T-Mobile To Launch Android Tablet

nandemoari writes "T-Mobile is planning to use Google's open source operating system 'Android' on devices that blur the line between cellphone and home PC. In addition, Samsung says they will also produce Android phones, but need to work out the kinks first. Both announcements come shortly after HP revealed that it is investigating the idea of using Android to power some of its low-cost netbook computers in place of Windows."

Comments

Why Not Existing Phones? Am I Missing Something?

[eldavojohn]

It's my understanding that Android is a mobile OS based in Linux so why do we need to feature new phones? Can't we take an already popular model (like the Chocolate or Razr or whatever the devil it is the kids consume these days) and just compile it down to match the architecture and write the drivers for the devices on the phone?

I mean, I've got Linux running on my Nintendo DS from a community effort and it seems to support much of the DS' devices like the touch screen. You're telling me Google or Samsung or interested parties couldn't do the same for an existing phone? Am I missing something regarding hardware requirements? I mean, I know it uses Java libraries for the applications but a lot of existing phones should be beefy enough for that, right?

been debating: iPhone versus Android

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been debating on learning to write software for the iPhone or the Android OS. I'm thinking if T-Mobile has a nice tablet PC based on Android that this will probably make me decide to go with Android since it uses technologies I already know how to work with.

Re:been debating: iPhone versus Android

[nicolas.kassis]

Rhodes is a ruby framework that lets you write apps that run on all the major mobile platforms. While you won't be able to make a Quake port with it. For the many apps it's very suitable.

Re:been debating: iPhone versus Android

[mjwx]

I've been debating on learning to write software for the iPhone or the Android OS. I'm thinking if T-Mobile has a nice tablet PC based on Android that this will probably make me decide to go with Android since it uses technologies I already know how to work with.

At this stage I'd go with Android simply because of the fact that there are more Android devices planed. From HTC the G1/Dream is released and the G2/Magic is slated for release mid year. Samsung have claimed to have an Android device out by EOY, Nvidia is working on a mobile device claiming it will run Winmo and Android. Motarola may still be working on Android devices as well (but rumours are their Android team was diminished by the financial apocalypse). Android will have better numbers compared to the iphone at this stage and I think that the people who don't care about phone aesthetics or OS (most phone purchasers) will end up with an Android device in a few years due to the fact that Google are trying to make the OS accessible to manufacturers however it will take some time for Android to grow in numbers.

In addition to this, Apple have set up their App store to cater to large software development houses, independent developers will be forced out via attrition. Very few developers have actually made money from the appstore considering the cost of entry, Android marketplace is US$25 + your time. Further more Apple will maintain dictatorial control over the appstore reserving the right to refuse publication of your app or even yank an published app for any reason. Granted that Google can pull apps from the Android Marketplace but you can publish your app on your own website and people can still install it from there as Android is not restricted to the Android Marketplace.

Re:Orthogonal

[Deag]

Well verizon are selling something like that

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/vzhub/overview.jsp

Marketing is not technology

[xzvf]

A more important question is why Android? To answer my own question, it is marketing and the value of attaching Google to the phone. Doesn't matter that the phone runs Linux, what matters is the phone is attached to Google. It is an interesting shift in ownership of mobile phones. The iPhone is an Apple product, not an AT&T phone. Will Google follow the MS PC model and like Windows PC by Dell will become Android phone by Samsung?

Re:Marketing is not technology

[Locutus]

I'm not sure the phone/OS being attached to Google is a big deal or game changer. What we're seeing is not phone vendors selling phones to the public but Telco's still selling phones tied to their networks. Apple controls the iPhone OS much like Microsoft controls the OS for some phones. but, the difference with Android is that vendors are allowed to take Android outside its basic design. For instance, Microsoft, for over a decade would not let vendors change the desktop UI phone users saw on their WindowsCE/PocketPC/Mobile phones. Only late last year after much complaining from one vendor did Microsoft allow the vendor to define what the UI looked like for the customer. Microsoft also dictated the screen resolution. Android give alot of power/control to the device or telco vendor and also provides alot of backend stuff with the application store end of it. Unfortunately, we're finding out that the Telco's are still given ways to block apps so Android is not yet the "user" friendly phone platform. Telco's like a massive amount of control and they are still getting it.

LoB

Re:Marketing is not technology

[the_macman]

You've touched on something I've been trying to understand for a while. I'm a big proponent of OSS. When I first heard about Android I figured it would be similar to Linux except on my cellphone. From what I've seen it's the same old bullshit as usual. Tied to certain carriers, certain apps are blocked, etc.
 
Would someone with an android phone or maybe an android dev explain what exactly is open source about it?