AllYouCanTech

The Year 2025: Significant Progress for Google and Samsung within the Android Ecosystem

A Year of Achievements, Challenges, and Evolving Focus: The Year That Transformed the Android Environment

2025 represented a pivotal year for the Android ecosystem, featuring substantial advancements from its two leading entities, Google and Samsung. This year was defined by a sequence of tactical achievements, notable challenges, and a realignment of focus that together transformed the Android environment.

Google’s Tactical Transformation: Adopting AI

Google’s trajectory in 2025 was highlighted by a tactical shift toward artificial intelligence (AI). The company prioritized a deeper integration of AI within its ecosystem, resulting in major advancements with its Gemini initiative. This year, Google concentrated less on hardware and more on software and AI, laying the groundwork for sustained success. The Pixel 10 series, dubbed as “prepared for the Gemini age,” exhibited Google’s dedication to AI, featuring robust on-device AI processing abilities. Innovations like Magic Cue and AI-crafted writing prompts showcased Google’s creative strategy to enhance user experience with AI.

Samsung’s Comeback: A Year of Breakthroughs

Samsung experienced an exceptional year, characterized by a succession of successful product introductions and tactical choices. The company commenced powerfully with the S25 series and sustained its momentum with the Galaxy Z Fold 7 and the groundbreaking Galaxy TriFold. Samsung’s emphasis on hardware advancements, coupled with a solid partnership with Google, proved to be an effective strategy. The introduction of the Galaxy XR, a formidable contender against Apple’s Vision Pro, underscored Samsung’s capacity to compete successfully in the marketplace.

Evolving Focus and Market Changes

Both Google and Samsung showcased a sharp awareness of evolving market dynamics. Google’s focus on AI signifies a wider industry trend towards intelligent, context-sensitive devices. On the other hand, Samsung’s concentration on hardware advancements and strategic rivalry with Apple highlights its determination to uphold its leadership within the Android ecosystem.

Final Thoughts: A Year of Change

2025 was a crucial year for the Android ecosystem, with Google and Samsung spearheading the efforts to reshape the landscape. As both corporations persist in innovating and adjusting to shifting market conditions, the future of Android appears optimistic, with AI and hardware innovation leading this change.

Examination of AI Advancements in 2025: Performance Assessment of Google, Apple, OpenAI, and Additional Leading Entities

**Here’s an Overview of How AI Evolved in 2025, and How My Forecasts Fared**

The years 2023 and 2024 were pivotal for AI, but as we neared 2025, both consumers and industry experts raised concerns. Some doubted the trajectory of AI development, while others worried that companies like Google and Apple might overpromise and underdeliver.

At the end of last year, I made multiple forecasts, and the majority have been realized. AI has swiftly embedded itself into operating systems, becoming increasingly agentic and actionable. However, I was taken aback by Samsung’s clarity in differentiating between on-device and off-device Galaxy AI capabilities, permitting users to disable online features with a simple switch.

As we wrap up 2025, let’s assess the performance of the AI sector and the success of its leading entities.

**Evaluating My Predictions for AI in 2025**

After dedicated AI devices like the Humane AI Pin failed, I accurately predicted a transition towards integrating AI within mobile operating systems. Google spearheaded this movement, substituting Google Assistant with Gemini throughout Android and Wear OS. Microsoft’s Copilot evolved into a crucial element of Windows, while Apple faced challenges with Apple Intelligence in iOS and macOS.

Gemini Live’s multimodal video and screen sharing, first a prototype, emerged as a fundamental feature for Android in 2025. Google broadened the availability of Gemini Live to almost all Android devices, marking a noteworthy milestone.

While Google progressed in multimodal functionalities, the development of agentic control was slower than anticipated. The launch of the Gemini Agent and Google Antigravity app happened later than expected, as did OpenAI’s AgentKit. AI agents are now a primary concern for leading corporations.

I had expected a greater number of AI features incorporated into operating systems, ideally featuring on-device processing. However, growth in this domain was not as rapid as predicted, with Gemini Nano and Galaxy AI managing some on-device functions, yet not to the extent desired.

In late 2024, both Google and OpenAI’s CEOs dismissed worries about an AI “wall.” I believed that competition would propel advancement, and indeed, firms competed for dominance in AI benchmarks throughout 2025.

I expected indistinct boundaries between on-device and off-device processing. Samsung’s toggle for AI data processing countered my expectations, and I am anticipating that other companies will implement similar options.

**Google in 2025: A**

Google thrived in AI during 2025, with Gemini 3 reaching remarkable achievements and gathering nearly 350 million monthly active users by November. Gemini’s brief period as the leading free app in the iPhone App Store indicated its potential beyond Google’s ecosystems.

Google AI Pro amassed over 150 million subscribers, generating revenue through advertising trials and AI development tools via Google Cloud. Highlights included Gemini Live’s video capabilities, the Google Antigravity AI-based IDE, and the Nano Banana image generator. Google’s free AI functionalities, even catering to discontinued smart home products, further cemented its success.

Despite a robust AI strategy, Google’s absence of brand collaborations, such as Meta’s with Garmin or OpenAI’s with Disney, may pose a challenge for 2026.

**OpenAI in 2025: B-**

OpenAI seems to be refocusing for the future rather than aggressively creating new AI products. While ChatGPT retains a substantial user base, its current priorities appear uncertain, with recent enhancements like group chats and possible ad placements.

OpenAI’s $500 billion valuation gives it leverage, and its transformation into a for-profit entity was noteworthy. Collaborations with Jony Ive and Disney, along with a functioning prototype of an AI device, may bode well for 2026.

If OpenAI capitalizes on its for-profit structure, develops a successful AI device, and utilizes Disney’s investment, 2025 could be regarded as a pivotal year. However, the current performance justifies a grade of B-.

**The Remainder in 2025: C**

The majority of AI companies, aside from Google and OpenAI, performed moderately in 2025. Meta received a B grade for its sophisticated face-worn multimodal AI technology within smart glasses. The integration of Garmin with Meta AI was commendable, yet Meta’s excessive involvement of AI in unwanted areas overshadowed its accomplishments.

Apple and Samsung retained a standard performance, lacking any groundbreaking AI innovations. Apple’s ability to refrain from overpromising was admirable, whereas Samsung’s top AI features were largely attributed to Google.

In the AI model sphere, unexpected entrants like DeepSeek showed potential but quickly diminished.

**Final Assessment**

Despite the advancements in AI, the overall grade for 2025 stands at a B. While over a billion individuals utilize platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot, the anticipated transformative effects have yet to be realized. The year 2025 concludes without the attainment of artificial general intelligence or solutions to significant global challenges. AI’s resource consumption raises concerns, and even OpenAI’s CEO recognizes the swift pace of change.

AI models and interfaces have become more potent than ever, yet the enthusiasm surrounding AI’s potential has not fully materialized. Given this context, a B grade is the highest I can assign AI.

Comparative Evaluation of 10 Fitness Watches for Precise Step Monitoring: Reliable Brands for Your New Year’s Objectives

I tracked each step to evaluate how effectively brands like Apple, Garmin, and Samsung perform regarding walking or running step counts — and the findings were quite unexpected.

In 2023, I donned six smartwatches while covering 6,000 steps to determine the most precise brand. Garmin outperformed Apple, Samsung, and others, but two years later, I opted for a more extensive test involving additional brands and newer versions!

Brands may not highlight step-count improvements, yet Google attempted to refine its step-count algorithm and later reverted it due to inflated results. I suspect other fitness brands frequently update their step calculations, too; timepieces that performed poorly two years ago may have enhanced, while top performers might have declined.

To verify if Garmin still reigns as the step-count leader, I charged 10 of my finest fitness watches — one each from Apple, Samsung, Garmin, Google, OnePlus, Amazfit, COROS, Polar, Suunto, and Withings — and strapped them onto my slender running arms for two 5,000-step walking trials and one 5,000-step jogging trial. I logged steps manually as a control group using a counting app.

Since I could only wear five watches at once, that resulted in 30,000 steps in one exhausting day. However, I gathered some intriguing data! Here are the most (and least) dependable fitness watches for achieving your daily 10,000 steps!

Tests 1 & 2: Step count during walking

My Apple Watch Ultra 2 certainly delivered the most consistent and trustworthy results; its “high dynamic range gyroscope” truly reflects its sophisticated title, whereas the older Series 7 I used in 2023 produced more average results.

On the whole, any watch within 100 steps after 10,000 is still regarded as quite effective by my standards, placing the OnePlus Watch 2R, Garmin Forerunner 970, Polar Vantage V3, and COROS APEX 4 in a reliable category.

The COROS APEX 4, though not flawless, significantly outperformed the APEX 2 Pro in my 2023 assessments. The Garmin Forerunner 970, however, actually showed superior performance in my initial hands-on evaluations, varying by just one step after 10,000. That could have been a coincidence, or perhaps my initial test today was; it excelled notably in the second test. Additionally, Polar met my expectations admirably.

I am baffled as to why the Suunto Race 2 performed so exceptionally poorly; it showed perfect accuracy in the run test, as you will observe, but neglected thousands of walking steps, regardless of whether it was positioned on my wrist or further up my arm.

The Galaxy Watch 8 Classic results were more off than I anticipated from a leading brand, but Samsung has historically not performed well in prior step evaluations, either.

In contrast, the Pixel Watch 4 outperformed my Fitbit Sense two years ago…at least initially. During the second test, the Fitbit app failed to register any new steps, then deducted approximately 4,000 steps upon my return home. I suspect this was merely a strange glitch, but it prevents me from accurately ranking Google’s watch.

Test 3: Step count while jogging

In this trial, every single watch met the quality threshold I expected, even the rather mediocre (Withings ScanWatch 2) or poorly performing (Suunto Race 2) watches from the earlier tests.

I believe it’s simply easier for watches’ accelerometers and gyroscopes to recognize the deliberate, steady motions of a running stride than the subtler, more ambiguous arm movements during walking.

An unintentional experiment: Pocket step tracking

For my final walking trial, since the weather forecast predicted imminent rain, I sported five watches while stowing the other five in my pocket for quick swaps. This resulted in a delightful surprise when I discovered that some watches recorded nearly 5,000 steps from my pocket!

Specifically, the Forerunner 970 counted 5,037 steps, the APEX 4 logged 5,041, and the Ultra 2 registered 5,088. Other watches registered significantly fewer steps, like Samsung (~2,000) and OnePlus (~3,000), but I won’t hold that against these brands; it hardly qualifies as a fair test.

I still find this thrilling because I’ve talked to numerous people, including my brother-in-law, who express frustration over their inaccurate step counts while pushing a stroller or hiking with a trekking pole, as their arm movement doesn’t constitute a “normal” step motion. Yet, based on this experiment, placing your smartwatch in your pocket could be a practical workaround, depending on the brand!

Why an accurate fitness watch is crucial for your step objectives

The goal of walking 10,000 steps daily may have originated as a marketing