Related
Hey all, Just bought the g-tab as my first android device. I liked playing with the Xoom and iPads in the store, but wanted the same experience for cheap and knew that I would have to root this g-tab thing to unleash that awesome hardware value. So far I've easily put TNT Lite 4.2 and it really is much faster and more usable then the Tap N Crap that viewsonic shipped. Thanks a bunch devs for fixing what should have never been modded in such a crappy way.
My question is will there every be Android 3.0 available for the gtab? I just read an article about how google is trying to ensure oems don't mess up the UI like viewsonic did to protect their reputation. Since the gtab wasn't even an official android device, I'm wondering if Honeycomb will even be available to viewsonic or devs here to put on the gtab.
I totally agree with this article. Google shouldn't be as totalitarian as Apple, but this lack of quality control is making Android look bad in the public sphere (not to hackers of course) So did I just buy a dead end device?
As a new user - I still can't post links, so here's the pasted article from pc world:
Why Google's Tighter Control Over Android Is a Good Thing
Limiting availability of Android 3.0 code and apparent tightening of Android smartphone standards means that Google finally gets it about the platform.
By Galen Gruman, Infoworld Apr 6, 2011 11:30 am
Last week, Google said it would not release the source for its Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" tablet to developers and would limit the OS to select hardware makers, at least initially. Now there are rumors reported by Bloomberg Businessweek that Google is requiring Android device makers to get UI changes approved by Google .
As my colleague Savio Rodrigues has written, limiting the Honeycomb code is not going to hurt the Android market . I believe reining in the custom UIs imposed on Android is a good thing. Let's be honest: They exist only so companies like Motorola, HTC, and Samsung can pretend to have any technology involvement in the Android products they sell and claim they have some differentiating feature that should make customers want their model of an Android smartphone versus the umpteenth otherwise-identical Android smartphones out there.
[ Compare mobile devices using your own criteria with InfoWorld's smartphone calculator and tablet calculator. | Keep up on key mobile developments and insights via Twitter and with theMobile Edge blog and Mobilize newsletter. ]
The reality of Android is that it is the new Windows : an operating system used by multiple hardware vendors to create essentially identical products, save for the company name printed on it. That of course is what the device makers fear -- both those like Acer that already live in the race-to-the-bottom PC market and those like Motorola and HTC that don't want to.
But these cosmetic UI differences cause confusion among users, sending the message that Android is a collection of devices, not a platform like Apple's iOS. As Android's image becomes fragmented, so does the excitement that powers adoption. Anyone who's followed the cell phone industry has seen how that plays out: There are 1 billion Java-based cell phones out there, but no one knows it, and no one cares, as each works so differently that the Java underpinnings offer no value to anyone but Oracle, which licenses the technology.
Google initially seemed to want to play the same game as Oracle (and before it Sun), providing an under-the-hood platform for manufacturers to use as they saw fit. But a couple curious things happened:
Vendors such as Best Buy started selling the Android brand, to help create a sense of a unified alternative to BlackBerry and iOS, as well as to help prevent customers from feeling overwhelmed by all the "different" phones available. Too much choice confuses people, and salespeople know that.
Several mobile device makers shipped terrible tablets based on the Android 2.2 smartphone OS -- despite Google's warnings not to -- because they were impatient with Google's slow progress in releasing Honeycomb. These tablets, such as the Galaxy Tab , were terrible products and clear hack jobs that only demonstrated the iPad's superiority . I believe they also finally got the kids at Google to understand that most device makers have no respect for the Android OS and will create the same banal products for it as they do for Windows. The kids at Google have a mission, and enabling white-box smartphones isn't it.
I've argued before that Android's fragmentation, encouraged by its open source model, was a mistake . Google should drive the platform forward and ride herd on those who use it in their devices. If it wants to make the OS available free to stmulate adoption, fine. But don't let that approach devolve into the kind of crappy results that many device makers are so clueless (or eager -- take your pick) to deliver.
So far, Google's been lucky in that the fragmentation has been largely in cosmetic UI areas, which doesn't affect most Android apps and only annoys customers when they switch to a new device. The fragmentation of Android OS versions across devices is driving many Android developers away , as are fears over a fractured set of app stores. Along these lines, Google has to break the carriers' update monopoly, as Apple did, so all Android devices can be on the same OS page.
It is true that HTC's Eris brought some useful additions to the stock Android UI, serving as a model for future improvements. But the HTC example is the exception, and Google's apparent new policy would allow such enhancements if Google judges them to be so.
More to the point is what the tablet makers such as ViewSonic, Dell, and Samsung did with their first Android tablets. Their half-baked products showed how comfortable they are soiling the Android platform. For them, Android is just another OS to throw on hardware designed for something else in a cynical attempt to capture a market wave. The consistently low sales should provide a clue that users aren't buying the junk. But do they blame the hardware makers or Google? When so many Android devices are junk, it'll be Google whose reputation suffers.
Let's not forget Google's competition, and why Google can't patiently teach these companies about user experience: Apple, a company that knows how to nurture, defend, and evangelize a platform. Let's also not forget the fate of Microsoft and Nokia , who let their Windows Mobile and Symbian OSes fragment into oblivion. And let's remember that the one company that knows how the vanilla-PC game is played, Hewlett-Packard, has decided to move away from the plain-vanilla Windows OS and stake its future on its own platform, WebOS , for both PCs and mobile devices. In that world, a fragmented, confused, soiled Android platform would have no market at all.
If Google finally understands that Android is a platform to be nurtured and defended, it has a chance of remaining a strong presence in the mobile market for more than a few faddish years. If not, it's just throwing its baby into the woods, where it will find cruel exploitation, not nurturing or defense.
I didn't read your 1000 word post, but I read your topic. HC on GTAB has NOTHING to do with Google. It has everything to do with Nvidia abandoning GTAB.
The media has an idea in their head but they are shooting the messenger. Google has no choice when Nvidia stops producing source for the proprietary elements of the system.
Nvidia simply does not care about Harmony which is the hardware reference legacy devices are built on.
So this device is going to be left behind when it comes to the new android stuff?
It is interesting that you ask. With 318 posts here you have to have followed some of the threads discussing this before. At this point in time I don't think anyone knows. Lots of speculation, lots of pent up desire and the best Devs ever so I am sure there will be improvements, Will it ever make full HC who knows?? If you read your article carefully, even the stuff out there ( Zoom and Transformer) does not have complete Honeycomb.
I wonder what Honeycomb will bring to the picture that we don't have already. I have my gtablet rooted and running TnT 4.4 and it's sufficient for almost all my tablet needs. Yesterday I was reading Kindle books to the kids, streaming movies/music from my media center PC, watching youtube and browsing the net, all with nary a hiccup. I even got a cheapo keyboard leathercase to use for editing documents. If it's the UI, the current Launcher Pro Premium and GO Launcher EX are pretty nice alternatives.
I have played with the XOOM tablet at Best Buy and thought other than some pretty UI and a nicer screen, functionally I wasn't getting much for double the price.
samaruf said:
I wonder what Honeycomb will bring to the picture that we don't have already. I have my gtablet rooted and running TnT 4.4 and it's sufficient for almost all my tablet needs. Yesterday I was reading Kindle books to the kids, streaming movies/music from my media center PC, watching youtube and browsing the net, all with nary a hiccup. I even got a cheapo keyboard leathercase to use for editing documents. If it's the UI, the current Launcher Pro Premium and GO Launcher EX are pretty nice alternatives.
I have played with the XOOM tablet at Best Buy and thought other than some pretty UI and a nicer screen, functionally I wasn't getting much for double the price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats interesting. What ROM are you running? Most of my video is choppy, and I read in the dev forum this has to do with no video acceleration yet for the Gingerbread versions.
Good point - if it does what you want it to do then so what if it's not the newest... I'm a little embarrassed, but still rockin out to my first gen iPod nano a the gym
Guess I still wanted whatever tablet specific ui improvements that honeycomb was expected to bring.
nitefallz said:
Thats interesting. What ROM are you running? Most of my video is choppy, and I read in the dev forum this has to do with no video acceleration yet for the Gingerbread versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I mentioned in my post, my ROM is TnT Lite 4.4 with Clemsyn's kernel (v9). I can stream 700 MB avi files with no stuttering or choppiness. I use GMote app on the tablet and the GMote server in the media PC. My video player is Rockplayer, which is free from the market.
I too was just at Best Buy bout a week ago and messed around with the Xoom for a little bit. Quickly I realized why its been a couple years since I've been to this store (prices?!?!), not to mention the help asking me if I had any questions and if I was looking to buy the Xoom (they left me alone after proclaiming I was completely satisfied with my gtab).
The only real difference I could notice (which in my eyes was a big one) was the interface. Its definitely more "flashy" in looks and prettier for eye-candy, but no real difference outside of that, actually seemed to lag a bit; almost comparable to the gtab out of box.
Me personally, I'm in no hurry to see any kind of honeycreams equivalent make its way to the gtab. I'm more anxious to see gojimi release their vegan ginger Beta more than anything right now. Been counting the days (sometimes hours) since reading their update about him coming back from vacation, lets do this!
Closing thread - see this
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1026411
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.
I'm sure this is being discussed somewhere on this massive forum, but didn't see it in here, so here it is. This is honestly one of the biggest draw backs in my opinion to buying an Android phone. For instance, my mom bought the Samsung Charge which is still on Froyo. There appears to be no plans to take it up to Gingerbread or ICS. That's just sad. The phone is new and she'll be two OS's behind. I have a feeling we'll not see ICS unless we crack it ourselves.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
stalked_r/t said:
I'm sure this is being discussed somewhere on this massive forum, but didn't see it in here, so here it is. This is honestly one of the biggest draw backs in my opinion to buying an Android phone. For instance, my mom bought the Samsung Charge which is still on Froyo. There appears to be no plans to take it up to Gingerbread or ICS. That's just sad. The phone is new and she'll be two OS's behind. I have a feeling we'll not see ICS unless we crack it ourselves.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what the result of having (or at least attempting to have any open platform). There are so many players with so much freedom that fragmentation is unavoidable. This is nothing new to the LINUX community.
Just look at every time Linus Torvalds and his successors release a new LINUX kernel, it can be any where from days to years before it gets implemented depending on what distro you are running.
This disadvantage is easily over come by the advantages that come from an open platform.
A closed echo system has its advantages as well, but given the opportunity apple would be more than happy to control everything you do with your phone. Flash is a prime example, if apple could they would keep you from using flash ever again, not because that is what is best for you, its because it is one way apple can control you and make more money at your expense.
I believe flash is one more reason apple hates Android so much, because Steve Jobs in a maniacally ego driven rant declared flash dead. Now thanks to Android by next year there will be more fully flash capable phones than not, and eventually apple will have to cave.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
What a crock. IOS updates have been laggy failures on old hardware. Siri is not available on old hardware, and other features of IOS have not been made available to older hardware.
Saying it's bad because new versions of android can't run on older hardware is bull****, but trying to say it's not true for IOS is bigger bull****.
And funny, the guy seems to have cherry-picked some of the worst possible Android device examples.
Admittedly, he limits it to US carriers, and - well, they are the worst since they insist on customized devices that often don't get updates their international brethren receive.
Look at the I9000 and I9100 - both are almost identical to the Captivate and I777 respectively, but they get FAR more frequent updates. #*#[email protected])*#[email protected])#[email protected] AT&T.
The only real advantage for Apple is that they can and will tell a carrier that wants to exert control over the handset to go **** themselves. As others have pointed out, in many cases, iOS has serious issues with backwards compatibility - upgrading a non-S iPhone 3G to iOS 4 would cause it to be a laggy piece of ****.
Whereas Android 2.3 was on many devices a performance and battery management improvement, and if it wasn't - unlike iOS nothing prevents you from flashing back.
I could care less about iOS. Granted the article was definitely a hack job at Android from a Apple Fanboi. No matter that though, there is definitely truth to the article as well as setiment stated here that American carriers are asswipes when it comes to updates.
I have an AT&T family plan, with my SGS2 and three Iphone 4s. I wouldn't give up my Android if Steve came back from the grave and begged, but I wouldn't ask my less than tech savvy wife, daughter, or lazy son to give up their Apple. Both have a place, and we each have a preference. I had an original Captivate, which was, for me, absolutely awesome. It wasn't because AT&T made it so, it was because I took the time and effort to learn about Android, and used the tools available to keep up to date with the OS. I sold my Cappy when I got the SGS2, and sold it for more than I paid for it. To me, the fact that the carriers don't keep the OS up to date is just a minor inconvenience. I have the skills, and with Android, the ability, to utilize whatever hardware I happen to own to its maximum capability. Try that with an Iphone. Not gonna happen.
The original article is full of facts, but doesn't really contribute to the truth. Android is only as good as the hardware you run it on. Same with iOS. If you choose not to purchase bleeding edge hardware, you cannot expect the OS to run well. Try running Windoze 7 on a 486 box made for XP...
When the Q was first leaked during I/O, I remember thinking immediately that it looked awesome and that I would buy it, as long as it was around $150. Bear in mind this was before it was even apparent of what it actually did, there was just a leaked product image and the notion that it was a Nexus Device. I was dissapointed with the price at first, but can see that Google blew their budget on the design of the Q itself (just read the "Finish" description in the Play Store listing, it makes the device sound AWESOME). I have a couple of questions about the Google's decisions though and some insights on some early common questions I had as well.
First and foremost, my immediate response to the unveiling was the question "Why does it not run Google TV?". This took relatively little time to figure out though. Only days before they announced the new Sony Google TV at $200 and the even more affordable Vizio CoStar at $99. At $300, it was clear that this was not going to compete against them, cool design or not. They also were going for a different direction with this and I also believe they're putting Google TV on the back burner for now as their primary entry point into the living room. This device is obviously more reminiscent of the [email protected] showing that Google had at I/O last year, and is even strikingly similar to the Tungsten Speaker they had demoed last year, down to the LED lights, NFC pairing, and instant streaming from Google Music/What would become Play rather that streaming from the device itself. Also, the amount of testing that this device has been going through if you have been following Google Reports closely which desciribe a Bluetooth Internet connected device that was being tested in private through employees at home; you can tell that they are aiming for bigger things than Google TV with this. Personally, I'm glad as I never understood Google TV; I don't watch a lot of cable and an Android device mirrored on a TV would be more beneficial to me, as I only really want Chrome and Apps.
The second question I had came after I learned about the streamer from News sources, as I can't recall it was in the unveiling. The Nexus Q runs ICS, not Jelly Bean like the other Nexus devices. This puzzled me at first but makes sense when you understand that 4.1 really only brings graphical changes and graphical performance enhancements (seeroject Butter). The advantages of 4.1 would only come in once the Q gets a GUI, but I suppose that the gap less playback support would be useful as well. Either way, I also believe Google will update this device to 4.1 eventually for compatiblility as it is a Nexus after all.
Next, the hardware. I don't really understand why it is essentially the Galaxy Nexus under the hood rather than the Nexus 7. I guess cost would probably be the answer but isn't the Nvidia Kai platform the answer to that question? If they released it with Tegra 3, it would essentially be the Ouya "Elite" (a parallel to the Xbox 360 Elite, down to the black finish and premium features like 25w AMP). In some ways, this could be what Google had in mind when they packed it with 16GB of storage. My speculation is that the reason for this particular hardware is that it's cheaper for them to produce, as the Galaxy Nexus has been in production for so long now. The internal storage is probably because of this too.
The largest question is what Google wants this product to do exactly. Android Police had some interesting ideas that this could become your central [email protected] hub of sorts, and sync with all your other Android powered fixtures in the future (like the bulbs last year at I/O or an Android powered Nest like thermostat). The fact that it communicates directly with Google Play and doesn't rely on streaming also supports this idea, as it means that it is independent and can become the center of your future Android powered home. The superfluous ports and private testing, along with the advertised hackabity makes it seem like they are hoping for a Kinect like response from the Dev community, in which people will find out how to use it in interesting and unique ways. They most likely want to see what UI and applictions others come up with before revealing their own.
Lastly and this is something I've thought only recently is about the off-market price. The device isn't even released yet people are selling the I/O model on eBay for $229. This just speaks to the demand for this product I guess, but it means serious Devs who see potential in this device can pick it up for a relative bargain if they so desire.
So, what are your thoughts?
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.