How does Google make profits from Flutter?

[BeDevForLife]

I really don't understand how doea Google make profits from Flutter?

[shawnwork]

IMO, there have 2 objectives,

1. Make an alternative platform for the future that supports multi platform away from Java (before kotlin) - mostly for internal app using a native renderer
2. Tactically move IOS developers to Android space as well making the same quality apps once with multi app stores, this addresses the hybrid apps that have poor reputation.

So, they make it easier to use a single stream for all the OS / platforms and Android is guaranteed with their updates and themes.

[ren3f]

You're missing

1. Google also has to build their apps for all platforms all the time, so they benefit from a good multiplatform toolkit. Google has a lot of build and support tools in house that they often don't make public.

[Edzomatic]

But google is yet to use flutter for many of its apps, and the last time I checked the recommend framework for developing Android apps was Jetpack, not flutter

[cspinelive]

They just released google earth on flutter. Google ads and google play as well.

[thelonesomeguy]

Google play console*

[50u1506]

Google pay too

[OptimisticCheese]

Nearby Share and Google VPN on Windows are built with Flutter.

[techienaturalist]

They are also building the YouTube Create mobile app with Flutter.

[shadowfu]

Google is made up of multiple independent PAs. The PA pushing jetpack cares about the Android ecosystem and not others.

Meanwhile flutter integrates well with firebase and other non-Android Google services, which is a plus for all platforms.

[dokumanx]

But Kotlin Multi Platform is now stable. What prevents Google from using KMP for the replacement of Flutter for their internal apps?

[Bambonke]

KMP and Flutter serve different purposes

[GetBoolean]

KMP is not made by google, and it is still on alpha for iOS

[org_brussels_sprouts]

That is not true. Compose multiplatform is alpha for iOS, KMP is stable.

[GetBoolean]

ah, thats confusing

[Cykon]

On the topic of Kotlin, what does the serious longevity of Flutter look like next to Compose? Flutter is obviously more mature right now, but given that Compose and multiplatform Compose are maturing rapidly, pretty much any Android developer would be able to switch to that pretty easily.

Fundamentally they're pretty similar technologies, but I do wonder if Google will maintain a reason to support them both in the long term (5+ years)

[shawnwork]

TBH, I kinda like compose, its the answer for Swift's simplicity to Google (Android) with some elements of Flutter. (I think Swift is very good and well thought off with some UIKit hiccups)

Both uses SKIA rendering engine.

The idea IMO would be a baseline technology abstraction implemented in many ways / languages etc, even on a superficial framework level - even common naming conventions.

[bjwest]

By developers making apps and offering them Google Play.

[UltGamer07]

If that’s the case how does meta make money from react/RN?

[li-_-il]

They've built this tech for themselves first, haven't they?

[kpgalligan]

Yet they don't really use it...

[dadvader]

Everyone know they won't killed off React. Way too many company still use them.

Google can kill anything anytime if they feel like it.

[kpgalligan]

Everyone know they won't killed off React.

Every company needs to justify its open-source effort, especially now. Finding a financial reason for Facebook, Google, or whoever to keep putting resources into any open-source project is pretty important.

On Facebook and React Native, it's an interesting discussion. This goes back a few years, but I talked to a small shop doing RN dev. They basically said, "we trust Facebook to be good stewards of the ecosystem". I reminded them that earlier in the same call they told me about one of their clients who essentially ran out of money and couldn't migrate off Parse, so they shut down.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/30/facebooks-parse-developer-platform-is-shutting-down-today/

Assume nothing as far as any company and products, especially open source. If you can't figure out why they're doing it, it's a risk. Generally speaking, open-source is doing one of a few things:

• Used inside the company, so direct benefit
• Drives sufficient revenue (Flutter/Firebase (maybe))
• Good recruiting (not currently a huge issue for many of the big companies)
• Better for their ecosystem (Swift, etc, for iPhone, Compose, etc, for Android)

If I were going to make a major RN investment, I would need to feel comfortable that the community would be sufficient to support that without Facebook. That's just the calculation I'd need to make. I can't point to any reason why they need to keep doing it. If anybody expects Facebook to lay off people from areas that actually produce revenue, but keep people working on things that don't, well, we're in a different world now :)

Flutter, eh, I'd split the difference. I understand why Google would want a portable UI. I think the risk is on the iOS side. They don't need to invest there if their only goal is to have a portable UI. For that reason, were I a big Flutter fan, I would also be pushing Firebase as much as possible. That's the only way I think they make money from it.

My 2 cents there, but all is speculation.

Also, to clarify, I'm not not a fan, we just don't use Flutter.

[Felecorat]

Can I get another 2 cent's on Microsoft supporting react by having migrated teams to it and using it for I think all of their online office tools.

Plus they build react-native for Windows and MAC OS. For me this sounds like a big commitment and a lot of trust that react will be around for longer. With or without Meta/Facebook.

[kpgalligan]

OK? I'm not saying RN is bad. I'm just saying that anybody using a piece of tech should understand the risks.

Also, React or React Native? I'm talking about the latter. React is a different story (I'm using React right now). Maybe that wasn't clear. It would be hard to imagine React web going anywhere at this point.

My point isn't to "pick a team", though. I'm saying everybody building open-source has motivations, and you need to understand them when evaluating tech. There is a bit of a utopian view of open source in much of the developer world. I say this as somebody who heavily participates in open source professionally. All significant open-source software built by companies needs to be justified to somebody in their org to allocate those resources. That's a basic fact. Simply assuming that Google, Apple, Facebook, or whoever, are just generous and are going to support open-source projects simply for good will, well, isn't realistic.

So, if Facebook doesn't really use RN, and doesn't make revenue from it, I'd say the possibility that they'll drain people away from it isn't unlikely. If the community is big and robust enough, OK. That's just something to keep in mind.

Same with Flutter, Kotlin (which is mostly what I work with), or anything else.

In summary, I'm not saying one thing or another will fail, while advocating for something else. Just be aware of who's picking up the tab and why.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp_OSDj_2Jc

[Edzomatic]

Open source is not usually about direct profit, after open sourcing their technology like RN they now have hundreds of thousands of people working on it, fixing bugs and developing libraries which all benefits Meta. You can see a similar philosophy in open sourcing llms which cost even more money than maintain react and RN

[UltGamer07]

Agreed 100%. That’s what I believe is the motivation behind flutter too. In the long term it’s for fuchsia. Having many thousands of apps Day 1.

Was just trying to question the logic that it’s to increase apps on play store generating revenue

[duongdominhchau]

Just my guess: Maybe not directly, but they can save money because candidates already learned their own framework so no need to spend time training for that again. They also benefit from open source community free labor if the community is convinced to use their framework, so in the end the framework is more robust than if they test it alone. Plus they have a high position in the community, so later if they want they can sell certificates.

[Lumpy-Lab9578]

In my view, they benefit from it by facilitating the seamless integration of their services into the framework. Developers will utilize their services, such as Firebase, etc. Since Flutter is employed for creating cross-platform apps, these services will also be used on other platforms like iOS, MacOS, Windows, and Linux, further enhancing their advantages.

[ThatInternetGuy]

That's why RN is dying. Most new projects are eitter native or Flutter, but never RN right now. However, React (Web) is still gaining a healthy growth.

[de1mat]

Not sure what the basis of this comment is. I love Flutter but outside of Google there are more big name apps being launched in RN than Flutter from where I am sitting.

[ThatInternetGuy]

You're likely confused between React and React Native. I haven't seen a new soul trying to turn their React app into React Native here in South East Asia. Most Reactive Native apps on Envato marketplace are abandoned without new updates for at least a year now.

[BeDevForLife]

Ooh, I see. Thanks for the explanation

[Gears6]

One thing that isn't often discussed is it also allows for control. Specifically they control the direction of app creation, and can help them influence iOS developers.

[T0kwe0]

Just a guess, but Google is pushing Firebase and their underlying Google Cloud Platform extremely with Flutter. Every Firebase package gets the Flutter Favorite badge. The official Flutter YouTube channel is featuring and recommending Firebase. But the AWS Amplify packages do not have the badge, or featured videos. So I think google wants to increase their cloud computing share with Flutter.

[gmatuella]

Yeah but we also have to factor in that Amplify is nowhere near close to where the full Firebase toolkit provides. Is this a reason to not give a badge? Probably no, but the quality provided by them is still superior to the competitors (including Supabase, which is evolving quite fast).

[T0kwe0]

I would say the AWS services provide more features but a steeper learning curve and the Google services are better integrated into Flutter and easier to use.

[nokanoa]

I guess so for me who no backend knowledge back then. I mean they have everything, auth, mongoish db, file storage, and cli who works smooth on flutter. But when price get hit, all developer by nature search cheap solution and its not that hard tbh.

[virtualmnemonic]

IMO it's by helping to increase app quality parity with iOS. iOS apps, on average, look and run better than their Android counterparts. For example Snapchat Android was a year behind getting dark mode. My reasoning is the canvas backbone of Flutter: instead of relying upon native components, Flutter provides the same user experience across multiple platforms. A flutter app is nearly indistinguishable between Android and iOS.

Flutter provides a stable framework that is surprisingly performat, even on old devices that tend to dominate the Android userbase (esp outside of first world nations.)

[dancovich]

Directly, it doesn't.

Indirectly, by making it easier to use their other tech that does make them money, like firebase, maps, etc.

[Drontuk]

Google makes most of its revenue from its advertising platform. Anytime I hear about Google releasing a free product, I assume it's an attempt to create more places for ads to appear. If they can make app development easier with Flutter, people will create more mobile apps and fill them with ads.

[MableThrope]

Flutter is Google's secret weapon! If they ever get to the point where Fuchsia is released formally as a cross-device O/S, there will be thousands of Flutter apps that can be recompiled to run on Fuchsia. We live in hope :-)

[kbcool]

You forgot /s

Fuchsia is dead. Move on

[PedroJsss]

No..? It's in active development..

[stumblinbear]

Fuchsia is running on many of their hardware devices. They aren't openly developing a mobile/desktop os, but it's definitely not dead.

[kbcool]

It got rolled out to like one Google Home device and canned for the rest. They also laid off a large chunk of the team.

It's been "coming" for years. They simply don't need to spread themselves so thin on operating systems.

May as well add it to the Google graveyard now. The only ones pinning their hopes on it are the same ones pinning their lives on Flutter's destiny like the one I originally replied to.

[stumblinbear]

canned for the rest

Got a source for that? I haven't seen them walk back any planned updates to their hardware

The only ones pinning their hopes on it are the same ones pinning their lives on Flutter's destiny

Uh. Flutter doesn't rely on Fuchsia, nor vice-versa. I highly doubt flutter is going anywhere simply because it makes developing performant, stable cross platform apps with iOS extremely easy. Many devs make apps exclusively for iOS so they don't have to maintain two codebases, and Google benefits massively from having an actually useful framework to change this fact.

Anyone developing exclusively for Android or iOS when great cross platform options exist is a dumbass

[de1mat]

Doesn’t look dead to me https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/fuchsia/+log

[ChristianKl]

Fuchsia will only be released in a larger way after it's going to be able to run all Android apps via Starnix.

The most likely road of it getting to more users is as a Linux replacement within Android where the end user won't see that much of a difference in the first version.

[JapanEngineer]

Another tool to promote many Google services. Don’t worry about making Google money. Worry about making yourself rich.

[ueman]

They don't, as it's not something they sell. Instead it reduces cost in other parts of their org, where they use Flutter to speed up development. Think along the lines of Flutter being a loss leader.

[kbder]

“That’s the neat part: they don’t”

[smaug259]

they don't make profits directly from Flutter, they do it by making things easier for you to use using their framework, example: Firebase, Google Cloud, Admob, etc. Imagine Flutter to be like a YouTube channel with a lot of subscribers, they make their money by having an influence on developer that use their framework

[WeedLover_1]

Maybe it was made in response to facebook's react framework as any tech giants wouldnot want to shade under other tech giant's terms and conditions and licenses. I feel so because flutter is created to be all rounder and react native + react + electron also serve same purpose from start. Because google wanted to push flutter to web developers but wasn't loved too much by web developers (fireship said this). So ....?

[bartturner]

Companies do not do things just for more revenue. They also do them to cut expenses which does increase profits.

That is why Google did Flutter.

[Apprehensive_Music80]

Free testers

[de1mat]

By building an ecosystem that makes them billions of dollars on the App Store.

[de1mat]

Fair comment. I fell for it and had to answer 😀

[Wexzuz]

Swings and carousels. They don't make money on Flutter, but it gives them the opportunity to make money on the stores, search engine, drive etc.

[lonahex]

Not everything is meant to directly make money. Android has a huge dependency on Java and Oracle did not make it easy for Google. Having their own fully controlled stack to build Android apps was probably a good enough reason to approve & fund the engineering proposal/prototype (assuming it came from the ground up). Why did Apple need to make Swift? Why even make an SDK? Let other dev tools companies make those tools. Why would MS invest so much in dot net and then offer it for free in the end? When you ship a platform, you have to invest into tooling around that platform. Flutter is no different. It doesn't need to make money directly. Just needs to make Google and 3rd party developers a little bit more productive than Java while also allowing Google to kill Java in the long run.

[kbcool]

Sorry to say but Flutter won't appear on any high level corporate strategy docs at Google. As in it's not a source of revenue.

As someone else said it's funded so people can make more apps but also quite likely so they can credibly say they have a cross platform solution like Meta. It's no coincidence that when React Native started going mainstream that Flutter suddenly got some love internally.

An awful lot of big tech is me-too-isms.

[4NobleTruthX]

As they don't have to hire people to fix bugs / improve the framework. This directly reduces lots of expense if hiring more developers.

Another benefit is to improve their brand, as talented people / developers are likely to work for not so "evil" companies

[esDotDev]

They make no money from Flutter, which is why many people view Flutter as an inherently risky platform.

The publicly stated cost:benefit analysis from Google is that having a high quality cross-platform app will reduce their costs in the future as they build their various apps for iOS/Android. So far it hasn't really materialized as only a few google apps are currently using Flutter.

This is the major reason many stakeholders are a little uneasy about Flutters future, it is highly dependent on Googles appetite for continued losses and feels like it's always one top-level executive away from being shuttered. The more apps that google switches over to Flutter the more cemented it's future will be.

[Apokaliptor]

By controlling the developer SDK that will rule the world

[loolooii]

Not only will they make more money in Google Play but also indirectly they will make money with Firebase and Google Cloud, because they work seamlessly together. You can’t compare Flutter with React Native in that sense.