Slashdot Mirror
High Expectations For Google Android
Several readers have pointed out recent articles discussing the development and features of Google Android. Silicon.com has what is essentially an FAQ for Android, providing the relevant basic information about it. Apcmag questions whether Google can meet the high expectations most enthusiasts have for the platform, and The Register discusses Google's claims that it will be competitive with Apple and worth the wait. We discussed a preview of Android last month. Quoting The Register:
"Google mobile platforms guru Rich Miner acknowledged that for the moment, Apple may have an advantage. After all, Steve Jobs and company have actually shipped a piece of hardware, while the first Android handset won't arrive until 'the second half of this year.' But Miner also told the crowd that Stevo hasn't treated developers as well as they deserve. 'There are certain apps you just can't build on an iPhone,' Miner said. 'Apple doesn't let you do multiprocessing. They don't let your app run in the background after you switch to another. And they don't let you have interpretive language in your iPhone apps.'"
iPhone will be hard to beat. Apple is way ahead of the curve no matter how you cut it.
Using my many years of reading Slashdot as a gauge, the enthusiasm for the Android handsets, and lack thereof for the iPhone, that are evident on this site lead me to believe that Android will flop and the iPhone will take over the mobile market. Large-scale market trends always seem to defy the common wisdom brokered by the denizens of this site.
Of course, I'm not making a prediction. Just a hunch, based on self-selected observations. My take means nothing, ultimately.
I don't think that Google really intend to try beat iphone. There is room in the phone space for more than one phone.
Get back to me when you have an honest-to-god product to sell me, not a plan for a product. Right now it's all promises.
Keep in mind that the road is littered with the bloodied corpses of alleged "iPod killers", and that the iPhone is undoubtedly the chosen scion of the same clan.
However, I do welcome any competition to the space, since a competitive market benefits everyone. Right now the competition is a wee bit on the pathetic side.
You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
Android is. The reason is the intent behind it. Android wants to keep binary executables from limiting platforms for Android phones, and as Java and .NET have shown, these days there is little reason to use native code except when the "interpreted" (which is a bad word for it) code can't access all the native APIs.
Apple wants no interpreted code so there is no way any software can get onto the iPhone that they haven't approved -- and they aren't going to approve a lot of the types of software that regular people are going to want (IM that works when they're on a phone call or surfing the net, for example).
Apple's made a huge mistake in their lockdown and with any luck Google will either beat them or force them to stop being... well... Apple. (And I say this as an iPhone and Mac user...)
It's interesting to note that iPhone doesn't allow interpreted code... while Android doesn't allow native code. Which one of these is more "open"?
From what I've seen so far, the limitations in Android are mostly technical, whereas the limitations in the iPhone SDK are mostly business. From that perspective I'd say that Android probably has a higher ceiling.
How does it feel when your product is totally pwnt before it's even released? Hundred thousand downloads of iPhone SDK within 4 days is A LOT of downloads. By June we should see some serious appage showing up, running on a real device, with a business model, brand and strong distribution channel behind it. Stakes are high, so GOOG can't throw in the towel now, but one core mistake that companies often make is they assume their competitors will stand still while they catch up. And that's just not the way it works.
No, I think you're largely right. I've watched so many "for sure" predictions become patently false on this site I've begun doing the exact opposite most of the time.
Example 1:
"OGG is the new hotness and will rule the compressed music formats."
How's that market domination working out for you? I'm glad I didn't invest my personal collection heavily in that format. Does it have a use? Absolutely. Will it ever come anywhere near matching the ubiquitous MP3 format? Nope.
Example 2:
"This is the year of Linux on the desktop!"
Mind you, this was said in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001...and so on. Are there players? Sure. Microsoft's missteps with the delays of and eventual bad user experiences with Vista and their stopping sales of XP opens a door for companies like Ubuntu, but no one's quite gotten their foot in despite your personal experiences to the contrary. Apple's been the real winner there, doubling their market share in the last few years while Linux has remained constant.
My take on Android versus iPhone (disclaimer: I'm a very happy unjailbroken iPhone user) is that they're not meant to compete with each other, at least not directly. Google offered a platform that depends on vendors to customize. Lots of potential? Sure. Lots of potential for suckage? Absolutely. Look at some of the stark differences between different Symbian and Windows Mobile devices and then tell me that Android is going to win hands-down. Hell no. Some company might be able to make phone with an interface and functionality to match the iPhone, but saying that it's better just because it's open is ridiculous. Better for who? Better for the consumer? Or better for you?
Apple offered not just a platform, but an "experience" where everything, if you'll pardon the over-used expression, just works. 99% of iPhone users aren't going to care less that software isn't GPLv3'd and you can't do whatever you want with your phone, and the sales they've racked up so far pretty much indicate that.
By the end of 2008, Slashdotters may find that they have 10 million so-called "pretentious hipsters" to deal with while they're still bitching about how bad the iPhone is. Yeah, that's me all right, a pretentious hipster. Windows/Exchange admin posting on Slashdot.
It seems like when you say "the iPhone is nothing but another phone" every Apple apologist in the world jumps all over you telling you that the iPhone is actually a full blown computer.
."
But as soon as you want to do something crazy like, say, run more than one program at once, you hear "Well, the iPhone is first and foremost a phone. .
So which is it? If I want to quit an application I imagine I am completely capable of doing so, and the iPhone runs OS X which these same people tell me is the most advanced OS around, and it ought to be perfectly capable of not giving a program in the background a lot of resources. Why is security on an iPhone suddenly such a huge deal, if its really a computer?
I guess I just don't get it.
*Gets ready to be modded -9999 Troll*
I don't want to judge Apple's practice, but I see a trend here: Reduce functionality and make sure that things work the way they are supposed to. Instead of designing the ultimate device they deliberately skipped features which would cause trouble: GPS, 3G, battery replacement. The same applies to software: Instead of implementing a feature list with many broken things which don't work too well on a mobile phone (Flash being the most prominent), they made sure that the key components work as well as they can. Mobile browse and e-mail use statistics prove them right after all. Applying the same limitations to 3rd party software just seems to be the next logical step - why would you enable them to ruin the main selling point, which still is ease of use?
I don't read replies by ACs.
The iPhone is a great phone, and IMHO without peer in the US. But being the best cellphone in the US is like being the valedictorian of summer school.
My prediction is that the iPhone will always be more stable and have a more consistent interface and user experience. It will always be a great phone. But Apple is about giving you the core features you need and knowing what to leave out. That leaving out bit burns we basement dwelling robot building slashdotters. But Apple's brilliance is giving you a great user experience, and I don't see that ever changing. To apple the iPhone will always be a closed platform (sure you can put some apps on it, but don't try to fundamentally change it). It will always be a phone or/and ipod, not a computer.
The Android is whatever people think it should be. So it's a phone, a computer, a bottle opener. etc. It will have lots of uses in lots of arenas that apple doesn't want to play in. It will allow other countries phones to really kick ass. It will also be much less consistent as lots of people code for it. To a lot of people, this is insanely exciting, and provides the first glimpse of a unified geek tool in your pocket (are you glad to see me?).
Android being free will be super attractive to phone makers, and to consumers. It will gobble up marketshare in many markets. And I suspect that Apple is just fine with that. Apple is in a great place taking the top portion of the markets they play in.
Sheldon
CPU on smart phone/PDA has capped at 600MHz for the past 6 years. This is quite sad. This has been 4 gens of Moore's Law and nothing has improved. Resolution has gone to VGA, but has dropped to QVGA. Until the smart phone processors go > 1GHz, smartphones just won't achieve the promise of the convergent device.
I think that if Google makes Android too open, it will end up like Windows Mobile - kind of a mess. Think about it - if you let developers install instant messengers as background tasks, how will you handle that in the UI? As you are typing an email, a big popup box jumps in your way? Or maybe you clutter the screen with little taskbar-like icons blinking and flashing and beeping? Then you wonder why the battery life sucks compared to when it was new, and why you keep locking up as the phone runs out of memory...
I think that limiting the device's features to keep it usable is a reasonable thing to do. Especially since usability is the main iPhone advantage. Sure, a few hard-core AIM'ers might not buy an iPhone without a backgrounding AIM client - but if the phone remains usable as a result then it is still a plus. Perhaps Apple can come up with a scheme to make exceptions for well-behaved apps...
As for interpreted languages - Apple isn't going to stop you from using Python to make your application, so long as your application cannot run arbitrary Python code. They just don't want to have an in for malware. It should be pretty easy to attack iPhones - they will all have IP addresses falling within a narrow range - only 4 carriers. If you have a signed application that simply executes arbitrary code... that sort of blows away the whole point of signing applications, doesn't it?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Apple's made a huge mistake in their lockdown and with any luck Google will either beat them or force them to stop being... well... Apple. (And I say this as an iPhone and Mac user...)
Fellow iPhone and Mac user here and I'd say... doubtful. How many times does this have to be proven? Apple does not care what geeks want. Ever since the "No wireless, less space than a Nomad" days, Apple has been mostly ignoring the geek community and making bales of money despite this. Or maybe even because of it--despite how it seems when you spend your days on Slashdot, geeks really don't make up that much of the population. And even if we spend more moeny than average, our demands (support more hardware! support more crazy apps!) would lower profit margins. You saw the roadmap event, I assume? Didja see their sales numbers? Apple could have skipped an SKD for another six months, another year, forever... and iPhones would still be selling just fine.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
What?
That doesn't even make any sense.
Apple stands to make 30% of every iPhone app that goes onto the phone.
You better damn well believe they're doing everything they can to ensure there is NO way to get any other software on their but through them.
Scripting, plug-in modules, extensions, etc all mean that there are ways to get code onto the phone after Apple has approved the software and taken money for it.
there won't ever be any android phones, android is a PLATFORM for phones. and android will beat iphone because it focuses on the developer, i don't really give a fuck if it becomes the market leader, i just want a better mobile platform.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The iPhone absolutely does allow interpreted code -- it's called JavaScript.
Which makes it all the more bizarre that they won't allow a native app to do what Safari does... but then, didn't they also dictate that you may not write a browser?
Oh, and one advantage to Android: If you really want to write native code, I don't think anything stops you getting a phone which lets you do that, and also supports the Android API.
But it seems to me, with Android, you can build any app you want, as long as it'll run in Java. With the iPhone, you can build your app in native code, but you have to write it within a bunch of arbitrary restrictions (like "no background tasks"), and Apple has the final say of what will run on your phone.
I know which one I'll be buying.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
There's nothing really bizarre about the decision at all. It is clearly there to avoid people using VMs or interpreters to circumvent the Apple AppStore's monopoly on application distribution. Whether you think this is a good or bad decision, it is not a bizarre one.
On the iPhone, which is after all a phone, whatever application you are in bows to the incoming call. iTunes fades out and you get the call. I suppose that you could prioritize everything, but just having the phone be God is currently the paradigm, and it seems to work out well for them.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.