Related
HTC have recently been give FCC approval for their latest innovation, the Falcon, but will it live up to expectations? So far very little information has reached the public domain regarding the features of this little gem, but there does seem to be a drizzle comming from somewhere. Whether it be just rumours, or journalists making assumptions remains to be seen, but the feeling I'm getting is that there will be a mixture of excitement and disappointment when this device finally reaches the market.
In my opinion the manufacturer of both devices, the XDA and the Falcon, made a bad judgement call when putting together the spec. Ok, I'm not going to bad mouth the phone that we all love, but I know that a lot of people believe it could have been so much more. You see, they made the assumption that because the XDA intgrates a phone with a PDA it should be a compromise of the two. The problem is, that someone who has bought an XDA would have probably (eventually) bought a PDA anyway, but they'd have got a really good one - or when they buy a phone, it's a really top notch one.
So what do we know about the Falcon? So far very little. We know it uses CDMA networks (3G) and has a built in GPS reciever - these should certainly be well recieved by the XDA community. We also know that it has a voice memo button - so no need to scramble though the menus when you remember the name of that CD you wanted to buy. That's about it.
Many sites are publishing a limited spec sheet for the falcon, and while incomplete, they seem to be suggesting a lack of further improvements. A disappointing 32Mb of RAM, lack of SDIO, a 4096 colour screen, and none of the really useful extras like consumer IR or a built in camera. The biggest kick in the balls, still, is the lack of any WLAN device - they really want you to use those expensive data networks even from your own armchair.
At last we are getting a PDA phone with 3G functionality, although without the video phone. This is something that has been long awaited and will be welcomed. Unfortunately, the customer waiting for the serious PDA combined with a serious phone may have a long time to wait. Perhaps they just can't fit it all in the box yet.
My two pence...
Isn't it so that the iPaq is also build by HTC? In that case I can imagine that Compaq never would allow HTC to create a superior device next to their iPaq. HTC would be crazy to put the deal with Compaq at risk so the XDA is just HTC's leftover technologie, the real goodies are developed for the iPaq.
What is called for then is an Ipaq, with in built GPS, GSM, GPRS, and CDMA!!
I have 2 working titans, i was wondering if it would be possible to de-solder the memory chip off one and solder it into the other one where it has the empty space for ram, would this work? does anyone have a link to the high res photos of the board inside?
nevermind, upon taking apart one of mine and removing the shields i see no blank space for extra ram, i wonder what i was thinking of that i saw had an extra spot, it looks like theres no room under here
I will NEVER understand why a $600.00 retail phone that runs windows would not come with more RAM - it is the ONLY complaint I have with this device!! MAKES NO SENSE!!! How much MORE could it have costed to put a 128MB unit in there???? $10????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARARARGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
I think the issue is really just that the phone was late to market. The hardware was well within the standards for WM5 (for which it was apparently designed). By the time the phone actually made it to market, 128MB of memory was now the standard with the introduction of WM6. There are reasons other than cost to not just throw a ton of RAM into a device.
kashabrown said:
I will NEVER understand why a $600.00 retail phone that runs windows would not come with more RAM - it is the ONLY complaint I have with this device!! MAKES NO SENSE!!! How much MORE could it have costed to put a 128MB unit in there???? $10????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARARARGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I am so sick of hearing this argument from consumers, who the majority of the time don't have a clue how marketing and the economy works. think about it...if you ran a multi-billion dollar company making these devices, would you throw all your cards on the table in one fell swoop? of course not!
these companies are not stupid...sure they could release a device tomorrow that had 2gigs of ram, an awesome video card, 800x600 res screen, 64gb built in storage, and still be the size of the xv8600 if not smaller...but that would kille the company and also violate market laws no doubt (like when microsoft released internet explorer for free back when netscape navigator cost $30 a month to use...
come on, these companies are in it for the long haul...if they released a deivce with those stats i just listed (and they could easily...think how small a 8gb transflash card is...you could have 128GB (notmb) of ram easily running on those things, but anyway, if they released that, guess what you, the consumer would want 6 months from now? A device that was twice as good, and had twice as much ram, and speed and space, etc...
Why would these compnies shoot themselves in the foot? They are making money hand over fist selling these devices that use technology available 5-10 years ago...heck, if i were a CEO of LG or HTC or Samsung or whoever, I would be loving this.
It just makes sense, and the average consumer makes a post like that with no thought as to what would happen to the economy or company. Just because it can be done and easily done and you want it, doesnt mean the company is going to say "sure, let's skip 5 years of profits, and just give them what we could sell in 2012, now in 2008" - heck no they arent going to do that obviously.
THE BOTTOM LINE: We, the consumers, have a short memory, are very impatient, and want the next best thing no matter how good the current thing we have is. If they put 256mb in the Titan, your last post would have been...."WHY CANT THEY PUT IN 512MB?!?!?!!?" you see? So, these coampnies are making tons of money by dragging out the release of new technology process...I mean think about it...we have dual core 2.4ghz processors in the year 2001. It is SEVEN years later, and we are still selling dual core 2.4ghz computers for $1,500 and up. Sure, you can get a better deal by building your own but the average consumer doesnt know how to do that, so that lack of technical expertise, combined with slow technology drift, keeps these companies in the high profit margins. I mean by now, if we were all 100% tech-savvy we would be demanding (as a whole) 12-core computers, with 20ghz ciphs each core...it's just not gonna happen when these big conglomerates control the flow of technology.
One company kind of broke free of this, and did work on their own. Look up the RED 4K Camera. current professional cameras for filming are $2,000 and up and film 720x480pixels, well HD cameras ar emore expensive, $4000 and up for pro quality and they are 1920x1080 pixels, well the RED 4K Camera came out over 2 years ago and it can film in 3 to 4 times HD res @ 4000pixels. Of course since they are th eonly ones doing it they can charge $20,000 per camera when in reality the parts to make it cost about $500...but do you know how to make a video camera? do you know how to build a PDA? Do you know how to manufacture 64GB ram chips to put in your PDA? Are you a programmer and cna you make the firmware for your custom device? and the list goes on and on....this is why we PAY $600 for a device that costs them $50 to make. Get it?
::: Connor
crobs808 said:
Ok, I am so sick of hearing this argument from consumers, who the majority of the time don't have a clue how marketing and the economy works. think about it...if you ran a multi-billion dollar company making these devices, would you throw all your cards on the table in one fell swoop? of course not!
these companies are not stupid...sure they could release a device tomorrow that had 2gigs of ram, an awesome video card, 800x600 res screen, 64gb built in storage, and still be the size of the xv8600 if not smaller...but that would kille the company and also violate market laws no doubt (like when microsoft released internet explorer for free back when netscape navigator cost $30 a month to use...
come on, these companies are in it for the long haul...if they released a deivce with those stats i just listed (and they could easily...think how small a 8gb transflash card is...you could have 128GB (notmb) of ram easily running on those things, but anyway, if they released that, guess what you, the consumer would want 6 months from now? A device that was twice as good, and had twice as much ram, and speed and space, etc...
Why would these compnies shoot themselves in the foot? They are making money hand over fist selling these devices that use technology available 5-10 years ago...heck, if i were a CEO of LG or HTC or Samsung or whoever, I would be loving this.
It just makes sense, and the average consumer makes a post like that with no thought as to what would happen to the economy or company. Just because it can be done and easily done and you want it, doesnt mean the company is going to say "sure, let's skip 5 years of profits, and just give them what we could sell in 2012, now in 2008" - heck no they arent going to do that obviously.
THE BOTTOM LINE: We, the consumers, have a short memory, are very impatient, and want the next best thing no matter how good the current thing we have is. If they put 256mb in the Titan, your last post would have been...."WHY CANT THEY PUT IN 512MB?!?!?!!?" you see? So, these coampnies are making tons of money by dragging out the release of new technology process...I mean think about it...we have dual core 2.4ghz processors in the year 2001. It is SEVEN years later, and we are still selling dual core 2.4ghz computers for $1,500 and up. Sure, you can get a better deal by building your own but the average consumer doesnt know how to do that, so that lack of technical expertise, combined with slow technology drift, keeps these companies in the high profit margins. I mean by now, if we were all 100% tech-savvy we would be demanding (as a whole) 12-core computers, with 20ghz ciphs each core...it's just not gonna happen when these big conglomerates control the flow of technology.
One company kind of broke free of this, and did work on their own. Look up the RED 4K Camera. current professional cameras for filming are $2,000 and up and film 720x480pixels, well HD cameras ar emore expensive, $4000 and up for pro quality and they are 1920x1080 pixels, well the RED 4K Camera came out over 2 years ago and it can film in 3 to 4 times HD res @ 4000pixels. Of course since they are th eonly ones doing it they can charge $20,000 per camera when in reality the parts to make it cost about $500...but do you know how to make a video camera? do you know how to build a PDA? Do you know how to manufacture 64GB ram chips to put in your PDA? Are you a programmer and cna you make the firmware for your custom device? and the list goes on and on....this is why we PAY $600 for a device that costs them $50 to make. Get it?
::: Connor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand your arguments and mostly they are correct. But $30 bucks a month for Netscape Navigator? I can't remember that. I was surfing the net back in '94 on Netscape and I don't remember paying anything for it (apart from dialup charges - and that was even before IE existed) ****, does that show how old I am???
crobs808 said:
Ok, I am so sick of hearing this argument from consumers, who the majority of the time don't have a clue how marketing and the economy works. think about it...if you ran a multi-billion dollar company making these devices, would you throw all your cards on the table in one fell swoop? of course not!
::: Connor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They did it with the Touch.....they must be able to do it with the mogul even if they revamp it a bit. we put a man on the moon recently so why not more ram in a phone.
maccaberry said:
I understand your arguments and mostly they are correct. But $30 bucks a month for Netscape Navigator? I can't remember that. I was surfing the net back in '94 on Netscape and I don't remember paying anything for it (apart from dialup charges - and that was even before IE existed) ****, does that show how old I am???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well you cant be that old if you dont remember netscape sueing microsoft for anti-trust lawsuits for releasing free software into a market that undercut their $10-$30 netscape versions depending on which one you bought...(remember, netscape gold and all that lol, back in the early 90s (this is pre 1994) - that's just when yahoo finally came around. i mean i am only 26 and i remember having to use Mosaic web browser...the browser that eventually became Netscape Navigator...LINK #1 - Mosaic and this LINK #2 - Netscape - it talks all about the antitrust lawsuits, etc..
anyway, back on topic...double the ram didnt happen because of one word..."MONEY!" - you can make WAY more money as a company seeing how far and long you can push the customer.
-connor
Tregrad said:
They did it with the Touch.....they must be able to do it with the mogul even if they revamp it a bit. we put a man on the moon recently so why not more ram in a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you didnt understand his post, its not about cost or technology, its about marketing
the phone was designed fro WM5, so 64mb ram was more than enough, why should they put 128mb in the phone when in a year they can release a new phone with 128mb and everyone will buy that?
does it suck? sure, but its life, better get used to it
defaultdotxbe said:
you didnt understand his post, its not about cost or technology, its about marketing
the phone was designed fro WM5, so 64mb ram was more than enough, why should they put 128mb in the phone when in a year they can release a new phone with 128mb and everyone will buy that?
does it suck? sure, but its life, better get used to it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the same idea why we don't have cars with fuel injectors that can run 70 miles to the gallon using standard gas. As long as demand is high enough on goods that are out there (i.e. old phones, old cars, and everything else) and people are willing to keep buying them with outmoded technology, there is no reason to sell the next great thing UNTIL someone else threatens to sell the same thing. Is there really any competition for HTC in the US markets? No. LG sux and runs an OS that looks like my mother-in-laws Razr. Samsung is ok, but doesn't have the utility and look of the vogue or titan.
serfboreds said:
This is the same idea why we don't have cars with fuel injectors that can run 70 miles to the gallon using standard gas. As long as demand is high enough on goods that are out there (i.e. old phones, old cars, and everything else) and people are willing to keep buying them with outmoded technology, there is no reason to sell the next great thing UNTIL someone else threatens to sell the same thing. Is there really any competition for HTC in the US markets? No. LG sux and runs an OS that looks like my mother-in-laws Razr. Samsung is ok, but doesn't have the utility and look of the vogue or titan.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude this is so true. They already have several engines that can get 50-100 mpg no problems. But why wold they bother when they can sell us hybrids which cost heaps more and don't get nearly as good mileage.
The latest is a 6 stroke engine that uses a standard four stroke motor and add two extra strokes per cycle using water! as the 'fuel'. The motor doesn't 'make' more power for nothing. This is not some fake 'perpetual motion machine' . The extra efficiency is achieved purely by getting more heat out of the same amount of fuel instead of throwing the heat out the tail pipe.
See this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_stroke_engine
Its a bit off topic but its a true example of the same thing. they will only do it when the market forces them to do it. $10 a gallon gasoline might be the push. (Look at Europe - they pay about they and their cars average about 40-45 mpg).
maccaberry said:
(Look at Europe - they pay about they and their cars average about 40-45 mpg).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but their cars only hold two and you drive around with their knees in their chests, so you better go on a diet, destroy your way of life and get rid of that SUV. I for one am going to be pulled out of my F-350 dead before i give it up.
thats why i make my own diesel fuel NOW if I could just figure out how to make my own phone LOL.
What yall are saying is true tho. we all know that the technology WE see, is the bottom of the barrel of their ideas. no one here would shoot their whole wad at once to appease the clammering consumer. a smart business man would make as much as they can by letting a bit out at a time while developing more and more "stuff" we desire and are willing to give up our hard earned money for.
Its called "capitalism" I know that a dirty word for the "dirt worshiping squirrel hugger" out there but, thats the way it is so get in the boat or tread water for as long as you can.
i dont get ppl with SUVs....i mean i live in Texas and i dont have an SUV or a truck...just a 4door sedan for me and my family. that's all i need, even with some dirt/rock roads when i go out into the country...a truck would actually be more bouncy and annoying to ride in. ive never liked SUVs for any purpose...but soccer moms for some reason think they need the Xterra or their husbands need Hummers to drive one or two kids to and from soccer practice...i dont get it. SUVs are pointless unless you work in construction.
-connor
Tregrad said:
They did it with the Touch.....they must be able to do it with the mogul even if they revamp it a bit. we put a man on the moon recently so why not more ram in a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe that was with the help of those $4000 HD digital video cameras
I am with you, I will be buried in my F350 Diesel.
Tregrad said:
True, but their cars only hold two and you drive around with their knees in their chests, so you better go on a diet, destroy your way of life and get rid of that SUV. I for one am going to be pulled out of my F-350 dead before i give it up.
thats why i make my own diesel fuel NOW if I could just figure out how to make my own phone LOL.
What yall are saying is true tho. we all know that the technology WE see, is the bottom of the barrel of their ideas. no one here would shoot their whole wad at once to appease the clammering consumer. a smart business man would make as much as they can by letting a bit out at a time while developing more and more "stuff" we desire and are willing to give up our hard earned money for.
Its called "capitalism" I know that a dirty word for the "dirt worshiping squirrel hugger" out there but, thats the way it is so get in the boat or tread water for as long as you can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what are the chances of the Ram chip from a touch/tilt being soldered into the mogul assuming there is any similarities
they did something similar with the old palms to double the ram can be found here
http://pages.interlog.com/~tcharron/Palm8M/III8M.html
im fairly new to the pocket pc phones but what are the chances of using the extra rom space as a page file?
maccaberry said:
Dude this is so true. They already have several engines that can get 50-100 mpg no problems. But why wold they bother when they can sell us hybrids which cost heaps more and don't get nearly as good mileage.
The latest is a 6 stroke engine that uses a standard four stroke motor and add two extra strokes per cycle using water! as the 'fuel'. The motor doesn't 'make' more power for nothing. This is not some fake 'perpetual motion machine' . The extra efficiency is achieved purely by getting more heat out of the same amount of fuel instead of throwing the heat out the tail pipe.
See this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_stroke_engine
Its a bit off topic but its a true example of the same thing. they will only do it when the market forces them to do it. $10 a gallon gasoline might be the push. (Look at Europe - they pay about they and their cars average about 40-45 mpg).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is better:
"Although you can definitely pre-order an Aptera if you're okay with space-aged design, Volkswagen is hoping to provide another option for those looking for ridiculous MPG and a little bit of normalcy in construction. Okay, so maybe the 1-Liter isn't exactly standard fare -- with its plastic / magnesium shell and all-glass roof -- but at least it packs four whole wheels and an iconic VW badge, right? According to Motor Authority, the automaker will be producing said vehicle and pushing it to market as early as 2010, and while the minuscule engine will only take you to 75MPH, it will still seat two people -- one in front of the other, though -- and get around 235MPG. No word on a price or any of that good stuff, but we're hearing that they'll only be produced in "limited numbers" whenever they're launched." (from engadget)
As for European cars..europeans don't need to travel as much because the size of the countries in europe are rather small in size comparison to the USA..realistically speaking is over 85mph even really necessary at all?
As for Titan..capitalism is one thing..we aren't asking for 1gb ram even though we would like it...but a decent amount to ensure you don't feel lag would make sense...
I love Europe... but the euro is costing more than the $... not a smart time to go there... YAY U.S. economy!!!!
anyway... I thought this was a WM forum... for a moment I felt I was in a Popular Mechanics forum... my 2 cents
gTen said:
As for Titan..capitalism is one thing..we aren't asking for 1gb ram even though we would like it...but a decent amount to ensure you don't feel lag would make sense...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
remember the titan was designed for WM5, and with WM5 128mb might as well be 1gb, lol
remember the titan was designed for WM5, and with WM5 128mb might as well be 1gb, lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Titan was originally designed for WM5 yes, which is why the decision for 64 MB of ram was made. Then, however, they decided to throw WM6 on it and didn't even bother to give a damn that 64 MB of ram for WM6 is like running Windows XP with 256 MB of ram...it works, but just barely. Instead, as another poster pointed out, they figured that it would work to their advantage as people would enjoy WM6, but be disgruntled (as we all are) with such limited resources. This would lead us to buy yet another phone later on down the line with 128 MB of ram and WM6 (or now WM6.1).
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem to think that they are entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
They won't charge because they can't adhere to any established schedule.
LG Optimus 3D (T-Mobile/P920)
Theoretically that could work and provide an incentive to the vendors. They could lower their initial price to buy a device (since the support cost are baked in), but software is still hard and i think customer acceptance of those upgrade fees would be the problem. As long as the industry leader (Apple) gives free OS updates it would be a hard sell to charge for Android updates. The bigger problem for most handset and tablet makers is that they are in a constant churn cycle trying to bring the next shiny new paperweight to market ahead of the competition. Apple has a fanatical user base and is somewhat insulated from competition. If you look at their hardware against say Samsung, Apple is a generation behind in radio and processor technology.
And each of these new churns of the newest hardware causes a hardware maker to have to redo all the device specific software (there's a lot of it) to run Android.
sbrownla said:
They won't charge because they can't adhere to any established schedule.
LG Optimus 3D (T-Mobile/P920)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who says they have to have a schedule? MS doesn't have a schedule. Also, didn't MS charge for one of the Windows Mobile updates? Pretty sure I'm remembering that correctly.
Well and the reason a lot of us even use Android is that it's perceived (rightly or wrongly) as being more open and inclusive. Part of that openness has been the eventual Open Source release of each version of the operating system.
I'd pay extra for hardware that ran a 100% Open Source version of Android though, with some freeer alternative to Market, etc.
TidBit said:
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the Windows world things are a bit different. You pay Microsoft only for the OS. The biggest issue to get a new Windows version running on an old pc is drivers. If we translate the Windows world to Android we would pay Google for the OS (and upgrades) and HTC (for example) for the hardware (and drivers). In this world, when a new Android version is released, I can asure you that users will start to chase HTC to write new drivers compatible with the new Android version. And they want it for free.
It would be better to standarize all internal components and connections in devices. And android should contain some generic drivers to at least boot the device and use basic functions (screen, sd card, touch).
I wouldn't mind paying something extra for OS upgrades, but I don't like the idea of paying HTC for an OS upgrade while most of the work was done by Google.
Btw, by buying an HTC Android device, you also donate some bucks to the nice guys @ Microsoft.
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using xda premium
As a consumer, unless you enter a contract with a vendor, you are entitled to nothing. However the market forces suppliers to behave in a certain fashion in order to maintain a place in the market. How well a company balances service, vs. cost vs. profit will in the long run determine how well they do in comparison to their competitors. Therefore consumers are in effect entitled to expect some level of support from vendors when they purchase a product.
The problem is , that level of support is undefined, so a vendor has to be careful how they set expectations and consumers have to be realistic in their expectations. It's a hard balance to achieve.
I would love to see the whole concept of mobile devices move to a more PC oriented ecosystem.
Think about it.. Being able to pick and choose which hardware and which OS, and only having to deal with the carrier for service (ala cable providers) would certainly change the way things work. In my opinion for the better.
No more carrier locked phones, no more manufacturer locked OS's. I could go pick up my HTC Phone1 or Samsung Phone9, load up my Android XP and punch in my Verizon credentials and im off.
Crazy concept, i like it. Downsides i could see being increased price in phones. But on the same token, just the fact they are carrier free would drive down the price due to competition.
Would drive down cellular prices too since the only thing they would be competing with would be service area, price and data caps. Similiar to now, but without the contracts tying you in to a phone for 2 years.
Also, side-rant. 2 years for a mobile contract is absurd right now. Mobile tech is exploding, and with major hw improvements within a years time are rolling out, its just not fair.
My buddy just upgraded from his HTC Hero last month. I couldnt imagine still using that relic after having upgraded to an Epic, then an iphone4. Going back to the Hero would be torture.
TidBit said:
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem to think that they are entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny that you mention this because I remember Apple charging like $5 to upgrade older ipod touches to the newer OS and people were throwing a fit. They eventually gave the software upgrade away for free. I think everyone feels entitled to the honeycomb upgrade since HTC promised that it was going to be available soon. Nobody wants to buy a new tablet every year. Just look at Apple as an example. They could have easily only made IOS 5 only available for the Ipad 2 and alienated the millions of Ipad 1 owners out there. Instead, they offered the upgrade for both devices so people with the older model can still enjoy some of the new features. I think what everyone here is afraid of is that HTC is going to announce a HTC Flyer 2 in a couple months with a dual core processor and honeycomb/ice cream sandwich.
thetruth1983 said:
It's funny that you mention this because I remember Apple charging like $5 to upgrade older ipod touches to the newer OS and people were throwing a fit. They eventually gave the software upgrade away for free. I think everyone feels entitled to the honeycomb upgrade since HTC promised that it was going to be available soon. Nobody wants to buy a new tablet every year. Just look at Apple as an example. They could have easily only made IOS 5 only available for the Ipad 2 and alienated the millions of Ipad 1 owners out there. Instead, they offered the upgrade for both devices so people with the older model can still enjoy some of the new features. I think what everyone here is afraid of is that HTC is going to announce a HTC Flyer 2 in a couple months with a dual core processor and honeycomb/ice cream sandwich.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you are right. I did buy my HTC Flyer when the price dropped to $299 and I really love it. It is much better than my old Viewsonic G Tablet. I guess if I paid the $499, I would feel a little different.
Google tried the complete unlocked , open source concept essentially with their first Nexus phone, unfortunately it was a flop. The percentage of people that want to tinker with a phone (or tablet) vs. those that just want it to work is really small, otherwise, Apple wouldn't be so successful. I know most if us feel differently because we are passionate about the tech. and customizing.
And one more note. I worked for General Electric doing commercial software development for many years.I understand the business and legal aspect. Consumers are not "entitled" to anything, but..
I also understand that consumers are entitled to feel they are being treated fairly or you will be out of business (unless you have a monopoly , which unfortunately the cell industry behaves like in a lot of instances).
I do have a problem with false or deceptive advertising which this industry engages in fairly routinely.For example HTC announcing that the Flyer would get the honeycomb update and not delivering is deceptive. Verizon's TV ads about speed of network "rule the airways" while not talking about how they throttle your speeds is deceptive. It's not illegal, but it is deceptive and I do think consumers are entitled to the truth at some point.
DigitalMD said:
As a consumer, unless you enter a contract with a vendor, you are entitled to nothing. However the market forces suppliers to behave in a certain fashion in order to maintain a place in the market. How well a company balances service, vs. cost vs. profit will in the long run determine how well they do in comparison to their competitors. Therefore consumers are in effect entitled to expect some level of support from vendors when they purchase a product.
The problem is , that level of support is undefined, so a vendor has to be careful how they set expectations and consumers have to be realistic in their expectations. It's a hard balance to achieve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think there's an implied agreement that any major defects will be fixed unless you state otherwise. Take for example the HTC logging security issue.
---------- Post added at 03:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:35 PM ----------
DigitalMD said:
Google tried the complete unlocked , open source concept essentially with their first Nexus phone, unfortunately it was a flop. The percentage of people that want to tinker with a phone (or tablet) vs. those that just want it to work is really small, otherwise, Apple wouldn't be so successful. I know most if us feel differently because we are passionate about the tech. and customizing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FWIW, consumers *do* care about crapware. Friends know I'm an Android developer and the first thing they always ask, without a doubt, is how to remove ESPN or Avatar or other crap from their phones. Especially when people move over from the iPhone world, they are inundated by crapware.
I think the biggest selling point of the Nexus phones SHOULD be that they are mostly crapware-free, although I consider Twitter and Facebook superfluous.
ICS will let you disable system apps, which is going to be a huge bonus for users as long as the carriers don't find a way of blocking that feature.
If you believe that whole "implied agreement" thing, go check out what Sprint customers are dealing with now that Sprint yanked their unlimited data plan out from under them.
Eliminating as you call it ,Crapwear is not going to happen in Android period. You seem to have forgotten, Google is a advertising company. That's where they make the overwhelming majority of their income, about $12.5 billion last quarter. Android is a platform for leveraging that market.
The Nexus One phones were actually targeted toward developers and as such were pretty clean and open. The new Nexus Galaxy is a consumer phone.
Google doesn't make a dime from ESPN and Avatar pre-installs. The money they make on Admob is mostly from apps that users opt to download. Maps, which has some sponsored results, isn't crapware by most people's standards.
If Google had no interest in helping people out with clean phones, they wouldn't have put the ICS feature in to disable system apps.
As for implied agreement, see that those customers are angry. It's not like you're going to sue Sprint (although class actions do happen), but if you advertise one thing and do another, people get mad.
well ...
barry99705 said:
Who says they have to have a schedule? MS doesn't have a schedule. Also, didn't MS charge for one of the Windows Mobile updates? Pretty sure I'm remembering that correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS most certainly does have a schedule for updating all of their devices to Mango, by the way. And, they are updating every single one built by every single manufacturer. The schedule is available online. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsphone/en-us/features/update-schedules.aspx MS didn't charge end users for updates and never has, but the expectation is that all phones built around the same time period will have similar capabilities with regard to updating. With Android it's, "build first, slap the OS on later and see what works." In other words, it's not an OS-based market, it's a device-based market (I can't stand that word "ecosystem" unless it's used to describe biological phenomena, sorry).
What it boils down to is consumer expectation, as brought up by other commenters.
If Google were to charge for updates, they'd have a greater obligation to fulfill the promises made: update schedules, device lifespan, OS compatibility, etc. That would put more pressure on manufacturers to adhere to Google's whims, instead of allowing manufacturers to do whatever they want in terms of price/OS--that was the freedom and flexibility that the Open Handset Alliance was meant to offer manufacturers.
Android is too unwieldy and manufacturers (and Google) are making more money just throwing things out there and hoping that they stick than they would if they solidify anything related to the software on devices--which is what they would have to do if they began to charge for the OS.
They also run the risk of exposure to even more complicated licensing issues. You thought the Oracle debacle is bad, if Google were charging end users directly it would have been far worse for them because of the money they would have made on IP that came from sources that: (1) didn't put it out there to be 'profitable' to any one particular entity, (2) didn't put it out there in the first place (allegedly), etc.
Read this for a good perspective of where Google and the Android update schedules actually sit at the moment. Google tired to get a group of hardware makers to agree to timely updates and virtually nothing came from it. Google has no control.
http://www.tested.com/news/what-googles-android-update-deal-means-for-fragmentation/2310/
Sad but true.
I wish there were a Nexus with a physical keyboard.
I remain optimistic for the Flyer. I don't expect much from HTC, but I believe one of our independent developers will pick the ICS ball up and run with it.
HTC has shown a previous pattern of leaving their customers behind. I hope it is changing, but I don't count on it.
Im buying the new transformer prime... but about 4 days ago i was heading out the door to buy an ipad 2 before a friend showed me this great device. So far in the last 4 days since i heard of this tablet ive told 20 different people about this and NO ONE knows about it, NO ONE!! not a soul, and who can blame them?
there's no commercials, there's almost no add campaign at all... there's not even a solid release date yet!!
im finding it hard to make an investment in this company.
I won't get into how much money Apple dunks into marketing their products. This all comes down to how much more they will gain by dumping millions on advertising it. Will they make 10x profit compared to the cost? If they can't get a good estimate, then most company chooses to just let online "press" and retailers advertise in their stead. See how it goes and promote it further. Most people learn about products on TV and the Internet, but what makes them want to buy a product is from knowing someone that owns it or have experienced it first hand. There's no reason for a corporation to invest in marketing a product if it is not a 100% sure hit. It has something to do with corporate decisions.
The EeePad Transformer was a pretty good device with AWESOME support. That is what Asus does. I can verify that is what Asus does best; slow at getting customers, but keeps them forever because they stay behind their products. If you ever purchase their video cards, or other hardware, you will find that Asus will treat you like family.
Apple may have good Customer Support but that lasts how long? 90 days without a warranty?
But also, this is a new product as its not just another Tablet. While current Transformer users love the product, it does seem a little unusual. The Transformer line-up will become a pretty big thing in the next few years I'm sure.
I was surprised that in a group of 20 people 2 recognised Asus Transformer for what it was and no one called it iPad. It was in Poland. I don't know if there were advertisements in TV for it or sth. It's in most big shops though, maybe people know it from their ad flyers (I don't know how it's called - ads for big stores that are left on your front door with information about new promotions).
Android tablets suffer from hardware-war. But the thing is that majority of consumers are mainly interested in CONTENT, not the device and its hardware. This is why Amazon Kindle jumped amazingly fast in sales even though their custom skin for Android and hardware of the device are relatively lacklustre.
Android makers mainly battle with their features and hardware. But that's not the way to make an impact.
I understand word of mouth is a great way to sell products, but since no one i know has ever heard of this thing, i got lucky that some random xbl friend happened to know about it. I find it hard to beleave that ASUS is a marketing geniuses that is using a unique marketing trick which is the opposite of what everyone else does.
Apple has everyone brain washed, including me a little while ago, and thats what ASUS should be striving for.. not hide in the shadows and let the fans do the selling.
blaziner18 said:
I understand word of mouth is a great way to sell products, but since no one i know has ever heard of this thing, i got lucky that some random xbl friend happened to know about it. I find it hard to beleave that ASUS is a marketing geniuses that is using a unique marketing trick which is the opposite of what everyone else does.
Apple has everyone brain washed, including me a little while ago, and thats what ASUS should be striving for.. not hide in the shadows and let the fans do the selling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think anyone's trying to argue that Asus is a marketing genius. But they don't have anywhere close to Apple's financial resources. So instead of a billion dollar ad campaign, they spend that money on developing and continuously supporting their products. Apple may have people brainwashed, but Asus doesn't need to resort to that, as their products speak for themselves.
And if you look at the release of the Transformer 1, which sold much faster than it could be produced initially (and it looks like the same might be the case for the TF2), you can see they must be doing something right.
Thank god I won't have to see a billion other people holding the same device as me. I want to throw up when I see everyone on the bus using the same iPhone.
xTRICKYxx said:
Apple may have good Customer Support but that lasts how long? 90 days without a warranty?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wanted to clarify that Apple products have a 1 year warranty included, and you can just drive to an Apple store to get it serviced, and not having to pay to RMA your products by mailing it and wait...
I've been thinking about this tablet, and it's release date wondering why it's not out yet.
All I can think of is
1) Want to get rid of inventory of TF101's
or
2) Really want to wait to get the ICS out with the tablet. Because it significantly increases the performance of the Tegra 3 quad core tablet. Maybe, if they release with Honeycomb, and the Quad core is slightly better performance than Dual core, they look overpriced, and low benchmarks get circulated around the web.
Both are pure speculation without but there has to be some reason it's not out yet.
farplaner said:
Just wanted to clarify that Apple products have a 1 year warranty included, and you can just drive to an Apple store to get it serviced, and not having to pay to RMA your products by mailing it and wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..and have to deal with an Apple Store Genius. I've seen many smarmy Apple users, but these "Geniuses" take it to a new level... No thanks.
They remind me of the "Santa's helper Elves" in A Christmas Story (yeah, the one with Ralphie).
They re definitly waiting for ICS to launch the Prime. And they are right to do so. don't ship an unfinished product, especialy when hopes and demands are so high about it.
nook-color said:
I've been thinking about this tablet, and it's release date wondering why it's not out yet.
All I can think of is
1) Want to get rid of inventory of TF101's
or
2) Really want to wait to get the ICS out with the tablet. Because it significantly increases the performance of the Tegra 3 quad core tablet. Maybe, if they release with Honeycomb, and the Quad core is slightly better performance than Dual core, they look overpriced, and low benchmarks get circulated around the web.
Both are pure speculation without but there has to be some reason it's not out yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or they want to be sure they have plenty of stock, and that stock it where it's supposed to go, before releasing it. I imagine there's a lot of demand, and more places than ever wanting to sell it. Logistically, it's a lot of work.
Smyc151 said:
Or they want to be sure they have plenty of stock, and that stock it where it's supposed to go, before releasing it. I imagine there's a lot of demand, and more places than ever wanting to sell it. Logistically, it's a lot of work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I'm thinking is the case. The first time around, the TF101 was back-ordered for weeks and the dock didn't launch for a month after the tablet. This is not a fun situation to be in for the company or consumers. I'm sure that not being able to meet demand takes a toll on potential sales.
That said, it is also possible that they are wanting to deliver what had been rumored, since it was within their abilities to do. The tech blogs were making a lot of noise at the end of last month, beginning of this month about the Prime as being the first Tegra 3 and first ICS tablet to market. It does not seem out of the question that Asus would try to live up to the rumors if possible, especially while trying to justify a higher price-point than the original.
well this is making me feel better about ASUS, but my last argument is more of a nuh-uhh then anything else. I still say, even if they lack the resources there should be some small add campaign, a release date, internet adds. I was extremely lucky to find this product.
farplaner said:
Just wanted to clarify that Apple products have a 1 year warranty included, and you can just drive to an Apple store to get it serviced, and not having to pay to RMA your products by mailing it and wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair, Asus has service centers all over their home country Taiwan that are similar to Apple's genius bars.
I think it's just because Asus is based in Taiwan that we don't see much of their advertising and great service. They seem to focus most of their efforts in their home country. If you go look around there you'll see Asus ads everywhere.
Just because they don't advertise; makes it a bad product. Most people buy IOS devices because they simply aren't geekish and just want a device that works ,(Not counting the ever annoying and ignorant iSheep/iFanboys).
What i love about Asus, is that the products speak for themselves.
I remember when the HTC Evo 4G had been announced but not yet released... and everyone was clamoring and *****ing, wondering why HTC & Sprint didn't bother with any pre-release advertising and hype. And look, it went to become one of the more popular Android offerings in recent history.
Don't sweat it...
Guys here in the US the Prime is 100% sold out on Amazon, has been since 48 hours from being made available. Doesn't matter if it has commercials or not, it's already making money and isn't even on shelves.
kristovaher said:
Android tablets suffer from hardware-war. But the thing is that majority of consumers are mainly interested in CONTENT, not the device and its hardware. This is why Amazon Kindle jumped amazingly fast in sales even though their custom skin for Android and hardware of the device are relatively lacklustre.
Android makers mainly battle with their features and hardware. But that's not the way to make an impact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 is better than the A5 Chip.
The GPU in Tegra 3 is actually better than the SGX543, but its 2 GPU not one which is why its benchmark is higher, if you half the score in GLBenchmark for iPad 2 you see that Tegra 3 is btter. So hardware Android isnt far behind.
I've been a Nexus phone user for a long time, and now I own a Nexus 7 tablet. My wife just got a Galaxy S2 (work provided) and I find what Samsung has done to the software of that phone appalling. Especially since Ice Cream Sandwich Android has become minimalistically beautiful. I love my stock "Google Experience". Everything is so simple and beautiful.
My question is this, would it be feasible to crowd source an open sourced hardware project to design and build an android phone? I've developed software for years but don't know anything about developing hardware outside of my arduino kit. Hardware vendors are failing by trying to focus on software (like Samsung and HTC) as the differentiator, seemingly forgetting that thy are hardware manufacturers and great hardware should be enough.
My thought is to design a fairly cheap (at or under $500), hopefully high quality phone that is compatible with stock Android. Think something like the Nexus 7 only at 4-4.3 inches and with a cell radio. If its compatible with stock Android then we wouldn't have to spend time like Samsung does making our software compatible with the newest Android release before making it available to the public.
Are there any hardware engineers out there who might be able to tell me what this would take? I'm sure it would take a lot of people and a lot of time, and might not be possible without billions in the bank, but I'd like to know if the necessary skills exist in the community and if we can pull them together.
I doubt it will be possible just because of the amount of funds necessary to begin such a project. OEM's can make their devices because they order components in mass quantities so they get wholesale pricing and I just don't see the demand for such a device being enough to crowd-source it.
I think that the phone hardware should be a mid-low quality one in order to get the funds needed to slowly start making them. And even with that, it's not an easy task, since you will be selling a mid-low quality device for the price of a high quality one. You would have to offer something more.
But it's an interesting idea.
I am an electrical engineer that specialized in digital design and computer software, and made some custom boards for a small company. So, I'm speaking from some experience, not just blowing smoke out my ***.
Is it possible to design a phone? Sure.
I would guess the processor would have to come from TI, and Qualcomm and NVIDIA have such bad support reputations.
We would need a team of engineers on par with the size of the CyanogenMod community. We need electrical engineers from digital, RF, analog, power... and probably other EE specializations. Then some mechanical and probably other engineers.
For under $500? No.
As previously noted, the manufacturers are buying LARGE quantities, probably with lots of legal agreements, to get better prices than we could asking for 1,000 (if we're lucky) at a time... IF we could get enough priority to get our hands on that many.
The printed circuit boards alone are going to be expensive, not counting the cost of adding the components to it/them. The board(s) in your phone are (complete guess here) 6 or more layers, divided into digital, analog, and RF sections, with internal vias (connections from one layer to another that do not pass clear through the whole stack of layers.) They've been simulated in expensive CAD software, prototyped and tested in a $nnn,000 test chamber, possibly sent back for a design tweak one ore more times, THEN sent to the FCC
+equivalents for their OK. In other words, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Adding to the previous point, these are tiny, MANY pin, surface mount components, that cannot be soldered by hand. So, you've got to find a custom board assembly company, and pay to have the parts added.
Alternatively, it could be a little cheaper, but it would be the size of one or more of the Harry Potter books... in hardback.
Then get your hands on: batteries, charger, display, Gorilla glass, and a case to hold it all.
The only reason why we see phones at $500, or $200 with contract, is because the carriers are going to get a huge amount of money from you when you pay for service. I guessing here, but those prices are both subsidized by the carrier. That $500 price has already reduced from the manufacturer's price using money sucked from the customers under contract.
Haraldr Blaatand said:
I am an electrical engineer that specialized in digital design and computer software, and made some custom boards for a small company. So, I'm speaking from some experience, not just blowing smoke out my ***.
Is it possible to design a phone? Sure.
I would guess the processor would have to come from TI, and Qualcomm and NVIDIA have such bad support reputations.
We would need a team of engineers on par with the size of the CyanogenMod community. We need electrical engineers from digital, RF, analog, power... and probably other EE specializations. Then some mechanical and probably other engineers.
For under $500? No.
As previously noted, the manufacturers are buying LARGE quantities, probably with lots of legal agreements, to get better prices than we could asking for 1,000 (if we're lucky) at a time... IF we could get enough priority to get our hands on that many.
The printed circuit boards alone are going to be expensive, not counting the cost of adding the components to it/them. The board(s) in your phone are (complete guess here) 6 or more layers, divided into digital, analog, and RF sections, with internal vias (connections from one layer to another that do not pass clear through the whole stack of layers.) They've been simulated in expensive CAD software, prototyped and tested in a $nnn,000 test chamber, possibly sent back for a design tweak one ore more times, THEN sent to the FCC
+equivalents for their OK. In other words, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Adding to the previous point, these are tiny, MANY pin, surface mount components, that cannot be soldered by hand. So, you've got to find a custom board assembly company, and pay to have the parts added.
Alternatively, it could be a little cheaper, but it would be the size of one or more of the Harry Potter books... in hardback.
Then get your hands on: batteries, charger, display, Gorilla glass, and a case to hold it all.
The only reason why we see phones at $500, or $200 with contract, is because the carriers are going to get a huge amount of money from you when you pay for service. I guessing here, but those prices are both subsidized by the carrier. That $500 price has already reduced from the manufacturer's price using money sucked from the customers under contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a lot of great information. I have a few thoughts.
You mention the $500 price point being subsidized, but that's not necessarily true. I buy only unlocked devices without contract (not from Carriers) and my Nexus S cost $529 new.
What about just using a reference design from a manufacturer, essentially just a rebadge. You can see that Orange has done that with the Intel Medfield reference design.
rharter said:
That's a lot of great information. I have a few thoughts.
1. You mention the $500 price point being subsidized, but that's not necessarily true. I buy only unlocked devices without contract (not from Carriers) and my Nexus S cost $529 new.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then I'm not as smart as I think I am. It was a guess. I was wrong.
rharter said:
2. What about just using a reference design from a manufacturer, essentially just a rebadge. You can see that Orange has done that with the Intel Medfield reference design.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a complete phone they are selling to carriers (to help get their Atom processors some attention). From this article about the Medfield reference design:
The more tempting possibility is one that I'm not sure Intel is feeling risky enough to explore, at least not in 2012. Selling its reference design through a carrier is one thing, what I really want to see is Intel selling the reference design, unlocked, to consumers directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, without more information, I don't see this as any different than most other phones. The phone is still a black box to be hacked.
I did a little googling, and didn't find anything in the way of actual design details. I did come across this article Fast, good, or cheap - or why you can't build a smartphone, which basically says the same thing... only with a more cynical attitude.