Google Revs Android, FCC Approves First Phone

Cycon writes "Google has announced, 'We're releasing a beta SDK. You can read about the new Android 0.9 SDK beta at the Android Developers' Site, or if you want to get straight to the bits, you can visit the download page.' A new Development Roadmap has also been released to help developers understand the direction the software is taking (as this is still only a Beta release). In addition, the FCC has approved the HTC Dream, and it is believed Google and T-Mobile will launch the phone in the US on November 10, since a confidentiality request attached to the application asks the FCC to keep details secret until that date."

Comments

iPhone appstore killer.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Compare the iPhone's walled garden approach to this:

All applications are equal

Android does not differentiate between the phone's basic and third-party applications -- even the dialer or home screen can be replaced.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to get troll-rated into oblivion for this, but how is it different from few dozen window mangers for Linux - arguably one of the main reasons why the community is so fragmented and the interface standard still lagging behind proprietary systems?

Choice is often overrated. A team of professional interface designers should make the choice for me instead of giving me tons of options to figure out.

Android is a cute gimmick that's going to make an initial splash and then fade away into obscurity. And knowing Google's mantra of perpetual beta products, I'm going to guess that the project will be kept on life support forever, eventually ending up on cellphones in developing nations.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Choice is often overrated. A team of professional interface designers should make the choice for me instead of giving me tons of options to figure out.

I couldn't agree with you more!

The choice between MS, Apple & Linux is superfluous. Let's go with the most popular choice - that way developers can concentrate on one platform.

The choice between Firefox & Safari on OSX is superfluous. Apple's team of professional interface designers should make the choice for us; all those OS X users using Firefox are just delusional.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Sentry21]

That strikes me as what we in the industry call 'a recipe for disaster'. So how long until we see the first security hole that lets the payload replace the dialler and home screen (and maybe the contacts app) with apps that steal all your shit?

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

So how long until we see the first security hole that lets the payload replace the dialler and home screen (and maybe the contacts app)

You realize that there's been several security holes in the iPhone that give the attacker root access? I'm not sure why you believe Apple's closedness with regards to the appstore has improved security.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[pammon]

It's trivial to lock down. The carriers and handset makers are free to modify Android however they please, with no requirement that they release their changes, and no requirement that the open source version of Android even work on their phones.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[madsenj37]

You are on to something with your comment. Others have taken your point to the extreme. Studies have been done. People prefer some choice over not having any. People are happier when they do not have to make too may choices, however.

Some choice>No Choice
Too few choices>Too many choices.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Bert64]

Exactly... You have you "professionally" designed interface there by default, and which most people will use...

But there is still choice for those people with different requirements, some people may choose to use the phone for things the original interface developers never thought of, others may be handicapped and need a special interface, leaving the choice available is a good thing even if most users will just stick to the default.

As for so called "professional" interface designers, how many phones have you used with utterly horrendous interfaces? All of the windows mobile phones i've used had terrible interfaces that were more suited to a PDA than a phone...
And then there's interfaces which are just great for some people and some tasks, but useless for others, like the iphone which is the best phone interface i've ever used for web browsing, but is pretty useless when you want to type a text message one handed.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[HxBro]

There are plenty of phones out there that you can already replace everything on it, from cooked roms, to new dialers, new interfaces, you can even install android on some of them!

For once I like my windows mobile powered phone ;)

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[haltenfrauden27]

Yeah I mean one point one could make here is that webapps are really the killer app for cellphones. As real browsers ( read: Opera/Konqueror/Firefox ) take hold on phones, I think this will become more and more the norm.

That's particularly the case when you consider a phone is nearly always at least minimally online.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[ozmanjusri]

All of the windows mobile phones i've used had terrible interfaces that were more suited to a PDA than a phone...

All the Windows Mobile PDAs I've used had terrible interfaces that were more suited to a desktop than a PDA.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[jacquesm]

There's one more factor, monocultures are very susceptible to diseases, for virus writers/bot herders to have to choose limits the impact of their deeds.

As a rule they'll go for the lowest hanging fruit first, the more diversity there is the harder it will get for them to make a living.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[tyrione]

This is a statement about the Android software, not about the phones that run it. In other words, the real question is: replaced by whom?

Nothing in the Android license requires phone manufacturers or network operators to allow users to replace software. Google didn't get all those mobile operators on board by promising them a lack of control.

This is a statement about the Android software, not about the phones that run it. In other words, the real question is: replaced by whom?

Nothing in the Android license requires phone manufacturers or network operators to allow users to replace software. Google didn't get all those mobile operators on board by promising them a lack of control.

Exactly right. Apple didn't like handing control of their platform over to Verizon and Verizon wasn't interested in anything but controlling the platform so Apple courted them all and AT&T seizing on the platform's upside took the risk and has seen profits ever since. This also motivated more Fortune 1000 companies to do business with AT&T for showing they were willing to work with Apple.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[mk2mark]

There's choice, and there's having to circumvent a ban on native applications. While I agree that a user interface should be simple (the rule about being able to understand a program's functions after a few minutes of said interface springs to mind), I certainly don't think that should extend to denying people the ability to have a preference. Which is what we seem to be talking about.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Mr_Silver]

The choice between Firefox & Safari on OSX is superfluous. Apple's team of professional interface designers should make the choice for us; all those OS X users using Firefox are just delusional.

I know what you're getting at, but there is another side to this.

I own a Topfield freeview PVR. It's a great device because it supports the development of TAP's - applications which can either compliment or replace functionality on the box.

For me, this means I have timers (which are a poor-man's season pass/series link, but something very few other boxes have), a really good channel browser, advert skipper, more features for handling recorded programmes etc.etc.

The problem is, that all these extras/replacements have different look and feel, user interface and flow. Some people have made a good effort - others have whipped out Microsoft Paint and knocked something up. For example, the actions of the colours buttons are inconsistent, even right down to exiting a screen and being asked to save changes (some say "do you want to discard?", others say "do you want to keep?" - both with yes/no buttons).

So whilst I have a tonne of great functionality provided by lots of dedicated people, the UI is a complete mess.

Re:iPhone appstore killer.

[Sloppy]

What the hell is the world coming to, that the inability to install software is somehow seen as a virtue and the ability is a 'recipe for disaster'?!

If users don't want to run malware, then they should stop running malware. Yes, some people will go on running malware because that's their culture. Well, fine. But why the fuck should those people hold everyone else back?

In denial?

[zdude255]

I wonder if Google will still deny they are working on a phone.

Re:In denial?

[strider44]

Since Google Android has a web site and has had for at least a year ... I'd say no.

Of course they're not actually working on a phone, just software for phones.

I think this stuff should all be spun off

[jacquesm]

Google is becoming more and more like a christmas tree, the main trunk of which seems to be interconnecting information about all the users they've got in their various services.

Pretty soon they'll know your current location, what you've been searching for all your life, who you've been talking to and what you had for breakfast, as well as the contents of your email and your various documents.

That much information in the hands of one party is asking for trouble, either because they'll have a breach sooner or later (hopefully later) or because they find new 'creative' uses for all that data about you.

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[QuantumG]

Or you could choose not to use Google.

The rest of us shouldn't have to suffer for your paranoia.

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[Ihmhi]

Pretty soon they'll know your current location, what you've been searching for all your life, who you've been talking to and what you had for breakfast, as well as the contents of your email and your various documents.

Good, maybe Google can help me find a girlfriend who isn't a crazy whore.

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[jacquesm]

hello again,

I'm not stopping you from getting on with your life or using/enjoying googles free services, far from it, I wish you great enjoyment :)

To label me a 'paranoid freak' for not being 100% gullible about what google is going to do with all that data, and noting that you do not speak for more people than yourself (even though plenty might agree with your, but then again, they might agree with me too) is not exactly friendly.

I've worked for some a big corporation that was datamining the hell out of whatever information they had in order to improve their sales, privacy be damned. I was young and ignorant then, and didn't even realize how wrong it was, but I've gotten a bit more skeptical since then.

I doubt google is much different, the bottom line is what matters to them. The product of google is not search or applications like email or maps, the product is their knowledge about you, the user and to capitalize on that knowledge.

I remember this episode:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/06/08/google-research-prototypes-ambient-audio-contextual-content/

And the double click acquisition as well as the amount of pressure that had to be put on google to get them to (finally!) place a privacy policy on their site.

So, how about we do a little wager, say 1,000 euros that before 2015 there will be some major (say > 1000 accounts) breach of privacy that will have googles accumulated user data at its core ?

This would include inadvertent leaks, disclosure of such records to authorities, outright data theft, identity theft and such.

Since I'm just a 'paranoid freak' and you're speaking for 'the rest of us' and you're pretty sure that google is collecting that data in a responsible manner with no chance of mishap whatsoever that should not be a hard decision.

take it ?

    greetings,

      Jacques Mattheij

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[Dhalka226]

I think the OP's problem with you is your headline and what seems to be your conclusion: That these services should be "spun off" because too much information in one company's hands is asking for trouble. The only logical way that makes a difference is if these new, spun-off companies/divisions can't talk to one another or share that data. If that weren't the case, it would be the same situation we have now that you're objecting to.

With that in mind, there's an argument to be made that Google couldn't offer the same level of service without the same level of information, due either to the fact that the information is the price they ask you to pay for their otherwise free services or because they actually need the information to make the service itself better. Thus while you claim you only speak for yourself, you're actually proposing a solution that would impact everybody. The OP's suggestion was, in my mind, the correct one: Rather than forcing your views on everybody in that manner, if you're uncomfortable with Google having so much information about you, you should just not give it to them by not using their services.

Your concerns about privacy are valid, the decisions should just be made by each individual for himself.

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[Jedi Alec]

Hmmm....GoogleDate. Actually sounds pretty plausible. Get on it guys!

Re:I think this stuff should all be spun off

[Dragonslicer]

Done and done

The new PC vs MAC

[religious freak]

Remember when MSFT was the one promoting openness, as compared to the evil Apple and IBM empires?

I wouldn't be surprised to see a repeat, but with Google in the role of the open system, ala Android. It'll be interesting to watch the clean, sleak and confined iPhone go against the more likely open and flexible Android.

If history is any indication, I think Google wins.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

It'll be interesting to watch the clean, sleak and confined iPhone go against the more likely open and flexible Android.

Depends. It will be a short race if we're watching the clean, sleek and confined iPhone go against the clean, sleek, open and flexible Android....

Frankly tho', I'm surprised at the number of posters on this site who seem to believe we're going to be looking at a contest between Apple & Google for the smartphone king crown.

Is it American chauvinism that makes so many here discount RIM & Nokia?

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[mbaciarello]

Google Earth.

Glad you mentioned it.

I can't comment on how open that app is, as I don't know enough about its inner workings. However, though I'm no IT professional, if I wanted to take a look at its code, I wouldn't know where to find it. I just know that if I want to measure anything that's not a series of segments I'm gonna have to buy the Pro version.

Anyway, get this: GMaps for the iPhone is practically unusable in my first language, which is not English. It keeps reporting results that are tens of km away. At the same time, the web version (yes, the one that shows you ads) is working fine for me.

Why are results different? Could it be that they're not working as hard on GMaps for a competing platform as they are on their own?

And where's the Google Mobile app for non-American users? We've known the iPhone would be sold in other countries for months now. Surely they are working as hard on GMobile for the iPhone as they are on Android, right?

All apps and platforms and users are equal, right?

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Serious Callers Only]

Remember when MSFT was the one promoting openness, as compared to the evil Apple and IBM empires?

No, I don't.

I do remember how they screwed over their suppliers (QDOS), partners (IBM with OS 2, Sun with Java, PlaysForSure etc), and customers though(WinME, PlaysForSure). Also how they steamrollered the industry into the near monopoly monoculture we have today (Contracts forbidding BeOS or Linux on OEM machines, binary formats etc). Nice job rewriting history though.

Worked out well for them till people got tired of being screwed over and paying for mediocre knock-offs of other people's ideas.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Znork]

Is it American chauvinism that makes so many here discount RIM & Nokia?

I suspect it's more a question of what hype you're buying into. Personally I don't find either platform particularly compelling (nor am I particularly impressed by RIM & Nokia). Call it a decades worth of weariness at more or less semi-proprietary offerings that never seem work quite right.

I find the Openmoko far more interesting; I'm sure it'll be... difficult... in the beginning, but the potential for actually evolving into something entirely new (rather than what some particular 'Vision' dictates) makes it something I'll throw some money at.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Nursie]

Again, US centric.

Over here in the UK I have yet to see an iPhone. I know that the girlfriend of one of my friends has one, but that's it.

Nokia is the dominant force in this market.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Nursie]

You haven't heard of blackberry?

Or the company that broke 40% market share in the mobile handset market earlier this year?

Which rock have you been under? It must be a big one.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[jacquesm]

Second that. I've had plenty of Nokia phones and I'm really quite tired of the sloppy workmanship (3rd headset in as many months, menu key just sort of dropped off the phone, and really all I do is have it in my pocket) as well as the lousy software.

The first series nokias are why people are still buying them today, those things were indestructible and reliable. It takes a while to destroy a brand of that size, but they'll get there.

THe openmoko is the most interesting thing happening in the telco space in 10 years, far more interesting than the iphone (to me at least).

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[mdwh2]

As another UK poster, same here. I've never seen one, I don't know anyone who has one. I know someone who thought about maybe getting either an Iphone or another phone, but that's it.

And yes, we can happily use our phones to browse the web, send emails, listen to music, use 3G, and have done for years. We also send pictures, do video recording, run generic applications that are compatible across most phones, and don't have to retype manually if we want to copy some text. That's on cheapo phones, before you even get to smart phones. I've heard that phone technology isn't as good in the US - perhaps that's why I don't understand what all the Iphone hype is about.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[mdwh2]

Nokia makes...oh shit, no one in the general public can tell you a single model number of a Nokia.

People know that Nokia makes phones. The model numbers are irrelevant. I'd bet that more people know that Nokia makes phones, than know that Apple makes phones. You might as well complain that people can't name a particular model of Macintosh, or a particular model of a Dell PC.

No one "cares" about their Nokia, people "love" their iPhones.

Most people care about their phone. There just seems to be something peculiar about the Iphone and Slashdot that makes some people hype it up as something better than all other phones ever.

And, hell, Android? Man, no one has even heard of it.

So what? Last time I looked, people had heard of Google. And unlike Apple or most other companies, they seem to have achieved massive brand awareness with hardly any advertising.

Re:The new PC vs MAC

[Chineseyes]

Is it American chauvinism that makes so many here discount RIM & Nokia?

How do people like this get modded insightful??

I can't speak about RIM but I have owned a dozen Nokia phones over the past 10 or so years and they sucked or were decent but nothing great. About six months ago I purchased an HTC tytn and it is leaps and bounds better than anything Nokia ever put out. I think the iphone is ridiculously overrated but I used one and it was still better than anything Nokia has put out yet. This has nothing to do with "American chauvanism" and it has everything to do with Nokia having a very long track record of putting out half ass products.

November doesn't mean November... remember iPhone?

[jsharkey]

Remember that Apple requested requested a lengthened period from the FCC for the iPhone, but they launched about 3 weeks before that date. A November date for Android doesn't preclude an earlier launch.

All Android Needs to Succeed

[Nom du Keyboard]

All Android needs to succeed is to not be the a**holes Apple is about SDK's and 3rd party apps. Do that and the world will be full of Android users saying to iPhone users: "Can your much more expensive phone to this yet?"

The made a big deal about the big buck$$$ iPhone displaying the I Am Rich jewel. I guess Apple didn't want competition for their own Apple I Buy Things When They're New And Expensive And Still Have Bugs logo on the phone.

Re:All in all, another brick outside The Wall

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Anyone can grow a garden at home. Yet still may people seek to attend the carefully cultivated gardens of botanical centers around the globe, and gladly pay to do so...

You totally missed the point. I wasn't saying that Android's an appstore killer because of homebrew development.

The difference is that the ecosystem of paid, professional developers for Android will be able to do things like:

* Add copy/paste functionality (if missing)
* Develop an unrestricted skype / SIP phone application.
* Develop apps that run in the background.
* Allow applications to be installed without the vendor's approval.
* etc, etc etc.

Why do people assume it will be open?

[pammon]

What makes people think that the mobile network operators, who have resisted this sort of openness in their handsets before, will embrace it now? Nothing in the Android license requires them to do so.

Apple had to struggle to find a single carrier willing to allow the iPhone. Google showed up with six. You don't get six times as many carriers by promising them less control.

Re:All in all, another brick outside The Wall

[Anonymous Coward]

Except the iPhone is not like the carefully cultivated gardens of botanical centers. It is like Monsanto(TM) corn that has been genetically modified to be sterile, and comes with a license agreement.

And you sir missed mine

[SuperKendall]

You totally missed the point. I wasn't saying that Android's an appstore killer because of homebrew development.

I didn't miss your point. I pointed out, there are many points.

The difference is that the ecosystem of paid, professional developers for Android will be able to do things like:

* Add copy/paste functionality (if missing)
* Develop an unrestricted skype / SIP phone application.
* Develop apps that run in the background.
* Allow applications to be installed without the vendor's approval.
* etc, etc etc.

And all those are great - for some people. But are not needed - for some people.

After all you're already splitting hairs with end users on many points in your bullet list - does an end user care new IM notifications come from an external server? No. Do they really care if they can't get incredibly sucky VOIP over 3G and find WiFi instead to use Skype, those 1% of users that actually will seek out other ways to talk using voice on a PHONE? No. Do end users care what a developer must do to get an application? No, they see the applications before them. And developers can run anything they like on a phone without any restriction whatsoever for just $99.

There are some people that demand all those things, and many people who would consider they have them with an iPhone already, or at least the ones they care about.

The whole copy paste thing is so tired. It was debunked the first day someone used an iPhone. Would it be handy sometimes? Sure. But the device is perfectly usable without it because many data channels where you would normally use cut&paste are wired to funnel data as you desire (like emailing a web page link).

many carries are open, Apple is not

[speedtux]

What makes people think that the mobile network operators, who have resisted this sort of openness in their handsets before, will embrace it now?

T-Mobile, Cingular, AT&T, and others have allowed unrestricted, fully programmable handsets on their networks for many years.

Apple's iPhone is a huge step backwards in terms of openness. Apple's misrepresentation of the facts is adding insult to injury.

Apple had to struggle to find a single carrier willing to allow the iPhone.

That's because the iPhone is locked down and controlled by Apple. If the iPhone were as open as Palm, Symbian, or Windows Mobile, every major carrier would be shipping it.

I mean, people have been unlocking the iPhone and using it on other carriers. The carriers didn't complain, Apple did.

Re:many carries are open, Apple is not

[pammon]

If the iPhone were as open as Palm, Symbian, or Windows Mobile, every major carrier would be shipping it.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that the carriers rejected the iPhone because they thought its closed nature would make it unsuccessful in the market? Or maybe they were making a moral stand for consumer openness?

A more likely explanation is that the iPhone took control from the carriers and gave it to Apple. Consumers, empirically, ended up somewhat better off.

I mean, people have been unlocking the iPhone and using it on other carriers. The carriers didn't complain, Apple did.

Carriers complained bitterly about unlocking. It took a class action lawsuit and a visit to the Supreme Court to end AT&T's policies against unlocking. If they've been quiet about iPhone unlocking, it's only because they've lost that battle.

Apple has to make a good faith effort to prevent unlocking as part of their contract with AT&T. To Apple, an unlocked phone is another sale, and they have no reason to care if you do so.

Re:many carries are open, Apple is not

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you saying that the carriers rejected the iPhone because they thought its closed nature would make it unsuccessful in the market? Or maybe they were making a moral stand for consumer openness?

Carriers rejected the iPhone because Apple wanted a monthly revenue sharing agreement.

A gate vs. nothing

[SuperKendall]

You realize that there's been several security holes in the iPhone that give the attacker root access?

There will always be ways around security defenses. You can climb over a gate, yet people still install them. Why?

It's because it's foolish to do nothing and invite the worst.

Thankfully of course Android does do something in terms of app sandboxing. So the real question is have they struck the right balance by being more open to start with?

I think you missed your own point

[Namarrgon]

The whole copy paste thing is so tired. It was debunked the first day someone used an iPhone... the device is perfectly usable without it

Your own usage may not require copy & paste, but many other tasks are tedious and impractical, if not impossible without it.

I have an iPod Touch and it's great for many things, but the lack of copy & paste is the #1 reason the iPhone is (still) not on my radar this time round.

Re:I think you missed your own point

[Ihmhi]

I have an iPod Touch and it's great for many things, but the lack of copy & paste is the #1 reason the iPhone is (still) not on my radar this time round.

Well, you could always post on 4chan from a laptop...

Re:Your Money Mistake

[Namarrgon]

The iPhone's SDK is free to download - but you have to pay $99 if you want to actually distribute your application.

I'm not aware of any fees for Android distribution.

Re:you got it backwards

[Anonymous Coward]

This about linux is truth, indeed. I was shocked myself some month ago.
Point of most common choice being best is definitely wrong taken. You BEST developers, not quantity of them from all sides.

I bought new laptop without OS preinstalled. Because of some timeline issues I booted up Ubuntu linux and in 15 minutes I had fully operational PC, including function keys, wireless (802.11n!) and LAN, OpenOffice and Firefox out of the box. I did not touch any settings when it booted up. 15 MINS!

Then after few days I decided it's time to go to.. Vista, it took me 7-8 hours effectively to install, find all drivers and make everything working normally.

Android will only run low res Java apps

[ad454]

Consider the iPhone, which despite being so crippled, a developer can still create and compile some native application for it, and install it via iTunes store or jailbreak.

Google has decided TO BAN ALL NATIVE APPLICATIONS for its Android phones, and only allow Java.

http://code.google.com/android/kb/general.html
Q: Can I write code for Android using C/C++?
A: Android only supports applications written using the Java programming language at this time.

As a crypto developer, this means that my applications, which deal with complex CPU intensive cryptography that are not fully supported by any Java libraries, will never run on Android, even though I can port them to the iPhone, Windows Mobile, PalmOS, etc.

In addition, Android devices are only allowed to have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) resolution displays, which is half the screen resolution of the iPhone HVGA (320x480). Some Microsoft Windows Mobile phone even have full VGA (480x640) or WVGA (480x800) displays. This will also limit the usefulness and functionality of applications running on Android compared those other smart phones.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[Cycon]

Consider the iPhone, which despite being so crippled, a developer can still create and compile some native application for it, and install it via iTunes store or jailbreak. Google has decided TO BAN ALL NATIVE APPLICATIONS for its Android phones, and only allow Java.

Surely we will end up seeing "jailbroken" Android phones. If you are willing to consider a jailbroken iPhone as a legitimate target platform, you should know that people are already working on (and have met some success with) building and executing C and C++ applications on the Android emulator.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[Anonymous Coward]

In addition, Android devices are only allowed to have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) resolution displays

This is completely incorrect. The emulator has always supported QVGA and HVGA displays. The current UI is designed for a touchable HVGA display. There is nothing in the system that prevents scaling up to even higher resolution displays (which is a lot easier than scaling down to lower resolution displays).

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[fabs64]

Cryptography? Like.. Maths? Yeah.. unless you're writing optimised assembly it's going to make very little difference what language you write it in, particularly on a device like a phone.

And that's not even going into the fact that most of these phones are likely to run Java bytecode natively anyway...

Also, the Java based framework not supporting native applications is not the same thing as native applications being banned.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[FlashBuster3000]

> Android devices are only allowed to have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) resolution displays

What the hell are you talking about resolutions?
Surely android is not designed for only a few resolutions.
In fact it is designed in such an awesome way, that you only need one binary package for every phone and resolution.
Get your facts straight, before posting bullshit, thanks.

Also, cpu intensive tasks dont belong on a phone.
Maybe you are wondering why Alias Maya wasnt ported to a phone yet. But i won't tell you why, heh...

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[pammon]

There are several things in the system that will make it difficult to scale up to higher resolution displays. One example is Android's use of integer pixel coordinates, instead of abstract floating point coordinates. By tying Android to pixels, Google ensures that application elements will appear smaller (and so less usable) on higher res displays.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[pammon]

It is rather doubtful that an Android phone will execute Java bytecode natively, given that Android doesn't use Java bytecode.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[Walles]

Android devices are only allowed to have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) resolution displays

Do you have a source for this? Searching the Android API reveals a class for keeping track of display resolution, which kind of speaks against what you're saying.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[mmurphy000]

Your crypto logic can be implemented in C/C++ just fine, using JNI to bridge into an Android application. While it is true that full applications cannot be written solely in C/C++, that doesn't mean you cannot use C/C++ outright. Admittedly, that FAQ entry is poorly written, but a simple search of the android-developers Google Group shows a fair bit of Android/JNI activity, including posts from Android core team members indicating that JNI is possible.

Android devices are only allowed to have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) resolution displays

I have no idea where you got that idea. Heck, the Android emulators by default launch as 480x320 and support skins with 320x480 and 240x320 resolutions. It's even been hinted in some presentations that Android might run on devices without screens — not that I'm completely certain how that would work (voice recognition only?).

In the future, you will get more efficient responses to your questions by posting them on an Android Google Group, rather than ranting about them on /.

Re:Android will only run low res Java apps

[SpinyNorman]

To have a GUI scale in that way (appear same but higher resolution on higher resolution display) you really need more than abstract coordinates (not float vs integer - abstract resolution independent vs pixel based). You also need a stroke (vs pixel) based graphics library like Apple's Quartz (display PDF).

No Bluetooth?

[Mr. Underhill]

Did I read that right? Android 1.0 and Android 1.0 devices won't have bluetooth? That seems like kind of a big miss.

Re:you got it backwards

[el_chupanegre]

In contrast, most people buying a Mac end up having to fiddle around for hours choosing and installing the applications they need. And many people end up buying and installing one little Macintosh hack after another to work around the limitations and annoyances of the Mac interface.

Do you actually have anything to back that up?

If we're talking 'installing hacks' you honestly think that Macs need that more than Linux? You've never had to mess with xorg.conf or samba configs then? I have to do it every single time I install Ubuntu in a virtual machine.

The only thing I've ever done on a Mac that could be considered a 'hack' of the OS is create my own keyboard mapping because I'm too used to the UK layout where " is shift+2 and @ is over near enter

So, if you want a no-hassles, consistent user interface that just works, go with a major Linux distribution, don't waste your time on the Mac.

Once again, I'm sorry but I disagree. One anecdote I have about Ubuntu and it's lack of consistency is with the system tray. All the little widgets can be right clicked and 'locked' to the bar so that you can't move them. All except the network widget that is... When I changed screen resolution (because it auto-detected the wrong one, no hassle at all right?) the network widget didn't move over with the clock, it stayed in the middle of the bar!

Since there's no way to 'unlock' it from the bar, I can't move it, so it's still stuck there now, very very annoyingly. I also can't work out a way of getting rid of it.

tell that to the first Android phone vendor

[alizard]

The Dream is said to be in compliance with Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR.

A blessing for small manufacturers.. I can't wait.

[mrboyd]

I was roaming around electronic shops in Singapore a few months back and I've seen hundredth of Chinese iphone copies. Some of them even added nice features like FM radio and TV tuners on top of an already 3G phone. Some of them look really decent from a physical point of view but in all of them the operating system and interface seemed clumsy and literally rushed out of the door when compared to a UIQ, Windows Mobile or Iphone.

It's not that difficult to put together a physical phone since most chipsets are fully integrated little marvel. Building an operating system and all the applications a user expects takes a while. Polishing them until they shine, ala apple, takes even longer.

Now I am just wondering what will happen, if Google keep its promises, when those manufacturers will get access to the Android system for free. I saw at least 5 or 6 iclones that I would gladly use if the system was decent. It could very well be a revolution.

Re:you got it backwards

[Bitsy Boffin]

I think you are talking about the Network Applet (nm-applet ?). That is a Notification widget and as such is displayed in the Notification Bar along with similar icons like the Update notifications. You should be able to grab the handle of the notification bar (which will be to the left of the icon) and drag it as required (and lock it if necessary).

iPhone SDK appears to require a Mac and a company

[tepples]

The iPhone SDk is free to download.

But it costs roughly $1,000 to run: $600 for a Mac mini, $200 to add RAM, a KVM switch, and other things to make your Mac mini usable, $100 to unlock your iPod Touch or iPhone, and $100 for shipping and taxes.

the (again free) ADC account used to access the official SDK

I tried to register for an ADC account using my personal Apple ID. I got stopped when the form refused to submit because "company" was blank. Was it trying to imply that I have to start a company and apply on its behalf in order to get an ADC account?

The iPhone wins for most development at that point since you have a nice compact UNIX system and can use C to develop which hackers generally are more used to than Java.

Android wins because you can run the JDK on your existing Windows or Linux hardware instead of having to buy a Mac.