Related
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.
At my work we are evaluating the feasibility of using some Android devices for data collection/modification purposes.
Right now we use the all too familiar (in the retail industry anyways) Symbol/Motorola Windows Mobile PDA. While these devices work, they are stuck in the past in almost every way. The always have awful resistive touch screens, often don't properly support modern WiFi encryption standards, are very expensive, slow, etc... Not to mention Microsoft has all but dropped support for Windows Mobile/CE entirely, and you have to pay Microsoft for the privilege of writing an application for the platform. Maintaining the app we use for that platform is becoming a pain, and its not going to get any better. Instead of putting any more time into the WM app, we feel its time to move on.
We have already been developing a intranet page to replace the functionality of the Windows Mobile app. What really pushed us towards Android was the fact is has a modern internet browser. This allowed us with just a bit of additional html/css/javascript to serve up a version that works fine in the Android browser. Something we tried and failed to do with the Windows CE browser. We where also able to get it working fine with a external motorola bluetooth barcode scanner for input purposes.
Our only issue now is what kind of devices are out there for this type of application? The ideal device would be about phone sized, or maybe slightly larger (small tablet even), would be a bit more ruggedized than your normal consumer electronics and have Wifi/Bluetooth (cellular functionality not required or wanted) Right now the only device I've found that meets those requirements has been the Motorola ET1 Android tablet. Am I missing some others out there?
The test devices we have been using where a modified Nook Color and a original Motorola Droid, obviously such devices would not be suitable in actual use.
In terms of size i'm sure you have heard of the galaxy note, mind you you might kill it in a comercial setting.
You probably want to google for IP67 certified devices. The Motorola DEFY+ comes to mind since it's so cheap, It also has CM7/9 support and possibly MIUI.
Hey Guys, just came across this article and thought it was a good read. Do you think Android will partner with Asus to make their own brand of tablets...will it be better for us as Android buyers in the future if Android had more control by being the hardware as well as software maker. or do you feel like this is turning them into Apple-lite
http://www.androidauthority.com/will-google-abandon-android-71483/
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
detta123 said:
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah basically..lol.
they taking the whole Asus Manufacturing Google Nexus tablet and spinning it into some crazy apocalyptic Android dying story. Android will be fine. Android growth has really actually just begun. we haven't seen nothing yet. Google needs a nexus tablet to instill confidence and optimism in Androids future. It can almost be guareenteed to attract more developers to android ecosystem. If android was dying, I'd seriously doubt they'd be making a tablet with Asus, restructured Google Play Store, and Making Google store purchases possible to be made online by anyone. All these recent moves Google has made is pointing to something big coming up.
Android for LIFE!
All of my current and future devices will continue to be android.
It is just way too much fun, IOS sucks.
If android goes away, I will go back to laptops.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
I dont even want to read that article Android brings profit and is a huge thing worldwide. Why would you abandon something like this? Of course its not Google's biggest income generator but it has so much potential and it serves as competition to Apple.
Google deciding to do some hardware manufacturing? I really like that. They probably learn from it and be able to improve the software/hardware.
There is one thing though they could do to android imho. I like some of the 3rd party GUI's that come with android devices. For example HTC Sense. They add alot of nice widgets and great looking uniform base apps.
BUT. At the price of getting important updates like ICS half a year later? No... No.
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
clouds5 said:
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Yeah i've read about that too. i dont think custom UIs need to go away. Sometimes they're great. And with tegra3 phones coming out i guess the performance wont be such an issue anymore.
But i'd love to see some change in that situation. I think updates shouldnt be delayed more than 1 month. Not like half a year.
The article is the usual blog filler; title is admittedly clickbait. Then again, most news & blog sites have SEO'ed titles to varying degree. Yellow journalism used to be on the fringe. Now, it's the way to get clicks. That's the cost of "free" content.
Idle gossip aside, Google's strategy for tablet adoption has not worked. It will need to do something, and soon. We should know by Google I/O in June, if not earlier.
IMO, the rumors presently circulating--direct-sale of cheapo tablet & online store--aren't enough. The problems are more fundamental, and are myriad. To me, what's discouraging aren't the obstacles, but that I haven't seen any signal from Google leadership that they recognize the scope of the obstacles.
At any rate, Android won't suffer the fate of WebOS. It's entrenched on phones, and its open-source distribution will allow it to live on as a "hobbyist" OS, if nothing else.
Things move pretty fast in this mobile market, so we won't have long to wait, one way or the other.
Trolling done wrong.
A terrible excuse for either op-ed or journalism. sigh.
Seems this kid who wrote the article didn't get the point of android....
It amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products... it generates Google accounts which can be used for the almost infinite range of Google products. It helps to spread G+ and not to mention Google ad-words..
There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand... When you use it the normal way you pretty soon notice that Android is a Google product... you are asked to create a Google account, you have a ton of Google services pre-installed etc. .
Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort. Just because it spreads Google stuff. The power you have when 50% of the smart-phones world wide run with your is is enormous... Google does not have to worry too much about branding as long as the providers don't remove the Google-Products from it...
I see it like a commenter in the article, Google Tablet to fight the Kindle Fire... because it breaks the Google-branding... not so funny for Google...
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
e.mote said:
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, the Motorola Xoom, great as it was(I owned one), was simply overpriced.
I do believe that in order to be widely accepted as being better than Apple, Google needs to seriously focus on getting better developer support. You can release the best tablet in the world, but if you do not have developer support, people will continue to flock to IOS. Lower the price of tablets while maintaining good quality standards, and gain developer support=win for Android
e.mote said:
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You make some interesting points, but I disagree that iOS is anywhere near being accepted as a PC replacement. In many important ways, Android is much farther along in this respect--access to the file system alone is one area. And, I think the idea that tablets will replace PCs is way overblown--having tried to use mine (even with the keyboard dock) as a replacement for my Windows notebook, I can testify that although some things are more convenient with tablets (like ebook reading, casual surfing, etc.), NOTHING is as efficient as with a "real" PC.
I could never do my job on any existing tablet, whether it's iOS or Android. I work with complex documents, use Photoshop for more than changing color tones, do some light video editing, etc. None of those are efficient (or even possible) on a tablet. Even the simple things like browsing, Twitter, etc., etc., are more efficient on a notebook or desktop. Again, a tablet is convenient--lightweight, long battery life, etc.--so it has its place alongside a real PC. But thinking it can replace a PC for most people is, I think, entirely unrealistic at this point.
Maybe that'll change in a few years, although I doubt even that. Seriously, who can imagine working EXCLUSIVELY on a 10" screen? And if a tablet becomes something that you plug into external monitors and keyboards and such, well then, ASUS is already mostly there with the Transformer series. And at that point what we'll have is just a more portable PC with external accessories. Once a tablet becomes complex enough in terms of network support, printing, peripheral devices like scanners, etc., then is it really a "tablet" any longer?
..........
demandarin said:
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
sparkym3 said:
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was what it was involving. thanks for pointing out those details.
Link doesn't work anymore!
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.
Saw youtube commercial that Huawei's OS will come out on the Mate 30, but if given the option, would you update the Mate 10 to it?
I'm not sure I would anymore. Before, when I was on windows mobile/palm/blackberry os, I liked those OS more than Android. I used them until I couldn't as well, but over time the lack of access to google services and having to find alternatives made using the phone less and less enjoyable. So even if the "hype" over Huawei's OS being "better", I'm not sure I want to switch and put up with the struggle I did with the previous OSes that ended up failing.
I get that in China, this isn't an issue because Google services were never really available to them, but it has for the rest of the world. So would people on XDA switch even if they had to sideload and manually update all their apps each time?
I've had the same experience in the past with windows phones so don't think I'll go down the same road again. Think I'll carry on with android on my Mate 10Pro and see how things develop. I'll probably look to change away from Huawei when I upgrade, which is a shame because I've really liked the camera & battery life.
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
No, without Google services Huawei would be a dead issue for me, and it's debatable wether Huawei would have access to AOSP either, as some of the core system are still the IP of Google and without them there would be no apps. Having to side load apps (if they would even work) would mean no updates unless you wanted to manually download and install everything when you wanted to update things (no thanks). Unless this stuff gets settled Huawei is without a license to use ARM core designs in their chipsets, no Bluetooth (US company), no Wi-Fi (also a US company), no Microsoft for their laptops, in effect Huawei will have no market for anything outside of China.
Wish I knew how to add a poll but this section of xda doesn't get much traffic now anyhow.
Saw oppo had a 5x zoom like the p 30 pro? Might be using it next but what difference is it? One Chinese company to another Chinese company?
For me, it depends on the OS and the apps it supports. I too came from Symbian, Meego, Windows and BB before using Android and iOS.
With the duopoly these 2 systems have, it's hard for a new OS to get developers to build apps and users won't come in without the apps. A vicious circle that's hard to break. A new OS can break in only when a group of popular companies come together to build and support the platform.
The only Google apps I use are Maps and YouTube. There are alternatives for both and so, it's not a deal-breaker for me.
Sent from my BLA-A09 using Tapatalk