Related
This question has flooded my mind almost as much as Android has flooded the market...
Does anyone else think that Android has gone out of control? I mean there are literally dozens of devices announced / released every week, updates are a mess, developing is tricky due to all the different versions of the OS, screen resolution, cpu, gpu etc. The custom overlays is so common that the AOSP phones are almost non existant.
Manufacturers release a new phone each week since its an easy buck because its free and they know that with Android it cant keep a decent life span since its forgotten pretty much the day its released since all the new phone arriving or due to arrive, so asking for good support is a bit much nowadays. It seems like Android is becoming the new "featurephone OS" since almost every phone released runs it, so imo it loses its Premium feel since i can run most of the same apps in a crappy free budget device than a high end monster save some games and speed...
I have had dozens of android devices, from the HTC Touch port, to the EVO 3D, and frankly its hard to get exited for an android device nowadays since theres always something bigger and better almost immediatly instead of living out its life span before it gets eclipsed by something else. Thats why i like the iOS and WP7 approach since they release it in batches (cept apple because its 1) in a certain time frame, so you know you dont have to worry about being left behind or being behind the curve for a good while (i you care about that stuff like me) OS updates are a sure thing, app compatibility is all there and it just feels more integrated and organized
Android feels like mess actually, i have an android and really like the OS but honestly, its a touch friendly version of Windows Mobile in my eyes. It has all the features you would wanr, but performance is inconsistant, user experience is a mess, updates are hit and miss, and development is a headache
Sorry to rant so much, i really like Android actually, but got to the point that flooded the market with such a thing has ruined a good thing imo
Any imput?
s3nT Fr0m mY pYrAmId fLaVoReD gLaCi3r
*Fixed a few things
Well, I believe that's what android is about. Its like windows, many different computers run different versions of windows. I understand the "premium feel" aspect, but there's no alternative to Linux on phones besides android.
on the other hand, no one wants to be as confined as iphone. there is nothing unique between one iphone and another. they are both iphones whereas android has variety
It'll really be interesting to see what the future holds. Android could replace Windows and MacOS in a lot of ways.
Good post OP. I feel, as you do, that the fragmentation of the Android platform is a complete mess. It would have been nice if Google had more control over what happened to the OS on a manufacturer level. I'd have liked, at the very least, to have seen a minimum hardware requirement, an outright ban on carrier bloat and manufacturer skins too. I'm a purist though and some people buy HTC, for example, because they want 'Sense'. Personally i believe these skins should have been an optional component, perhaps available as a Market download.
Updates to the OS should have been arranged in a more consistent and controlled manner too, but with the diversity of hardware it has become a crap-shoot. Manufacturers are churning out phone after phone and most are horribly derivative. Of course, it's all about the $$.
I'm a fan of what Microsoft are doing with the WP7 platform and can only dream about a similar scenario with Android!
I think its all good.Its all about freedom.The freedom to choose you firmware,kernal,ROM or what ever.Others like iOS are to confined.Its great.
It is just because android is "opened". All manufacturers can produce and sell a phone running android. Like the computers, for example, you can't say to HP that "Why did you guys releases computers so fast? ASUS just released one yesterday!"
Also about what you think android is complicated is because of it's customizability (ability to be customized). When it can be very personalized, it gets a lot of settings. When it have a lot of settings, things get complicated. This is also why every android device is unique
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I've always been a PC guy and have used Macs in the past. I'm just used to Windows as opposed to an iOS. The fact that Android is open sourced, it allows for any user to customize it however they want.
I own an EVO 3D, and own an iPod Touch. There's endless possibilities on what I can do on the 3D versus what I can do on the iPod. I also know that the iPod can be jailbroken as well.
I do understand your argument as there are many different phones that come out each week/month. It gets overwhelming as to which device is better and what not, but it all comes down to what the end user wants for a device that fits their needs. A typical user just wants to be able to call, text, and get online. These typical users would like to see different styles, colors, sizes that fit their lifestyle.
Apple has a standardized iPhone/iPod and it receives an update once in a while. Granted, you can pick out a cover for it in different colors and styles, but it has the same UI look.
But I, on the other hand, like to tinker and like to customize the device of my choice.
Based on the fact that we're all members here on this forum by choice and are happily reading and writing...I'd say that there's no such thing as too much.
Although I'll be honest, I was dying to just say about this much "...................." (there I said it)
i agree that android is all over the place with late updates ect however i love the fact that its available in all flavors not just one flavor like you know who.
Android is just the hip thing. It's quickly becoming to mobile-devices what MS-DOS/Windows was to home computers. Only, the licensing is different
That doesn't mean there's too much of it though. Android is still linux at its core, and part of that is putting up with the disorganized community development.
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.
Before we start this discussion, i'd just like to say that the devs are doing a brilliant job of bringing android flavours to the Touchpad and this discussion should in no way be a deterrent to them doing their work.
Is it just me or is the touchpad a neglected device in terms of development compared to other tablets? i.e. asus, samsung, htc.
There are a huge number of devs and a wide variety of custom ROMS, themed ROMS, ported ROMS, Mods the list goes on and on.
As far as I'm aware of the problems (feel free to correct me) the source for half the hardware hasn't been released (such as the webcam) etc etc. so it kind of makes it very very difficult if not impossible to experiment with different ROMS.
Yes some out there can say to me "buy a tablet that was meant to run android next time" fair enough. But is it alot to expect the same level of development as usual android tablets?
webOS is very lovely but it doesn't cut it for me in terms of customisation (even with some of the childish looking themes on preware). CM9 has its issues still with regards to not everything working yet, but even when it's complete i still miss simple conveniences like VPN and connect WiFi using WPS automatically to name a few.
So can we expect that kind of development? or is it too much to ask.
I doubt we'll have Samsung level development, but that's true of any non-Samsung device. Have no idea why they're so popular, but usually the size of their dev communities put others to shame.
As you've pointed out, we don't have all our hardware working right now. Between that and the fact that CM9 itself (as a whole, not just the TP Version) is incomplete, its no wonder there's only two or three roms. Many people make their roms using another as a base, be it a stock firmware (of which the TP obviously does not have) or CM. Since CM9 is in a constant state of flux, there's no solid base for the TP yet.
As it is, we have the CM9 alpha, CM9 weeklies, AOPK, Unofficial Cornerstone kangs, MIUI, Classicnerd, Cherrykang... and that's just ICS based stuff. Add in Gingerbread roms and non-Android OSs like Ubuntu and you'll find we have a quite a good selection already.
my gripe with gingerbread ROMS is not as some people say "phone rom on a tablet" its just the fact that the apps recognize it as a phone and ruins the whole thing.
apart from MIUI, alot of the other ROMS look and feel pretty similar to me and there isn't much that sets them apart. granted cm9 is in its infancy (EVERYWHERE including my evo 3D, google definitely not redeeming itself over this update fiasco). I haven't really sampled Ubuntu to make a judgement on it.
I suppose if one was to put together something original a) it would be so hard people wouldn't bother attempting it cuz it's just too time consuming b) it'd be like making a lovely dish from leftovers....kernel's modified and compiled from things like htc jetstream (and rumor has it the GS2 on AT&T), ROMS put together from 7" android tablets most of which have the same resolution as the touchpad so it'll make life easier with respect to resizing.... again too much effort and time consuming to be worthwhile
I feel the TouchPad has great development. Especially when you consider a vast majority of the devices were sold before android was put on the device. When the fire sales happened the people that bought them didn't know android was going to be put on it. So anyone that wanted to play with android or build ROMs probably got an android tablet.
There will never be a full stock optimized android build. With the Samsung devices they have a solid start point, and a manufacturer that is devoted to the success of the device. HP has washed its hands of the TouchPad more or less. Everything done to get android on the TouchPad had been done by volunteers, without the resources really needed.
Samsung just generally makes things easiest for people to hack it. HTC and Asus ship their devices with locked bootloaders. Samsung doesn't, so they have one less hurdle right from the get go. The other side of that is Samsung makes great hardware, and decent software. This is easier to show in the phones. HTC makes good phones, but there is two or three extra hurdles that don't exist on Samsung phones. LG phones also don't have those hurdles, but their hardware isn't as good, and they are notoriously bad at getting android updates out.
Another thing to consider is the quality of android overall on a tablet. There is minimal tablet apps, and little motivation. Apple bet their company on the success of the iPad, Microsoft is doing the same with Windows 8. If either of them fail at their tablet product their entire company is in jeopardy. But Google wouldn't notice if android tablets fail, and flop. The entire thing to them is like a hobby. I think if android tablets were more popular in general we would see a lot more going on here. The fact that the TouchPad has sold more units than any other android tablet (combined I think) is really sad. Android just isn't taking hold in the tablet market, and won't without a lot of work by Google. But, what's their incentive? 98% of their revenue is from advertising. They still make money when an iPad pulls up an ad served by Google. They don't really have a lot of skin in the game, and it shows. I think the only reason Samsung, HTC, Motorola etc sell android tablets at all is because they don't really have a choice. They can't sell iOS tablets. The real test will be Windows 8 on ARM. If these companies can license W8 from Microsoft, its familiar to them. Its like building a Laptop or Ultrabook, they rely on Microsoft's ability to make compelling software, and enterprise friendly systems. That's really what HP was trying to do with the TouchPad. HP said the TouchPad wasn't their last tablet, but I would bet their next one runs W8. I think the tablet race us destined to be a two pony race, and that android isn't going to be the second pony much longer at the rate things are going. </rant>
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
ace9988 said:
Before we start this discussion, i'd just like to say that the devs are doing a brilliant job of bringing android flavours to the Touchpad and this discussion should in no way be a deterrent to them doing their work.
Is it just me or is the touchpad a neglected device in terms of development compared to other tablets? i.e. asus, samsung, htc. niggles (or problems; you decide) with cm9 has started to
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get so tired of people complaining they don't get the same things from a $200 device as others get from their $600 ones. The reason the TPs are selling at the price they are is that the manufacturer stopped development. But, IMNSHO, the TP users are actually benefiting from that. If HP were still in charge, the TP would not have ICS, Ubuntu or Arch running.
this is my first tablet after all.....and when we're used to the development we see on our (assumed) android phones you can't help but compare, but like i said its only a discussion. and whats Arch?
Doesn't the fact that HP released the android kernel help development? How much does it help
I know that we all probably figured as much and understand that in the future, Mobile phones and tablets will defeat PCs and Laptops completely (now that we are getting devices that can double or even triple as phone, tablet and potentially PC/laptop), still it is an interesting read and article. So, have a look at this. Specifically click on the "Future of Mobile>" link at the bottom of the article to see a powerpoint presentation!
Interesting indeed. I've wondered about this before, specifically Microsoft's future and the 'Andriod vs. iOS' war.
When it comes to Microsoft, I'm just not sure anymore. Sure, they have their hands gripped tightly around the desktop and laptop markets, but seeing this only reaffirms my opinion that Microsoft doesn't have much left going for them. With smartphones and tablets often going for more than an entire desktop computer, and now that phones and tablets truly are grossing more sales than desktops and laptops, Microsoft isn't the giant corporation it used to be. At least, not in comparison to the competition. If they don't get their act together soon, they may start to see profits dwindle. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't tried stronger marketing campaigns for their Windows phones and tablets; I know they exist, but I've never seen one in person and I've never seen an ad for them.
When it comes to Apple vs. Google/Motorola/Samsung/HTC/Nokia/Rim (essentially all mobile phone manufacturers), I've often wondered who will pull out ahead when smartphones continue to rise in sales and popularity. On one hand there is Android, along with it's very large user-base and realistically small developer-base, and on the other is iOS and its even larger user-base, extremely strong fanboy mentality, and its incredibly large developer-base. I used to think Android had it in the bag as I started seeing them all the time at school and work.. but I just don't know anymore. I would like to see Android win, because it's my personal preference, but I don't see it happening. Honestly, I think Apple's got this one in the bag. When it comes to apps and the user interface, they've already won.
theredvendetta said:
Interesting indeed. I've wondered about this before, specifically Microsoft's future and the 'Andriod vs. iOS' war.
When it comes to Microsoft, I'm just not sure anymore. Sure, they have their hands gripped tightly around the desktop and laptop markets, but seeing this only reaffirms my opinion that Microsoft doesn't have much left going for them. With smartphones and tablets often going for more than an entire desktop computer, and now that phones and tablets truly are grossing more sales than desktops and laptops, Microsoft isn't the giant corporation it used to be. At least, not in comparison to the competition. If they don't get their act together soon, they may start to see profits dwindle. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't tried stronger marketing campaigns for their Windows phones and tablets; I know they exist, but I've never seen one in person and I've never seen an ad for them.
When it comes to Apple vs. Google/Motorola/Samsung/HTC/Nokia/Rim (essentially all mobile phone manufacturers), I've often wondered who will pull out ahead when smartphones continue to rise in sales and popularity. On one hand there is Android, along with it's very large user-base and realistically small developer-base, and on the other is iOS and its even larger user-base, extremely strong fanboy mentality, and its incredibly large developer-base. I used to think Android had it in the bag as I started seeing them all the time at school and work.. but I just don't know anymore. I would like to see Android win, because it's my personal preference, but I don't see it happening. Honestly, I think Apple's got this one in the bag. When it comes to apps and the user interface, they've already won.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as I have an Android tablet and Android phone in my hand I will not agree that iPhone is winning. As of now Android has one thing going for it and that is its humongous user base. Yet it is baffling that it has at best a moderate developer base. I would guess that more devs would dev for this platform. Also, I learned that deving for android is easier as well. Oh well...
The ONLY way Android can win is if Google grows a pair of balls and tells all the manufacturers firmly that there is no way in hell you are allowed to make customizations. All you are doing is ruining the experience without significantly improving user experience and causing additional delays and fragmentation with deploying updates. From now on all of you release AOSP and update the week Google releases source code. Android's Achilles heel is fragmentation. That is why despite the fact that there are more androids than iPhones developers don't prefer it OR get much revenue from it.
So, Google, Grow. Some. Balls!!!
Moreover, I have always had a soft spot for Microsoft. I dunno but it being the underdog I always wanted MS to come sweeping to victory with their Windows phone 7. Frankly it is a very good OS. Many of my friends state that it has one of the smoothest UI. And it is so good that it can run amazingly on a single core device. All WP7 devices are single core but you'll never notice it. It is that good. In fact, I believe it was this CES or may be the last, when MS was cocky and started boasting that if you show us a device that can run smoother and faster than their Nokia Lumia 900 device, they will give you $100 (or may be the phone, I dunno). It was a bet.
Also MS did one more thing right. It had the balls, unlike Google to tell manufacturers that they can't customize WP7 other than the color scheme and some innocent apps/links on the home screen. No theming or skinning. And all WP7 devices get updates promptly, at worst within a month!!! Google, you can learn a thing or two from MS! Unfortunately MS is not really advertizing WP7 as much as they should. They can easily get more market share by appropriately marketing it and boasting its plus points!
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA Premium HD app
The reason why Android has so few Devs compared to apple is because apple is one phone with a large portion of the market. If you're a company producing apps, you look at this and think: well, we could code for Apple and get this much market share, our we could code for Android, and then we would have to make sure it's compatible with all 200 different types, screen rezs, screen sizes, etc, to get a slightly larger market share.
In fact, up until about last summer, Google's dev page said to program the code for iPhone first, and then port it to Android, if you were going to do both.
So yeah. Unfortunate, but a fact of life.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda premium
Very thorough presentation there.
Why is it more apps are being developed for iOS and not android?? I personally think this sucks considering phones with android are dominating the smartphone market e.g android currently runs on Samsung phones, HTC phones, LG phones, Motorola phones, ZTE phones, Huawei phones as well as tablets such as Acer, Nexus 7, Galaxy Tab, HP Touchpad etc. I just get the feeling android is being left out. IOS runs on the iPhone and iPad and that's it....doesn't make sense to me.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Agreed. Fortunately I have all the apps that I need
Its because if you make a app on iOS it only has to really work on 2 or 3 devices which makes testing and making bug free much easier.
With android there are so many devices it can be hard to debug across all device and screen sizes etc etc.
For 'simpler' apps its not a issue but with bigger more complexed apps it can be a bigger issue and thus far more work for the dev
Apparently over 40% of IOS Apps have never even been downloaded once so I think the word Shovelware certainly applies.
Its still the largest single device out there, one phone and one tablet. I imagine it makes dev work easier, sort of like building a complex website that only has to work in one browser. Plus the way the media talks about the iPhone all the time, many probably think it has a huge majority of the market share.
spunker88 said:
Plus the way the media talks about the iPhone all the time, many probably think it has a huge majority of the market share.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that's right. In fact, I never seen an Google commercial on TV, and many people don't know about Android. However, if you ask them "Do you know the iPhone/iPad?" surely the answer will be "yes... it's cool"
RoberGalarga said:
Yeah, that's right. In fact, I never seen an Google commercial on TV, and many people don't know about Android. However, if you ask them "Do you know the iPhone/iPad?" surely the answer will be "yes... it's cool"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are some Nexus 7 commercials on these days, and back before Verizon got the iPhone they ran quite a few commercials with the OG Droid and Droid X. The iPhone is in nearly every new movie when a cell phone is shown. Its ironic because for years Apple embraced being different than the mainstream majority of whatever product they were trying to sell. Now the iPad/iPhone is about as mainstream as you can get since its everywhere.
What about the android shop in California....that must be the only store dedicated to an OS lol
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Once Google opens a nexus store in every big city in the world and has more commercials, sues the heck out of everybody and mocks Apple then they will be more popular. Oh yea there are ups and down on both platforms. Apple charges 99 bucks a year to develop apps and publish them while android only charges 25 bucks. But like said above there are too many androids from 3.5 inch 800 megahertz processors to giant 4.8 inch phones with a quad core cpu. The galaxy note is 5.3" GEEZUS
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda app-developers app
apple smooth and no laggy
NicoJanuar said:
apple smooth and no laggy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And JellyBean isn't?
NicoJanuar said:
apple smooth and no laggy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iphones and iPads are just overpriced ****e imo! They all look and feel the same, layout has been the same since day 1, their not very attractive, specs are a joke (4s is EXACTLY the same as the 4 just added a dual core 800mhz CPU and a joke piece of software called siri, which doesn't work half the time) and they have a cheek to charge £599 for a beefed up version of the iPhone 4!!! You must be kidding right??
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
I just picked up a Galaxy S3 and it cost roughly the same as a new iphone. Apple appeals to a broad consumer base as any idiot can figure it out, and most people only use their phones to talk, text, facebook, angry birds, etc anyway. They're usually stable, and just work. Android, however, claims the cake because it doesn't lock you into any single hardware manufacturer, and has the open-source backing. It just so happens that since the tv is lovestruck by apple products, most people clamor to apple cause they saw it on tv, and since apple has the outspoken user base it does (aka fanboys), it popularly perceived that ios is the most popular platform. And with that, most entrepreneurs are going to go with the platform they feel their products will get the most exposure on, which leads to higher revenue. Econ 101
drbobmd said:
I just picked up a Galaxy S3 and it cost roughly the same as a new iphone. Apple appeals to a broad consumer base as any idiot can figure it out, and most people only use their phones to talk, text, facebook, angry birds, etc anyway. They're usually stable, and just work. Android, however, claims the cake because it doesn't lock you into any single hardware manufacturer, and has the open-source backing. It just so happens that since the tv is lovestruck by apple products, most people clamor to apple cause they saw it on tv, and since apple has the outspoken user base it does (aka fanboys), it popularly perceived that ios is the most popular platform. And with that, most entrepreneurs are going to go with the platform they feel their products will get the most exposure on, which leads to higher revenue. Econ 101
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you pretty much nailed it. Android being based on linux, and an 'open' system, alot of linux users/hackers use it, and there for do not want to pay for software, as with their computer operating systems. Now dont get me wrong, some people do pay for software, but if you can find a free alternative, or even better just create your own, why would you pay for it ?
With Apple products, basicly morons are buying it because they are told to, they think it is cool, all thier dumb ass friends have them, and so any software that is needed for it, they will pay through the nose for, just like their devices they have to upgrade before they have finished paying off the last one.
Forgive my extreme dis-like for Apple products. I just really do not like them.
It was long before the iPhone that I stayed away from Apple products. Their computers were and still are way overpriced when compared to the same specs on a Windows PC. Or you can build your own and save even more money. iPods are overpriced and you are forced to use iTunes. I've used Creative and Sandisk players that don't require any software as they were USB mass storage devices. I can write a simple batch file to sync two directories, I don't need a big program like iTunes. I remember one of my friends showing off their cool new iPod shuffle years ago, the model without a screen. Meanwhile I had a Sandisk player (forget the model) that had a screen and more storage space plus it costs less. I also had (still have) my Dell Axim x50 which still is a better MP3/video player than any iPod today since it has CF and SD slots and can play nearly every format with TCPMP.
Android was the next move for me after Microsoft discontinued Windows Mobile. Its the only popular mobile OS for power users left. Its a lot more stable than WM ever was, not responding apps will force close where as on WM you would often have to restart the device.
Unless Apple does something innovative with the iPhone, I predict it is on a sinking ship. Its an outdated device/UI after 5 years with little changes. After ICS, anytime I see an iOS device it just looks so outdated. There have been hardware upgrades but today's iPhone doesn't look much different from the 2007 model. The mobile market moves fast and those who don't keep up die off, look at what happened to Windows Mobile which didn't change for years.
One Topmost reason why Apps are more developed for iOS than Android:
The high-rated, most popular and mostly downloaded apps in Android suffers PIRACY ISSUE which is not acceptable to the developers as it incurs the developers a huge loss. Although it also happens with iOS apps, but their piracy rate is not that high as Android.
Also we must be thankful to the developers that in spite of these issues, they still develop good apps for us and make Android a better OS.
Sent From My Pencil
clonak said:
I think you pretty much nailed it. Android being based on linux, and an 'open' system, alot of linux users/hackers use it, and there for do not want to pay for software, as with their computer operating systems. Now dont get me wrong, some people do pay for software, but if you can find a free alternative, or even better just create your own, why would you pay for it ?
With Apple products, basicly morons are buying it because they are told to, they think it is cool, all thier dumb ass friends have them, and so any software that is needed for it, they will pay through the nose for, just like their devices they have to upgrade before they have finished paying off the last one.
Forgive my extreme dis-like for Apple products. I just really do not like them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah dude I feel ya. You get the same (for the most part) applications for less to nothing, and if it doesn't have the exact functionality you're looking for, you can change it yourself. Apple doesn't even give the option to sideload whereas Android allows it even for a stock unrooted user. But where we see these drawbacks, it does make iOS much more stable because it's extremely difficult for iphone users to screw it up. But you have to remember, different clientele. The one thing Apple has going for them is their brilliant (if you wanna call it that) marketing. That's the only reason they've done so well, is because they've managed to make a cult of it and exploit that fact that people are half the time so pathetic they need some product/brand to represent who they are, and Apple has provided that branding for millions of people. I do some home automation/networking projects as a hobby, and I hate my buddy's macbook cause that thing leaves crap all over my servers, even if the shares are on major lockdown. And getting them to play nicely with media, forget about it.
spunker88 said:
It was long before the iPhone that I stayed away from Apple products. Their computers were and still are way overpriced when compared to the same specs on a Windows PC. Or you can build your own and save even more money. iPods are overpriced and you are forced to use iTunes. I've used Creative and Sandisk players that don't require any software as they were USB mass storage devices. I can write a simple batch file to sync two directories, I don't need a big program like iTunes. I remember one of my friends showing off their cool new iPod shuffle years ago, the model without a screen. Meanwhile I had a Sandisk player (forget the model) that had a screen and more storage space plus it costs less. I also had (still have) my Dell Axim x50 which still is a better MP3/video player than any iPod today since it has CF and SD slots and can play nearly every format with TCPMP.
Android was the next move for me after Microsoft discontinued Windows Mobile. Its the only popular mobile OS for power users left. Its a lot more stable than WM ever was, not responding apps will force close where as on WM you would often have to restart the device.
Unless Apple does something innovative with the iPhone, I predict it is on a sinking ship. Its an outdated device/UI after 5 years with little changes. After ICS, anytime I see an iOS device it just looks so outdated. There have been hardware upgrades but today's iPhone doesn't look much different from the 2007 model. The mobile market moves fast and those who don't keep up die off, look at what happened to Windows Mobile which didn't change for years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually you can use an ipod with rhythm box, an itunes-like media player for Linux . I don't have one, so I can't say anything on its functionality. I had a windows phone on, if I remember correctly, a motorola que or something. WORST PHONE EVER. I got from a friend, but I was rebooting a good 10 times a day cause it would lock up or something wacko. In terms of iOS's gui, all they'd have to do is keep adding gooey nonsense and if the play it off as an upgrade, the apple kids will eat it up for the next 30 years without any need for advancing the base functionality. Honestly, I'm sure karma will catch up with Apple (as it did for Microsoft) and they'll bury themselves in crap. Don't know what, I'm just being hopefull
Really because the iOS users are the dumbest and will buy pretty much any app that is developed.
I joke I joke.
But really the reason is because a lot of developers feel that all android users do is pirate apps so they can't make a profit.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
There are so many factors why apple appstore has more apps,
Firstly it has a quality control, so when your apple appstore app is approved, then its a thing to be proud of next, the payment schemes offered my apple is easier than android, and also, you just need to test on 2 or maximum three devices unlike android where you gotta test on so many devices to with so many different API versions and screen sizes.
Next , visibility of new apps is much much more on apple store compared to Play store.
And lastly, the play store's global reach is less!
protonsavy said:
There are so many factors why apple appstore has more apps,
Firstly it has a quality control, so when your apple appstore app is approved, then its a thing to be proud of next, the payment schemes offered my apple is easier than android, and also, you just need to test on 2 or maximum three devices unlike android where you gotta test on so many devices to with so many different API versions and screen sizes.
Next , visibility of new apps is much much more on apple store compared to Play store.
And lastly, the play store's global reach is less!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bingo. They simplify everything for quality control that they feel provides a better user experience, and to some extent it does. While it is extremely restrictive, it still provides the masses with simplicity, of whom don't know a motherboard from a graphics card half the time. Android is more of a Wild West of sorts, allowing the users to have more control of their environment. Then again, Apple proponents are more likely to pay stupid amounts of money for close to anything so they can be one of the cool kids whereas Android folk either couldn't/didn't want to afford an iphone, or are Linux people who aren't gonna be keen on paying for software in the first place.