Slashdot Mirror
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."
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?
My work here is dung.
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.
No, nobody is as lame as Verizon.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
why do we need to feature new phones?
Because the phone manufacturers and networks would love you to buy a new phone and sign a new 2 year contract. If they allowed you to upgrade your software, the only company that wins is Google.
> ... that blur the line between cellphone and home PC.
I always wanted a desktop cellphone.
This doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong if they make something great, but this just strikes me as a device that we don't need.
A cell phone (I've got an iPhone) is designed to be portable. I'm just not going to use a portable 8" tablet all the time. A cell phone should be small, but it's portable so I can whip it out at any time to look something up.
Something larger, a home PC, is too big. Even if we take something like a netbook, it's bigger than something I want to carry around all the time. I don't think there are enough people who will want to carry something that size around all the time.
I'd expect battery life to be a problem, at least if you want to keep it light.
There may be a reason that people aren't rushing to buy stuff bigger than Nokia 810s. As other cell phones get more powerful and easier to use for the web, there doesn't seem to be a big reason to carry something bigger. You quickly get to the point where a netbook would fit you better.
But something between a netbook and a cell phone? I'm skeptical of the size of that market.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Yes we totally can do that. In fact, many people already have. The hard part is writing the drivers with no hardware documentation.
1. Joe Sixpack is gonna use whatever OS is on the device they buy.
2. Commercial driver support is needed for this to avoid the hell that linux drivers can become.
People using Android on a phone do not want to mess with the OS on their appliance. For adoption to happen, people must have a smooth transition, and a cobbled-together Android distro for $HARDWARE will turn off a lot of potential users.
That said, do you really want an Android with a Razor? What could it possible need to shave?!.
Or an Android with a Chocolate, or a Blackberry? My wife would leave me in a second for a robot that takes orders and comes bearing sweets.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
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?
The CTIA 2009 conference was just a few weeks ago and there was almost no news on Android. Now we are hearing from many vendors who where there but showed and said nothing about these products. I even saw one post where a reporter had to ask about Android to find out they were going to ship an Android phone mid-2009. That same reporter noticed that this vendor was only announcing Windows Mobile 7 stuff at the show and _that_ wasn't even targetted for 2009.
Now that we are starting to see/hear about Android products and phones, it really blows me away that businesses still let Microsoft sucker them into defining their marketing. I would not like to see Google or anyone else have to resort to paying customers to pre-announce and pre-promote their products to stall or diminish the value of the partners other products. But this is classic Microsoft and not any new and improved Microsoft. They've done this in the 80s and 80s so change is not in their blood. But what is up with these companies how let them do this and take their money while allowing them to dictate what their customers want, need, or deserve? Does $$$ really buy everything including the future of your company?
It's good to see someone is finally talking about new product showing up this year. I still wonder what kinds of backroom pressure is being exerted to limit these kinds of things.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
It's my understanding that Android is a mobile OS based in Linux [wikipedia.org] 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?
The motorola razr2 v8 already comes with Linux:
https://opensource.motorola.com/sf/projects/razr2v8
Cellphone specifications are usually very closed. However, since HTC makes the T-Mobile G1, and its internals are very similar to HTC's other smartphones, it has been ported to some of them, although it is still a work in progress.
which seems counter-intuitive to the concept of an open platform
Not at all. Android can't have drivers for a technology if there's no way for its authors to get their hands on specs, short of reverse engineering each piece of hardware which is prohibitively time intensive.
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
Android is Open Source . Did you miss the memo?
Google only wins if we win. It is a symbiotic, and very healthy relationship type known as interdependence, which you may want to read about here.
Oh yeah, and one final thing. Google already won. We already won. I have a G1 running Linux with root access and the ability to cross-compile whatever kernel, libraries, and applications I want and install, boot, and use them.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
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.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
My wife would leave me in a second for a robot that takes orders and comes bearing sweets.
Fortunately for you I'm already married -- what's that honey... OK, I'll have it ready in a minute -- GTG.
Me lost me cookie at the disco.