display, I can’t say I’m disappointed with the current screen, and, no, I am not expecting an iPad 3 this fall. Apple is selling every unit they can build, so there’s no incentive whatever to change anything till next year.

One stellar addition to the iPad product line is the Smart Cover. Fascinating how Apple continues to devise the simplest, most explanatory product nomenclature. Apple’s competitors can learn a thing or two. I mean, what does the Xoom mean anyway? Does that mean it zooms? It sounds almost the same as Microsoft’s failed Zune, so where’s the logic in that?

The Smart Cover, available in polyethylene and leather, is sheer genius. Using a system of magnets that match the ones in the iPad 2, it seems to magically adhere itself to top and left side of the unit. Made up of four rectangular pieces, it seems to unfurl as you open it. It also serves duty as a base to hold the iPad 2 vertically, and, yes, it automatically puts it to sleep when closed (if that option is selected on your iPad 2). As I said, sheer genius.

While I’ve got a lot more testing to do, I can well understand from this up close and personal encounter why the lines are still streaming around Apple retail outlets, and why the competition has little hope of catching up any time soon.

So the news comes, to nobody’s surprise, that Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) will be held from June 6th through 10th. That’s the schedule previously revealed simply by observing the dates blocked out for upcoming corporate trade shows at Moscone West in San Francisco. In passing, any developer who waited more than 10 hours to get a ticket is out of luck. That’s how long it took to sell out, compared to eight days last year.

The real question, however, is whether it’s all about software, or some new Apple gadgets will find their way into the presentation, and therein lies the dilemma.

According to published reports from several sources, both highly credible and otherwise, Apple is putting off release of an iPhone 5 (or whatever it’s to be called) until the fall. This is based on indications that Apple has yet to line up the components to build the new smartphone. On the other hand, it may well be that alternative component makers are being sought simply because of the supply chain disruption that resulted from the massive earthquake in Japan. That tragic situation has already impacted all sorts of products, including autos, which depend on sourcing certain key parts from Japanese factories.

As always with Apple, we just don’t know.

Then there’s iOS 5, which may also be postponed until the fall. Or maybe not. Why this might happen is anyone’s guess. Some suggest that Apple needs more time to bake in a compelling new feature set, including expansion of cloud-based resources for storage and syncing. That is expected to include a new version of Apple’s MobileMe service, which has been a middling success over the years.

One key reason why the tech media is assuming that Apple is putting off the iOS is a phrase from the WWDC announcement, where Apple promises to “unveil the future of iOS and Mac OS.” This seems to imply that the future involves the next versions which, of course, won’t be available yet. On the other hand, with Mac OS X Lion scheduled for this summer, that future would be mighty close at hand. Indeed, the iOS could arrive within the same timeframe, and fulfill the same requirements.

Stay with me here, as I’m just speculating, and I do not pretend to possess inside information about Apple’s hardware and software plans for this year, or any other year.

It may well be that Apple will stage separate events in the next few weeks to announce the arrival of the iOS, and the actual release date for Lion. This would focus more consumer attention on the latest and greatest products, while WWDC would be more closely targeted to the future. It would also afford a second opportunity to get lots of press coverage.

This means, for example, that Apple might summon the media (and they always listen) to an event in, say, May, to discuss both the iOS and Mac OS X Lion. Since the iPhone is now just another product in Apple’s lineup, it’s also possible the next version’s arrival will be heralded with a simple press release, in the same fashion as Mac hardware upgrades nowadays. This would happen if the new iPhone was only slightly different from its predecessor. Other than a revision in the case design, the rest of the changes would be largely predictable, such as more powerful CPU and graphics capabilities, more megapixels for the built-in cameras, and perhaps a further modification in the antenna design to rid Apple of the “Death Grip” stench that continues to lurk in the background, if only at a reduced level.

Even if the next iPhone is a world device, incorporating both GSM and CDMA capabilities in one case, that might not be sufficient to earn a separate briefing. As I said, the iPhone is now a mainstream product, and Apple doesn’t need to invite the media every time there’s an upgrade. Some day, the same might hold true for the iPad, particularly after all the competitors nipping at Apple’s heels begin to focus their attention elsewhere on products they can actually sell in decent quantities.

There’s yet another rumor that continues to rear its ugly head, and that’s the possibility of an iPad 3. Some suggest it will incorporate the higher-resolution display that Apple wasn’t able to add to the iPad 2. Others talk of a 7-inch version, the better to compete with smaller tablet entrants from Samsung and other companies.

But both theories ignore that proclamation from Steve Jobs about 2011 being the year of the iPad 2, or Apple’s objections to a 7-inch tablet. Sure, Apple has been known to spin negatively about a product category that they will soon enter. The real issue is whether a 7-inch form factor provides enough “elbow room” to become a creditable alternative to smartphones with 3.5-inch and 4-inch screens.

Jobs says they don’t, and the size defeats the advantages of a tablet, since its not significantly larger than a smartphone. More to the point, Apple isn’t into releasing extensive model lineups, covering all sorts of fine distinctions, in order to flood the market. They pick and choose what they think will sell. The rest of the industry can fill in the gaps, real or otherwise.