Why the Google Android Phone Isn't Taking Off

Hugh Pickens writes "Farhad Manjoo writes in Slate that while the iPhone commands nearly 14 percent of smartphone sales and BlackBerry about 21 percent, Android has only 3 percent. And even though Android is far friendlier to developers, it has failed to attract anywhere near the number of apps now clogging the iPhone. Manjoo writes that Google went wrong by giving handset manufacturers and carriers too much control over the design and marketing of Android phones so there is no idealized 'Google phone' — instead, Android devices get names like the T-Mobile G1 or the myTouch 3G, and each is marketed separately and comes with its own distinct capabilities and shortcomings. 'Outside handset manufacturers lack ambition — -none of them even seems to be trying to match the capabilities of the iPhone, let alone to knock us down with features that far surpass those of Apple's device,' writes Manjoo. 'A smart handset manufacturer could build a top-of-the-line Android device that outshines Apple's phone in at least a few areas — better battery life, a much better Web browser, a brighter or bigger screen, faster or more functional controls... something that might help Android inspire gadget lust. But so far, that's not happening.' John Gruber echoes this advice and adds this advice to Android manufacturers: 'If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.'"

Comments

"It's the Network"

[Stupendoussteve]

The G1 and myTouch are nice, unfortunately they're on T-Mobile, which is nice but not nice everywhere. If T-Mobile worked in my area I would certainly try them out, at least.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Doctor_Jest]

That's my problem. T-mobile has some craptacular coverage out where I live.. (and it's even hit and miss closer to the big city...) I'd rather them get some decent coverage (and I hate AT&T as much as I do Microsoft.) But what's funny is that I'm not interested in an iPhone, even though I'm a mac-head. (I have 4 Macs of varying ages... evenly split between Intel and PowerPC.) I guess I'm not the target demographic, but I wouldn't hazard a guess as to what that demographic might be (I'll leave that to marketeers and the like.)

Here's to hoping T-Mobile fixes their service issues (to bring them on par with the AT&T/Verizon ubiquity.) Oh, and hopefully they won't lose customer data again. :)

Re:"It's the Network"

[TheGreenNuke]

Agreed. Most people I know consider T-Mobile a second rate carrier and the only thing holding them back from getting the G1 or myTouch. It would be interesting to see what happened if they started selling them unlocked thus allowing them to be used on AT&T's network for some (closer to) direct competition with the iPhone.

Re:"It's the Network"

[LWATCDR]

In the US that is tied to the lack of CDMA support. You have four major players. Number 1 Verizon and number 3 Sprint are CDMA. Number two AT&T is GSM but has the iPhone. That leaves only number four to push Android. Add in that HTC is heavy into Windows Mobil and you have a not great phone on the number four carrier. Too bad they didn't include CDMA from the start and got a phone maker like Samsung, LG, or Motorola the be the exclusive hardware partner.

Re:"It's the Network"

[sadler121]

An unlocked Android phone will only work on GSM/GPRS/EDGE. T-Mobile and AT&T use different frequency allocations for UMTS, UMTS 850/1900 for AT&T and 2100/1700 MHz for TMobile. What would be great is if we can get a quad band Android phone that supported those frequencies, but as of yet, there is none.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System#Spectrum_allocation

Re:"It's the Network"

[TheGreenNuke]

Wasn't aware they weren't quad band. So they update the hardware when they start selling them unlocked. Can't increase the cost that much. Three years ago I got a free dumb phone that's quad band.

Re:"It's the Network"

[ickleberry]

Buy an unlocked phone and it will be on whatever network you want, I will never understand why people still buy phones through the network. Phone networks are no charities, you will definitely end up paying back the full value of the phone in the form of overpriced contracts and roaming charges. but people like to fool themselves into thinking they're getting a good deal

I was on the Isle of Man a few days ago and bought a sim card for my unlocked E63 and went on the interwebs for 1p a MB, if I was using my SIM from back home i'd be paying that per kb. My phone is also completely devoid of any firmware restrictions or carrier branding.

Unfortunately in the states the networks have done such a good job at passing off the idea that the phone, plan and network are so intrinsically related that most people there even on GSM networks don't know that a SIM card exists. and with the advent of the iPhone and the likes of Huawei making Vodafone-branded phones they are trying the same shit in Europe. The openness of GSM/3G is a great thing and I don't want to lose it

Re:"It's the Network"

[Darkness404]

But do you think Verizon would even -allow- a phone with Android to run? I mean, I've compared the same dumb phone (I think it was the Razr) across AT&T Sprint and Verizon, the AT&T and Sprint phones were pretty good but the Verizon phone was pretty much neutered to the point where they can't do anything beyond changing the background, changing it from ring to vibrate and using the camera. Verizon is -terrible- when it comes to phones, they might have the "network" but when all the phones are total crap, the network is useless. I think it even went as far as Verizon rejecting any phone with wi-fi.

Re:"It's the Network"

[roguetrick]

Verizon's smartphones aren't so locked down as their regular offerings. I know my palm centro works great and can do anything any other centro can do. Verizon also is putting out an android phone by the holiday season I believe, named after some american city. With all that said, the level of lock-down of most of Verizon's phones is pretty goddamn appalling.

Re:"It's the Network"

[whoever57]

I will never understand why people still buy phones through the network. Phone networks are no charities, you will definitely end up paying back the full value of the phone in the form of overpriced contracts and roaming charges. but people like to fool themselves into thinking they're getting a good deal

Quite simple: the cellphone companies give no discounts for buying the phone from another supplier. So, you just paid more for a phone and the only advantage that you may get is being able to break the contract at less cost. Since the cost of breaking the contract is limited, it's not an irrational decision to buy the phone from the carrier.

Futhermore, T-Mobile will unlock one phone every 90 days at no charge.

Re:"It's the Network"

[ickleberry]

they don't but they should. in my country they do, my plan costs half that of the same plan that includes a phone and my contract is only 30 days

Re:"It's the Network"

[FictionPimp]

Exactly, as soon as there is a good andriod phone on a network with 3g in my area that doesn't restrict my ability to install applications I'm going to take it.

Apple has burned me and I am waiting to switch.

Re:"It's the Network"

[JoeSavage]

The bands for 2G (GSM/EDGE) and 3G (W-CDMA) are different, so you can have a phone that is "quad-band" for 2G but is single-band for 3G. The radio designs for W-CDMA are MUCH more complex than GSM/EDGE, thus having a phone that supports multiple W-CDMA bands significantly increases the BOM cost and the radio footprint compared with a single W-CDMA band design. Such phones are definitely being made, but at least it makes sense why a phone targeted for T-Mobile would only support their frequency bands. FYI, in the States, AT&T uses bands II and V while T-Mobile uses band IV. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands

Re:"It's the Network"

[Bodero]

Verizon Android Phones Are Officially Coming.

There exists a pretty strong misunderstanding that Verizon "locks down" their phones. They did, yes. But in the past year, they've stopped disabling GPS on their phones (including the Omnia, Storm and Tour), said that all future Blackberries will have Wifi, and launched their Open Development Initiative to get data devices (among other things) on their network.

Oh, and their next generation network (which is launching 2+ years before AT&T's) is LTE, based off the GSM standard.

But I don't blame you, they've definitely had restrictive tendencies in the past.

Re:"It's the Network"

[johndiii]

The extent to which they locked down the Razr is the reason that I am no longer a Verizon customer. They were way too willing to cripple the phone so that they could charge me for services.

I have an iPhone now. I'm not wild about everything that Apple and AT&T do, but I'm much happier with them than Verizon.

Re:"It's the Network"

[mini me]

Rogers uses UMTS 850/1900 and offers the HTC Dream (same as the G1) and the HTC Magic. It shouldn't be impossible to get one into the US.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Rei]

T-Mobile has no data coverage where I am. Which is a real shame as I really wanted a T-Mobile G1; I would own one right now otherwise. :P I guess I'll just have to wait.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Atryn]

Wow, so Verizon is actually thinking now? I'm notably biased but wow, all that stuff is old news at Sprint...

Sprint Nextel has led GPS since 2002, already has a WiFi Blackberry (and all future smartphones will have WiFi), has been part of the Open Handset Alliance and had a leading Developers Program for years...

And, oh yeah, Sprint already has 4G launched in 4 cities with like a dozen more in September and ~20 by EOY 2009 (not 2010 or 2011)...

Ok, now you can mark me down for trolling...

Re:"It's the Network"

[edmicman]

I was going to write the exact same thing. Android hasn't taken off yet because it's available on....T-Mobile, and that's it. WTF is with "iPhone cometitors" and their picking the shitty carriers? T-Mobile and Sprint are the carriers for the only phones that really have a chance so far to compete? I can't think of anyone in this area that has TMo, and Sprint's coverage sucks. If someone's getting a phone around here, it's either AT&T or Verizon, and I'm in the VZW camp.

FWIW, I think Android *is* poised to start making some noise. It looks like Verizon is finally starting to line things up; a flagship Motorola Android phone, the BB Storm 2 later this year, and the Palm Pre sometime next year. Honestly, the iPhone is the only thing keeping AT&T afloat; as soon as Verizon offers some real alternatives, we'll see some crazy shit.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Bodero]

And Sprint has some of the lowest cost plans available too.

However, their network is not as large as Verizon Wireless' or AT&T's. Local Sprint service here leaves a lot to be desired. Thus, I don't disagree with you, but it's not all things to all people. If you live in a metro area and don't travel to more rural areas, however, Sprint may be perfect. And they _all_ have great coverage on the interstates.

Re:"It's the Network"

[markkezner]

FYI, my Android Dev Phone 1 is quad band and can work with at&t or theoretically any other GSM provider. Related Wikipedia article

I can't speak for the vanilla G1, but I don't think it's capable of this.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hardburn]

That's your opinion. It's perfectly reasonable to agree to a more restrictive contract in exchange for a cheaper phone, provided everything is clear up front.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Bodero]

There are at least 2 Blackberry World Edition models on Verizon Wireless with quad-band World Edition capabilities (the Tour and the 8800 both are CDMA phones with SIM cards). It's not all things for all people, but the solution does exist if you travel outside the US extensively.

Re:"It's the Network"

[RenderSeven]

Only thing worse than TMobile is AT&T here... my wife has an iPhone and has to keep the Blackberry to make calls. I went with the myTouch 3G and absolutely love it, better form factor and it actually does a good job making calls, and TMobile hasnt been as bad as I thought it would be. The myTouch on TMobile is remarkably better than the BlackBerry on TMobile, so better ABB circuitry. In 6 months, Ive owned a Blackberry, Palm Pre, iPhone, and myTouch and the one I kept is the myTouch. On the downside the battery life on all except the BBerry is horrendous. At least they all take a standard USB cable to charge, except the iPhone of course :-)

Re:"It's the Network"

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

I am a G1 owner and may have to ditch T-Mobile because of bad coverage on the West Coast, but dammit Google Voice has been a killer app for me and has kept me with that particular headset for the last month and I have no intention of switching.

Re:"It's the Network"

[stoolpigeon]

HTC has said that by next year half their phones will be Android.

Re:"It's the Network"

[wampus]

Insightful? Really? Walking into a store and signing a contract for a discount on a phone you want is like rape? Grow some perspective you twats.

Re:"It's the Network"

[moosesocks]

If they fire the Vogons in their customer service and billing departments, I might actually consider staying with them once my contract expires at the end of the year.

I've been egregiously overbilled and put on hold for two hours far too many times to seriously consider them doing business with them beyond the terms of my contract. (the first I considered it an annoyance, the second time I figured they were incompetent, and by the third time, I was convinced they're outright criminals)

Re:"It's the Network"

[MBGMorden]

The severity of the situation is less, but that doesn't mean that one can't model another. Put it this way: when a scientist does a controlled experiment in a lab to simulate a tsunami, you can't really compare his little 3 foot splash in a pool with some toy buildings to a natural disaster killing hundreds of people, but that doesn't mean that there is no similarity. You're missing the entire purpose behind analogy.

The comparison is just that if you want a cell phone in the US, you take the phone from the carrier because you're not saving money by not taking it. If you buy your own phone to connect to the network then you're just paying the same rate as the subsidized customers AND you had to shell out for your own phone.

Re:"It's the Network"

[agentofchange]

Futhermore, T-Mobile will unlock one phone every 90 days at no charge.

Unfortunately there are millions of people who would like their phone unlocked.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Dun Malg]

What would be great is if we can get a quad band Android phone that supported those frequencies, but as of yet, there is none.

...except for the G1's and G2's made for Rogers Wireless in Canada. Available on ebay.

Re:"It's the Network"

[jmerlin]

At least Apple isn't DISABLING functionality in the phone so that YOU CANNOT USE IT AT ALL without paying an exorbitant fee to the company or using some god awful and massive pile of crapware that you MUST purchase for a HUGE price from the service provider.

They're bad, but Verizon takes the cake. Disabling BT on Razrs so you must pay for an $80 piece of software which is MORE THAN THE COST OF THE PHONE to get your pictures or put stuff on the phone (not as if it's a smart phone or anything at that), was a very bad move. I will never be a verizon customer again.

Re:"It's the Network"

[speedtux]

Do you seriously think you're getting something for free?

You're better off paying for the phone out of pocket and getting a prepaid plan.

Re:"It's the Network"

[nog_lorp]

No, re-read his post. You got an intelligent response to your previous comment, and then echoed the same response yet again. The similarity is in the decision making process forced on the 'victim'/'consumer'.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Dun Malg]

Oh, and their next generation network (which is launching 2+ years before AT&T's) is LTE, based off the GSM standard.

Yeah, that's all well and good... but you'll still be limited to phones custom built for Verizon's network, which is the primary shortcoming of Verizon wireless service. They're not using the GSM standard design. I can't order the latest totally nuts japanese cell phone and just stick my Verizon SIM card in it now can I? I can with AT&T. I can't take my Verizon phone on my trip to [europe|asia|*] and buy a prepaid SIM and stick it in now can I? No, because Verizon uses a one-off network incompatible with most of the rest of the world. Same goes for Sprint/Nextel.

Re:"It's the Network"

[EvilJoker]

I hate to be pedantic, especially since your source makes the same mistake, but LTE is not based on GSM- it's just that GSM has reached its end-of-life and needs to be completely replaced. Currently, the best option for future deployments is LTE, therefore all the GSM carriers are going to switch to it. CDMA still has life in it (LTE is based on UMTS, which relies heavily on various parts of the CDMA stack), but Verizon has decided to switch to the upcoming technology now, rather than invest further in an unpopular technology.

Re:"It's the Network"

[WaywardGeek]

Actually, T-Mobile G1 has free roaming on the AT&T, so my coverage is always at least as good as AT&T. I love hacking Android, but HTC makes crappy phones. I think that's the real reason they aren't selling well. Basically, it's a sucky phone. In particular:

- Battery life is a joke. It's a smart-phone with a bright color display and the old Razr battery.
- There's no headphone jack. Instead, you get a kludge-cord that connects your headset through the power jack.
- The camera takes butt-ugly pictures
- The speaker is too quite. You can't hear your call or music in traffic or on a plane
- Cheap construction - the glass lens cover on mine broke when I dropped the phone 2 feet onto carpet.
- The phone is ugly, and has a small display when compared to an iPhone.
- It's actually *more* expensive than an iPhone, once you buy some flash memory for it.

In short, only dorks and geeks like me who love hacking Android and hate getting screwed by Apple are buying G1's, and it's HTC's fault. I'll consider buying a different Android phone if someone could please just add a damned headphone jack!

Re:"It's the Network"

[pavon]

Do you seriously think you're getting something for free?

Of course he doesn't, he just knows that that he has to pay whether he gets the phone or not.

You're better off paying for the phone out of pocket and getting a prepaid plan.

That's what I do, but I don't use my phone very much. My brothers looked at how much a prepaid T-mobile or Tracfone plan would have cost them and it was more per month than their current plan with unlimited texting, on top of the fact that they would have had to pay the full price for a phone.

Re:"It's the Network"

[sadler121]

Quad Band GSM, not UMTS. According to the wikipedia article you linked to, the dev phone only has 3G WCDMA (1700/2100 MHz).

Of course, others have suggested to by a G1/G2 off ebay from Canada unlocked as Rogers uses the same frequencies as at&t in the States.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Dun Malg]

both are CDMA phones with SIM cards

No, both are CDMA phones with a GSM module shoehorned in as well, which allows you to "fallback" to GSM in foreign parts where CDMA isn't supported. The "Verizon SIM" is just a billing hack to make the GSM module work. It's not like you can stick any SIM in an 8800, or pull the Verizon SIM out of one and stick it in an iPhone.

Re:"It's the Network"

[kamatsu]

1) Battery life lasts up to 2 days on my G1, after I upgraded the radio firmware, perhaps you should try this.

2) Headphone jack is annoying, but it's not a power jack - it's just USB, and there are numerous other phones that do this.

3) My experience with the camera has been good. My anecdotal evidence has just as much weight as your anecdotal evidence.

4) I've dropped my phone on concrete from 6 feet height and it's been *fine*, not even scratched.

5) The display is actually around the same size as the iPhone, but the clunkier design does admittedly make it feel smaller.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hardburn]

No, I'm not. As the GP points out, you can very much get a full functioning phone without signing a contract. You just pay more to do it. That's a simple matter of negotiation, as far as I'm concerned. Nobody is forcing the choice on you.

Re:"It's the Network"

[bickerdyke]

- The speaker is too quite. You can't hear your call or music in traffic or on a plane

I'd consider the disability to annoy your seat neighbours with music a good design choice.

- It's actually *more* expensive than an iPhone, once you buy some flash memory for it.

I doubt a flash card for about $10-$15 could change the race between HTC and iPhone THAT much!

Re:"It's the Network"

[XDirtypunkX]

Not all HTC Phones are crappy hardware though... the HTC Touch HD is an amazing and well built piece of hardware (even if you need to be a power user to actually get software on it doing what you want) that even has a proper headphone jack.

Now, if they made a better version of the Touch HD with Android instead of WM, then that would be super damn awesome.

Re:"It's the Network"

[taucross]

Apple has burned me and I am waiting to switch.

Apple burned a few people, actually.

Re:"It's the Network"

[gmack]

It looks like the CECT G1 will work on AT&T but not TMobile if your info is correct. They report that they work on: GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz .

Upside: the phone is cheap ($105 - $130) and comes unlocked.
downside: no Wifi or GPS.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

Quite simple: the cellphone companies give no discounts for buying the phone from another supplier. So, you just paid more for a phone and the only advantage that you may get is being able to break the contract at less cost.

It lets you get a cheaper contract though. The best deal for getting an HTC Dream on T-mobile is £97.87 on a £20/month 18 month contract, giving you a TCO of 457.87 over 18 months. Conversely, I bought my Dream on eBay for £143, add on £15 for unlocking == £158 for the phone and then I get to choose the best contract for me.

I've got a Three PAYG SIM in it, which works out well for me since I don't make very many voice calls - I get 150MB of data for free every time I add credit to my balance (the 150MB expires after 90 days) and I can purchase 2GB of data (expires after a month) for £5. Assuming I don't make any voice calls over it and I choose to buy 2GB/month of data, that's going to work out at £90 over 18 months, giving me a TCO of £248 over 18 months, a saving of £209.87. In reality, I _do_ make voice calls, but many of them are made using SIP over 3G or WiFi rather than via the PSTN, but also I take advantage of the 150MB of free data so I will buy a data bundle less frequently than monthly. I expect it will probably cost me under £90 over 18 months.

In any case, I think the article is pretty much bunk - "none of them even seems to be trying to match the capabilities of the iPhone, let alone to knock us down with features that far surpass those of Apple's device" - that really depends on what you are trying to do. If you're interested in posing then it is hard to beat the iPhone because no one else can use the Apple logo. On the other hand, I bought a Dream instead of an iPhone because its feature set *does* far surpass the iPhone's *for my needs*. For example, the Dream has a proper QWERTY keyboard instead of a crappy on-screen thing, which is very important to me for what I use my phone for. It also lets me do stuff like run VoIP software, background tasks and I even have Debian installed on it. The battery life isn't great, which is also a problem for the iPhone, but the HTC Dream lets me replace the battery, so if I'm going to be away from power for a long time I can just take a couple of spares, which is completely out for the iPhone.

When I was originally shopping around for a phone I was told by the sales man in the Carphone Warehouse that the HTC Hero was "much more like the iPhone" and thus "better" - I quickly pointed out that if I wanted an iPhone, I'd buy a damned iPhone. I'm specifically not buying an iPhone because it doesn't do what I need a phone to do. Call me stupid, but isn't is more sensible for there to be a range of devices that covers the needs of everyone, instead of a million and one iPhone clones that only cover the needs of one specific group?

Re:"It's the Network"

[jesset77]

Hmm, odd. T-mobile covers my entire state (Oregon) flatly better than any other provider (Sprint, AT&T, Verizon, Unicell, etc etc etc) from our biggest town (Portland) to our shrubbiest desserts (Burns? Brothers? K falls?). I work at a WISP where we give internets to people who live 1-2 miles from their neighbors, and I've convinced our staff to begrudgingly emigrate from the above mentioned other networks. The effect being that installers no longer "vanish" from cell service when out on jobs. Ever. Anywhere. It's actually a little unnerving as they get into the habit of phoning me with questions before thinking problems through now. ;3

Srsly though I just want to know what areas you lot are having problems in. Is it really large cities? Oregon lacks those.. is it Carolina or Minnesota? If I'm going to continue evangelizing, I'd like to know as much as I can about potential caveats. Thx :3

Re:"It's the Network"

[nonades]

Meet the Motorola Shules: http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/07/30/renders-of-android-powered-motorola-shules-fly-in-from-mother-russia/ Yes it's a render, but from what I've read on different sites the current live shots of it don't reflect how it currently look compared to the renders. Also, this phone is coming to Verizon (along with another Android Morotola phone). Docs leaked by Best Buy put this phone as coming out in late Oct.

Re:"It's the Network"

[jesset77]

srsly, I think replying with "mod parent up" is more effective than having mod points and doing it yourself.

Kind of like Lobbying is better than voting. Man, I wish I understood moar game theory. ;3

Oh, and mod parent up. :) (tip your waitress, I'm here til Thursday.. try the smoked salmon!)

Re:"It's the Network"

[jesset77]

Ragh! See my above post. Are you from Washington or Cali then? T-mobile beats AT&T (and everyone else's) coverage in Oregon, and we own 20% of the West Coast. So by all means let me know where you are seeing these coverage challenges? I needs me some intel. :P

Re:"It's the Network"

[BlackCreek]

# Missing a 3.5 jack is an obvious problem;

# G1 at least uses a mini-USB connector instead of a proprietary cable. So my GF and I only need one cable for my G1 and her BlackBerry;

# Battery life is a joke compared to a Nokia, but a colleague that has a iPhone 3GS can barely make it through 1 day; My G1 goes 2 to 3 days on a charge.

# the display is average, but so is the iphone's. My GF has a Nokia XPress Music, the thing has 50% more pixels than the G1 or the (new) iphone.

# loudspeaker indeed sucks. Some modified images (XDA) bump the volume a lot, but sound quality is IMHO still low

Re:"It's the Network"

[streamerman]

To me it seems an issue with marketing and branding. Given the right approach and supporting technology / software, Android could really take off. A few weeks back, I sold my iPhone 3G in favour of an HTC Hero. To me the reviews of the Hero have been unfair - whilst never touching on the thing that really mattered to me - how I want to use my phone! There are some bugs with the software (as you'd expect for a new device), but I would certainly not want to swap back to iPhone any time soon. The interface of the iPhone was ample (in 1.0) when we only had 15 icons... navigating through even 3 pages of icons frustrates me. I want my own dash board that summarises my calendar and an OS wide notification system that doesnt take over my phone when i get an SMS. What about an email notification when my screen is locked? Android fits that bill. That said, I have every respect for Apple and their design decisions. The success of most of the Apple's product lines are through their simplicity and user friendliness. Their devices appeal to the masses, look simple and elegant, perhaps easy to set up. To me, this has been their biggest selling point besides hitting the early adopter / tech savvy people with something that does something slightly differently. The simplicity is (to me) also the products biggest downfall. I want to tweak, adjust, play, disect the OS and add bits of functionality that the SDK will allow me to make. How about a simple mode in Android? or an advanced mode in iPhone? All in all, I'm glad that both Google and Apple (and Palm, but I live in the UK) have done things differently - it will really encourage innovation and learning from each others benefits and mistakes. I will however continue to lust after new devices, especially the ones that fit my needs the best. I'm just glad I realise the differences and dont rely solely on the advertising.

Re:"It's the Network"

[mcvos]

The G1 and myTouch are nice, unfortunately they're on T-Mobile, which is nice but not nice everywhere. If T-Mobile worked in my area I would certainly try them out, at least.

That's exactly why I want to get rid of my iPhone. It uses T-Mobile here, and the T-Mobile network here sucks. I was without phone connection during HAR. The HTC Hero (with Android) uses KPN which has the best network, so that's what I want.

Also, the iPhone sucks because Apple keeps denying cool apps from the app store. I think Android's openness may end up winning in the long run when more and more people discover this problem.

Re:"It's the Network"

[MikeBabcock]

You really don't understand the use of comparison in argument, do you?

Re:"It's the Network"

[LWATCDR]

Actually the Sprint people have been very good of late. Even the folks in the store.
Things do change for both good and bad.

Re:"It's the Network"

[LWATCDR]

Yes Verizon and Sprint are both finally getting Android phones which I feel will help a lot. I also think AT&T may be getting them but I doubt they will push them.
Frankly I was hoping that Palm would adopt Android since it was in so much trouble. My wife has a Pre and she loves it except for the lack of apps. Hopefully that will change soon. But before the Pre I kept thinking put Android on the Centro folks.
Now if the smartphone folks will just stop limiting the Bluetooth profiles and put on good voice commands I will be a happy man.

Re:"It's the Network"

[LWATCDR]

LTE is the replacment for GSM. The problem with LTE is that there is still no standard for voice calls on it. LTE as it stands is just a data standard.
I suggest they adopt Speex for the codec. It isn't going to happen but it would be cool.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Bodero]

You might be right, but so am I. They are CDMA phones with SIM cards. They allow you to use them in GSM countries. I didn't say you could use your iPhone on Verizon Wireless with it.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Andy Dodd]

"Actually, T-Mobile G1 has free roaming on the AT&T"

False. T-Mo's AT&T roaming agreement breaks frequently and for months at a time.

For 2-3 months my ex had a T-Mo phone that in theory roamed for free on AT&T.

In reality, it would lose coverage once she passed exit 67 or so on NY State Route 17. No coverage whatsoever anywhere west of that, while my AT&T phone worked perfectly.

As an experiment I once put her T-Mo SIM into my unlocked AT&T phone (AT&T Tilt). It didn't work, and even after putting my SIM back in, my phone's IMEI was blacklisted by the tower for 15-20 minutes - no coverage even with my AT&T SIM for that period!

Re:"It's the Network"

[Andy Dodd]

Knowing Verizon:
That "Crazy shit" you speak of will be 6-9 months behind when other carriers release similar phones.

In the case of phones that Sprint also releases, the Verizon version will be crippled significantly compared to the Sprint one in addition to being behind schedule due to "network certification issues". (Translation - "we're not done crippling it yet")

See:
Palm Treo 650 (Bluetooth DUN crippled on Verizon version, and was 9 months after Sprint)
Verizon XV6800 (An HTC device, had a diff name on Sprint - PPC-6800 maybe?) - 6+ months behind on Verizon compared to sprint for "network certification issues". I don't know what they crippled, after seeing that phrase I went to AT&T because my VZW contract was up. By the time the 6800 was released by Verizon, AT&T released the Tilt (aka HTC TyTn II) which was a generation ahead.

Re:"It's the Network"

[predator29]

I'll have to try out T-mobile, couse they are the only one in this are :) btw, pls help me, and click this to get a job for me: http://druba2009.atw.hu/

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

But do you think Verizon would even -allow- a phone with Android to run?

Yes! All major US carriers will have at least one Android phone available by the end of the year - including Verizon and AT&T. By the end of the year, over 20 different phones will be available around the world. Verizon is actually very excited about their public offering. They've been repeated denied a piece of the iPhone pie and as such, are fully expected to make Android be their f-u AT&T/Apple move.

Re:"It's the Network"

[pwfffff]

- True, in a way. The battery is fine when idling, but when you have music and IRC in the background and you're trying to browse the internet, it will only last 3-4 hours. Of course, you can only do two of those at once on the iphone, so who knows what the battery life would be if it could actually multitask?
- This is my one big complaint, but there ARE adapters out there.
- I haven't noticed this at all. Maybe you should point it at something prettier.
- It's too quite what? Really though, it's fine. I have it at minimum volume in quiet areas, and when I turn it to max it works fine even in a crowded area.
- You must be good at dropping things or have a shitty memory. I've dropped mine 5 feet. Onto asphalt. While on a moving bike. It has two small scratches in the case and the battery cover popped off, but the phone didn't even restart. I'm seriously curious to know how you managed to crack it on 'carpet'.
- You're ugly, and you can go ahead and take an inch or two off the screen size for anything that involves typing.
- Yeah, I hate having the option to upgrade my own phone -_-
-

Re:"It's the Network"

[Bill_the_Engineer]

I love my myTouch. I'm surprise to find myself saying that, but I'm currently TDY (working far away from office) and the 850 MHz (voice) roaming works so much better than both the Nokia and Motorola quad-band phones that I retired. My GSM phone is working better than my coworkers CDMA phones here. I believe it's from the way GSM bands were originally auctioned off by the FCC which allowed local telcos in ultra rural areas to get into the wireless industry.

The Wi-Fi access, outside of the edge network isn't bad either...

On my way to the middle of nowhere, T-Mobile had 3G networks at my airports so that was nice. Of course as with all wireless carriers, your mileage may vary.

BTW, I disabled data roaming and depend solely on Wi-Fi at the moment. Between the hotel and the hangar, I haven't missed the mobile network.

The article totally misses the point that the iPhone has been out for quite a while, and Apple has dumped a lot of money into marketing. As for Google branding, the android phones I have have "with Google" printed on the phone.

Oh I don't work for T-Mobile, but I've been a customer of theirs since they bought out my local GSM provider many years ago. As with all long term relationships I had some bad moments and some good moments..

Re:"It's the Network"

[mcvos]

Quite simple: the cellphone companies give no discounts for buying the phone from another supplier.

They do. A subscription + free phone often costs $20 per month, but a sim-only subscription can be as low as $3 per month. No idea if there are sim-only subscriptions with unlimited UMTS, though.

Re:"It's the Network"

[ukyoCE]

when all the phones are total crap, the network is useless.

Right, unless you, ya know, use your phone to make phone calls.

In which case the network is far more important than anything else. Unfortunately that is how Verizon gets away with having such craptastic neutered phones.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

In the US that is tied to the lack of CDMA support.

Android now has CDMA support. Full support is including in Donut.

Number 1 Verizon and number 3 Sprint are CDMA.

Both of which will have an Android offering by the end of the year. Depending on which rumors you believe, Verizon and Sprint, between them, will have two to five Android handsets available by the end of the year. Some of the five may be launched as late as first quarter of next year. Regardless, you will see at least one Android offering from both Verizon and Sprint by the end of this year and likely within the next 20-60 days.

Add in that HTC is heavy into Windows Mobil

HTC has publicly stated they are and have been refocusing on Android as their primary OS. Android allows them to target all tiers of the phone market while WinMo allows allows them to target the high end. Their refocusing efforts have been in effect since the beginning of 2009.

Motorola the be the exclusive hardware partner.

While not exclusive, it might as well be. Motorola is in fairly bad shape these days and direly needs a serious success. Its well known Motorola has been retooling to put significant engery behind Android. As Android now supports CDMA and GSM on the same platform, by the end of the year, every major US carrier will have an Android offering. World wide, over twenty (as many as twenty five) Android handsets will be available. Come September/October, in the US alone, the numbers will begin to rise.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Jahf]

"I'd consider the disability to annoy your seat neighbours with music a good design choice."

Then you would be someone who prefers to remove choice and capability from all for the punishment of a few. Many of us use cellphones in environments that need hands free -and- clear sound at higher volumes. Perhaps next time instead of sitting there gritting your teeth you could politely ask the person to turn it down.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

Both the G1 and ADP1 are quad band but neither can physically support 3G on AT&T network. While the radio can technically support 3G on AT&T, the hardware required to drive the radio was not including on the board - presumably to same money. Many people are using G1/ADP1 on AT&T but give up 3G service in doing so. EDGE and GPRS work fine.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

Exactly, as soon as there is a good andriod phone on a network with 3g in my area that doesn't restrict my ability to install applications I'm going to take it.

Then you'll have options available within the next 20-60 days. On Android, you can install third party applications - they just may not be available from the market. Unlike the iPhone, the platform is open.

Re:"It's the Network"

[poetmatt]

google voice has been retarded enough that I'm almost ready to drop it/swear off google.

They have switched routing phone numbers for it like 30 freakin times, and it's hidden from visual sight on the g1. Honestly, this is just stupid/frustrating. I use myfaves for everything but google voice, really I can't afford to use hundreds of minutes on google voice.

Re:"It's the Network"

[kchrist]

You misunderstand. Any T-Mobile user can request an unlock code for their T-Mobile-purchased phone after 90 days of service. I've done it myself with two phones in the past. Just call and tell them you'll be traveling overseas and need to buy a local SIM at your destination and it's done.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

First and foremost, Android ABSOLUTELY HAS TAKEN OFF. Anyone that says otherwise is either lying or an Apple plant/fanboy. Period.

To say Android has not taken off is to say the iPhone is a complete failure. Period. This is of course, not true. The simple fact is, contrary to the complete bullshit provided in the article, Android has MATCHED or EXCEEDED the iPhone at every market metric. So saying Android is a failure is absolutely saying the iPhone is a failure. In short, FACTUALLY SPEAKING, the article is complete bullshit.

Every market projection thus far, places Android exceeding the iPhone by 2012 - which isn't that far away. And every expert agrees, contrary to the absolute bullshit of the article, the fact that Android has been able to grab as much market, to the detriment of both Blackberry and Apple, so quickly, very much validates Android is rapidly succeeding. Period.

In short, the article is best used to wipe ones ass because just about every aspect of the article is complete bullshit. Everything they spin as negative is actually validation of a positive. Bluntly, the article is either a plant by Apple or an Apple fanboy. The truth is, Apple is/was forced to refocus their development efforts and hardware with their most recent offers specifically because of Google/Android/G1. If Android were such a failure, despite meeting or exceeding every iPhone milestone, Apple wouldn't be changing gears to keep up and/or adopt. When the market leading is forced to change plans, you have absolute validation of a market threat. A market failure is never a threat.

To summarize - the article is absolute bullshit as supported by the market and every market fact. The fact these bullshit articles are seeing the light of day is very real validate that someone is VERY, VERY, VERY SCARED of Android. As it directly compares with Apple, obviously the writer sees the day where Apples is playing third fiddle. The sad truth is, they are already rosening up their second fiddle - proof of these bullshit articles and Apple's recent publicity and/or the SDK/hardware offerings.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

On the downside the battery life on all except the BBerry is horrendous.

For Android users, poor battery life is often a complaint. This is because of always on connectivity combined with its awesome multitasking capabilities. An application called WiSyncPlus (http://www.gearsoft.mobi/wisyncplus.html) drastically improves battery life for most users. Many claim to have doubled or better their battery life. Its also popular with overseas users where unlimited data plans are not as common and/or required. For these users WiSyncPlus provides a means to both increase battery life and control monthly costs.

Re:"It's the Network"

[_anomaly_]

How about this... make Android (and sell the phones) in such a way that it does not require a data plan.

Instead of "unlocking" phones, how about "locking" phones with wifi enabled.

The first provider+phone manufacturer+OS combination to support enabling wifi even with a traditional *voice* service plan will become very rich.

Re:"It's the Network"

[farble1670]

I doubt a flash card for about $10-$15 could change the race between HTC and iPhone THAT much!

a 16GB class 6 SD card runs about $50. even that is going to have much slower transfer rates that the iPhone's SIM based memory.

Re:"It's the Network"

[PeelBoy]

I would really like to know how you managed to break the glass lens cover on your phone by dropping it from 2 feet onto carpet.

I've dropped my G1 about 4 times now, always onto concrete or asphalt and always from 4 feet or higher. The sides are a bit scuffed up, but the lens is just fine.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

Battery life is a joke. It's a smart-phone with a bright color display and the old Razr battery.

Not true. You can see longer battery life with a G1 than you can with the iPhone 3G or 3Gs. An application called WiSyncPlus goes a long way toward forcing a more "iPhone-like" operating profile. When running as such, users can observe up to 100+ hours more battery life than what the iPhone is seeing. Commonly people are seeing 1 day between charges if they twitter/facebook/email/im lots; which is impossible to the same degree with an iPhone. Those who are more conservative with their choice of applications see 1-2 days between charges. Those two groups typically see 2-3 days between charges with WiSyncPlus installed. Those who typically use their device more as a phone and occasionally as a smart device, combined with WiSyncPlus, can go a week between charges.

Furthermore, after Android 1.5 ("cupcake") was released, battery life improved considerably. Those that parrot poor battery life for any Android handset are either ignorant of the facts or pushing an agenda. Simple fact is, battery life is much better after the release of cupcake. With applications like WiSyncPlus, battery life can actually exceed, by far, the battery life of iPhone users. And even better, battery life continues to improve with additional Android improvements. Those users running "donut" derived Android are seeing yet additionally improved battery life; over and above that seen with "cupcake."

Instead, you get a kludge-cord that connects your headset through the power jack.

Not sure why that's a "kludge" other than an attempt to paint it very negatively. Most don't consider a multiple purpose port to be a "kludge" unless you're trying to push an agenda. Many multipurpose adapters are available which provide a multitude of options from a single port. While I do agree, a dedicated 3mm port would be better, that's still a far cry from a "kludge". Despite not having a dedicated 3mm port, the fact you have purchase an inexpensive adapter which provides a 2mm or 3mm port plus additional features while still exposing the USB port, is many things, but definitely not a "kludge" to be painted in negative light.

The camera takes butt-ugly pictures

Not sure where you got that bad information. For its MP rating, the pictures are actually very nice. I've shown pictures to people who asked about the source. They believed it was from a dedicated point-n-shoot having a higher MP rating. The simple fact is, the image quality is actually quite good.

The speaker is too quite. You can't hear your call or music in traffic or on a plane

Where are you getting your factually incorrect information from?!? The speaker is very loud. I can listen to music while I'm in the shower, with the phone ten feet away, playing over its internal speaker. Granted, like all tiny speakers, fidelity is what it is, but loudness is definitely not a problem unless unless you require a 100 watt amp for your hearing aid.

Cheap construction - the glass lens cover on mine broke when I dropped the phone 2 feet onto carpet.

Complete bullshit. The G1 is very well built and very tough. I've dropped my from waist high over carpet and didn't as much get a scratch. I've also fumbled it over title. It didn't receive a strictly vertical strike but its horizontal velocity had it traveling pretty fast. It stopped after it bounced off the wall, having skipped across the floor. Not issues. For this one I did have it in plastic armor. Even then, I would have only expected scratches.

Obviously you're a scared iPhone fanboy who can see the writing on the wall. You Apple/Iphone is quickly becoming eclipsed and simply isn't as "cool" as it once was because of Android. There isn't a iPhone 3Gs user that doesn't owe a thank you to Google/Android.

The phone is ugly, and has a small display when compared

Re:"It's the Network"

[RenderSeven]

An application called WiSyncPlus

Hey thanks for the tip! Not everything cool is in the Android store... oops I mean T-Mobile store (and thats part of the problem as TFA points out). I found PdaNet to add tethering last week, which addressed my only big objection to TMob; works *exceptionally* well!

I should say battery life has improved over last two weeks, and not sure why... OK not gaming as much :-) but it seems to be power managing WiFi a little. Just added BlueTooth H2D headphones an hour ago so we'll see if that kills the battery any worse...

Re:"It's the Network"

[PeelBoy]

You're being silly. You can still save plenty by using it for outgoing calls.

I haven't had any problems with it yet, and it's a free service that saves me money, so how can I complain?

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

I wish more people would let others know about WiSyncPlus. I'm so tired of hearing about poor battery life; especially from other Android users. At this point there is no excuse for Android users to complain about poor battery life.

I don't use tethering much but one the rare occasion I have, its been a real life saver. Tethering capability is a must for smart phone owner as far as I'm concerned; be it Android or other. The fact Android users can install third party applications is a real blessing. Tethering is just one bonus available to Android users.

Also, don't forget you can change the WIFI sleep behavior in the advanced settings. This too can improve usability and/or power savings, depending on you use and what you expect from your phone. Menu -> settings -> Wireless controls -> Wi-Fi settings -> menu -> Advanced -> Wi-Fi sleep policy. The settings is pretty well hidden but can really change a user's WIFI experience.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Mister Whirly]

It's not Minnesota, at least not the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area. T-Mobile works great all over there. And as long as you don't stray too far from the major freeways, even going out to the boondocks I still get reception.

Re:"It's the Network"

[jeddak]

Verizon is releasing an Android phone end of October. I will bet money that's it's completely locked down.

Re:"It's the Network"

[toadlife]

Google Voice?

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

The battery life isn't great, which is also a problem for the iPhone, but the HTC Dream lets me replace the battery, so if I'm going to be away from power for a long time I can just take a couple of spares, which is completely out for the iPhone.

I really, really wish people would stop saying that. The battery life is actually pretty good and with some simple software, can be made even better while still providing more functionality that is available to iPhone users. Contrary to the apples to apples comparison iPhone users always portray, Android runs background services and can therefore, carry a workload during periods which are simply impossible on the iPhone. In other words, what they portray an an apples to apples comparison is actually an apples to oranges on 'riods comparison. A steady workload means steady battery consumption. There is nothing you can do about that other than limit the different in workloads. If you want your battery to last longer, make it run on par with the iPhone's limited workload. Doing so is trivially easy and many software solutions for Android already exist to do so.

Additionally, you can install software like WiSyncPlus, which for many, drastically extends battery life. With WiSyncPlus you can easily obtain 100+ hours, or more, over what iPhone users have, assuming an iPhone-like workload. And best of all, with WiSyncPlus you can still achieve workloads on your device which will still make iPhone users envious. Simply put, with readily available software solutions, an inferior G1 can still provide more functionality AND MORE BATTERY LIFE.

Simply put, the battery life on the G1 is actually FAR better than what iPhone users have. Period. The questions is, are you using your phone to create a proper comparison. Most Android phone users do not. If you want longer battery life, get WiSyncPlus for a couple of bucks. If you want multiple batteries, drop $30-$60 each. Or, you can actually limit yourself and your phone to the reduced workloads of an iPhone and still have longer battery life.

Long story short, please, please, please story propagating the horrible misinformation that G1s have poor battery life. This has not been true since "cupcake" was release. The simply truth of the matter is, G1's have been battery life and iPhone 3G and 3GS. Even better, battery life continues to improve as Android evolves. So please stop parroting the misinformation feed to everyone by iPhone fanboys.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

a 16GB class 6 SD card runs about $50. even that is going to have much slower transfer rates that the iPhone's SIM based memory.

Right, but you don't need fast memory to play music. Basically it winds up waiting on IO and as its far from IO bound to play music, that's not a problem. Generally speaking, on an Android phone, the primary purpose of SD is to carry our music around.

Besides, I paid roughly $50 to a 16GB class 6, months ago and that came with a reader. Chances are it can be had for cheaper now.

In the end, the point is moot.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

Of course, you can only do two of those at once on the iphone, so who knows what the battery life would be if it could actually multitask?

It would be far worse, which is why they don't allow it. G1s can already exceed iPhones in standby battery life, when operating like-loads. Therefore its not unreasonable to jump to the conclusion the same would hold true if the iPhone were made to allow multitasking like Android.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FictionPimp]

I hope so. I'm locked into AT&T for a little less then a year. So at that point I can switch carriers. Honestly AT&T has the best service in my area, so if they got an android phone I would switch. Otherwise Verizon has good service as well and I would switch to them if they promise to keep the phone open and not impose any kind of special verizon lock downs like they have done in the past with custom firmware on razors and the like.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

which for many, drastically extends battery life. With WiSyncPlus you can easily obtain 100+ hours

100 hours falls into the "not great" category I'm afraid. I've just had a look at WiSyncPlus, and whilst some of the features sound nice, many of them are actually part of the stock Android OS (e.g. options to disable WiFi when the screen is off, disabling data roaming, etc.). Many of the others can be done by Locale, which I already use.

HTC claims 319 hours of standby on the Dream for GSM, 402 hours for WCDMA. This is just never going to happen - the battery is 1150mAh and the service manual specifies a sleep current of <3mA (this is with the phone in aeroplane mode - i.e. all the radios turned off). 1150mAh over 319 hours is 3.6mA - that means the GSM radio has to average no more than 600 microamps and the CPU never has to wake up. The WCDMA standby time is even more of a work of fiction - 402 hours works out at 2.86mA which is _less_ than the sleep current specified in the service manual (again, let me reiterate - the specified sleep current assumes that the CPU is totally inactive and the radios are powered off).

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised really - all the cellphone vendors have similarly fictional standby times. My ancient P900 was sold as having a standby time of 480 hours - that's 20 days. Even when it was brand new it didn't manage more than 10 days.

But note: I wasn't complaining about the battery life of the HTC Dream. I fully accept that *no* smart phone has a good battery life, which is why being able to take a couple of spare batteries with me is important. The Dream lets me do this, the iPhone does not.

Simply put, with readily available software solutions, an inferior G1 can still provide more functionality AND MORE BATTERY LIFE.

I have to ask, why do you say "inferior"?

Long story short, please, please, please story propagating the horrible misinformation that G1s have poor battery life.

As a HTC Dream user, I am talking about my own experiences here. My own experiences tell me that in normal use the battery life of the HTC Dream sucks. Similarly in normal use the battery life of pretty much any smart phone sucks (some more than others). Yes, you can extend the battery life by avoiding using some of the features, but then it ceases to be "normal use" - you can get great battery life out of any phone if you turn it off, take the battery out and pack it up in its box, but it ceases to be very useful like that. This is not "misinformation", it is personal experience.

This has not been true since "cupcake" was release.

I'm running the JF Cupcake 1.5 CRB43 ADP firmware.

The simply truth of the matter is, G1's have been battery life and iPhone 3G and 3GS.

I have never owned an iPhone, so I can't really comment on the battery life myself. I know people who own them though, and from hearing their comments on the battery life I considered it to be too short to consider getting a phone where I can't change the battery. But again to reiterate: this would apply for pretty much *any* smartphone.

So please stop parroting the misinformation feed to everyone by iPhone fanboys.

This is *not* misinformation, as I originally said, it is my personal experience. It seems to me that it is you who wants to spread misinformation in order to support your position - you're not an Android fanboy by any chance are you? I'm afraid I have little time for fanboys, no matter which side they are on, I'm only interested in facts and what works *for me*, I'm not interested in hearing people spout BS in the hope of covering up the problems with whatever platform they are a fan of.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

AT&T is the only wild card because of their exclusive deal with Apple. AT&T was slated to have an Android phone enter the market this month. It seems they came to their senses and realized their offering was too far down on the ladder. Speculation is AT&T will still have an Android offering by the end of the year but exactly what form that offering will look like is questionable. Regardless, many are not expecting a high end offering on AT&T because it will seriously compete with the iPhone and endanger then exclusive deal. As such, most are expecting an upper-middle class offering rather than the low end offering they previously planned and canceled.

But ignoring AT&T, just about everyone else that matters in the US has already committed to at least one Android offering by the end of the year. Some will have two offerings with T-Mobile primed to *possibly* have as many as three.

I'm like you. I currently have a G1 on AT&T, sans 3G because of hardware frequency limitations. Just about everyone I know would willingly grab an Android phone if it were offered on AT&T, save one. That one person is on T-Mobile and the only reason they don't have an Android phone is because they just finished renewing their Blackberry and was locked in before they learned about Android.

On the other hand, most everyone is anticipating a very strong Android offering from Verizon as their AT&T/Apple F-U move. Verizon has been trying hard, but completely unsuccessful, to get a piece of the iPhone money. They have repeatedly been given the finger by Apple. In response, everyone expects Verizon to hit the ground running and push Android real hard. Obviously this is not fact (we'll see) but everyone involved in Android will be very surprised if the Verizon offering is crippled. In fact, they are actively attempting to lure developers to enhance the Android-Verizon experience; for whatever that means. I do know they desperately want Verizon exclusive applications to bring in the masses to both their network and Android phones.

As for Sprint, I'm not sure what to think there. It seems they are a little more timid, but far less so than AT&T to offer an Android solution. Most are expecting a toe in the water to see where it takes them. Time will tell.

Regardless, you will soon have many Android options available.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

100 hours falls into the "not great" category I'm afraid.

Then that means the iPhone is a total piece of crap. I suspect you misunderstand my statement. My statement means, 100 hours over and above what you get on the iPhone. I don't mean 100 hours or more total runtime. Those kind of numbers would be bad. Thankfully, all Android phones can easily see more runtime than an iPhone on a single charge, given comparable workloads.

I have to ask, why do you say "inferior"?

I was being sarcastic. Most consider the G1 to be inferior. Its not. How can it provide a richer experience and more battery life and still be inferior? That's my point. Dry sarcasm is tough in electronic form.

As a HTC Dream user, I am talking about my own experiences here. My own experiences tell me that in normal use the battery life of the HTC Dream sucks.

Then that's because you don't appreciate what is going on with your phone or have a poor selection of battery unfriendly applications. Both are common. Far too often people blame Android/Phone/battery for what is really ignorance or a complete disregard for what they install on their phone. I'm not saying that's you're issue, but it likely is at least a huge part of the equation.

For example, I spoke with a user that was livid about how poorly his G1's battery lasted. After talking with him, he left bluetooth and wifi on all time, even when they were not being used. But even worse, he had his twitter application polling for updates every MINUTE of the day. That means his phone never slept. He was angry his phone couldn't last the day without charging.

Realistically, the G1's battery life is better than the iPhone's. The difference is, they have drastically different workloads. If you still want better battery life and yet still want to use background communication, do checkout WiSyncPlus. Many have reported doubling their battery life. Depending on what I'm doing, I see anywhere from one to three days of battery life. And those one day charges are from TONS of web browsing, reading, emailing, and twittering, all on WIFI, plus occasional GPS.

Simply put, if you honestly believe you have poor battery life, you have a poor selection of applications (or configuration thereof), likely don't have WiSyncPlus, leave all your hardware on all the time without regard for their use, have a broken phone, have a bad battery, or have extremely weak service where you're at; especially 3G. All of which are factors which will drain the battery of all phones in existence.

I'm running the JF Cupcake 1.5 CRB43 ADP firmware.

I was running JF for a while too. Since you already have a modded rom, go get Cyanogen's image (4.0.2). You'll notice another 20%-30% increase in battery life, despite being TONS faster. From the market, install the cyanogen updater. Do a backup first. If need be, install the nandroid backup tool first. Regardless, do a backup first. I strongly urge you to do a leading reading about the upgrade process on xda first.

And just FYI, I upgraded from JF 1.5.x to CM-3.9.7 to CM-3.9.10.x to CM-4.0.1 to CM-4.0.1 and never had to wipe once.

If you don't mind spending a couple of bucks, purchase WiSyncPlus. So long as you don't require twitter updates every one minute, or equally insane, always on update rates, chances are you will notice at least some battery life improvement. And if you're a more common/casual user, chances are you'll notice huge improvements.

This is *not* misinformation, as I originally said, it is my personal experience.

That's the thing, it *ABSOLUTELY* *IS* misinformation. That's not to discount your personal experience. The point is, people constantly compare with the iPhone and conclude the G1 has horrible battery life. The fact is, under the same work load, the G1 whips the iPhone.

Furthermore, for your own experience, chances are you fall into the category where you simply don't appreciate all the work you're asking the phone to do on your behalf. And to be

Re:"It's the Network"

[Serious Callers Only]

The severity of the situation is less, but that doesn't mean that one can't model another....You're missing the entire purpose behind analogy.

For an analogy to be effective, there was to be some connection between the two states. Your analogy illustrating analogies notwithstanding (I'm sure the grant-parent grasps the concept of analogies), there is no valid point of comparison between being violently sexually assaulted, and choosing a bad deal in a shop. Infantile jokes about rape really aren't funny or insightful; as with the use of Hitler or the Nazis in comparisons, it's a good indication that the argument is ill thought-out melodramatic nonsense.

The comparison is just that if you want a cell phone in the US, you take the phone from the carrier because you're not saving money by not taking it. If you buy your own phone to connect to the network then you're just paying the same rate as the subsidized customers AND you had to shell out for your own phone.

And that sounds just like rape, right?

Re:"It's the Network"

[verifiedCoward]

I would have preferred to stay with T-Mobile when I bought my iPhone. Yes, their network is not quite as ubiquitous as AT&T's but I had much better experience with TMO. If you want GSM in the US, those are your only choices. But even the iPhone isn't worth full retail if you don't get the carrier subsidy.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

Then that's because you don't appreciate what is going on with your phone or have a poor selection of battery unfriendly applications.

I appreciate just fine what's going on with my phone and the apps are what I bought the phone for.

Far too often people blame Android/Phone/battery for what is really ignorance or a complete disregard for what they install on their phone.

You'll note I didn't blame anything, I simply said that in normal use smartphones generally have a crappy battery life.

After talking with him, he left bluetooth and wifi on all time, even when they were not being used. But even worse, he had his twitter application polling for updates every MINUTE of the day. That means his phone never slept. He was angry his phone couldn't last the day without charging.

I have to say that this is one criticism I have about Android - the stock OS doesn't actually make it that easy to know when apps are draining the battery and which are responsible. On the occasion that I've installed a badly behaved app that doesn't let the phone sleep, my first indication has usually been when the phone runs out of juice. Flashing the notification LED or something when the screen is off but the phone is awake would go a long way to help. The Spare Parts app is quite useful, but it still isn't easy to work out what app is responsible when the phone is being reported as running 10% of the time.

Depending on what I'm doing, I see anywhere from one to three days of battery life.

People on Slashdot often seem to struggle with the idea that people might be away from a power socket for more than a few minutes. It isn't uncommon for me to be away from a power socket for a week or more. "1-3 days" just doesn't cut it.

That's the thing, it *ABSOLUTELY* *IS* misinformation.

No, it really isn't. Sure, you can get great battery life if you turn all the useful stuff off, but that isn't what most people want to do. I'm not interested in knowing what the absolute maximum battery life I might get is, I'm interested in the life I'm going to get in normal use. This is no different to car manufacturers quoting "best case" (i.e. totally unrealistic) MPG figures - it might sell well, but it is utterly meaningless since no one will ever see that kind of efficency in the real world.

The point is, people constantly compare with the iPhone and conclude the G1 has horrible battery life.

You'll note that I didn't do this - I said they *both* have sucky battery life. In fact, I went further than that and said that pretty much all smartphones have sucky battery life.

Re:"It's the Network"

[ncc74656]

As an experiment I once put her T-Mo SIM into my unlocked AT&T phone (AT&T Tilt). It didn't work, and even after putting my SIM back in, my phone's IMEI was blacklisted by the tower for 15-20 minutes - no coverage even with my AT&T SIM for that period!

Didn't know they had that capability. I unlocked my iPhone over the weekend and swapped SIMs with my boss (his CrackBerry uses T-Mobile) earlier today to see if the unlock worked. It took a while for my phone to connect to T-Mobile once it was booted up, but it eventually got through. After making a test call, I put the AT&T SIM back in; it connected back to AT&T as quickly as it normally does.

(The unlock wasn't so that I could switch over to T-Mobile; doing that with an iPhone 3G is pointless for the reasons given above by plenty of others. It's mainly so I have the capability to stick in a foreign SIM if I head out-of-country so I don't get bent over paying AT&T's international rates.)

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

You'll note I didn't blame anything, I simply said that in normal use smartphones generally have a crappy battery life.

I think we're talking two sides of the same coin here. I'm addressing the perception of poor battery life. Based on your comment, its fair to say, "in contrast to other smart phones, the G1 has good battery life." And that's the problem. We're really dealing with perception and semantics. The perception is, of smart phones, the G1 has especially poor life. That's the perception I disavow because its factually not true. Realistically, the G1 has very good life given its load. That's the facts.

In other words, if you walk around saying the G1 has poor battery life, people accept it as such as so much myth exists to support that position. So long as you qualify your comment of compared to non-smart phones my G1 has poor battery life, I don't have an issue with that statement. But if you state it where the perceived comment is in contrast to other smart phones, as in it has poor life, then that statement is completely misleading, factually false, and only serves to provide additional substance to what is already a run-away myth.

That's the point I'm making.

I have to say that this is one criticism I have about Android - the stock OS doesn't actually make it that easy to know when apps are draining the battery and which are responsible.

For that reason "Spare Parts" needs to be more readily available. I agree. I don't recall if its included in the OEM builds or not. It does a good job of tracking battery use, power locks, sleep/wake time, etc. Like you I do agree the results are not always obvious to the layman. As a side note, I believe its also available on the market as a free download.

People on Slashdot often seem to struggle with the idea that people might be away from a power socket for more than a few minutes. It isn't uncommon for me to be away from a power socket for a week or more. "1-3 days" just doesn't cut it.

If that's the case, then either no smart phone is a good pick for you, you need to change your expectations to be far more realistic, or you need to adjust your phone's workload to provide the mandatory life. None of those are unreasonable options.

Keep in mind, even at three days, I'm doing a fair bit of email and phone calling and a little browsing/texting. If I only did email and phone calls (length dependent), more than three days is easily achievable. Again, WiSyncPlus also helps here. I do agree it would be impossible without the likes of WiSyncPlus. From the website you can read the battery claims. Standby time is claimed to be very high. But its not realistic to expect any smart phone to be always on and yet last weeks at a time. That's the reason the Palm-Pre is doomed to horrible battery life. No phone does that without extra batteries. None. Its physically impossible and therefore very unrealistic to have such expectations. And that's what seems to confuse me. Above you readily admit no smart phone has good battery life and then you turn and seem to suggest your G1 has poor battery life while knowing full well it doesn't; and then turn again and insist it does. I don't know what to think of that.

No, it really isn't. Sure, you can get great battery life if you turn all the useful stuff off, but that isn't what most people want to do. I'm not interested in knowing what the absolute maximum battery life I might get is, I'm interested in the life I'm going to get in normal use. This is no different to car manufacturers quoting "best case" (i.e. totally unrealistic) MPG figures - it might sell well, but it is utterly meaningless since no one will ever see that kind of efficency in the real world.

Maximum battery life is not what this thread has been about. Not one bit. At least not in any form on my side. I'm talking about real world, realistic battery life. If it was about maximum battery life, easily you can see weeks on an Andro

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

If that's the case, then either no smart phone is a good pick for you, you need to change your expectations to be far more realistic, or you need to adjust your phone's workload to provide the mandatory life.

As I have already said, several times, I am happy to accept that no smartphone has a good battery life. The HTC Dream (in fact, anything not made by Apple) allows me to work around this problem by just taking spare batteries. This is one of the many many reasons why I consider the HTC Dream to be better than the iPhone for my situation.

If it was about maximum battery life, easily you can see weeks on an Android phone.

I'm sorry, that's simply not true (assuming that by "Android phone" you are talking about something similar to the HTC Dream). The Dream has a 1150mAh battery and is specified to draw around 3mA with the CPU asleep and all the radios disabled. That puts the absolute upper limit at a little under 16 days, and I hardly think you can really count that as "standby" given that the radio is turned off. These are limits set by the hardware - there is nothing that the software can do to either increase the battery capacity or decrease the device's minimum current draw.

I'm actually confused as to what your position actually is. ;)

My position is that all smartphones have an unacceptably short battery life when being used normally and that the workaround is simply to carry multiple batteries and avoid devices that prevent you from changing the battery.

My position is also that the manufacturer's quoted standby times are a complete work of fiction and cannot ever be achieved by any means.

Re:"It's the Network"

[T-Bone-T]

You don't need fast memory to play music but it sure helps with high-quality video and graphics.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

I said, "you can see weeks", to which you said, "I'm sorry, that's simply not true...That puts the absolute upper limit at a little under 16 days".

Last I checked, 16 days is "weeks". There are 14-days in two weeks. So technically two weeks and some days is doable. I believe that still counts as weeks. But we're splitting hairs here as we both agree, that's not a realistic use of the phone nor should it be the basis of realistic expectations. I'll also note the graph at the link I provided also supports a standby time of 16 days; as extrapolated based on graphed measurement.

My position is also that the manufacturer's quoted standby times are a complete work of fiction and cannot ever be achieved by any means.

I exceed the official standby times on my G1 all the time, while realistically using my phone. I can only do so by using WiSyncPlus but regardless it is a very real and very usable use of the phone while still providing plenty of functionality. The standby time for the G1 is realistic. Do not confuse standby time with usable time. The standby time for the G1 is obtainable and realistic. But standby time is a far, far cry from talk time or actual time spent performing a useful workload.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

Not really. With video you're still typically CPU bound. And even on the iPhone, any quality, showcase type game is going to load the required resources at level boundary because even the iPhone doesn't have that kind of I/O and CPU to spare without causing problems for game play.

Re:"It's the Network"

[stigmataman]

They've publicly stated they'll have one by the end of the year or in the first quarter. Looking like the Motorola "Sholes" will be their first Android device, and I wouldn't be surprised if it comes out by November.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

Last I checked, 16 days is "weeks".

Yes, that's 16 days with the radio off. I certainly wouldn't consider a phone with the radio off to be "in standby". Turning the radio on is bound to lose more than 2 days and I'm honestly not at all convinced that the phone is going to leave the CPU turned off for the whole time, even with background data disabled.

But we're splitting hairs here as we both agree, that's not a realistic use of the phone nor should it be the basis of realistic expectations.

I'm not splitting hairs, I'm pointing out that your claimed figures are an outright lie. Having to use fictitious figures to back up your arguments demonstrates pretty weak arguments IMHO.

I exceed the official standby times on my G1 all the time, while realistically using my phone.

Errm really? The quoted standby time for the G1 is 319 hours GSM, 402 hours WCDMA. I do not believe you exceed these times, especially if you are "realistically using your phone".

Frankly, your claimed standby times throughout this thread have been extremely variable - you started off saying that you got over 100 hours more than an iPhone, then you said you got 1-3 days (notice that 3 days is less than 100 hours - do iPhones get negative amounts of standby time or something?), then you said you regularly exceed the quoted standby time of almost 17 days.

The standby time for the G1 is realistic. Do not confuse standby time with usable time. The standby time for the G1 is obtainable and realistic.

That simply isn't true. By HTC's own specs for battery capacity and current consumption, the 402 hour standby time is not achievable - the specs quote a 3mA current draw when the CPU is asleep with the phone in aeroplane mode, the battery capacity is 1150mAh. Simple maths will tell you that this means you get a absolute limit to the standby time of 383 hours - well short of the 402 hours quoted, and this is assuming that the CPU never wakes up (seems pretty unrealistic) and all the radios are off (which doesn't constitute "standby" as far as I'm concerned. Especially since the quoted 402 hour standby time actually specifies that the WCDMA is active!)

But standby time is a far, far cry from talk time or actual time spent performing a useful workload.

Please re-read what I said until you understand it: according to the official specs the absolute minimum power the phone can possibly draw while powered up, with the radios off, exceeds the average maximum power you would need to be drawing in order to achieve the standby times they quote for a powered up phone with the WCDMA radio on. The quoted standby time is not only unrealistic, it is physically unachievable due to the hardware constraints.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Doctor_Jest]

For me it's just east of Dallas (Rockwall, and right outside of that area... the further east you go, the less coverage you have if you veer even a little from I-30). It's spotty between Rockwall and Royse City as well, I suspect it's the slightly hilly nature of certain roads (and the expansive ranches that probably don't have any incentive to allow cell towers. Though Sprint's pretty solid, and AT&T is as well.. I have not tried Verizon... nor do I know anyone offhand who does ironically enough. I don't like how they gimp their phones (and I will protest until FiOS comes and levels the cable/DSL playing field here.... heh.)

Dallas is golden of course.. for most providers... with the exception of the dense inner urban jungle (it's not deadzones but patches of low signal strength that can play havoc with lesser phones...)

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

wouldn't consider a phone with the radio off to be "in standby".

There are many radios involved these days. Regardless, standby means exactly what it sounds - standing by to be used as a phone. Airplane mode is not considered "standby". Standby means ready to receive or initiate an outbound call.

Errm really? The quoted standby time for the G1 is 319 hours GSM, 402 hours WCDMA. I do not believe you exceed these times, especially if you are "realistically using your phone".

Then you'll not believe anything. Though in hindsight clearly should not have said, "all the time." That was used to stress its is obtainable and I've done it. I have no idea why using a phone as a phone is considered unrealistic to you. Regardless, using a phone as a phone is as realistic as it gets. Using a phone as a phone with occasional texting (basically free) and occasional email is very realistic use of a phone. Telling anyone that using a phone as a phone is unrealistic is going to get you a look like you're an idiot every time.

As for your math, reality says they provided a worst case power draw and the quoted specs overstate the actual draw. Furthermore, it is EXTREMELY common for batteries to hold larger capacities than their rated values when they are treated nicely; especially lions and nicads. Did I mention EXTREEEEEMLY common. So one can completely ignore your math as right out of the gate, once you leave theoretical land, you're working on a false assumption. In other words, even if the CPU draw is understated, its still safe to completely ignore your math. That's the difference between theoretical and the real world.

At this point, as you constantly contradict yourself and refuse to believe factual statements, while at the same time likely have yet to check the link I even provided to you, I believe we're done.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

There are many radios involved these days. Regardless, standby means exactly what it sounds - standing by to be used as a phone.

Exactly - as I said, you can't consider a phone which has both the WCDMA and GSM radios turned off as "in standby".

I have no idea why using a phone as a phone is considered unrealistic to you.

Where did I say that was unrealistic?

Go back and reread - I said that running the phone for 402 hours in aeroplane mode is unrealistic (by the manufacturer's own specs). You claim to have done this with the WCDMA or GSM radio turned on - I simply don't believe you as the hardware specs indicate this to be impossible. Throughout this discussion you have used inconsistent and fictitious claims to support your arguments, this is no different.

Using a phone as a phone with occasional texting (basically free) and occasional email is very realistic use of a phone.

Using the phone for voice calls, SMS messages and email is by no means free - both have a cost on the device's power budget: Voice calls involve powering up the CPU and screen in order to dial and then the radio is transmitting and codec running for the duration of the call - this is extremely power-heavy. SMS messages involve powering up the CPU and screen while you are composing or reading them and require the radio to transmit when sending and receiving. The same goes for email, although the power costs will be higher than SMS since the protocol is less efficient and the messages bigger.

Telling anyone that using a phone as a phone is unrealistic is going to get you a look like you're an idiot every time.

Absolutely, anyone claiming that is going to look like a complete idiot, luckily I haven't ever claimed that. Conversely, accusing people of saying things they never said in a publicly archived thread is going to make you look like an idiot.

As for your math, reality says they provided a worst case power draw and the quoted specs overstate the actual draw.

The 3mA figure was lifted from their test specs. True, some of the phones they manufacture will have a slightly lower power draw due to manufacturing tolerances (but I doubt the tolerances are very big), but similarly, some of the phones produced *will* be drawing 3mA. Quoting standby figures that are unachievable by a proportion of the phones manufactured seems somewhat disingenuous.

Furthermore, it is EXTREMELY common for batteries to hold larger capacities than their rated values when they are treated nicely; especially lions and nicads. Did I mention EXTREEEEEMLY common.

[citation needed]
If the battery was capable of a higher capacity then that is what would be printed on the label.

At this point, as you constantly contradict yourself

Where have I contradicted myself?

and refuse to believe factual statements

Your claims seem far from factual to me, especially given how outrageously inconsistent the figures you have claimed have been over the course of the thread.

while at the same time likely have yet to check the link I even provided to you

You might want to go back to school and learn how to read properly - I already said I had looked at the link. I also pointed out that the upper limit to the Dream's life is governed by the hardware - no piece of software can magically extend it beyond that limit, even though you claim it does. A piece of software can't change the design of the hardware or the laws of physics.

Re:"It's the Network"

[FireFury03]

An unlocked Android phone will only work on GSM/GPRS/EDGE. T-Mobile and AT&T use different frequency allocations for UMTS, UMTS 850/1900 for AT&T and 2100/1700 MHz for TMobile. What would be great is if we can get a quad band Android phone that supported those frequencies, but as of yet, there is none.

The HTC Dream is quad band, but only for GSM, not UMTS (which I believe applies to pretty much all "quad band" phones doesn't it?).

I'm in the UK, so I only recently realised that AT&T used nonstandard frequencies for UMTS, but I'm a bit confused - I thought 850/1900MHz were GSM bands in the US, are AT&T reusing their GSM frequencies for UMTS? If so, how are they doing this without taking the GSM network offline?

Re:"It's the Network"

[Reaperducer]

You're right, T-Mobile has fantastic coverage in Minnesota. The reason for this is T-Mobile ate the home-grown Voicestream service back around 2001 or so.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

That's precisely my problem... T-Mobile coverage stinks where I live (South Jersey). I had T-Mobil a bit over two years ago, and basically had to go outside, and often to the end of my driveway, to get reliable call service. No way I could count on them for 3G networking service. I complained enough about it that they said they'd consider putting up a cell tower on my land (I have 26 acres), but months later, I still had nothing back from them (we were in a decent hole in the coverage... but there are so many, they might have chosen a more strategic place for their next 100 towers). So I switched to Verizon, which actually works fairly well, even from my cellar.

It's a shame... I was pretty happy with T-Mobile as a company, and they're reasonably priced, for a data-centric plan with unlimited data use. Whereas Verizon is the devil incarnate, and charges like AT&T for the expected data access. But the bottom line: it's the network.. if you can't connect, what's the point?

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

There's another reason T-Mobil may have coverage problems... they may get more connections at 2100MHz, but they're going to need more towers at 2100 and/or 1700 to cover the same area AT&T can if they have 850MHz as an option. The higher frequencies make sense in urban areas, where you need more channels and don't care as much about range, but they suffer outside of cities.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

The iPhone's SIM card, like all SIM cards, is slow, and just used (optionally) for phone setup and number storage.

The 16GB or 32GB of memory is built-in NAND flash, soldered onto the main board... the same sort of flash memory you'll find in any old flash memory card. It will probably be a tad faster driven directly from a CPU interface, rather than over the SD connection, but keep in mind, a class 6 card runs at least 6MB/s, and potentially up to 45MB/s, depending on the capabilities of the master, which isn't all that slow for smartphone/PDA requirements. You're talking about devices with 128K-256K of total DRAM.. they have limits on how much data they're ever going to load at once.

On my old Treo 700p, I used a 16GB SDHC card for main storage, and it worked just dandy... plenty fast. I would much prefer a smart phone with a memory slot than one with even a fair amount of fixed storage... particularly the full-sized SDHC card on the Treo. I have a laptop, several digital cameras, an audio recorder, etc. that use SD/SDHC, and it's terribly useful to include your PDA/Smartphone in that device pool.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

You underestimate the demands of video. Regular HD or HDV video runs 25Mb/s, full 1920x1080 AVCHD peaks at 24Mb/s, and is generally a bit lower than that. All of those can be reliably written in realtime to a Class 6 SDHC card (sure, HD/HDV is usually written to tape, but the SDHC cards are plenty fast enough). The "Class" spec is for minimum write speed, they always read faster. And you don't need anything close to HD resolutions in a pocket device on playback.

If you're lucky enough to have a pocket PDA-style device that can shoot HD video... well, dozens of camcorders and DSCs (with HD video features) are already using SDHC as a perfectly good high-def video recording medium. It's even moved into pro-class cameras (Panasonic AG-HMC150, JVC GY-HM100, GY-HM700UXT, as well as SxS holders for SDHC cards, which work in most SxS flash cameras) over the last year.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

Verizon isn't so weird in moving to LTE for 4G. Sure, this came out of the GSM camp, but it's more like WiMax than anything else (http://gigaom.com/2008/03/05/a-little-4g-sibling-rivalry/). And, keep in mind, UMTS (GSM's 3G technology) is already a CDMA protocol, not TDMA like GSM voice, EDGE, or GPRS. And in fact, Qualcomm, the developer of the CDMA standards in the US, cancelled their development of their own, proprietary G4 technology, UMB, in favor of LTE as well. With Sprint already committed to WiMax, that's pretty much the story.

As far as LTE entirely replacing GSM (or anything else), that could happen, but probably not all at once... first generation LTE phones are probably just using LTE for the network, as today's phones still use the older technologies for voice. Some of that really depends on when the rollout actually happens, and how large it is -- as in the early days of digital phones, there rollout was slow enough that most first generation digital phones also did AMPS as a fallback.

Based on LTE's System Architecture Evolution standard, LTE is all IP-based. So if you want voice directly on an LTE network, it's VoIP that pretty much works today... SIP, or something proprietary. The telecoms are still milling about other solutions that'll make things more efficient, VoLGA, ISM (based on SIP), and perhaps some others. That doesn't really need to be in place until they start phasing out the older protocols.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

The problem with Sprint's 4G is that they're using WiMax, while everyone else on the planet will be using LTE. Ok, it's actually Sprint and Clearwire... but Sprint owns 51% of Clearwire, so it's pretty much the same thing. So 4G roaming is not even remotely an option with Sprint, and they're small enough to make this a likely problem. This might still be cool if you're in Atlanta, Baltimore, Las Vegas, or Portland, but they aren't going to have the kind of cash that Verizon or AT&T can toss at this. So that lead won't necessarily last long enough to make it to one's home or business.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

LTE is initially the replacement/upgrade for UMTS.. as well as the 4G IP-based technology being adopted by Verizon and Qualcomm. It may some day be an actual replacement for GSM, but initially, it's just a faster data connection than you had in your previous phone. They won't be taking the legacy voice protocols, like GSM or CDMA, out right way, any more than today's UMTS phones lots the original voice protocols.

There are plenty of standards that'll give you voice over LTE, just as there are for any other IP-based network. Hopefully carriers will settle on a universal standard to let you make VoIP calls on LTE... but it's largely a software problem. And it won't necessarily be solved the same way by every carrier -- we've seen this before, like GSM vendors using different, incompatible frequencies for UMTS.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

Yeah, Verizon was pure evil on the RAZR. Actually, if you have the "m" version, you could get your photos off the phone simply by re-directing them to a mico-SD card.

But really, Verizon was horrible on this. They took out the halfway decent Motorola interface you got on any other RAZR, and put in their "Red" interface, which was the same basic crap you got on the cheapest Verizon phone, with roughly the same features. No Java, and yeah, that Bluetooth thing. The original version from Verizon still had the OBEX protocol in it, and you could send photos to a PC or some other BT device. They pulled it out, on a later "upgrade". They really wanted to you to have to use their web site for photo offloads, paying per photo -- that was their main goal, not selling the $80 USB kit.

They did not, however, mess with the Palm Treo 700p, my second Verizon phone. Not that they had much of capability to do so and still sell a smartphone. Of course, if you look at Verizon right now, they don't have any good smartphones... a couple Blackberries, a few Windows Mobile options, and perhaps an old Palm. What they've been pushing are some of these LGs, semi-smart phones that look vaguely iPhone-ish, but are deeply evil when you look at the support from Verizon. You can only get a handful of applications, but the worst is that you don't buy these, you rent them.. for $5-$10 a month sometimes. That's the heart of where Verizon is on smart phones. I think they view anything better as simply a competitive necessity at best (assuming they do decide to compete at some point, with new Palm or Android phones).

My only concern about Verizon is that they have excellent coverage where I am. AT&T runs a reasonable second, while T-Mobil and Sprint don't seen to even be trying.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

Based on the recent reports, that was Apple's handiwork, not AT&T's. Google Voice has the nerve to change the Apple GUI in ways that Apple won't allow you to change their iPhone. Er, I mean, your iPhone.

But that's a tiny thing compared to the evil of Verizon's mucking around with phones. It's kind of like, if AT&T sold the iPhone, but tossed out the Apple OS and put in some crippled version of Windows Mobile or something.. that's the way in which Verizon has previous messed with their high-end-but-not-quite-smart phones, like the RAZR some years back.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

Verizon uses CDMA.. no SIMs. The code that you'd normally get from a SIM is permanently in the phone. You can change your phone online, for free.. but Verizon knows the codes assigned to them, and will most likely reject a code from some other CDMA phone.

Re:"It's the Network"

[GooberToo]

[citation needed]
If the battery was capable of a higher capacity then that is what would be printed on the label.

Go check any hobby which requires the constant use of batteries and chargers. R/C cars, boats, and airplanes are a good source of information - as are the companies who manufacture their chargers and batteries.

This is fact, the rated capacity of a battery represents the MINIMUM capacity; not the maximum. For others, the difference can be huge. Otherwise you'd wind up with batteries which could never hold their rated capacity. For some poor quality packs, the minimum and maximum may not be far apart. Quality batteries can commonly hold 20%-50%, or more, over their rated capacity, so long as the cells remain balanced and are properly trickled charged. As lion packs are always (assuming a reasonable aversion to fire) trickled charged, it is very common for a fully charged battery to exceed its rated capacity - for at least a good chunk of its life. This is one reason why Android calibrates to each battery pack over time. Different packs will provide for different capacities, including well over their rated capacity. And over time, for most packs with use, the capacity will shrink.

And don't for a second assume that hobby batteries are different than the batteries used for phones. It is common for hobbyists to collect their cells from cell phone battery packs, and with them take the integrated charging circuitry. As a rule of thumb, cell phone batteries tend to have very high quality cells because of both the charging cycle demands and fire liabilities.

As you seemingly are unaware of the state of batteries, I can understand why you believe what you do. Regardless, the information you presented as fact, may be, but it is far from representative of the whole picture. The information I present as fact, is fact. Nothing I stated is misleading or untrue. Hopefully you can come to terms with this and realize they need not be as mutually exclusive as you insist on believing.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

If they can really claim thousands of applications, even at this early date, that's saying something pretty profound about the potential for the Android market.. because that's showing that developers believe it (and perhaps, that it's easy to write apps, which is also important). Add in the possibility of using 3rd party apps... not possible on iPhone. Then you have lots of companies looking to Android to solve their problem with the iPhone, and perhaps even re-invent their cellular business. Motorola reportedly has 250 people working on some aspect of Android. At some point, it's not simply a measure of possible success, but rather, how could this possibly fail? Android could well become to smart phones and PDAs what Windows has been to PCs.. the Default Choice.

Sure, Apple's had a head start. But they also had a big head start in the personal computer business over IBM. For a short time, they had better hardware and a better OS... didn't help, and that's largely because no single company will deliver the same kind of success you get from "everyone else" working on the same platform.

Stupid Apple Dogma is also only tolerated by iPhone users, because the iPhone has been the bright, shiny object in the light there last few years. But it does eventually get back to reality. One problem is battery life -- both kinds. When you have an all-in-one device, don't be surprised if people use it that way. Can I get a day's worth of phone, PDA, MP3 player, video player, etc. use out of an iPhone. Sometimes, others... not so much. Now consider that, this pretty much means charging it every night. I have a two-year A&T contract, but my battery is good for somewhere between 300-500 charges, being as it is a normal everyday Li-Poly cell. That means, if I'm really using an iPhone as intended, the battery won't last the life of the frickin' contract.

That was no big deal for my Treo 700p... I could buy a new, factory-original battery for $20 on Amazon and replace it myself. It IS a big deal having to send the phone back to Apple, and paying what amounts to ransom to get it back with a new cell. And yet, this Apple dogma isn't going away, it's spreading.. they're doing this to laptops, now.

The greatest thing about the PC market is that someone will make a machine that's close to what I want.. if not, I can make it myself. If you use a Mac, Apple has 5-10 options for you. If you use a PC, HP has 50, and if they don't suit you, there's Dell, Gateway, Acer, Sony, Toshiba, Fujitsu, Boxx, etc. This same thing should take hold in the Android market.. we already have Motorola and Sony/Ericsson announcing Android phones, and plenty more to follow... it's not just weird Chinese companies. This will ultimately be the big win in the Android market... Apple's tunnel vision will exclude most users, just as it does in the personal computer market.

Re:"It's the Network"

[hazydave]

Good in theory, sure. Here's why people fear Verizon.. the Verizon version of the RAZR (and followup phones with mini-USB jacks) would only charge with Verizon-approved chargers. Go figure! My buddy at work could connect his AT&T RAZR to his laptop and charge it... I connected mine, and got "unauthorized charger" messages. Same with connecting a bog-standard USB cable to a bog standard USB power dongle, either on AC or in the car.

That kind of petty evil has been keeping people away from Verizon. They have the best signal in my area, but give me someone else who can reach my house with a functional 3G signal (even if they can do voice, I'd have to consider it), and I'd dump them in a heartbeat.

If Verizon takes the introduction of their Android phone to change this behavior, for real, I'll be on-board in a heartbeat. If they do this right, they could knock the iPhone down a notch or two, and that would be good for everyone.. even, in the long run, iPhone users. If it's business as usual, they could screw it all up for Android before they have a chance to hit critical mass.

Re:"It's the Network"

[RenderSeven]

Aw thats just wrong! 'Petty Evil' is a nice description too. I had thought carriers and hardware vendors were moving away from this nonsense with the adoption of USB. I was furious at HTC when I got my myTouch and saw the proprietary connector until I realized it was a superset of miniUSB and took a standard cable just fine... that was sort of clever. But the phone doesnt care where the power comes from. Neither does the iPhone, nor Palm, nor Blackberry. In the latter case it negotiates high current mode with a laptop port and wont pass without the blackberry driver installed. Thats annoying but the driver is free, and as I said the phone itself doesnt care... plugged into a powered hub it doesnt need to negotiate to get high current; same for straight chargers.

WRT Verizon, I couldnt agree more... thats a deal-breaker, even if they gave me free chargers for life.

Re:"It's the Network"

[Atryn]

The problem with Sprint's 4G is that they're using WiMax, while everyone else on the planet will be using LTE.

Assuming you are uninformed... Check out The WiMAX Forum where the front page states: With more than 487 networks deployed in over 141 countries.... You can also check out the WiMAX maps of deployments.

Oh wait, did you hear me right? Yes, DEPLOYMENTS.

Kindly point me to the live deployments of LTE that "everyone else on the planet" will be using while "only" Sprint/Clearwire are using WiMAX?

they could still do it if they wanted

[Trepidity]

There's nothing, as far as I know, in any of the existing arrangements stopping Google from co-branding a phone with a manufacturer that's blessed as "the Google [whatever]". A Google-branded phone would probably be a stronger player--- moreso than a T-Mobile-branded phone that in the explanatory text tells you about how it runs Google Android.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Darkness404]

Except for the fact that most people don't buy third party phones (well, other than this one family who is the phone-murderer and keeps buying used phones off of E-Bay to replace the phones they killed...) and so if they don't have it in AT&T, Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile's stores, no one will buy it unless there is -huge- hype about it like the iPhone, but other than that everyone pretty much just buys their phones from their cell phone company. And similarly, no one wants an expensive phone, $200 for a smartphone that seems to do -everything- seems to be the most anyone will pay, $300 unlocked will not sell well, people want cheap phones even if they are tied to an unholy contract or the phone isn't that great.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[TheGreenNuke]

$300 unlocked will not sell well

Right, because people didn't line up to buy their $599 (8GB) or $499 (4 GB) iPhones when they first launched. $300 unlocked would be a bargain for a smartphone.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Darkness404]

The difference is the iPhone had -everything- usable, polished and was honestly the best around phone without question. On the other hand Android while not terrible still doesn't have as good as web browser as Mobile Safari, the commonly available Android handsets lack a headphone jack, lack of apps, etc.

And at the time? Compare every available American handset to the iPhone and the iPhone was the only one that got everything right (minus the apps/3G, but they eventually corrected those). So its no surprise someone wanted to pay $500 on the one phone that actually worked decently.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[tooyoung]

The Google brand would go a long way. I saw a decent amount of information on a new "Google phone", back when it was released, but not many people seem to be aware that its called the T-Mobile G1. The G1 also suffers from a name that isn't quite as memorable as iPhone or Razor. I tend to confuse products that are just a combination of letters and numbers, like various car models.

The article seems to make some laughable assertions:

A smart handset manufacturer could build a top-of-the-line Android device that outshines Apple's phone in at least a few areas ... a much better Web browser

Really? Is that such a trivial task? Safari is a well established browser, and assuming that a mobile competitor can be cranked out trivially is questionable.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[fermion]

Recall that traditionally in the US a device manufacturer develops a base phone and then modifies that phone to meet the profit requirements for the mobile provider. The classic case was the Razr which apparently came in a full fledged version in europe, but with significant changes in the US. I recall that it took forever for a Razr to come out for Cingular because of all the changes the wanted. Later on we saw the impossibility of getting a phone that played and downloaded music. There was no upside for the cell company so it did not happen.

The reason that Apple is popular is that found a hungry phone company, the new ATT, that would allow it build a phone that had the end user in mind for the customer, and not the the cell company, as is normally the case.Therefore, for the first time, we had a phone that did what we wanted it to do, not a phone that maximized the amount of money we had to spend to get simple things done.

The reason that the google phone is not so good is because there are now two profit interests between the end user and the phone. The Google, who has control over manh of the features, has a interest to maximize ad revenue. No ads, not google. The cell phone company, such as t-mobile, has to maximize billing. In the google world, the end user has moved from a distant third to a distant fourth.

We see the failure of the Google attempt to Googles blatant use of the FCC to hijack a market that it cannot win through fair competition. This is not the first that google has tried this.

The Google app on the iPhone would be interesting, but what people do not realize is that the iPhone, as a product, does not have to have every App on it. We could instead live in a competitive environment in which products are not all low mark up commodity products, but rather a mix of commodity and differentiated high end products. In this world, consumers have an opportunity to buy a product that fits their needs rather than a product that is minimally acceptable. If consumers want the highly integrated google experience, then by all means there should be a google phone that provides such an experience, and maybe Verizon or T-Mobile will sacrifice profit to provide such an experience. For now, iPhone users seem to appreciate the integrated Apple experience, and I for one see no need for google, with it's privacy destroying metrics, to degrade that experience.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Anonymous Coward]

There tends to be four groups of cellphone buyers in the US:

Group 1: Want a low end plan, and want a good phone that is "free". Chuck them a flip phone with the ability to download some ringtones, some games, and maybe some primitive Web browsing, and they are happy. Here, the phone company makes their money from the plan, or the termination of contract fee.

Group 2: Wants an iPhone by name, and no other will do. This isn't saying this is either good or bad, but this is a large market, especially high school and college age students. This group completely replaces the Sidekick market.

Group 3: Executives with their corporate phones. Of course, iPhones offer remote wipe via me.com and encryption, but both Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices offer a lot more functionality. Blackberries can be configured to remote wipe themselves if they don't receive a network signal after a period of time (say someone yanks the SIM card, or cuts the antenna so a remote wipe sequence won't hit the phone.) Both Blackberries and WM devices can be configured to wipe if the PIN is guessed wrongly more than a set number of times. Both devices also offer enforcing of corporate policies.

Group 4: High end phone users. They like their specialized apps, so they will hunt down and import a phone that does their liking, then hit a GSM provider up for an OOC (out of contract) plan. $20 for a SIM card, and they have service.

Unfortunately, until Apple is shorn from AT&T, group 2 is a lost cause. Group 1 sometimes is profitable because they are a constant income stream monthly, but it is a highly competitive market because people shop by price and little else. Group 4 is relatively small, and doesn't impact total sales as much. Group 3 is a market that a number of cellphone providers are competing for.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Sparr0]

Have you used a good implementation of mobile Opera? Hands down better than Safari on the iPhone, in almost every way. Add multitouch if you desperately need it, but I don't.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[markkezner]

The reason that the google phone is not so good is because there are now two profit interests between the end user and the phone.

Google does not control anything about the experience once the phone is in a consumer's hands. Any of the phone's features can be replaced, including the home screen, contacts, email, or anything else.

I don't hate apple or the iPhone, in fact, I'm writing this post on a Macbook. It's a very nice phone, and it's very polished. But to be fair, it is apple who insists on having absolute control over the user's apps, through the approval process.

The Google, who has control over manh of the features, has a interest to maximize ad revenue. No ads, not google.

I have not seen a single ad in any of the standard applications for it. Not one ad. Some third party apps I downloaded do have ads, but that's neither here nor there.

We see the failure of the Google attempt to Googles blatant use of the FCC to hijack a market that it cannot win through fair competition. This is not the first that google has tried this.

Fair competition? If you want to talk about fair competition, they why can't I release an iPhone app that gives turn by turn directions? Why can't I release an alternative web browser or music store? Why can't I use google voice? Apple doesn't allow for competition against their services or that of their partners.

On the other hand, Google wouldn't even care if I released a web search app for Android. Apps only get removed if they get flagged as inappropriate (ie porn)

The Google app on the iPhone would be interesting, but what people do not realize is that the iPhone, as a product, does not have to have every App on it. We could instead live in a competitive environment in which products are not all low mark up commodity products, but rather a mix of commodity and differentiated high end products. In this world, consumers have an opportunity to buy a product that fits their needs rather than a product that is minimally acceptable.

Wouldn't it be better for individual users to decide for themselves, rather than some stooge at apple deciding for you?

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Brannon]

Compare the "must have" features of a modern automobile to the Model T and there are massive amounts of things missing. I'll chalk your misinformation up to a fundamental misunderstanding of the world you live in, as it would be rude of me to call you clinically retarded.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Dun Malg]

The difference is the iPhone had -everything- usable

Except copy/paste, 3G, video recording, and several other features that came standard on other phones of the same period. But yeah, every one of the features they deigned to include worked quite well.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Kalriath]

On the other hand, Google wouldn't even care if I released a web search app for Android. Apps only get removed if they get flagged as inappropriate (ie porn)

On the other hand, how is that fair competition? I think Naughty America Inc might feel they're being unfairly prevented from releasing apps consumers (obviously) want.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Sparr0]

And you would say that the Model T had -everything- usable, polished?

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Tony Hoyle]

I'm sure you can get Android porn - just not on the Google Marketplace.

Google have no problems with you setting up an alternative Marketplace and distributing through that.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Cro Magnon]

Really? Is that such a trivial task? Safari is a well established browser, and assuming that a mobile competitor can be cranked out trivially is questionable.

They wouldn't have to "crank out" a competitor. They could use Opera, which is also a well estalished brower.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[markkezner]

Fair competition means that there is freedom to create competing products. That is, by limiting what runs on the iPhone, Apple is promoting the free market by allowing you, the all knowing and wise developer, to move to another platform and create superior product.

My point is that the iPhone app store is not a free\fair\competitive market onto itself. Of course I'm free to use another platform, but that changes what users I can market to. No one is saying that I can't develop for another platform. However, that doesn't mean I can't point out shenanigans when I see it.

The limitations on the iPhone are well known, and well discussed.

Well discussed in tech circles like Slashdot. Joe User just doesn't have a clue about the controversy. He just knows it's a really good phone, which it is.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Bert64]

Just because something is google branded, doesn't mean the carriers won't supply it to their customers.
There's no reason Google couldn't get their own branded phone manufactured and shipped to multiple carriers, virtually every carrier around offers blackberry, nokia, sony-ericson branded phones already.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Bert64]

Sometimes it's better to have a small set of features that work well, than a large set of buggy and broken features...

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Lemmy Caution]

By "executives," do you mean managers and working professionals in general? Because there aren't all that many "executives," properly speaking.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[mrjohnson]

What's wrong with the browser? They're both based on webkit. They both do about the same. The only real differences I can think of is the Android browser has Gears built-in and displays text at a reasonable size by default (where the iPhone leaves the page zoomed out).

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[norminator]

The Model T didn't come out when other cars were already commonplace. When the iPhone came out, there were plenty of other smartphones that had installable apps, 3G, and even the dumbphones of the time could do copy/paste and video recording.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[mcvos]

The 3GS is the iPhone that it always should have been. Only now everybody has that stuff.

Even so, there's one thing the original iPhone did way better than anyone else: the user interface. I never used any of the features of my old phone, but the iPhone made everything accessible and easy to use. And while Apple worked to get their features complete, everybody else learned from Apple and started fixing their UI.

My big question is: are other UIs now just as good as the iPhone? I like the multitouch, all the apps easily availlable without searching through menus, and the wide choice of extra apps. But the iPhone is too restrictive in which apps it allows, and it comes with a crappy carrier. If the HTC Hero has a similar UI but a better carrier and more freedom in apps, I'm going to switch. If it lacks multitouch and requires me to search through menus to get what I want, I'm not going to bother.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[eratosthene]

Y'know, my G1 has a big Google logo on the back of it. Just sayin'.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Brannon]

No Wifi, less space than a Nomad, Lame.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[SputnikCopilot]

Sometimes it's better still to have an enormous set of potentially buggy and half-written code which is available for modification at the whim of a basement developer. There's a reason why we ask, "but does it run Linux??" regarding every hardware project. Many would rather the hope that they (or one of thousands across the world) can build those features. It's better than the hope given by a corporate entity about a locked-down device. It took millions of complaints over a year to get the iPhone's hardware features usable in the software. The Verizon Razr (ie) didn't have such hope. A brick with a bootloader gives more hope for 30-year-old functionality (copy/paste) than does the most impressive new gadget if its true owners forbid lessees from running a few lines of code.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[shutdown -p now]

Best of all is to convince the people that they really, really need the features that you have in exact shape and form that you have them, and that they absolutely do not need any feature that you do not have, or which is broken.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[evil saltine]

Broken features such as?

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[JacksBrokenCode]

Sometimes it's better to have a small set of features that work well, than a large set of buggy and broken features...

Except when the market is saturated with competing handsets that have larger feature sets that aren't buggy or broken.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Darkness404]

Heh, have you ever tried to -use- a Blackberry browser? Not just the Bold, Storm and newer BlackBerries which came out after the iPhone but the ones before, were terrible the iPhone to be honest was the only mobile device with a truly decent browser. Yes, Opera Mini is nice and adequate for some reading, but Mobile Safari really took it to a next level.

BlackBerries are just fine for e-mail, but for web browsing on any one but the newer ones? Its a disaster.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[JakartaDean]

Except for the fact that most people don't buy third party phones (well, other than this one family who is the phone-murderer and keeps buying used phones off of E-Bay to replace the phones they killed...) and so if they don't have it in AT&T, Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile's stores, no one will buy it unless there is -huge- hype about it like the iPhone, but other than that everyone pretty much just buys their phones from their cell phone company. And similarly, no one wants an expensive phone, $200 for a smartphone that seems to do -everything- seems to be the most anyone will pay, $300 unlocked will not sell well, people want cheap phones even if they are tied to an unholy contract or the phone isn't that great.

I am sure you meant most Americans don't buy third party phones. I can assure you that most people do. In fact, while I'm ranting, all the comments in this thread that I've read, bar one, have been about American cell phone carriers. America is an important market, albeit stifled and behind most of the world, but that one market is almost irrelevant in the phone business. In short, pretty much all the comments posted here are wrong. I don't know why manufacturers aren't trying to sell Android phones (i.e. unlocked GSM phones, same as we already get) in Asia and Europe, but once they do I think things might turn around. In fact, I wonder if they're selling early, partly-broken models in the USA first, then once the bugs are worked out selling them in more discriminating and competitive markets.

Flame away, but non-Americans will, I imagine, know I'm right.

Re:they could still do it if they wanted

[Tintivilus]

You know, I've carried a Windows Mobile phone for two years and never once used copy/paste.

re Lack of apps, developers?

[jelizondo]

Part of the lack of good apps is the lack of solid documentation and examples. I spent weeks learning the API, but anytime I wanted to do something more meaningful that display stuff on the screen, I would get bogged down trying to figure out how to do it.

I'm not a newbie, I started programming computers back in the eighties (Z80 and 6502 assembler) so I know my way around, but the documentation is horrible, sometimes you think you got it all figured out and it turns out is an earlier / later version of the API, which doesn't quite work that way anyway.

Also, for those of us outside the U.S., it's hard to get a real phone to play with, even when Google gave thousands aways at Google I/O, you can't get one internationally at a reduced price.(At least you couldn't last time I checked.)

I gave up and decided to come back when there was some organization to the docs and some real support for independent developers

Having said all that, I believe the platform will take off and do very well; it is simply too young.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[jhol13]

platform

Sorry to take one word out of the context but this might be the key issue. If there are several, incompatible versions of the API then there will not be a platform.
Exactly this is one of the complaints of JavaME and Symbian and one big strength of Apple.

Unfortunately FOSS, and especially Linux, does not have a culture of keeping APIs unchanged, so whether Android can do it or not is yet to be seen.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[cduffy]

I'm curious -- have you done any development for Android, or are you armchair'ing this one?

They've been _extremely_ careful about what is declared a public API, to the point of holding back features on account thereof. That's one of the major reasons RFCOMM support (to pick something dear to my heart) has been unavailable for developers in every version released so far -- they're unwilling to declare the API stable until they have something they know they'll be able to maintain through newer versions of BlueZ and security audits/updates, and their compiler flags any attempts at using anything which isn't a public API (they've also released updates which break attempts to get around these measures and build software using version-specific, unreleased APIs).

Personally, I expect Android to take off on a larger scale when the fleet of phones expected to release late this year (from numerous manufacturers) make it out their respective doors.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[moon3]

I thought that the show stopper is Java/Web applications support only by Android and missing native apps SDK, i believe iPhone went ballistic right after the SDK for native software has been released and Apple got rid of that 'web applications only' mantra.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[jelizondo]

As I said, I've been around. I have done some work with Motorola phones, tried very hard with Android, but I couldn't get enough traction to do anything meaningful, so I dropped it; I have to earn my living every day because I'm not a salaried employee, so perhaps my patience is lower now than it could be.

I really got lost trying to get some SQLite stuff to work in the emulator, I could get some simple queries going but after that, there is not enough documentation to figure out easily how to get from display this one record on the screen to list this database and let the user choose one record.

Maybe I'm getting too old for this stuff. :-(

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[jhol13]

The poster I replied said "earlier / later version of the API". Sure, he was referring to documentation, but it is enough to show API is unstable.

Note: there already are Android phones around. They must use some API, or they would not function. If the API is still unstable as you say they have already failed: you cannot develop so that it works on *EVERY* Android phone, past, present and (near) future.

No, I have not developed myself (for several reasons), but this does not look good. Anyway I leave my judgement for 2010 - now it is too early to claim anything.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[w0mprat]

Part of the lack of good apps is the lack of solid documentation and examples. I spent weeks learning the API, but anytime I wanted to do something more meaningful that display stuff on the screen, I would get bogged down trying to figure out how to do it.

I'm not a newbie, I started programming computers back in the eighties (Z80 and 6502 assembler) so I know my way around, but the documentation is horrible, sometimes you think you got it all figured out and it turns out is an earlier / later version of the API, which doesn't quite work that way anyway.

Well what did you expect, Android is open source.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[RedK]

There are 2 APIs floating around in the SDK right now. Android 1.1 and Android 1.5. This is no different than the iPhone, where the APIs and frameworks are getting introduced and updated every release. If you use 3.0 features in iPhone's SDK, you're stuck as a 3.0 app. Same with Android. A 1.1 app will run on a 1.5 phone, but not the opposite.

I don't see where that is a problem since all software development as been like this for ages.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[BlackCreek]

Sorry dude, but you either looked at an earlier version of the SDK or you didn't find your way around. Or you are just whining (sorry but is always a possibility).

[...]

There are (literally) hundreds of application examples that ship with the 1.5 SDK. I've mostly gone through the API samples, but there other larger ones as well. Though you may not find links to the code from the html docs.

I did have some trouble getting sample unittests running, but other than that everything seems pretty sharp.

There is a level of maturity that a SDK acquire with time, Android is still in full swing right now, but the sheer amount of samples they have in a year from release is IMHO impressive. You are going to try Android again, consider getting the books from http://commonsware.com/ (no relation to the site, I did buy the books and I am happy with the material).

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[mrjohnson]

They added a native SDK a couple months ago.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[moon3]

No they didn't, this is a joke-DK Java binding madness. I love Android, but can't code for it, with such an offering people will stick with the old guns WinMO, iPhone, NDS, Symbian, PSP etc. using real devkits. Even the upcoming Zii Plasma looks like heaven compared to this, not to mention Zune-HD..

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Worse than that: Android is a a complete deviation from industry standard in mobile java code. Have code you've used before? Too bad, it doesn't work anymore. What, it works on any phone that supports J2ME (that is to say, almost every phone out there today)? That's also too bad, it won't work here. Write it again, and this time do it the google way.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[mrjohnson]

What else do you want? NDK allows you to escape Java and write performance sensitive code in native land.

You can't write the whole app in native code, from the look of it, but why would you want to?

After decades of esoteric and difficult mobile development, only a glutton for punishment would ask for it back.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[mrjohnson]

You know, after re-reading this, I think you may be confusing Android and Palm Pre. The Pre's apps are html/js. Android does have an SDK for building "native" apps (that you download and install).

As far as Android is concerned, native pretty much means the Dalvik interpreter.

[..] Apple got rid of that 'web applications only' mantra.

Android has no such mantra.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[cduffy]

The API is unstable only if you count versions which never became supported releases -- to go back to the RFCOMM API, there was an implementation in an RC that was cut from Android 1.0, but since it never made it into a release, the Android team never committed to maintaining support for applications using it.

Those APIs which did make it into Android 1.0 haven't gone anywhere, and won't go anywhere -- that's the whole reason APIs they weren't willing to commit to long-term got cut despite having working implementations in the RC.

If you call variability between RC and release instability, there's instability... but upstream has yet to abandon an API they committed to supporting.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[moon3]

This is about having a software that is written in C/C++ and doesn't require much rewrite on other platforms, but to port it to Android you have to do much more, you have to inescapably deal with Java, this costs additional time, effort and the viability of such a port is uncertain. Java should be optional secondary solution not a primary development platform.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[mrjohnson]

Because porting C is quick and easy right? Just recompile your winmo app for the iPhone and you're good?

You are way, way off the reservation.

It's mobile. They all have their different APIs and quirks. Java doesn't change that. It sounds like you're not a Java fan, which is fine, but to say the lack of native app building is holding back the platform is a real stretch.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[jhol13]

My point is that *IF* there will be several different mobile phones with incompatible APIs, Android will fail (at least in my eyes).

I do not care whether Android team says "we do not support that" - actually this just worsens the situation.

Apple's "3.0" is very, very close to previous, it is almost fully backward compatible and fully upward. That took over a year.

*IF*, as I read the comments, there are already lot of (enough to worry) incompatible API changes within first few months and *IF* the situation continues like that for a year then even Symbian will look very good indeed, in comparision.

Sure my text is 100% FUD, but I have learned to fear ...

Actually I think that *IF* (huge if, btw) Java can pull it all together it has a possibility of being winner. It is interpreted so it does not have as big binary incompatibility issues as, say, C. Anyway it is already in most phones in the world, although I do admit some (most?) implementations are "criminally" lacking.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[moon3]

If you are ok with calendar apps and Tetris for games then Java is probably ok, but Java driven Android will have a hard time to stay competitive against WinMo, iPhone, Linux, Symbian, Zii Plaszma, Nintendo, Pandora and Sony devices as developers of more demanding software would prefer these native code platforms first.

Porting your C/C++ code is by far the quickest (for a little more advanced stuff), if you do it the right way. I mostly only tweak the platform dependent files, a few lines of code. This is fun as you can get the most of the platform you run on by seeing the hard performance of the metal at hand directly and not through often lagging Java interface. Also C++ is much more advanced language then Java is, then why downgrade to Java only to slow your apps and limit your development? On the other hand to have everything written in Java on platforms like PC or OS X would mean forcing you customers to install often intrusive Java runtime, this is not an option for many.

Another problem is Java development IDE or IDEs that are lagging, slow and unreliable in general (this might be a personal bad experience) not to mention people have their own development environments that only need compiler/linker/debugger exchanged (often GCC anyway) and we are good to go. This works for devices from or by Microsoft, Apple, Sony, Nintendo, Zii, Pandora, Linux and PC. Now Android is something very different.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[cduffy]

OK -- I see the statement you're replying to.

Earlier versions of the published API are supported in later releases, period. Nobody releases phones based on beta/release-candidate/unpublished APIs -- that's just not done.

On the other hand, documentation for those API releases is floating around the Internet, and if you're googling for the method you want to do and get an unpublished API nobody supported and nobody ever actually shipped on a hardware phone -- well, if you try to follow that documentation instead of the docs installed on your machine when you installed the Android 1.5 SDK you're doing a damned stupid thing.

If you're writing for an Android 1.5 phone, you should follow Android 1.5 docs -- not Android donut snapshot-from-3-weeks-before-release, which is out there and floating around and indexed by Google. The Android 1.1 phones have pretty much all been upgraded over-the-air by their carriers by now, so you could certainly follow the docs for 1.1 and build against that too (and those apps would work on 1.5), but there's not exactly much of a point.

Following whatever docs Google happens to find for you when you look for something without checking whether those docs correspond with an actual released version of the platform that anyone, anywhere ever loaded on non-dev hardware... that's just boneheaded.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[cduffy]

You have the option to describe your app's GUI with XML. Nothing forces you to do it that way -- though given the host-side tools you can use to lay out or simulate those GUIs, it can be a handy approach.

Not unprecedented, either -- see libglade, which is one of the easier ways to build (non-mobile) GUIs with GTK.

Re:re Lack of apps, developers?

[mrjohnson]

Bah. My Android is fast and capable. Google sky map is pretty awesome, as are a several games I have. You should try it out before you dismiss it.

Typed on my HTC Magic.

Excelsior, Manjoo

[Mike Buddha]

I concur 100%. When it came to ditching my turdburger iPhone 3G, the thing that kept me from considering the Android phones was that the hardware was even sorrier than the 3G was. Someone ought to take HTC by the shoulders and shake them until they start putting batteries into their phones. I've got a feeling Samsung will come out with an Android phone worth buying at some point soon, though.

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[1001011010110101]

They already did

http://www.pcworld.com/article/166723/hands_on_with_samsungs_android_handset.html

Not sure when it will be available, but I think it was Real Soon Now.

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[RedK]

Samsung already has. The Samsung Galaxy. It is already available on O2 in Germany from what I can gather.

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[sadler121]

Taking a look at wikipedia will show that it supports the same frequencies as T-Mobile USA's 3G network, so it should work here too. Granted you still have the problem with T-Mobile not having that great of a 3G network.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_I7500

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[nschubach]

Somewhat off topic, but has anyone had experience with Verizon's "open" activation? The video in that article states that it's a CDMA phone so I assume it's a "VZ friendly" device. I plan on checking out Sholes when it hits, but if it's not a quality device I plan on immediately checking out this Samsung. My friend has a G1 and I've used it (and love it) but I don't want to use T-Mobile.

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[TooMuchToDo]

Sold. As soon as it's for sale in the US, I'm getting it. The G1 was meh, the myTouch felt underwhelming, but this phone seems to be the best of the Android phones out there. Especically like the included WCDMA support so I can get HSPA speeds.

Re:Excelsior, Manjoo

[1001011010110101]

I think this is one of the first Android phones from a big brand name manufacturer, the rest comes from HTC for what Ive seen.

Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[Lumpy]

I joined the dev programs so I could buy a completely unlocked phone. Honestly Google should have told carriers to stuff it and sold the GooglePhone completely unlocked.

Market the googlephone as well. Anyone seeing mine says "what is that?" nobody knows about them because apple out marketed everyone, and google is sitting there going, buy my stuff please? pretty please?

I'll give you a sucker, it's Pina Colada....

It's an example of lets not market this thing and let's laso make it very un-shiny.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[ciaohound]

let's laso make it

I think you meant "lasso." Honestly, I think Apple out-lassoes Google, the way they corral all apps through their app store, the way users get roped into a consistent look-and-feel at the expense of choice. Google, on the other hand, gives developers just enough rope...

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[drago177]

"google is sitting there going, buy my stuff please? pretty please?"

I disagree. I think Google is sitting there, being patient. It always looked like Google was into building something so right, that developers would come, and that would make the product so much better that people would come. Seems like they have always wanted to spend $0 on marketing - let the carriers do that. Google wants to spend 100% of their resources making a good product. I get the feeling they knew it might not take off as quickly as iphone. Maybe it will eventually, or maybe not. Maybe the market just isnt right for Android. Either way, Google is going to be patient and continue updating and making the service more solid, just like Maps, Gmail, Google Apps, etc. Just like those other services, since its practically free, it will never go the way of OS/2, somebody will always be using it. On the other hand, the upside is huge. A ubiquitous OS on the phone guarantees ad money.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

['The '.$L3mm1ng]

I'm in Germany and bought my "T-Mobile G1" unlocked - which appears to be the default here. I use it via Vodafone. My Android updates come from T-Mobile, though - if I'm on WLAN.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[BitZtream]

No one knows what your phone is because no one cares. Its not special to anyone other than geeks and there are a limited number of geeks.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[CrashandDie]

There is also a limited number of non-geeks.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[lennier]

"Honestly, I think Apple out-lassoes Google"

Nah, Steve Jobs is all hat and no cattle.

Re:Because they let the carriers screw with it.

[MacDork]

nobody knows about them because apple out marketed everyone

Did they? Or did they illegally leverage their monopoly in portable music devices to give themselves the advantage in a new market? :-)

It's the phones

[bzzfzz]

I spent several months at a startup where we were going to make $$profit by writing and selling Android applications. The problem is that the phones are, well, awful. The iPhone has set the standard, and things like the G1 are simply uninspiring by comparison. We would try to raise money, and in a room full of tech-savvy investors, most people have iPhones. We would pass around the G1 so they could see our app. Bottom line, they were not interested in investing money in a product that ran on a phone that was ugly.

Consequently I now write SQL for a living and get paid by the hour.

Android has done some great things. The control the user can have, the security model, the interaction between apps are all well thought out. One of these days it's going to be significant. Probably right after Linux is ready for the desktop.

Re:It's the phones

[AndersBrownworth]

"... right after Linux is ready for the desktop."

Here here.

Re:It's the phones

[RiotingPacifist]

The android ain't going to be the cashcow where people will pay stupid amounts for any old app, those people already have iphones (and i doubt that any startups have actually that made much after apple-tax)

Re:It's the phones

[Locutus]

I wasn't there so I can't tell if it was put forward but what makes Android attractive is that it'll run on more than one phone. Although Microsoft did a great job at keeping phone vendors from talking about their soon-to-ship Android phones earlier this year, there was some press over the last month or so about over a dozen Android based phones due to ship this year.

It should have been sold to the investors as the difference between the IBM PC compatibles and the Apple PC market. Apple makes a great device but it's a single vendor solution. The IBM PC compatibles shipped from dozens, hundreds, and then thousands of hardware vendors. If all they saw was the G1 and thought that it was the only market for the software then they completely missed the point of Android.

LoB

Re:It's the phones

[LanMan04]

My HTC Magic runs just as snappily as my friend's iPhone. And that's with Google Maps, SIPdroid, GOogle Voice, and a ton of other shit running in the background. The G1 was a test concept.

Citation needed

[93 Escort Wagon]

And even though Android is far friendlier to developers, it has failed to attract anywhere near the number of apps now clogging the iPhone.

I hear people parroting the first part of that statement, invariably without any supporting evidence. Please explain - I'm asking this seriously - why Android is "far friendlier to developers". If the apps aren't being developed, I'd argue that's at least one piece of evidence running counter to that assumption. The iPhone (and iPod Touch) seemed to have a significant number of third-party apps already available at launch, so marketshare can't explain it all away. Besides, as people love saying here, the iPhone's market share is not really all that big compared to some others (no, you can't have it both ways).

So is Android actually friendlier to developers, or is it just the old "it's on Linux and Open Source, so it contains the maximum degree of friendliness possible no matter how much a pain in the butt it is to use"?

Re:Citation needed

[maxume]

Well, you don't have to pay Apple money to develop for Android, and you don't have to get Apple's permission to distribute your app to users. Those are probably pluses even if you experiencing full-on reality distortion.

Apple may still be providing a more attractive program though, simply by bothering to market their phones.

Re:Citation needed

[jelizondo]

As I mentioned in my previous comment, the "friendlier" to developers is really that it is open source, that you can use open source tools (Eclipse, Ant, etc.) for development, but that's all folks! as the good bunny said.

Documentation sucks, most of developers are outside the U.S. (from my experience mainly India and Pakistan) where they can't get a developer's phone, the emulator is fine except that it can't emulate making calls or receiving them, etc. etc.

It is "friendlier" in a sense but like the Apple of old days (i.e. early 80's), when you could get real support, real docs and real machines to develop apps.

Someone needs to get behind developers' support right away!

Re:Citation needed

[Omnifarious]

I haven't tried to figure out the API, but it appears that Android based phones are much harder to program for due to lack of documentation, but you are also much more likely to have your app see the light of day than on the iPhone.

Basically the iPhone is about control of developers and users. As long as you don't do anything Apple doesn't approve of, the iPhone is lots friendlier to program for than Android based phones.

I'm going to have to sit down with the Android API and see if its as hard to learn as people say.

Re:Citation needed

[josteos]

I found Android to be a great platform to develop on. The biggest hurdle was using Eclipse after being a Win32/Visual Studio dev for 10 years.

I was attracted to it by the lower cost of entry (I didn't have to buy an apple!) and the lack of a GateKeeper at the app store. The pleasant development framework was an added bonus. The smaller user population isn't as cool right now, but I haven't invested so much into it that I can't afford to wait while the market grows.

Re:Citation needed

[Darkness404]

Lets see here, I don't need to buy a Mac and can continue to use my 2 year old computer for development, I also don't need to pay $99 to be able to publish my own apps, I don't need to wade through an "approval" process, basically there is no financial hindrance for people. I'd like to develop for the iPhone sometimes but I don't want to spend $700 minimum for a bit of small income, on the other hand, I can continue using existing materials and develop for Android. But the biggest reason why Android is going to thrive is no approval process, if Apple had a decent, sane process it wouldn't be as big of a deal, but with the headaches of the app store I can see the lack of that being the killer feature for Android developers.

Re:Citation needed

[mjwx]

Documentation sucks, most of developers are outside the U.S. (from my experience mainly India and Pakistan) where they can't get a developer's phone

BrightStor, who handles the distribution of the ADP ships the Android Dev Phone world wide. The issue is being able to fork out US$400 + the US$25 Android Developer enrolment fee. You'll also need a method of payment that BrightStor's bank will accept.

Re:Citation needed

[unoengborg]

I'm not so sure I would prefer iPhone hardware over e.g. HTC Hero. After all, in iPhone you can't even replace the battery yourself, and that in a phone that have even worse battery life. It is ridiculous. The Hero also feels more solid than the iPhone, I would say the Android, in HTC Hero, have got the Porche the auther of the original article is waiting for. Unfortunately it is a GSM phone so it will not do much good on the US market.

Re:Citation needed

[Joff_NZ]

I have an HTC Hero (I'm in Australia), and it's excellent. HTC have done a fantastic job of polishing up the UI (custom homescreen and widgets). The onscreen keyboard works really well, and it all seems like a well integrated platform.

Check out the videos on the HTC site, and see if you don't immediately get a case of overwhelming gadget lust ;)

Also, look up Locale for it. It can change settings on your phone depending on *where you are*. IMO, it's Android's killer app.

Re:Citation needed

[mdwh2]

You'll get your citations, when we get citations for the "The Iphone is better, it just integrates it better, it just is"...

Re:Citation needed

[jelizondo]

American?

Don't be insulted but $425 U.S. dollars is something like a WHOLE month's salary for a developer in Third World countries, meaning no rent, no food, no nothing for a month, or more likely, tightening your belt very hard for six months...

Now, Google gave away more than 2,000 (yes, two thousand) phones at Google I/O show.

Who is running demographics for Google?; from my experience at the forums and groups, most developers are in Third World countries (India, Pakistan, Eastern Europe, South America), if we had money to attend Google I/O it would not be a problem, but not having money makes "cheaper" than Apple's iPhone just relative.

Google should look at where the developers are and create a program accessible to those people, not just give away phones at rich (comparatively) developers...

Re:Citation needed

[mjwx]

American?

Australian,

I know how much it costs to get the ADP because I was considering getting one before I could buy an unlocked Dream in AU.

The issue is being able to fork out US$400 + the US$25 Android Developer enrolment fee.

Don't be insulted but $425 U.S. dollars is something like a WHOLE month's salary for a developer in Third World countries

Great work Colombo, Perhaps I was too subtle. I also forgot to include Tax, many 3rd world nations consider this kind of item a "luxury" and will have a high level of tax on it (100% is not uncommon).

Who is running demographics for Google?; from my experience at the forums and groups, most developers are in Third World countries (India, Pakistan, Eastern Europe, South America), if we had money to attend Google I/O it would not be a problem, but not having money makes "cheaper" than Apple's iPhone just relative.

Google should look at where the developers are and create a program accessible to those people, not just give away phones at rich (comparatively) developers...

I don't particularly disagree with what you've said but...

Having travelled to third world nations I could easily see how that kind of idea could be taken for a ride. Besides many of the developers in India are part of large consulting groups (Tata consulting for one) which makes millions in the off shoring biz and should be able to afford US$425 + local tax. Software development is a hard thing to localise, a Dev in India may be just as good as a dev in the Czech Republic or a dev in Canada or just as bad and thanks to the Internet they can sell their wares world wide.

Re:Citation needed

[Sparks23]

As someone with both iPhone and Android (G1) phones in her bag, I can honestly say I prefer the iPhone for my day-to-day phone use. Most of the complaints I've had about the G1 are echoed in the other threads on here: the market's search engine being some sort of sick joke (especially sad considering the market is written by /Google/), the update method for apps being frustrating in the extreme if you have more than one app to update at a time, the fact that my phone runs about as fast as chilled molasses if I've let too many things -- even the things that start themselves up as services without my intervention -- run in the background, etc.

(Some of my problems might be addressed with the Hero, which I haven't had a chance to play with.)

However, you are absolutely, completely, 100% right that Locale is Android's killer app. You can have the phone auto-mute itself when you are in a movie theater. It can play a noise and pop up an alert when you're within a block of the grocery store, reminding you to pick up your groceries. And it has plugins, so all KINDS of other stuff can be automated. Astrid (a great todo list program for Android) can integrate with Locale to attach locations to task reminders, and since Astrid syncs with RememberTheMilk, you can bring your RTM items in the same way.

Honestly, Astrid+Locale should be marketed /heavily/ as one of Android's killer apps. That's something neither the iPhone nor the Palm Pre can do, and where the Android solution works /very/ well.

Re:Citation needed

[ajlitt]

The iPhone (and iPod Touch) seemed to have a significant number of third-party apps already available at launch, so marketshare can't explain it all away.

Huh? It took seven months from launch for Apple to make an SDK available, and a full year before the App Store was opened. Google had phones and SDKs in developers' hands long before the G1 launch.

Re:Citation needed

[Timmmm]

Indeed. One of the things I don't like is that you're forced to use Java. I'd much prefer objective-C.

Re:Citation needed

[Dog-Cow]

There are tens of thousands of apps on the App Store. How many do you know of that have been rejected? A dozen? At most?

For the vast majority of app developers, the chances of getting on app on Google's app store are exactly the same as for Apple's.

Re:Citation needed

[Dog-Cow]

If you think cocoa is "for retards", whatever that means, you really don't have much experience with UI frameworks. Cocoa is trivial to use and trivial to extend. There's nothing you can't do in Cocoa that is doable in similar APIs.

You are 100% biased. I understand that.

Re:Citation needed

[Peter Amstutz]

From experience, working on an Android app in my spare time -

1) The SDK runs on Windows, Linux and OS X. This is a big plus since you can do development using desktop platform of your choice.

2) Android is Java based, which is a relatively civilized language compared to C/C++/Objective C (the relatively safe memory model of Java avoids whole classes of bugs based on memory mismanagement, buffer overflows or wild pointers).

3) Eclipse is a pretty powerful development environment. Having not used it prior to Android development, I'm pretty impressed at its ability to detect and offer to fix syntax errors automatically.

4) Running and debugging your app in the simulator Just Works

5) Access to existing Java class libraries and ability to share code with desktop apps (with some reservations, as android does not support the entire java.* standard library)

6) Multiple ways to install your app on an actual device without going through the Market (can download the .apk over WiFi with HTTP, for example)

Overall, I would say the development experience is pretty close to normal desktop app development. There isn't a big feeling of "going without" that I would have expected from embedded development - the one exception being filesystem storage, as users cannot be expected to download and install hundreds of megabytes of data required by your app as might be the case on the desktop.

Re:Citation needed

[GooberToo]

I just got a myTouch 3G so basically I can say that yes I do like it over the iPhone for the sole reason of multitasking but the problem for now is the hardware. It lags a lot.

That's actually a software problem and not hardware. The hardware is plenty fast. The next Android update goes a long way toward both drastically improving performance and reducing lag. I recently read the next Hero update drastically reduces latency to be on par with the iPhone. In short, latency is the only detractor when comparing the iPhone vs Android. And that difference is rapidly disappearing.

The only thing iPhone has over Android at the moment is hardware.

Not true. Android has had superior and/or competitive hardware from the word go. The problem is Android is still young and working hard to mature. As Android matures its able to better use the available hardware. Even with Android being less mature than the iPhone, Android already offers features which iPhone users can only dream and drool.

If you want to see what a low memory Android phone can do, check out Cyanogen's image for the G1. Performance is drastically faster while maintaining backwards compatibility. And keep in mind, Dalvik, the VM which all Android applications run, is still very immature. Give it another six months and performance will be through the roof. In a year or so, when Dalvik has some advanced VM capabilities and even perhaps a JIT, Android will be truly be kicking ass.

Re:Citation needed

[Shawndeisi]

The iPhone (and iPod Touch) seemed to have a significant number of third-party apps already available at launch, so marketshare can't explain it all away.


The iPhone was released on June 29, 2007 in the US. The SDK allowing third party applications was released for version 2 a year later.

Wikipedia:

"The App Store opened early in the morning on July 10, 2008 via an update to iTunes. Applications were immediately available for download at that time. However, iPhone and iPod Touch software version 2.0 was not yet available through Software Update, making the applications unusable. The iPhone OS 2.0 was released on July 11, 2008, and applications were able to be transferred onto the newly updated devices"

Your statement that there was no market before third party app development took place is patently false.

Re:Citation needed

[farble1670]

Also, look up Locale for it. It can change settings on your phone depending on *where you are*. IMO, it's Android's killer app.

eh hem. if android phones had reasonable battery life the usefulness of Locale would go way down. sure it's interesting to be able to set my screen brightness lower and turn the ringer off at night, but the real application of Locale is around squeezing a few more minutes out of that battery: turning wifi / bluetooth on and off, setting screen timeout, etc.

on the iphone, you don't need locale for these things. my wife leaves bluetooth, wifi, etc enabled all the time and still gets 4x the battery life that i do with my android phone.

Re:Citation needed

[Spaseboy]

The iPhone (and iPod Touch) seemed to have a significant number of third-party apps already available at launch

Uh, launch WHERE? You've got some strange selective memory. It was over a year after the iPhone was released and just short of a year after the iPod Touch was released that third-party applications existed without hacking your device. I say we look at the time period. The G1 is not even a year old yet and it has an exponentially higher amount of third-party applications in that time than Apple had on their devices in the same period.

Re:Citation needed

[Teriblows]

yup, when someone else can charge a premium and still beat you over the head its not good to go into conspiracy mongering. the problem with open source folks sometimes is they rarely ask themselves why something else succeeds. its never their platforms fault because they always believe their way is fundamentally better in all ways, as a given. apple gets away with bs like app filtering because of all the other advantages.

Many problems...

[Darkness404]

Even though there are a lot of Android handsets out they are all for... T-Mobile. Now, while T-Mobile is great for talking and texting and they have decent coverage and are GSM they have a fatal flaw, a lack of a 3G network. Ok, in larger cities you can get 3G just fine, but in a medium sized town? No 3G, AT&T has 3G there on the other hand. Similarly, they could have made the phones unlocked so you could use it on a different network, however they didn't. While AT&T is no saint when it comes to cell networks, they do have pretty good 3G coverage, T-Mobile, while improving just isn't there yet. Can't say anything about Sprint or Verizon as I haven't used either (Verizon seems to neuter -all- their phones to the point of being unusable and Sprint seems to be expensive).

Also, there needs to be a common third-party to buy their cell phones from, perhaps a Google store?

Re:Many problems...

[mjwx]

Even though there are a lot of Android handsets out they are all for... T-Mobile.

The problem isn't with the HTC hardware, the problem is with the balkanisation of the US mobile networks. Each telco operates on its own frequency. HTC went with the most common 3G frequency in the world, the 2100 band. In Australia every telco maintains a HSPA 2100 MHz network although 2 telco's simultaneously operate other 3G networks (Telstra = 850 MHz, Optus = 900 MHz). HTC didn't make a bad decision, they made one that was not US centric, this explains why the HTC Dream/Magic is more popular in Europe then in the states.

Re:Many problems...

[dunkelfalke]

USA is not the main T-Mobile market.

Docs support

[PrimaryConsult]

I would be more inclined to ditch my Windows Mobile for Android if MS/Open Office type apps were free, or even if there were full Google Docs support... the open development environment and physical keyboard option kick iPhone's ass for my purposes.

Re:Docs support

[WinterSolstice]

I just switched to the HTC Magic and I freaking love it - however, I must agree. The GDocs app is Free, which is nice and all... but Google really needs to get off their butt and make full Google Docs.

My wife and I both bought Android phones just recently (replacing a different smartphone) and we've been nothing but happy with them.

Requiring Developers to Collect Sales Tax

[TimTucker]

Signed up right away, got my Dev Phone 1 and then came the news that pretty much knocked most of the wind out of my sales when it came to development: Google announced that they were requiring developers to deal with collecting sales tax. I'd imagine that I'm not the only person wanting to write a few small apps in hopes of making a little extra income that was completely put off by the decision.

Re:Requiring Developers to Collect Sales Tax

[Lehk228]

google is giving you a 98% tax cut, assuming even distribution among states for your sales. any billing zip code in your state you had better set aside and remit sales tax to the local authorities, but the other 49 states aren't your problem. if google collected sales tax they would have to collect on every transaction.

Re:Requiring Developers to Collect Sales Tax

[bar-agent]

any billing zip code in your state you had better set aside and remit sales tax to the local authorities, but the other 49 states aren't your problem.

I don't think this is true any more. Didn't New York or something just recently pass legislation to collect sales tax on Internet sales?

Rough user interface

[abigor]

I find the Android ui to be kind of unpolished. It looks like something from several years ago. I know it sounds nitpicky, but it just doesn't have that "I want to use this" vibe.

Plus, how is Android more developer-friendly? The iPhone and Windows Mobile have nice SDKs, big communities, tons of code around, etc.

Re:Rough user interface

[SDFanboy]

Well for one thing, you need a Mac to write for the iPhone...

Re:Rough user interface

[RedK]

The standard Android UI is rough. However, Google does allow 3rd parties to make their own UI on top of Android, which gives you things like SE's Rachael (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UwcVlF5EUM) or HTC's Sense UI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LtKAnJf1Ss)

Re:Rough user interface

[drago177]

And you need to learn a new language (usually). Anyone that knows java pretty much can write for Android. Thats why its developer - friendly.

Re:Rough user interface

[abigor]

That has nothing to do with the actual development process. To write code for Windows Mobile, you need Windows. That's sort of assumed.

I think the comment was alluding more to the fact that Linux is open all the way down, but I don't see that as an advantage when the sdk language is Java.

Re:Rough user interface

[abigor]

Yes, that's a good point, and really the only "more friendly" point I can see. Though in all honesty, Objective C is pretty easy, and in both cases, you have to learn a new sdk.

Re:Rough user interface

[Wizard Drongo]

And anyone that knows Objective-C can pretty much write for iPhone. Specious argument really.

Re:Rough user interface

[BountyX]

Just a note, the UI is intentionally dark for battery life. All standard apps, call log, messaging, contacts, settings, etc. are all black background with white foreground.

Re:Rough user interface

[fabs64]

You don't need to pay extra money.
You don't need to use a specific operating system.
If your idea requires it you can replace and hook in to core system events.
The core system is open source and so you can see how it works if required.
There is no gatekeeper for distribution.

All of those things are going to go through a developers mind when deciding whether they want to develop for a system or not, and the points above are "friendlier" than the corresponding points for the iphone.
The iphone on the other hand has two very strong points keeping it on top:

Market share
Pretty/slick/cool in hardware and software. (This point appears to be reducing over time, see the HTC Hero and UI)

Re:Rough user interface

[moosesocks]

I briefly used an Android phone a few weeks ago. The UI reminded me quite a bit of GNOME circa 2002.

Take that as you may.

Re:Rough user interface

[drago177]

Are you trying to say that objective-c is just as common as java? I would guess Java is twice as popular as even regular C programming.

Re:Rough user interface

[dunkelfalke]

No, you don't.

Re:Rough user interface

[dbcad7]

I read these comments.. and I just don't believe any of you have used an android phone.. If anything the iPhone looks clunky with it's big icons, and no customizable home screens. Seriously head to a Tmobile store, or just do a damn Youtube search.. none of you knows what the hell your talking about.

Well in Canada...

[seifried]

No-one is selling the darn things (I've yet to see one in a store/cell phone kiosk). That could be part of the problem up here at least. If anyone knows where I can get one (in western Canada) please let me know, I'd love to be proven wrong.

Re:Well in Canada...

[hidden]

Where are you? Here (Edmonton, AB) every rogers wireless ad features either the Dream (the g1) or the Magic

Where can you get one? well...any rogers store.

Re:Well in Canada...

[CreamyG31337]

Uhh, you could try our only GSM provider... Robbers $600? could that be why? I'm holding out for those cheap ones they're supposed to be saturating the market with any month now...

Re:Well in Canada...

[RedK]

600$ ? No, you can get them for 79$ subsidized on a 3 year contract.

Re:Well in Canada...

[CreamyG31337]

maybe YOU can, I can't. I just got a hardware upgrade 10 months ago, I'm not eligible yet.

Re:Well in Canada...

[seifried]

Nice to know I can get one, but going to Rogers (especially on a three year contract) ain't gonna happen.

Re:Well in Canada...

[RedK]

Actually, I'm on 2.5 years of a 3 year contract. I'd need to argue to get one for 79$ too and probably threaten to unsubscribe and just pay what remains of my contract.

Re:Well in Canada...

[abigor]

Telus and Bell are apparently getting GSM compatibility by the end of the year: http://wirelessnorth.ca/2008/07/18/telus-and-bell-to-go-gsm-in-2010/

Let's hope we see some price drops.

Re:Well in Canada...

[CreamyG31337]

Well if you mean from rogers having some competition, i doubt it. The phones are pretty expensive to buy without contract as long as they design them with expensive components. But maybe if everyone switches to GSM, the manufacturers can reduce costs by getting rid of CDMA production lines or something...

Re:Well in Canada...

[agnosticnixie]

The Dev G1 is only 400$, unlocked, USD, sure, but with the CAD at almost parity, it's nowhere near 600$.

Re:Well in Canada...

[Bill_the_Engineer]

My local BestBuy is advertising the T-Mobile myTouch inside its stores...

Re:Well in Canada...

[GreenEnvy22]

Well Rogers has both the original G1 and the Magic. The local Rogers outlets here in Southern Ontario have had them for several weeks at least (thats just the first time I went into a store, could be longer). Rogers is nationwide, so you should be able to find them there too.

Re:Well in Canada...

[mrjohnson]

I saw a HTC magic on sale at the t-mobile kiosk at Costco and I just got my Rogers (Canada) magic from an ebay seller. They're available....

Even T-mobile affiats aren't offering

[kb9vcr]

Even T-mobile affiliates like iWireless (in Iowa) don't offer the G1 or myTouch. Google needs to stop relying on T-mobile and get Android phones as offerings from all national carriers. I'd love to get an android phone to replace my current sub-par MS 6.1 based HTC smartphone. Time to start flexing some muscle google!

talk about not understanding the industry!

[Tumbleweed]

Wow, just stunning. If the lack of an idealized phone were the problem, WinMo wouldn't have anywhere near the marketshare it has. For Android to take over, one simple thing needs to happen - a wider selection of Android phones on a wider selection of providers, at a wide selection of price points.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Old97]

WinMo's market share is shrinking quickly. It's around 13% versus over 20% when the iPhone started shipping. It's losing share to Apple, Palm and RIM. The lack of an idealized phone really is a big deal. Most consumers don't care about the O/S. They care about the phone, it's features and applications and it's "coolness". Each in their own way Apple, Pre and RIM have done a better job in large part because they control the hardware design. After all, cell phone users don't go to the store to buy an O/S. They go to buy a "phone". Interestingly, as someone else pointed out, WinMo is far more "developer friendly" than Android, Blackberry and, for the moment, Pre. Market buzz and customers willing and eager to buy apps - a market and the potential for profit - is what attracts developers first and foremost.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Tumbleweed]

So Android should be competing with WinMo instead of the iPhone?

Android should start by taking out WinMo, Symbian, etc. It can't replace OS X mobile on the iPhone because, hey, it's Apple - that's not gonna happen. It needs to replace WinMo in WinMo's marketplace niche. Competing against the iPhone is easy - make a nice interface and don't lock out and unfairly compete against developers like Apple is doing. The hardware from HTC & Samsung that are scheduled to be coming out over the next quarter or so will compete handily with the iPhone's hardware (the iPhone's hardware isn't really that great, except for the type of touchscreen it uses). It's a fairly low-resolution screen, at that, compared to the WVGA phones HTC has been producing for awhile outside of the U.S. market. Cameras with higher resolution & LED flash are also common on smartphones outside of the U.S., as well.

You can't kill the iPhone entirely on quality or price. Apple fans will buy overpriced/underpowered technology simply because it's cool to do so. Getting Android on multiple phones & providers will incentivize developers to make stuff even cooler than the iPhone is doing now, especially when it's the only place for some developers to go after Apple denies their app entry to the store. Apple is the newest entrant to the IBM/Microsoft club (as in 'club you over the head, you get to pay what we want for what we want to provide').

Nobody ever seems to learn this lesson; it's inevitable for Apple to go down the same path; they're already fairly far down it with the iPhone.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[ComputerPhreak]

Wow, just stunning. If the lack of an idealized phone were the problem, WinMo wouldn't have anywhere near the marketshare it has. For Android to take over, one simple thing needs to happen - a wider selection of Android phones on a wider selection of providers, at a wide selection of price points.

And Apple's success is because there is such a wide selection of iPhones on a wide selection of providers, at a wide selection of price points?

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Tumbleweed]

And Apple's success is because there is such a wide selection of iPhones on a wide selection of providers, at a wide selection of price points?

No, WinMo's success is. The iPhone's success is due to a rabid Apple fanbase, and a very nice interface (graphically and with the capacitive touchscreen, both of which are coming to Android phones within the next quarter). There are multiple competitors in the field. Android doesn't have to beat iPhone, it has to beat everyone BUT the iPhone, and I'm quite confident it will, given a few years. The hardware side will be ready to take on anyone by the end of this year. Once there are Android phones with capacitive touchscreens, that's the end of the one hardware bit the iPhone had that noone else does. A sexy interface can be made a lot easier than that, and an open marketplace is going to be a 'killer app' (pardon) for mobile app developers.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[GeckoAddict]

Interestingly, as someone else pointed out, WinMo is far more "developer friendly" than Android, Blackberry and, for the moment, Pre. Market buzz and customers willing and eager to buy apps - a market and the potential for profit - is what attracts developers first and foremost.

I agree. Windows Mobile is going through the classic Microsoft product life... New, awesome, and groundbreaking -> left to rot with incremental updates until someone else comes up with something better -> try to compete again.

I think Microsoft realized that they got passed, and that's why we suddenly have WM6.5 (with an new marketplace store [which they say will be more open than Apple's], a more 'touch-friendly' ui, and new gesture API), and WM7 in the works (Silverlight apps, multitouch). There's a ton of windows mobile apps out there, but they lack the central, easy to use store to buy them from. I think centralizing this could really help Microsoft get some share back, especially if major carriers sign on. .

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[indiechild]

I don't think Android would be wise to follow the Microsoft lead.

I think John Gruber (as usual) nails it. Google should follow the Apple model and make one really really good phone. Having the market littered with dozens and dozens of different Android phones only dilutes it and makes it confusing, for consumers as well as developers (imagine all the different featuresets you have to account for).

I think the mobile phone market at large nowadays is pretty ridiculous -- there's hundreds of different new models coming out all the time, most of which are crap. if they just made a handful of really good ones, the makers and the consumers would both be better off.

Oh, and a sexy interface isn't terribly hard to create, but an intuitive and user-friendly interface is *hard*.

As for an open marketplace, I think it's a good idea in theory, but in practice you have to be able to police it somehow. People complain that there's lots of crap on Apple's App Store, but an open marketplace would be worse.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Tumbleweed]

I think John Gruber (as usual) nails it. Google should follow the Apple model and make one really really good phone.

I don't think John Gruber understands that Google doesn't make phones. They make the Android platform. There are multiple form factors, and different people have different preferences and needs. For example, I want a WVGA display with no keyboard, to keep the phone thin. But that's just me - many people won't buy a phone without an actual qwerty keyboard, some want a clamshell, etc. If the iPhone was a clamshell, it would be just as popular.

As for an open marketplace, I d it's a good idea in theory, but in practice you have to be able to police it somehow. People complain that there's lots of crap on Apple's App Store, but an open marketplace would be worse.

The point of an 'open' marketplace has nothing to do with the quality of the best apps, for you'll find good and bad apps on any type of marketplace, but is rather to allow competition, which a closed marketplace does not. Apple is showing their dark side lately with their refusal to allow many apps they "don't approve" of, irrespective of the app's _quality_. This cannot be allowed.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[dunkelfalke]

Your comparison is completely wrong. You start talking about style and end talking about functionality. If you want functionality then a Windows Mobile phone is the right one.

The iPhone is for the same people who prefer a "hip" coctail bar over a Chinese restaurant, "Legally blonde" over "Hot Fuzz" and a Dodge Caliber over Toyota Camry

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[16K Ram Pack]

Quite. It's a bit early for "Android isn't taking off" when there are 2 phones available in the UK.

I own an HTC Magic and just the other day thought about how good a phone it is. My reaction to the iPhone 3GS features went something like this: "Got it already, got it already, got it already". OK, there's a couple of features on the 3GS that it doesn't have, but most of it was nothing new as far as I was concerned.

And while the app store doesn't have as many apps as the iPhone's, most of the useful apps have a good equivalent, and in my experience, Android is getting apps before iPhone.

Oh, and it's on Vodafone, which has a decent 3G network unlike iPhone which is on O2's network.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[dangitman]

Wait, WinMo's success? I don't think that word means what you think it does.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[rendermaniac]

The G1 (HTC Dream) and the G2 (HTC Magic) already have very good capacitive touch screens. I think the HTC Hero does too.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Dog-Cow]

The iPhone is for those who want a device that does what it does well. The vast majority of people do not care at all that the iPhone doesn't do a lot of things that other phones do. If they did, they'd buy other phones.

The vast majority of idiots on slashdot think this is because of style or cool-factor. It's not, but they can't admit that they just don't get it.

Function without form is USELESS to most people.

Apple offers a complete package for the smart phone. Everything from software to sync its contents to an app store available from the phone. Others are getting into this game, but Apple did it first. They did it well. It works. It's easy and simple.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Bill_the_Engineer]

The iPhone's success is due to a rabid Apple fanbase, and a very nice interface (graphically and with the capacitive touchscreen, both of which are coming to Android phones within the next quarter).

This is true. I think the real reason for iPhone's success, is Apple understood the importance of having a huge supply of Applications to sell on its iTunes App Store. So during the initial launch of the iPhone, Apple announced that a venture capitalist was offering venture funding for new iPhone cottage industry.

I know the venture funding was a major factor, since I know several software developers who applied and purchased an iPhone solely to develop on.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[TooMuchToDo]

There are just not enough mod points in the world to mod you up to an appropriate level =)

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[NDPTAL85]

In regards to your "got it already" comments, if you just do a straight feature for feature comparison of devices you may miss the point of the iPhone. Its not that the iPhone has more features than other phones, because for the most part it doesn't. Its that the UI is so much better that it makes whatever features it doesn't have, not that big of a deal. People would rather forego certain features for now for the simply amazing ability of being able to use whatever features the iPhone already does have. Not many phones are designed in such a way that its easy for non-geeks to figure out how to use.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[16K Ram Pack]

OK, maybe I'm a geek ;)

But seriously, I took to the HTC Magic quite quickly. At the time, the iPhone didn't have the landscape keyboard, and the magic did, which made using the keyboard so much better.

Have you used the HTC Magic? I really didn't find the UI operation any more complicated than the iPhone. You have a load of icons which you can scroll up and down, click to launch an app.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[NDPTAL85]

Yeah I've seen it and I'm impressed with the device. I've watched a ton of HD YouTube video reviews of it.

I'm not saying that Android sucks or anything, its just Apple is setting the standard for UI design. A lot of things that geeks like are things regular people find complicated or difficult to use. UI design extends past just how things look btw. The App Store is a huge part of the iPhone's success and a central part of that is that it DOES restrict development to what Apple approves. If Apple did as many people suggested and allowed folks to load third party apps outside of the App Store then the iPhone would lose much of its ease of use advantage over other platforms.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Nossie]

"WinMo wouldn't have anywhere near the marketshare it has."

I've had two WinMo phones... regarding marketshare...

At the time I bought my phones O2 XDA & XDA II (MDA in other regions) there were no other choices... The nokia communicator.. eh? and other shite like that.

Since then WinMo has been hobbled and tagged on to generic hardware... if it didnt miss gps it had no wifi... if it had both it was not 3G.. At one point I was waiting for one to come out with all 3 and before it could the iphone 3G came out. I bought one on a two year contract and thought it was ok, lack of copy&paste and mms etc were a bit frustrating but I never used MMS on my other WinMo phones so it was not like I missed it.. The GPS and 3G were sluggish (I never realised the Iphone 3G couldnt do 7.2 mbps 3G speeds!!!) But everything else seemed to work better than my WinMo devices EVER did. Shock horror, I could get updates to the OS - one thing I could NEVER get officially on WinMo.

WinMo COULD have been something special... instead it would appear because it was the only decent software at the time, MS sat on it till it was too late. Now they seem to be trying to make up for it with 'Windows phone' and we'll see how well it does. Microsoft need to make a consistent BRAND like iphone OS ... with 1 or 2-3 versions of the software. WinMo fragmented too much to the point where I couldn't tell what OS/features I was going to get and I could never get the correct OS on the correct hardware.

I gave my 3G to my girlfriend halfway through my 2 year contract with O2. I bought a 32GB Iphone 3GS straight out on payg for £540 and slipped my contract sim inside and I've never been happier. Of course, both of them are unlocked and jailbroken, my GF uses hers on the Three UK network with her own contract sim quite happily.

I hate Apples draconian view of the app store - although with that thought in mind I expect spyware/trojans to eventually creep into cydia. I also hate AT&Ts/O2s restrictions on tethering and what can or cant be done over the cell network... Fuck it, I've broken all those rules anyway *shrugs* I cant live without my 5 icon dock or intelliscreen.

Google can NOT follow WinMo to compete with Iphone.. do NOT fragment the OS over multiple fragments ... they need to build a brand and quality that customers can expect and trust... otherwise it will just become another WinMo that will not flourish in the market place because better competition now exists.

The irony of all this is that I work for Vodafone UK... I would never touch a blackberry out of preference (hey each to their own) and I doubt I'd break my O2 contract for a Vodafone one hehe.

I've also bought too many apps for my iphone... I'd need something very special to move me away from a platform that I have to say with some gripes that I'm very happy with.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[shutdown -p now]

The iPhone's success is due to a rabid Apple fanbase, and a very nice interface (graphically and with the capacitive touchscreen, both of which are coming to Android phones within the next quarter).

Can someone explain me what's so good about capacitive touchscreens? It won't let me use the thing while wearing gloves (which, depending on your climate zone, can be an issue), and, if I understand correctly, it won't let me use a stylus for precision control or handwriting input. These are clear downsides, so what is the benefit?

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[shutdown -p now]

14% of a world market is still pretty good, so I wouldn't call WinMo a failure either.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[Tumbleweed]

Can someone explain me what's so good about capacitive touchscreens? It won't let me use the thing while wearing gloves (which, depending on your climate zone, can be an issue), and, if I understand correctly, it won't let me use a stylus for precision control or handwriting input. These are clear downsides, so what is the benefit?

It's more responsive. Plus, there are styluses (stylii?) that work with them, though they're not generally included with such phones. I think HTC is planning on that with one of their upcoming phones, though. Gloves, though, yeah, that's a problem. No one type of phone is perfect for everyone, though, which is why many of us don't like the iPhone. :)

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[dangitman]

But Microsoft doesn't want 14% of a market - Microsoft wants to dominate markets. And that was the goal for WinMo. So, WinMo has failed miserably on Microsoft's own aims for the product.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[shutdown -p now]

Microsoft, as any other company, wants to earn money. Any product that earns money, directly or indirectly, is not a failure.

Re:talk about not understanding the industry!

[dangitman]

It is a failure to meet their goals. If you, as the CEO of a company, launch an initiative that is intended to put you at #1 or #2 in an industry, but it only gets you to #5 - that is a failure, even if you make a bit of money on the side. You're just redefining "success" downward until it becomes meaningless. Do we even know if Microsoft has made money of WinMo yet?

This game still hasn't played out yet, and even if MS is making some money off WinMo, in the future, it might start losing money and come out as an overall loss and wasted effort. And what if MS could have invested that money and effort into something much more profitable than WinMo, like not releasing Vista for example?

The Apple App Store vs Google

[improfane]

I imagine that Google will have a much more lenient application 'store' or method of downloading applications to your phone. As Apple recently blocked Google's Talk application, I doubt Android would do this.

Given Google's history, their record is pretty developer friendly:

• Google Wave is open, including the source
• Google Maps
• Chrome/Chromium
• Homepage
• Gadgets (whatever Google calls it)

While it might not hold much weight for a business to say it but there is also 'do no evil'.

Where's the market?

[MBCook]

Where is the market? AT&T has the iPhone, the phone. The one everyone wants to beat.

Sprint has the Pre. It's a pretty decent phone with a few build quality issues. Once Palm gets a brain and starts letting apps come out, it could be pretty good.

Verizon has... who knows. Standard Blackberries?

And then there is little T-Mobile with.. Blackberries.

I don't remember seeing many (any?) ads for the G1. I don't remember anyone talking about it except release day calling it "the google phone" when it's not Googly in any way. Basically, not many people care, because I don't think many people know about it. My boss has one, and it's quite nice. But it has no mindshare.

Why should it? It doesn't have an amazing app store (like the iPhone). It doesn't have sexy hardware (like the iPhone or many imitators). It doesn't have an amazingly cheap price. There is nothing to stand out about it other than running "google OS". And since Android doesn't have a reputation yet, that doesn't sell phones.

Great apps would help, but people won't build those until the thing is more popular. Better hardware would help a little so it doesn't look so blocky (the G2 should help here).

Microsoft has this same problem. When Apple wants the hardware to do something, it builds it. When Microsoft wants it, they push and prod and within a few years it happens. Dell (et all) don't make sexy computers, or at least didn't start until after years of Apple taking the "good looking" market.

Android could be something great, even if it takes the "low end smartphone" market. But it could take years to get there, and companies may not be willing to wait that long. If Google had taken some of the risk and co-developed a phone (a Honda or Acura to Apple's BMW, instead of the Ford Focus we got) Android could be in a better spot.

But the Pre is the weakest right now, in my eyes. They've had months and released almost no apps. You know what they just released in the last week or two? Out of the 4 or 5 apps, two were to help people with Jewish observances. Not exactly "phone moving" applications. Floodgates may not open until Christmas or later, and without some lower-level stuff there might not be good games. Some strong funded development in apps and some marketing could really help Android. More phones certainly would.

The question is, will this be the next DOS/Windows (good enough, builds up to dominance), or OS/2 (better than the common, but never achieves critical mass and becomes irrelevant)?

How about a series of ads showing how easy it is to navigate/use the phone, compared to the nightmare of a UI that Blackberries use? Aim for that market. Aim for consumers (not necessarily businesses) who want a smartphone, but don't want and iPod.

Of course, I wouldn't want to fight against a $99 iPhone. The only reason that thing hasn't destroyed the market is it's tied to AT&T.

Re:Where's the market?

[virtualXTC]

Why should it? It doesn't have an amazing app store (like the iPhone). It doesn't have sexy hardware (like the iPhone or many imitators). It doesn't have an amazingly cheap price. There is nothing to stand out about it other than running "google OS". And since Android doesn't have a reputation yet, that doesn't sell phones.

Great apps would help, but people won't build those until the thing is more popular. Better hardware would help a little so it doesn't look so blocky (the G2 should help here).....

Of course, I wouldn't want to fight against a $99 iPhone....

Err, have you checked the android app store lately? Does you iphone have turn-by-turn directions? Can you i-phone be used as a metal-detector? Did you iphone come with copy-and-paste enabled? Can your iphone use google voice? How much do your iphone apps add to the total cost of your phone? I've yet to have to pay for an andriod app, but did dump some money toward andnav2. Is there anything even close to Enkin for iPhone?

There is nothing wrong with the hardware; pictures / advertisements of the Android don't do it any justice. The functionality that the keyboard and trackball on the G1 provides crush any hardware extras the iPhone may have.

At $97 the Android is more than competitively priced. How much did all your iPhone apps end up costing you? Every app I've downloaded for android has been free (most in both senses). Most of all, why would i want to buy a phone that requires me to void my warranty if I ever wanted to develop my own personal apps for it?

Re:Where's the market?

[quacking duck]

Err, have you checked the android app store lately? Does you iphone have turn-by-turn directions?

Yes. I don't use them but Tom-Tom and smaller (cheaper) options are available. xGPS is also available for jailbroken iPhones.

Can you i-phone be used as a metal-detector?

Yes. The latest 3GS has an internal compass, and apps exist to use it as a metal detector

Did you iphone come with copy-and-paste enabled?

Yes - as of mid-June this year.

Can your iphone use google voice?

Finally, the first no (officially, anyway)

How much do your iphone apps add to the total cost of your phone?

Downloaded almost 200 apps, including games, traffic cameras, weather charts, fitness, stargazing, etc. Most are full and not demo/lite versions.

Total cost: $2.

(Apps like Pandora's Box and AppMiner are a godsend for tracking apps that are on sale)

I've yet to have to pay for an andriod app, but did dump some money toward andnav2. Is there anything even close to Enkin for iPhone?

Not personally aware of one yet but there was a /. article about London Tube system app working on that same principle.

There is nothing wrong with the hardware; pictures / advertisements of the Android don't do it any justice. The functionality that the keyboard and trackball on the G1 provides crush any hardware extras the iPhone may have.

What would do it justice then? Consider that the iPhone has no virtually no surface features, so its ads are all based on what's shown on the screen.

At $97 the Android is more than competitively priced. How much did all your iPhone apps end up costing you? Every app I've downloaded for android has been free (most in both senses).

Again, of my 200 apps, I've only paid $2.

Re:Where's the market?

[gutter]

Have you looked at the iPhone app store lately? There are plenty of free apps, just like there are plenty of paid apps in the Android store. I don't know about a metal detector app (seems unlikely to actually work well), but everything else you mentioned works fine, including apps like Enkin:

http://www.acrossair.com/apps_newyorknearestsubway.htm

You can of course use GV through the browser, although I admit I'd prefer a good native app. My guess is that Apple will have to approve it eventually - refusing just seems a little too anticompetitive.

There's nothing wrong with the G1 hardware, but it is most definitely NOT as nice as the iPhone hardware. I've spent plenty of time with the G1 and I'll take my iPhone any day - the trackball is OK, but I definitely don't miss it. That said, newer Android phones seem to have much nicer hardware - having multiple different phones is a big win for the end users, but will likely end up being a big pain for developers.

Re:Where's the market?

[onefriedrice]

Err, have you checked the android app store lately? Does you iphone have turn-by-turn directions?

Umm, yeah.

Can you i-phone be used as a metal-detector?

Thank god no.

Did you iphone come with copy-and-paste enabled?

Yeah...

Can your iphone use google voice?

Don't know, don't care. I don't use it.

How much do your iphone apps add to the total cost of your phone?

I've spent ~ $10 on 3rd-party apps. Most of them were free, the rest I have no problems shelling out a couple bucks to support development of useful apps (in case I wasn't clear, I wouldn't put a metal detector under this category).

I've yet to have to pay for an andriod app, but did dump some money toward andnav2. Is there anything even close to Enkin for iPhone?

No clue, don't know what that is. Apparently I'm living fine without it though, however amazing it may be.

There is nothing wrong with the hardware; pictures / advertisements of the Android don't do it any justice. The functionality that the keyboard and trackball on the G1 provides crush any hardware extras the iPhone may have.

I'm glad you like it. I haven't been able to use one personally because I've never even seen one. The majority of opinions I've seen from the few people who have actually held one, however, is that the G1 is bulky. If that's true, it would be worth it to me to shell out some more dough to have a phone that doesn't bulge in my pocket. My own opinion of course.

At $97 the Android is more than competitively priced. How much did all your iPhone apps end up costing you?

We've been over this: ~ $10. And I do have plenty of them which I use regularly. Hasn't exactly broken the bank.

Every app I've downloaded for android has been free (most in both senses). Most of all, why would i want to buy a phone that requires me to void my warranty if I ever wanted to develop my own personal apps for it?

I don't know, but you seem to be under the delusion that voiding the warranty of an iPhone is required to put your own apps on it. If you had any credibility left at this point, it completely evaporated. Pay a measly $99 bucks and load your apps on your own phone to your heart's content. Unlike developing apps on Android, you'll be happy to know the iPhone SDK documentation is very good, so you'll have your apps written and loaded in no time.

Re:Where's the market?

[thismightbeal]

I have and use an Android phone. I dont understand your problem with the market. I have *easilly* installed most of the apps that my co-worker with IPhone has (through the market app). The selection of apps is huge. It seems to me most people in this discussion don't have the phone, yet argue as if they do!

Re:Where's the market?

[mattrad]

Gahhh! You're falling into the same trap as Gruber. Android does not have to aim for the Porsche market, you don't have to *beat* the iPhone, and this isn't a zero-sum game. Google's mobile OS has the potential to be *the* main platform for high and medium-end phones, and possibly low-end ones as well.

Ask yourself why Android is so attractive to so many phone manufacturers? It allows them to dramatically lower the Bill of Materials and the R&D budget. They no longer have to worry about developing and maintaining their own operating systems, they just need to tinker around the edges. This is a huge cost saving.

Furthermore, if they're in the business of licensing the phone OS, such as HTC with Windows Mobile, then Android phones are a no-brainer. It enables them to lower the cost of producing the phone (the B.O.M.), meaning their customers - the phone carriers - can offer those phones free on relatively low cost contracts to the end-users.

And just wait until you can pick up an Android-powered smartphone for $99 without a contract e.g. the HTC Click or a Samsung device. That's likely to happen to 2010. Android at 3% and it's a failure? I don't think so. This one's a slow burner.

Re:Where's the market?

[MBCook]

I was referring to the market for physical phone it's self, not the app market. I really don't know the state of the Android app market (other than it's bigger than the Pre's, which is not hard to do).

Re:Where's the market?

[MBCook]

I'm a fan of Gruber, which may be why.

I realize the benefits of Android, they're quite clear. I would have loved something like Android before I got my iPhone.

I just worry the G1 hasn't made much of a splash, and if the other phones coming don't, I wouldn't put it past the carriers to say "We don't want another Android phone, those don't sell well." I worry that Android won't get the chance it should because it's not attached to a better phone. If things had started with 3 phones, I'd think of it in a better position.

Next year will be the big year. That's when we will see what happens. But the cell phone market (at least in the US) has it's priorities so strange (usability? What's that?), I'm not sure this approach is going to work.

Re:Where's the market?

[mrjohnson]

You forgot: push gmail and gchat. Compatible with $anyos over usb so it doesn't require iTunes and Windows or Mac computer. Over the air synchronization to your Google account, and also works with Apps for Domains. (Think MobileMe that doesn't suck, for free.) Built-in Google Gears on the browser. Apps that can run in the background.

And my personal favorite: the back button that works everywhere. It's killer.

Re:Where's the market?

[mattrad]

I'm also a fan of Gruber. But he, like many US tech pundits, often fall down when it comes to the wider mobile arena. My main point is that Android is so compelling to manfacturers; it leaves them free to concentrate on the real differentiators - hardware and form factor. This will increasingly enable them to drive down the cost to produce their phones. Their customers, the carriers, always want to sell phones that cost them little to buy, especially when they offer a slick user experience that their customers increasingly hanker after. [Oblig. car analogy] If you can offer an almost-BMW experience at a Toyota price, then people will go for it.

I agree that the US cell phone market has strange priorities, but show them the money, and they will follow. IMHO.

Re:Where's the market?

[evil saltine]

Glad I don't have to pay $100 to use my phone.

Re:Where's the market?

[dangitman]

And neither do iPhone users. What the fuck is your point?

Re:Where's the market?

[virtualXTC]

My reply was more in jest of the /. article than the actual functionality of the iPhone, but I'll reply with a few clairfications:

I actually didn't know that there are fee apps for the iPhone as all of the drones around me seem to pay for all their apps, so I'm a little less confused why people would actually choose an iPhone - thanks

You may have turn by turn, but the $99 version of the iPhone, to my knowledge, is with out an actual GPS receiver, therefore making turn by turn rather useless if you are a block over. The for pay apps completely replace a store bought GPS. The for free option has a poor visual map, but voice-wise is better than any in-store version, to the point where I never need to look at a map (but can just use google maps if I do).

The bulkiness of the G1 is due to the inclusion of a keyboard; the G2 is with out it, but I find the bulk, as with a pocket knife, is more than made up for in utility.

Despite not having to pay for apps, most users do pay an extra $20 a month over t-mobile for their iphone plan, not to say that at&t doesn't have better coverage, they just don't have $20 a month better coverage imho.

Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

We have known this for ages and we still act as if this is somehow surprising?

Most Apple users believe they are somehow better than everyone else and that they are somehow elite because they own an Apple product. -1 Troll me if you like, but there are many people who truly believe that and one classic twitter posting complaining about the reduction in prices of Apple notebook computers really expresses what everyone else is afraid to admit -- that buying a particular brand of anything somehow says something about who they are. People buying Harley Davidson motorcycles for weekend rides or having their bikes transported on trailers to motorcycle rallies like Sturgis somehow makes them a member of a biker's culture? It's not true. Slapping a popular label on your ass does not make anyone cooler or better, and yet people still persist in believing so and why?

The power of marketing influence is great! But these Jedi mind tricks only work on the weak minded.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[StreetStealth]

that buying a particular brand of anything somehow says something about who they are.

You are correct that buying a brand says nothing about who you are. But the substance of what you buy does indeed say quite a bit about your priorities. You seem to hold a greatly simplified view of the market and the forces that drive it: that all consumers buy only by brand and that none choose on merit. With the exception of you, obviously, the only one able to look past branding and make an educated decision.

But, it appears that brands do indeed matter to you! You make a dismissal of Apple products based merely upon their popularity and trendy branding, with no mention of any objective shortcomings. Has it occurred to you that a certain subset of Apple's customers actually buy their products for superior usability? That a Harley Davidson rider may have comparison shopped and chosen a Harley based on its mechanical qualities?

Brand identity is indeed one major force in the marketplace. But it's far from the only one.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

The point of my comment is that Marketing trumps Quality. It would be off-point to go into the fact that most Apple products are pretty good. I service Apple products and I often get paid for it. I probably know a bit more about Apple products than you do -- the good the bad and the ugly. It's not relevant to the point I was making which is that marketing and brand names maintain a nearly hypnotic brain control over most people and this is all thanks to marketing. Marketing exploits the weak minded and wills them to buy and believe. It works. The quality of the products or services are irrelevant.

I don't recall dismissing Apple products in my most recent posting. I dismiss users who believe that owning and using Apple products somehow makes them better, more special people.

And let's be really clear on this point. Apple does not survive on quality. They survive on their loyal and fanatical fan base. This fact is well documented by all sorts of researchers and marketing experts all over the globe. It's not just my opinion, but the exploration of a rather interesting phenomenon.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[cowscows]

I'm not going to argue that Apple doesn't market heavily and successfully, but I think there's ample evidence that Apple's success has more to do with just being the latest cool fad. Truckloads of iPods have been selling for something like 8 years now, they've sold over 200 million of the things. Everyone's got one, even my grandparents have a couple. Fads and fashion don't last that long, people are still buying them because they like them, and they like them because they're better than all of alternatives.

Hype isn't completely meaningless, but history is full of zillion dollar marketing campaigns for products that completely flopped. I know you like to think you're better than everyone else by pretending that they're just mindless sheep and you're enlightened somehow, but in reality, people keep buying this stuff because it works for them. The iPhone isn't the perfect device for everybody, but for lots of people, it really is a whole lot better than anything else available. The fact that it looks slick is just a bonus.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[guisar]

I'll tell you who does own these things- every ticket counter, very restaurant every place I went in Georgia and Alabama where there were African Americans the G1 seemed to have 75% market share. My wife has one but I'd never seen another in New England then I come down south and WAM! they are everywhere. Anyone else noticed the same?

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[trouser]

An objective comparison of the features of a Harley Davidson and pretty much any other motorcycle in the world shows that the Harley costs much more while offering much less. It is expensive, heavy, loud, primitive, guzzles fuel while offering pedestrian performance, handles like a boat and brakes like one too.

But people get Harley Davidson tattoos, wear Harley Davidson jackets and t-shirts and, where the law requires a motorcycle helmet, wear black open faced helmets that offer the minimum possible protection in the event of an accident because it is part of the Harley aesthetic.

If you want a really good bike buy a Japanese bike. If you want a really good bike for more money buy a German bike. If you want 1950s technology for even more money again buy a Harley, but don't kid yourself you're doing it for any reason other than to buy into the lifestyle and culture associated with riding one.

As for Macs, I've owned a few. They cost a lot of money, you have to wear a skivvy while using them, they might be reasonably powerful but OS(u)X makes pretty short work of the power on hand to deliver abysmal performance on anything shy of the latest models. And for any real work I go back to my old PC running XP Home. Because unlike the Mac it really Just Works. And I don't feel dirty, cheated and disillusioned every time I use it.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[bazaarsoft]

Apple does not survive on quality. They survive on their loyal and fanatical fan base. This fact is well documented by all sorts of researchers and marketing experts all over the globe. It's not just my opinion, but the exploration of a rather interesting phenomenon.

1. 1) Apple has expanded it's installed base significantly first with the iPod then the iPhone (and, during that time, the Mac as well), so your argument that they survive on the "loyal and fanatical fan base" is, well, utterly wrong. Just look at the Republican Party for an example of what relying solely on your base gets you.
2. 2) Please cite all of these so-called "experts all over the globe." Such exaggerated statements have little basis in fact.

Since you started with the sweeping hyperbole, I'll add mine: the vast majority of users of Apple products don't give a rats ass about any perceived ego boost that using said product gives them. They use them because they work - consistently, reliably and without getting in the way of what they want to do. That's always been what Apple does well and, for the most part, their competition fail to do well.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[Locutus]

"The power of marketing influence is great! But these Jedi mind tricks only work on the weak minded."

but there are just SOOOOooooooo....... many of them. ;-)

Ever notice who many emails from iPhone users still say "sent from my iPhone"? They've no clue that the default signature is set to that and they just keep going on with it.

LoB

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[abigor]

Well, for once you are certainly living up to your username (I usually like your posts a lot).

I write code that deploys on Unix of whatever pedigree (right now, embedded Linux). For those of us who need a nice gui that does all the corporate stuff, plus a proper Unix, OS X is quite frankly a godsend. The fact that it runs on beautifully constructed hardware is a nice bonus.

I've barely ever even paid attention to the cost - why bother? Amortised out over five or so years, all laptops are dirt cheap.

Anyway, everyone I know in "the biz" owns a Mac for the same reasons. I don't know any of the Apple people you seem to - or do you really know them? Maybe you're just assuming on the basis of a tired stereotype. Stop being so angry at your imaginary enemies and just look at the products for what they are - do they meet your needs? If not, move on.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

I was prepared to create a list and present it here, but instead I will just suggest you google for "study of apple marketing" for an unbelievable list of references.

Here's a sign of the kind of mind altering that marketing does. Not only do people feel that a particular product or brand name says something important about themselves, but if you say anything bad about the products, they take it rather personally. And the stronger the connection between product and person, the stronger the emotional reaction can be observed.

I drive a Jeep Cherokee and I hope no one thinks I'm an outdoorsy sporty person because of it. (That model of Jeep with 6 cylinder engine runs forever and still gets excellent miles per gallon) But I am sure there are people who believe I like to go tail-gating, hunting and driving in the mud because I have a Jeep. So I would agree that not EVERYONE who uses Apple is under their spell, but from personal experience, I have to believe what I say is generally true. I'm very familiar with Macs and iPods and iPhone. (After the Blackberry, the iPhone is the best mobile phone for integrating with MS Exchange server besting every phone especially those running Windows Mobile.) I'm very familiar with Windows, Linux and Mac OS X and a wide experience integrating them in different environments. I believe I'm at least fairly objective when it comes to knowing the technologies and the people who use them.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

Funny you mention Apple laptops. As a support type guy, I have to say that's the main reason I would personally never own a Mac laptop for anything important.

They are most certainly more expensive than they need to be and they offer NO damage protection warranty. Their idea of business level service is getting to be first in line to have an average 3-day turn around. They simply don't offer things like "next-day on-site" service and no coverage at all for things like coffee spills and drops. That makes using one for anything mission critical a bit more risky than any other brand and they make no apologies for it.

Apple workstations are another matter. They are less of a risk of suffering accidental damage and are quite reliable. Unfortunately, generic parts don't go into them easily and different models don't share too many parts. And working on them is quite often painfully difficult for all but the most basic components. Deployment in business networks are rare as full integration is next to impossible and certainly not simple.

From a software aspect, MacOSX enables a hacker such as myself a lot more freedom to play inside -- that's really nice. Since it is a Unix, I already knew its basics before I got started which is nice. Most MacOSX software works well and quite uniformly as most who write for it, follow the prescribed conventions for installation and deinstallation... all except for Microsoft Office for Mac which is abysmal and whose mail client doesn't even fully integrate with MS Exchange server. (Not Apple's fault I know)

But to know all of what I know about all these technologies and the tricks and techniques involved in getting everything to talk with one another, you have to be experienced and educated. This is a trait, which I am sure you will agree, is not a trait most people maintain.

FWIW, I also own a mac... three macs actually.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[bazaarsoft]

The problem is, when you make comments like:

So I would agree that not EVERYONE who uses Apple is under their spell, but from personal experience, I have to believe what I say is generally true.

You're contradicting your later statement that you're being objective. You're not - you're using generalizations and spurious arguments to make your case. The phrase "under their spell" is inflamatory language, implying that there's something inherently evil going on. If Apple were shipping total crap that didn't work, then perhaps you could view what they're doing as evil. However, the quality of Apple products and services is at least as good as anyone else in the industry, so they are no more evil than, say, HTC/Google. And your cop-out on citing specific references just further reinforces that you're making generalizations without any specific proof. In fact, none of the articles I read based on googling your phrase had much to say at all about quality vs marketing.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[gutter]

So I just googled "study of apple marketing" and nothing on the first couple of pages shows me any sort of statistically significant study indicating why people who chose to buy Apple products did so. I did see a lot of "case studies" and glorified opinion pieces.

If we were going to accept anecdotal evidence, I could tell you that none of the many developers I know who have switched from Windows to Mac in the past couple of years give a shit about brand - they just want to get their work done in the easiest way possible - for them that turned out to be a mac.

Of course, we would both be idiots to assume that our personal group of acquaintances were representative of the many millions of people who buy Apple products every year.

I do agree that marketing can be quite powerful. I also agree that there are probably people out there buying Apple products just for the brand. However, I think you're crazy if you think that the vast majority of Apple customers are buying Apple just for the brand, regardless of any advantage in hardware or software quality.

Marketing can guarantee a strong opening weekend for a shitty movie, but once people figure out that it sucks the attendance drops dramatically. People would not continue to pay a premium for products costing multiple hundreds of dollars if the quality wasn't there.

If I had to guess, I'd suggest that people are continuing to buy Apple products because they consistently boast the highest customer satisfaction rates in both computers and cell phones, and nothing sells products like positive word of mouth:

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2008/08/mac_customer_sa.html
http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/08/14/iphone-vs-pre-satisfaction-bakeoff/

So in the absence of any real evidence, we both have our theories. I just happen to think it's a lot more likely that people are rationally choosing superior products based on positive word of mouth than it is that people are irrationally spending lots of extra money because of some commercials they saw on TV.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[agnosticnixie]

These whiners also get regularly told to stop complaining, they're the quick adopters with too much spare money apple tends to use as testing grounds/overcharge lots before rev B comes out at 2/3 the original price - the hardcore base of Apple's market is only a vocal minority of it - generally the "pro designers" or people who used to have macs when apple was still peddling MacOS classic and who, at the time, also whined about having the baby Powerbook as part of the PB lineup (the opinion people have of it nowadays is a mix of revisionism, sais whiners being told to shut up and revisionism) - the growth of apple's market has mostly been with students and geeks in term of macs, and I doubt there's much correlation wrt to ipods and iphones as they sell much more of the two.
The calculation for most people who I know who have macs (and that's mostly professional geeks) came down to either support (I need *nix but oem whine about linux - some people have had warranty requests shot down by ignorant bean counters because they switched the OS on a dell), required applications (e.g. - a friend of mine in film studies has been looking around for tech jobs in the movie industry, even sysadmins are expected to have a cursory understanding of Final Cut, so he keeps both a mac and a linux box (for cinelerra and blender) - it's not standard but I'm pretty sure it exists a bunch of times), or familiarity, and the hardware is actually okay for the price compared to some other oem, especially when a) a 600$ Dell is a piece of shit and b) against retail, they've very reasonable and many people still won't buy online or can't (I've only bothered to upgrade my credit cards over 1.000 because I wanted to have enough to be able to replace my computer online if something catastrophic happened to it)- the OEM pricing to compare with is Dell's XPS line and Thinkpads, the macs come out of the comparison looking still a bit pricier, but it's a matter of 5-10%, and these lines have the same internals in the end. The problem is the lack of a low-end offering (ironically, seeing the Nokia netbook, I thought it was a "macbook mini" mock up until I saw the windows desktop), and for now, Apple says they won't do it.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[GaryPatterson]

Google "study of apple marketing" (with quotes) and you'll see three articles about apples (the fruit).

Take the quotes off and things get a bit more sensible, but you may want to read a few of the articles on the first page or two. A lot of them talk about good marketing combined with good products, which is not the point you're making. Others talk about good marketing and how other companies can do the same, which again is not the point you're making. You want them to say that customers only buy Apple products because of the marketing and their own fanatical bias, but sensible analysts don't go that far.

Talking about a bunch of fanatics not only misses the point, it also ensures companies (who buy into that) cannot possibly compete with Apple. Think for a moment - the number of iPhone users is increasing. Either Apple are getting more fanatics in the cult every day, or customers are getting something from their iPhone that you've not identified.

Which do you reckon is more likely? Get out Occam's Razor and cut away the extraneous rubbish.

It's the same with competitors who think a list of features trumps the actual usability of a device. Thankfully people are coming around on that one.

The whole "Apple is all hype and fanatics" thing isn't true - the products have to be good enough to carry that off and still bring in new customers.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[dafing]

Not annoyed with you, just thought I'd mention, I believe its only really in America that Apple is marketed at all. Just offering this as a bit of a correction, I understand that in America, every ad break (and I hear american tv has more of them) is filled with the Mac VS PC ads? Well, we dont have them, AT ALL. Yup, move to New Zealand if you dislike the smug mac character :)

I do believe I've Apple ads on tv ONCE or TWICE over a few years, such as when the iPhone came here (iPhone 3G), I dont even remember what the ad was, but it wasnt a massive thing. In large cities, Apple might have a billboard or two, and maybe skins on buses, but outside of America, I'd be willing to bet that Apple does not market anywhere near as much as people on /. suggest. I am very jealous of the Apple Stores, as I myself am a "fan boi", typing this on a apple keyboard, with apple mouse, Apple Cinema HD Display, PowerMac G5, Airport router..... :)

Just want to make it clear: I hear that Apple is some sort of ultra present company in America? This isnt so in most countries worldwide, Apple is sold based on its apparent quality ("a 5K laptop you have to order? must be special!"/ "Macs are used by A list celebrities, people who live in cardboard boxes use HP/Dell computers, every A list celeb/audio producer/graphic artist/movie producer uses a Mac so they must be good". Apple doesnt advertise here, so we dont have quite the annoying cult aspect as is portrayed in peoples comments.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[knappe duivel]

Most Apple users believe they are somehow better than everyone else and that they are somehow elite because they own an Apple product.

Try talking to an actual Apple user. I know dozens of them and not a single one fits your silly description. The fanbois you talk about hang around on macdailynews, not on slashdot. They are a small minority and give people like me, who actually like using a mac better than windows or linux, a bad name.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[Dog-Cow]

I know many many Apple product owners. None of them are self-centered assholes who think that owning Apple makes them better people.

Oddly enough, I see more assholes on slashdot who think that NOT owning an Apple product makes them better than everyone else. I think people like you are just projecting your own priorities and insecurities on the general population.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[Dog-Cow]

I guess I shall take comfort in the idea that it's better to be thought an idiot than to be one. Shame you have no such comfort.

I own an iPod Touch. To date, there is nothing the hardware is capable of that I have not been able to do with it.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

The cool factor has a LOT to do with it. One has only to look at which "apps" are popular to see that. While there are unquestionably many really good apps for iPhone, there are also a lot of stupid ones. The lightsaber? The zippo lighter? Good god.

It's sad that people think I am putting Apple products down when I'm actually talking about the people Apple target as customers, but these are the same people who are confused about their identities and their possessions. (That is to say, their identities are closely tied to their possessions... as I said before, insult their things, and you have insulted them. It makes sense that if I insult their things, they believe I am insulting them.)

So let me be clear on what I think about Apple gear:

It's Very cool. It looks like art. It is well engineered. It performs very well.

The complaints I have are about the company itself and its limiting and inhibiting policies, procedures and designs. "The Apple Experience" is a high priority Apple but so too is limiting and controlling 3rd parties which is why we see stories about the App store so often and why they are moving away from user-replaceable batteries. And let's also be clear on why I feel the way I do. Tell a hacker-geek what he can't do with his gear and you will find he responds negatively. Can't replace battery? = -1. Can't copy and paste? = -1. (Yes, I know that was fixed) Can't save attachments in email? = -1. Can't play flash in web browsing? = -1. The list goes on and on about what you can't do.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[alien9]

advocacy of better mechanical qualities of Harley-Davidson I suppose was stated quote. They just sell an idea of badassness (and patriotism) packed with '50s technology.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[dangitman]

It would be off-point to go into the fact that most Apple products are pretty good. I service Apple products and I often get paid for it. I probably know a bit more about Apple products than you do -- the good the bad and the ugly. It's not relevant to the point I was making which is that marketing and brand names maintain a nearly hypnotic brain control over most people and this is all thanks to marketing.

If it's all about marketing, then how do you explain Apple's devoted fan-base during the "dark years" when there was approximately zero marketing from Apple, and what marketing did happen was incompetent at best?

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

Simple: When faced with learning something new or staying with what you know, most humans stay with what they know. That's especially true in the U.S. which has been extremely resistant to using the world-recognized metric system for standard weights and measures. People who are invested in a particular technology rarely admit they were wrong and are highly resistant to moving on.

Apple's earliest strategy of getting Apple computers into every school also had a role in their maintaining their following. Classic Apple users are usually quite religious about their computers anyway.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[dangitman]

But you said it was all about the marketing. This shows that for many, it isn't, therefore your hypothesis is proven false.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

Where did I say it was all about marketing? What I said was that marketing [hype] trumps anything related to quality. This is basic consumerism in the U.S. There have been many "better cars" "better computers" "better technologies" or "better just about anything" out there that was crushed or otherwise ignored by the public because marketing kept the public attention elsewhere.

But I love the way you manage your argument. Say I said something I didn't and then what I said was wrong. Enjoy your smug moment for as long as it takes for you to realize your approach is pretty off.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[Uberbah]

Most Apple users believe they are somehow better than everyone else

Question: do you use a cannon or a howitzer for your projection?

They are most certainly more expensive than they need to be

They are price competitive for equivalent hardware. They have a limited selection, but lack of product options doesn't mean their offerings are overpriced. If you want a $400 POS special, or a kitchen-sink desktop replacement, obviously Apple isn't for you.

and they offer NO damage protection warranty

The ones that rip consumers off you mean?

Their idea of business level service is getting to be first in line to have an average 3-day turn around. They simply don't offer things like "next-day on-site" service and no coverage at all for things like coffee spills and drops. That makes using one for anything mission critical a bit more risky than any other brand and they make no apologies for it.

Would you like some cheese with that whine? Again, if you must have coffee spill warranties and on-site service, then by all means go somewhere else - no skin of your nose or Apple's.

And you conveniently ignore the facts that Apple laptops have much higher resale values, and are high on customer satisfaction/reliability surveys.

Apple workstations are another matter. They are less of a risk of suffering accidental damage and are quite reliable. Unfortunately, generic parts don't go into them easily and different models don't share too many parts. And working on them is quite often painfully difficult for all but the most basic components.

On what planet? Open the case and you have easy access to the memory, hard drives and PCI slots.

Re:Marketing trumps Quality

[erroneus]

I have always maintained business level warranty support on my laptop hardware and though I have only used it two or three times in my years of laptop ownership, I have to say it is quite worth it. My newest machine was ruined within two weeks of my first getting it. REALLY sucked surviving that weekend that it happened, but the next business day, there was a sharp repair guy with replacement parts in hand. If it was a Thursday, it would have been Friday that it was fixed.

I tried to word it carefully, the stuff about workstations, but yes, HDs and RAM are accessible and changeable but that's about the extent of it. Ever try to replace a power supply? Case fans? And the PCI devices have to be Apple compatible PCI devices before they will work -- can't just go pick up any old PCI device. But things like power supplies and fans and system boards don't move among machines of different models so money-saving tricks like saving your old machine for parts in your new one don't fly and actually taking them apart is more difficult that most laptops.

I don't ignore the higher resale value. Levi's jeans have a higher resale value than Wrangler, but so what? And as to the over-priced, unvaried, inflexible offerings from Apple? I wish I had gone further into it than I did. The display options or horrible. With my Dell, I have always been able to pay more for a nice 1920x1200 display. Completely unavailable for Apple laptops. The choice between matte and glossy? What? No choices? Crap. And the lack of "lower-end" models is Apple's fault. If people want to spend $400-$600 for a laptop that runs MacOSX just fine with the right software tweaks, then people will do it. The need for expensive "comparable" hardware is a complete myth as cheaper hardware runs the OS and the software just fine. They are quite simply over-priced and lack the options users want and even beg Apple for. There are few companies that are more deaf to their customers and fans than Apple.

Maybe the "smart" choice is to buy nothing.

[hoarier]

Phones are social objects; they live and die on cultural perception, on our collective assessment of what carrying them can do for our style.

or so the article tells me. Huh? My main phone (a Casio, for Japan) lives and dies on its battery. It's reliable and legible and the payment plan makes it cheaper than most of the alternatives. It's about three years old, making it half the age of my other phone (Sony Eriksson, for Britain). So I'm happy with it, though you're welcome to enjoy your own, very different phone.

Pace Farhad Manjoo but I really couldn't give a bowel movement about my "style" (if any) and unless you're an available and unusually alluring specimen of the opposite sex I don't care what you think of it either.

Consider using your old phone and doing less to accelerate the degradation of the planet.

I've yet to see one in the wild...

[ducomputergeek]

We've spent a lot of the past 6 months optimizing a mobile version of our website & ecommerce systems as well as developing native apps for the iPhone and Blackberry. I go around and test on anyone with a smartphone I see. And I've yet to meet a single person with a G1 or MyTouch.

Re:I've yet to see one in the wild...

[drago177]

I've designed websites before, and can't find anything wrong with your homepage from my G1. Is that the website you're referring to?

Re:I've yet to see one in the wild...

[mrjohnson]

I've seen a couple... But you've got to remember the iPhone has been out for 3(?) years longer than any Android device. And I'll admit the G1, which I loved, wasn't great hardware to open the game with. It was simply the first to market.

By the way, the free SDK download for Android includes an fully featured emulator that you can use to check your sites with. It beats following people around asking what phone they have. :-)

Re:I've yet to see one in the wild...

[PitaBred]

My wife has one, I've seen a few others around here. Maybe T-Mobile just isn't big in your area? It's not a bad phone... worst part about it is that it's slow.

Features...

[Nom du Keyboard]

features that far surpass those of Apple's device,

Tethering, VOIP, and Google Voice alone would far outpace the iPhones selection of farts and beer glass pouring apps.

Re:Features...

[WatertonMan]

Strange. I have Google Voice, tethering, and VOIP running on my iPhone. Oh yea, I spent the 2 minutes to jailbreak it. Works fine. No problems. Even commercial applications on the Cydia app store.

Re:Features...

[Doppler00]

I'm having a hard time finding any new phones that support tethering. It's like they want the fact that the feature even existed to slowly disappear. It's one of the only reasons I stay with T-Mobile having their super cheap $20/month internet plan.

Re:Features...

[drago177]

I've tried both, and the google voice app is a must-have. The website adds a layer of complexity making most of the service just too painful. Tethering actually works better on the iphone 3Gs since it doesn't run as hot, but comparing it with cost makes it worth it IMO - I pay $52/mo including taxes/fees for my own tmobile account & unlmt inet. My sister pays >$60 for her iphone, when she's actually on the family plan with my parents paying $80 for the base phone. What's the cheapest iphone plan out there with unlimited inet?

Re:Features...

[hollywench]

I stay with Tmobile because in 4 years I've never had a problem with them. Not once. I had AT&T for nearly 3 years, both before and after Cingular bought them and never again. Gah. Horrible, horrible customer service. :p

Yeah cuz the others don't have a head start ...

[Hohlraum]

I'm so sick of people making number comparisons between similar technologies that were released sometimes YEARS earlier than the others.

waiting for a hero

[c0reboarder]

Just waiting for the HTC Hero to hit the US on a carrier larger then t-mobile! (rumor dates are Oct 11th on Sprint...released in Europe in June) This phone seems to be in the same league as the iPhone and may help increase Android's popularity.

Re:waiting for a hero

[unoengborg]

No, Hero is not in the same leage, its an iPhone killer.

Multitasking, multitouch, Adobe flash, very much improved GUI by HTC, and you can change battery and SIM card without tools, ...

Re:waiting for a hero

[c0reboarder]

Yeah, it is a way better phone in MY mind too. Sadly the processor could be faster, (although the software updates should take care of a good chunk of the lag problem)... The marketing from Sprint probably won't be nearly as effective as Apple/ATT either... so I'm thinking killing the iPhone won't happen despite being an all around better phone. But damn I can't wait until this thing launches here!

Re:waiting for a hero

[webreaper]

Who cares about changing the god-damn battery? What is this obsession with dissing the iPhone for having a sealed battery?

I've had mobile phones (about one a year) for nigh-on 20 years, and have never ever ever wanted to replace the battery in my device. That includes cellphones, smartphones, PDAs, etc. I have an Android phone now (Magic) and still have no desire to swap out the battery.

So shut up about removable batteries. All but 3 people on the planet DGAS about them!

Here's why I don't have one

[blue l0g1c]

I'll tell you why I desperately want an Android phone, but won't buy one. It's because the carriers have locked-down what is supposed to be a "free, open source, and fully customizable mobile platform". If I get one that is unlocked through other means, it is prohibitively expensive and I'm pretty sure my carrier would still find a way to screw me.

Re:Here's why I don't have one

[mjwx]

I'll tell you why I desperately want an Android phone, but won't buy one. It's because the carriers have locked-down what is supposed to be a "free, open source, and fully customizable mobile platform".

Buy a HTC Dream or Magic unlocked from here or here, root and install Cyanogen mod on it. You still have to use a telco that has a 2100 MHz HSDPA 3G network but that's your problem, you have a free, open source and fully customisable mobile platform. If you dont like doing the work yourself then you are stuck with whatever the carrier chooses and again that's your problem.

Simple, it's all about design.

[dagamer34]

For the most part, I consider the HTC Hero the first Android phone worth owning because it looks pleasing to use. That's what the iPhone was successful. The G1 looks like a god awful brick and the myTouch 3G is only a slight improvement on that. People buy phones to make a statement, and just wanting to support open source doesn't get a lot of "normal" people onto the platform. I think Android will change for the better once Sprint gets the HTC Hero on it's network.

Re:Simple, it's all about design.

[GooberToo]

People buy phones to make a statement,

Not true. *SOME* people buy phones to make a statement. Others buy a phone for functionality. Those that want to make a statement buy something like a Hero or an iPhone. Those that actually want functionality from their phone buy something like a G1. The physical keyboard provides a huge boost for utilitarian users. That's a fact.

Really, when it comes to the G1, IMOHO, it highlights just how petty people can be. The phone really isn't bad looking in the least and so many have made such a big deal about the "chin" which is 100% completely a non-issue unless you're petty for the sake of petty, for the sole purpose of creating an issue which doesn't exist. Which is understandable as the G1 is a better phone than the iPhone 3G; so they needed something to try to make themselves feel better for owning the "cool" inferior phone. The simple fact is, all iPhone users owe Android/G1 for the features available in the iPhone 3Gs. Excluding memory and the jump in ogl es 2.0 support, the G1 is superior hardware.

As a side note, the G1 supports the majority of ogl es 2.0 in hardware/software but the Android platform doesn't. That's coming.

Re:Simple, it's all about design.

[Dog-Cow]

People buy phones to make a statement

Idiots and assholes on slashdot (claim to) buy phones to make a statement.

Real people buy phones because they do stuff.

One day you might actually understand this, but I won't hold my breath.

Re:Simple, it's all about design.

[TooMuchToDo]

Morons buy phones to make a statement. Intelligent people buy a phone to fit their needs.

I tried to get an Android phone, really I did...

[pongo000]

...but I wasn't about to change services just to get one. I have AT&T Wireless, and have been in the market for several years now for an upgrade. I've waited and waited for an Android phone to become available, but nothing ever came my way. So, I've settled for a Nokia E71x, which isn't my ideal phone, but it certainly beats the vaporware that is Android on AT&T Wireless.

Should google be a copycat?

[Skitsnack]

The article and the study looks at smartphones. There is a lot of people that just wants a nice phone that they can call other people with. A lot of these people also wants to take pictures or listen to music on their phone. Most of these people do not want to install third party applications on their phones. These handsets are much cheaper to buy and sells in much greater numbers. Some of these phones have the capabilities of what was really expensive phones a couple of years ago. So they need a shiny OS driving them.

If Google wanted to copy what Apple has been doing they could start selling a clone - the gPhone. But is Google really a hardware company? No, not really. As I understand it Google is trying to get Android to be the OS that other companies will want as the OS in their phones. Not Google's phones but their phones. In order to make that happen they have to give up total control.

Apple will probably be able to continue selling sexy expensive phones and make a great profit doing so. I think Google wants Android to be the OS that powers the rest of market. Look out Symbian.

MyTouch vs iPhone

[OzPeter]

I was interested in a new smart phone and did a comparison between the MyTouch and the iPhone by playing around with each for about 15 minutes in a store. I wanted to like the MyTouch, but overall the iPhone experience was much nicer when playing with all the Apps. But one thing that really got me (and my older eyes) was that the iPhones screen (and hence icons) were much larger than the MyTouch - so it was a no brainer if I wanted to be able to see things on the phone. However in the end I still couldn't justify the cost of a 3GS for the way I use a phone.

Re:MyTouch vs iPhone

[Belial6]

You are correct. I have an iPhone and a MyTouch right here in front of my, and the iPhone is just...Large.

So far, I like the MyTouch a little better, although, that may be partially because I like the ability to increase my storage with just a standard microSD. It could also be that knowing the battery is not user replaceable in the iPhone puts me off. All in all, they both are perfectly fine phones to use on a day to day basis.

Re:MyTouch vs iPhone

[dafing]

buy a secondhand iPhone, or get an unlocked phone. Im sad you are locked into a contract etc where you are? I bought my Original iPhone before they were out here in New Zealand, we only got the iPhone 3G on. My imported brand new iPhone, jailbroken to work off AT&T cost SLIGHTLY under $500 american all up, and I run it off a plan. I felt like a rockstar, having the most sought after ever device, nobody else could buy them in the country, apart from the hundred or so who also imported. I pay 20c a txt message that I send, use wifi for data etc. You could have an unlocked iPhone for basically nothing, if you either find an online seller that sells imported (or whatever) iPhones, or perhaps buy a secondhand, barely used iPhone.

I feel sorry for people who want an iPhone, but cant afford the service charges that come from being locked into a carrier! You CAN have an iPhone for essentially nothing!

I have a G1

[lattyware]

And for me, it's far better than an iPhone would ever be. Why, because it syncs to my Google Apps for your domain account, so I can access emails on my phone in a very efficient manner, because I have an app which throws texts back the other way so I can read them on my PC, because it does everything I want from a phone extremely well, and more. Oh, and a qwerty keyboard helps a lot too.

Re:I have a G1

[dafing]

glad you like your G1, Adam Curry also loves his. Im firmly in the iPhone camp, couldnt consider anything else, but Im not blind to other phones features. Syncing to Google would be very useful for many different features. Glad you're happy :)

Re:I have a G1

[BitZtream]

My iPhone syncs with Google apps for my Domain as well, I get my emails and cals synced just like you. I don't get a lot of text messages because, well, to put it bluntly texting is retarded on a phone that can do HTML email. A better keyboard would be nice, but my phone is for communicating important matters when I'm not at my desk, its not a replacement for my desktop.

Re:I have a G1

[lattyware]

Tell that to all of my friends that have phones that can't send emails.

Re:I have a G1

[Uberbah]

Then get one of the texting apps....Concern resolved.

Killer App

[deftmonkey]

If developer friendliness or freedom is the primary advantage of android, then someone needs to prove it by developing and marketing a useful and exciting app that can't exist on other mobile platforms due to their developer restrictions. That someone has to be Google, because nobody else is going to take the risk of putting in the time and effort for a platform with such a small user base.

Citation needed.

[mjwx]

HTC's Dream and Magic are selling better then expected.

It was never Google's or HTC's plan to take the market by storm, they intended to bleed Android in slowly rather then try to shove it at everyone at once a la Apple.

The Android market growth is slow, but steady. Comparing Google Android to Apple iphone is like comparing the tortoise to the hare. Android has only been released for a bit over 9 months, Google is following its standard MO, release slowly and improve just like it does with all of its services (Gmail for example). Google is simply not rushing to market. In the 9 months that Android has been released we've had two updates 1.1 and 1.5 (which added a heap of functionality).

Android will continue to grow as more handsets are released for it. It's a fair point that the HTC hardware could be better (it's not that bad either) but compared with the gen 1 iphone the gen 1 Android phone (HTC Dream) is far superior and HTC failure and DOA rate is far lower then that of Apple (this is why HTC phones are so expensive). Android is a good OS and it's usage will continue to grow. HTC have released their third phone (HTC Hero), just not in the states, Motarola have 2 on the way ("Sholes" and "Morrison") and Sony has 1 (Xpeira "Rachel") which looks to be the best HW yet for Android. After 5 minutes of using my android phone I realised that it wasn't competing with the Iphone, Google is targeting WinMo and has every chance of supplanting WinMo if development continues at it's current breakneck pace.

As for a "killer app", it's called flash and is coming in Donut.

Re:Citation needed.

[Belial6]

I agree that adding flash would be the killer app, but I can say that the lack of VPN is doing a lot of damage too. It just isn't a business phone without VPN.

Re:Citation needed.

[mjwx]

I agree that adding flash would be the killer app, but I can say that the lack of VPN is doing a lot of damage too. It just isn't a business phone without VPN.

Also coming in Donut.

I've already got VPN with Cyanogen Mod 4.0.1 on my Dream. PPTP and L2TP support, works well with MS PPTP.

Re:Citation needed.

[BarnJay]

I've had the HTC Hero for a few weeks now. Battery life is 2 to 3 days, running with WiFi when in the office or at home. It's got a fast browser, Flash support (although that is a bit slow but I'm not sure that there are too many Flash videos optimized for mobiles), multi-tasking, some nice widgets. It links to my Google mail, Twitter and Facebook accounts. You can view word documents, PDF and synch to Outlook contacts and e-mail. It has Google Maps, Google Sky and Google Voice if you are in the U.S.

The phone can be slow - although I haven't really noticed it, possibly because network stuff like weather updates goes across WiFi as I'm usually in the office and not across Edge/GPRS or 3G. I've also got a 16 GB Class 6 SDHC in it and caches moved to the card which may also account for the reason I don't notice too much lag. There's an optimized update coming up soon from HTC to reduce the lag. I think it's a nice smartphone to use. Hopefully with the updates to Android itself, including the kernel, Skype will get a full application ported to the platform for full WiFi VoIP.

At least there is choice for smartphones and the smartphone OS platform now. And there are a fair number of applications I think for Android, and they aren't all locked to the Google Marketplace - you can obtain software from other sources. Which I guess is my way of saying, that the wailing is a bit premature about the failure and demise of Android.

Re:Citation needed.

[mjwx]

Some hints of actual numbers:

http://phandroid.com/2009/08/23/first-month-in-europe-samsung-sells-100000-galaxies/

http://htcpedia.com/news/htc-sells-one-million-andoid-phones.html

The HTC Galaxy is a WinMo device.

But one Million phones by no means a failure. Also, that was T-Mobile announcing that it had sold 1 million G1's (source: Wikipedia) in the US in April this year so we are not including the HTC Dreams sold in Europe, Australia and Singapore or the HTC Magic and Hero. Most definitely not a failure by any stretch of the imagination.

Re:Citation needed.

[mjwx]

It's worth remembering that in that story the only reason that the tortoise wins is because the hare fell asleep under a tree. Apple don't seem to be taking any naps anytime soon.

You never really got the hang of that metaphor stuff did you.

The rabbit falling asleep isn't the moral, the rabbit went to sleep because he was so over confident (read:arrogant). The moral of the story is that you don't need to be the fastest to win and should never become cocky.

And yes, Apple is extremely arrogant so it is an apt analogy.

Re:Citation needed.

[indiechild]

I don't get why people consider Flash as a "killer app". What does Flash actually add in meaningful terms?

Mini games?

Re:Citation needed.

[lurch_mojoff]

Apple may be plenty arrogant, but it still is not an apt analogy. In order to be, it has to be analogous in the first place. Whatever you may think of Apple, their behavior in the recent past has demonstrated that they are not the kind of company that would rest on their laurels. In fact some still quote the fact that Apple killed the iPod mini at the peak of its popularity to replace it with the nano, something that very few other companies would do - most would milk the mini for all its worth before moving on. So yeah, the grandparent is completely right to say - "Apple don't seem to be taking any naps anytime soon."

Re:Citation needed.

[mjwx]

My HTC Hero already has Flash. It is a fabulous phone except that it uses a custom win32-only binary for calendar syncing which totally sucks. But there has been zero marketing on it. I literally bought it because I stumbled on it accidentally.

Marketing is an issue. In Perth just about every phone store has been forced to take down the iphone posters because they don't have any in stock (false advertising). You cant really compete with a media blitz the likes of the one Apple puts out. Although over here the HTC Magic is featured on posters at the entry to most Three and Vodafone stores.

Re:Citation needed.

[Elfez]

You're mixing up the HTC galaxy (winmo phone) and the Samsung galaxy (android phone), which is the one the link in the parent post is referring to.

Re:Citation needed.

[mjwx]

Apple may be plenty arrogant, but it still is not an apt analogy. Whatever you may think of Apple, their behavior in the recent past has demonstrated that they are not the kind of company that would rest on their laurels.

On the contrary,

Apple has repeatedly refused to listen to their customers or follow common sense (like listening to your customers). This is the equivalent of the hare taking a nap, these stories (old wives tales) should never be taken literally, the message behind it is that arrogance will eventually make you lose.

but it still is not an apt analogy. In order to be, it has to be analogous in the first place.

Metaphors do not need to be analogous. The tortoise and the hare is about the state of mind (rushed and arrogant vs slow and steady, chaos vs order) not about a literal race, the race is only there to convey the message about being too fast and arrogant about it, not meant to be taken literally.

This is why people use the phrase "slow and steady wins the race" when there is no actual competition, the story is about the state of mind.

Metaphor based stories are meant to be taken literally, if so shouldn't the tortoise and hare should live in similar places?

Re:Citation needed.

[Rennt]

I've got a killer app for ya. Debian. You should have seen the faces of my iphone-handicapped workmates when I first demonstrated ssh'ing into my phone. To a geek, nothing Apple can offer is as eat-your-own-face cool as running a complete debian stack on your phone. On my G1 I have: ssh, ftp, and web servers; pen testing tools; nethack - NETHACK PEOPLE!

Seriously, Android is huge. Anyone who doesn't get that, just does not get it.

Oh, the other thing that makes co-workers curse their pretty slave-pod? Chrono Trigger. Well, emulators in general, but Chrono Trigger really kicks 'em where it hurts. SUCK IT!

Re:Citation needed.

[ashpool7]

So, basically, by twisting the story to the pro and anti Apple stances, this discussion has essentially proved that applied metaphors are useless for predicting future performance.

The only way to figure out who is correct is by waiting an arbitrary amount of time (another issue to quibble over endlessly: how long) and by then, nobody cares.

I suppose the discussion is over in a stalemate when both sides are satisfied that the other is stupid and posting more won't change that.

Show some evidence

[sjbe]

Well, you don't have to pay Apple money to develop for Android, and you don't have to get Apple's permission to distribute your app to users.

Those are nice factors worth considering but you didn't really answer the question. Is it true that "Android is far friendlier to developers"? I don't actually know the answer and don't pretend to know. I've certainly seen no compelling evidence that Android actually is meaningfully friendlier (whatever that means) or better meets the needs/desires of developers. It might be but the evidence seems to be lacking.

Re:Show some evidence

[bobetov]

What part of "don't have to pay Apple money to develop for Android" and "don't have to get Apple's permission to distribute" did you not understand?

Android is a platform that give much more, and more meaningful, freedoms to app developers.

I'll add another big one - on the Android platform, replacing core apps with your own version is *encouraged*, and in fact *designed into the platform*. Unlike Apple's recent filing about "altering the core experience" re: Google Voice. Apple could create an iPhone-themed app suite for the G1 tomorrow, host it on their own servers, and no one could say otherwise. That's a pretty fundamental difference.

Say what you will about the iPhone as a sexy beast, etc, but as a developer platform and ecosystem, the only thing Android is missing is higher handset sales.

Re:Show some evidence

[samkass]

Android is a platform that give much more, and more meaningful, freedoms to app developers.

Freedom? Yes. Friendliness? Not that I've seen, and you haven't cited a single piece of evidence towards "friendliness", just "freedom".

It's really, really easy to get started with iPhone development. You pay Apple a small fee and get access to piles and piles of sample code, great documentation, a mature API, and you even get 2 support incidents in which you get to interact with a real Apple developer for your money. And now there's an ecosystem of developer forums, third-party libraries, articles, server/ad services, marketing support... it's actually a pretty friendly experience. It's true that Apple gets veto power, but even then the rejection letter is friendly :)

Re:Show some evidence

[et764]

I haven't actually written any Android software (although I have a myTouch now, so I might give it a try one of these days), so I'm not speaking from experience here. One advantage Android has over the iPhone as far as development goes is that it's Java-based. Pretty much every practicing software developer now learned Java at some point in their life, so chances are they could pick up the Android API pretty quickly. Android also has an Eclipse plugin, letting developers use familiar tools that work on Mac, Windows and Linux. It looks like there's also a C-based API for writing native code.

For the iPhone, on the other hand, you have to use Objective-C. While Objective-C seems like a nice language in a lot of ways, pretty much the only people who know it are Mac developers. You've also got to use XCode, which is Mac-only. Clearly this isn't preventing a huge number of apps from being written anyway (probably even more than are written for Mac OS X), but it does seem to me like it's at least somewhat of a disadvantage for the ease of developing apps.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

Factors that are friendly to developers :

• the developer fee is $25 ONCE
• there is no review of your application and when you publish it, it's on the Android Market right away
• Applications are written in Java, which means you can develop on any platform you like in a language that's not OSX specific
• the SDK integrates nicely in Eclipse, which means you can have a ~nice~ (debatable I know) IDE for free
• the documentation is (contrary to what other said) quite good and the #android-dev IRC channel on freenode provides great help

Sadly, Android suffers from

• an incredibly bad Market, with one of the worst search engine ever written (a regular joke on #android is whether Google should ask Microsoft or Yahoo for a better search engine), and virtually no useful feedback mechanism for developers. This results in developers pushing fake updates just to make users aware that their applications exist, and comments like "sucks. crashes" littering the market (with no way to know which version actually crashed, nor to ask the user who posted the comment why/how/where the application crashed
• 24 hours refund even for 99c applications who have demo versions available and virtually no copyright protection. When you first get a ORDER/REFUND" cycle of less than 4mn on one of your applications, you get angry. The angriness just transforms into fatalistic depression after the tenth. Similarly, with games, when refunds is asked after 23 hours, you can't help but ask yourself what exactly, in terms of gameplay, users expected from a 99c game. (this is especially infuriating when the game has high replay value, but can be finished the first time around in a few hours)
• Non-homogeneous hardware. You're supposed to write your applications so that they can run on vritually any display resolution, with or without trackball, hardware keyboard, and whatnot. Add to that the fact that the T-Mobile G1 is quite underpowered for graphically intensive applications and that that's probably what you're using to develop and the range of stuff you can do shrinks greatly.
• Android applications are writen in Java, with the shortcomings this brings with it (anybody want to write a game and see how the GC kills the framerate by processing stuff that has nothing to do with your application? it's *really* fun)

• So .. all in all, yes, it's far friendlier to developers, but it's also a highly frustrating platform to develop for.

Re:Show some evidence

[Mr2001]

It's really, really easy to get started with iPhone development. You pay Apple a small fee and get access to piles and piles of sample code, great documentation, a mature API, and you even get 2 support incidents in which you get to interact with a real Apple developer for your money.

With Android, you get access to piles and piles of code without having to pay anyone. Want to know how the default music player works? Just look at the source code. Good luck finding the source to the iPhone's music player.

If you want to interact with a real Android developer, just post on the newsgroups or find them on IRC. Again, it's free.

I haven't done iPhone development, so I can't comment on the relative quality of Android's documentation or API, but they seem fine to me.

Re:Show some evidence

[drago177]

"an incredibly bad Market, with one of the worst search engine ever written"

As a user, I liked one app I saw where, in the description, it begged people to go to 'this website' for feedback, complaints, etc, -before- posting feedback on market. I guess thats more advice than a defense of their market design.

But a defense might be 'they weighted the power to the users, despite their incompetence, to empower users, and evened it out with developers by not charging money'

"Non-homogeneous hardware..."
What I can't figure is why they didn't build a hardware tag on all apps, so you can build your app specifically for the G1, or do they do this?

Re:Show some evidence

[Builder]

Hi there... Part of your comment is a bit misleading... you say:

"You pay Apple a small fee and get access to piles and piles of sample code, great documentation, a mature API"

Well, yeah, I guess you could go that route.

OR - you could sign up for the FREE account, get the SDK, get all that great documentation, get the mature API and get a fantastic emulator to test in.

When, and ONLY when you're ready to test on physical hardware, you can pay Apple just under $100 and get the ability to deploy to hardware and release to the store. But for all your getting started steps, you don't have to spend 1c more than it costs to start with Android.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

... provided of course you own a mac (just to make that clear)

Re:Show some evidence

[religious freak]

MOD PARENT UP

Great post, thanks...

Re:Show some evidence

[mgblst]

With Android, you get access to piles and piles of code without having to pay anyone. Want to know how the default music player works? Just look at the source code. Good luck finding the source to the iPhone's music player.

The guy above you doesn't know what he is talking about. You can download the SDK, start writing your app without paying Apple a sent. You get the entire development environment for it, all in one handy package (You will need a mac). There are loads of tutorials, including many video ones, and huge development communities for the Iphone as well.

Re:Show some evidence

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

That you used the words "iPhone-themed app suite" says it all to me. GUIs are not just about aesthetic visual themes. They effect the design of the application. If Apple just released a themed iPhone app for Android, it would be like the difference between iTunes for Windows and the native Mac version.

As someone considering developing for the iPhone, it has more features that appeal to me, plus it fits in really well with the fact that I run OS X (and enjoy it) so I can develop using xCode, which seems like a really good development environment.

I think they're missing more than handset sales. I think they would benefit by having stricter design specs, or at least take more of a lead to show the hardware manufactures what needs to happen. Apple often leads in hardware because it also develops software so they have a better understanding of the relationship between the two when it comes to designing them.

Re:Show some evidence

[jrumney]

And both of you seem to have missed the important first step before you can develop for iPhone using the official SDK: buy a new PC from Apple, because you won't be able to use the one you've already got. I thought the days of tying development tools to overpriced vendor supplied hardware were over, but apparently not.

Re:Show some evidence

[BitZtream]

Look, no one really gives a fuck about having to pay apple or get permission, you know how I know? Because of the shear number of iPhone developers and apps compared to Android phones, developers and apps.

You twits need to find a better battle cry than 'apple makes you pay to play and doesn't let you do whatever you want' cause the only people that care are idiots like you who keep ranting how important it is failing to notice how no one else thinks its important.

Re:Show some evidence

[BitZtream]

And you have just pointed (and you fail to understand it still) why people prefer to pay Apple and develop for the iPhone and not for Android.

I'm not sure if you've ever dealt with real support from a company but having someone on the phone who knows wtf they are doing and works with you until its resolved is a little different than posting to newsgroups.

With android you get left standing naked in the middle of a field with nothing, not even a pair of shoes and told that if you look around and dig around you can find information on how to build some shoes, cloths, eventually maybe a compass and a map to find your way out of the field to your destination.

With the iPhone you get left standing named in the middle of a field with a cell phone and 2 free calls to people who know your situation, will air drop you some cloths and a compass and map, then if you need it, they'll show you how to read the map and use the compass. Finally, after you get out of the field, they'll market your story for only a 30% cut of the sales on the most people phone app store on the planet.

While your post could be 'informative' as it is moderated, it still utterly failed to get the point.

Re:Show some evidence

[Builder]

You assume that everyone has a non-Mac machine. I've been using Apple hardware exclusively for 4 years before the iPhone came out for day to day sysadmin, Java development and HPC development. So no, I didn't need that so called first step of yours.

Re:Show some evidence

[dgriff]

Android applications are writen in Java, with the shortcomings this brings with it (anybody want to write a game and see how the GC kills the framerate by processing stuff that has nothing to do with your application?

Not disputing this but just curious how you know that it is GC that is killing your framerate? Do you see pauses and have you correlated that with verbosegc? If it's just slow in general how do you know it's due to GC?

You could presumably write the critical parts of your game using your own object reuse/allocation policy (unless the problems are in the standard Android libs). I.e. don't use "new" all the time, just cache and reuse a pool of objects.

Re:Show some evidence

[iamflimflam1]

Objective-C is very easy to pick up - any half competent C/C++ developer with basic OO knowledge should be able to pick it up straight away.

The people who struggle are the ones coming from a java background who have never seen a pointer before, don't understand that there isn't a garbage collector etc..

The really nice thing for getting started when you compare iPhone and Android development is that an iPhone application follows a fairly traditional architecture. You are basically writing a desktop application with a slightly different style of UI.

The Android architecture is frankly completely insane. Longer term I'm sure what they've done makes it easier to extend the underlying system, but in terms of getting started it puts a huge barrier in the way. To even write a simple hello world application you need to learn a whole new way of writing applications.

Re:Show some evidence

[Mr2001]

I'm not sure if you've ever dealt with real support from a company but having someone on the phone who knows wtf they are doing and works with you until its resolved is a little different than posting to newsgroups.

I'm not sure if you've ever dealt with a real support from a developer, but having someone on the newsgroup (or IRC) who knows WTF they are doing and works with you until it's resolved is a little different than phoning tech support.

Especially when there's no limit on the number of "incidents" you can get help with, and especially when your questions can be answered by fellow application developers in addition to the people who wrote the library you're trying to use.

With android you get left standing naked in the middle of a field with nothing, not even a pair of shoes and told that if you look around and dig around you can find information on how to build some shoes, cloths, eventually maybe a compass and a map to find your way out of the field to your destination.

That's a nice glib stereotype of all things Linux-related, and there's even a grain of truth when it comes to, say, getting your Wi-Fi working in Gentoo or whatever.

But that stereotype is hilariously inaccurate when it comes to Android development, as anyone can see if they spend a few minutes browsing the SDK documentation, reading tutorials, or looking at the official support forums. It's too bad you didn't do that before posting.

Re:Show some evidence

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's one: you can develop on whatever OS you want. I wanted to get an iPhone to write apps, but guess what? You can't develop iPhone apps on a Windows or Linux machine, you must do it on a Mac!

And another two: You write your apps in Java - not in Objective C, and with the NDK you can even write parts in C.

Re:Show some evidence

[AndreR]

Yeah, it's like complaining to Microsoft that Visual Studio only runs in Windows.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

I wrote my first Android application on an Acer Aspire One (the 512MB/8GB SSD version) running Ubuntu Linux, and apart from the long starting time for Eclipse, it wasn't actually painful.

I would say that most persons have a computer with more grunt than that (it can even be a Mac btw.)

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

One of the tools you get in the Sdk, called adb, can show you the Warning/Debug/Error log in realtime while you run your application. (adb logcat or adb lolcat in a terminal).
Calls to the GC are shown too, along with the process ID and how long it took to run.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

True, if you don't use exclusively Java, you can get some decent performance. On the other hand, I still have an original Nokia nGage lying around, and although I never developed anything for it and so can't tell how developer friendly it was, it also had apparently more ~grunt~, considering it had a fully working C64 emulator along with full 3D games involving a lot more polys than doom ... and that came out in 2003 (It also had some serious problems in other areas. I'm not disputing this fact)

Re:Show some evidence

[cmdr_tofu]

When, and ONLY when you're ready to test on physical hardware, you can pay Apple just under $100 and get the ability to deploy to hardware and release to the store. But for all your getting started steps, you don't have to spend 1c more than it costs to start with Android.

Except, you need to own a newer Intel-based MAC.

Re:Show some evidence

[Dog-Cow]

How can you list nothing but Android-related points and then conclude that it's far friendlier? Just a wee bit biased, are we?

For the iPhone, you can develop in assembly if you want to. You can certainly use C or C++. You aren't tied to the horrible monstrosity that is Java.

There are only two downsides I know of to iPhone developement, in comparison to Android. One, it costs more money to get software onto a physical device, and two, you have a small chance of having your app rejected for sale on the App Store.

Then again, I have exactly one app for sale, with a niche target audience, and I still have managed to make more money than I've spent. I do have to admit that I already owned the Macbook I do development on, as well as the iPod Touch I wrote it for.

But in terms of friendliness, I don't see how Apple could be better. You get a free IDE, awesome documentation, an incredible set of frameworks (APIs) and a really great language. There is sample code for just about every topic and each revision of the OS adds more toys and more access to the physical device.

Re:Show some evidence

[Dog-Cow]

Oh noes. You have to hit build. Never mind that for the 5 different hardware configurations on which the iPhone OS may be found, there are exactly zero recompiles necessary.

You are seriously comparing a situation where you have to write new code to one where you will, theoretically, need to hit one button and you are trying to hint that the latter situation is worse? Typical Apple anti-fanboy.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

So, as you already owned a mac, were probably already familiar with objective-C, had an iPod touch, and had no problem shelling out $100 for the developer license, you don't see how those factors make it less friendly to developers? Welcome to the "a wee bit biased" club then.

As for the free IDE, awesome documentation and framework (don't get me wrong, the Android API in itself isn't bad at all.), the sample code and the additional toys, Android has them all. As someone else pointed out, you DO have access to the physical device with the release of the NDK. So on those points, I'd say both platforms are more or less equal (with, in my opinion, an advantage for the iPhone when it comes to native code, as the number of different platforms is lower)

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

I guess I have karma to burn, so I'll feed you.

The question was whether Android is developer-friendlier than the iPhone platform. Not whether the iPhone has been around for longer, or which platform has the most fart-o-rama applications. Therefore the battle-cry "Developing for iPhone means you have to shell out a lot more cash upfront and can't even be sure whether what you write will be published due to some arcane decision process behind Cupertino Castle's walls" is on point and relevant.

Re:Show some evidence

[TooMuchToDo]

So no, I didn't need that so called first step of yours.

Ahh, but the other %90-99 of us will need that "first step". What retard ties software development for a cellphone to a single hardware platform?

Re:Show some evidence

[TooMuchToDo]

You twits need to find a better battle cry than 'apple makes you pay to play and doesn't let you do whatever you want' cause the only people that care are idiots like you who keep ranting how important it is failing to notice how no one else thinks its important.

Yeah, because commercial app developers want to sink tens of thousands of dollars into app development and then have Apple pull the plug because your dictionary has naughty words, or your app conflicts with "core apps".

Re:Show some evidence

[naetuir]

...so I can develop using xCode, which seems like a really good development environment...

Clearly, you have never used a modern programming IDE. Please check out Eclipse, IntelliJ, or even M$ Visual Studio, then, compare with XCode. Please check back in with your results.

Oh, and to the parent: Freedom == Friendliness, for a developer. Some of us don't feel like spending (read: wasting) a ton of time developing for a system that can summarily dismiss our application submission, without anything other than a "We don't like it."

Re:Show some evidence

[spinkham]

Um.. Yes, it is.
I already own a PC with plenty of grunt for Android development, and it cost me less then $500 total. Only ~ $250 of that is current expenditure, the case, power supply, etc I've had for a while.

So, getting started with android development costs me nothing, where getting started with iPhone development costs me at least $500 for a mac mini + $100 or so for cheap monitor.

Re:Show some evidence

[eratosthene]

You can develop for Android on Mac, Linux, or Windows officially. It'll probably work on *BSD too. And if you consider using vi to edit text files bloatware, then yeah, I guess that's a problem. Sure, Google provides you with some nice Eclipse plugins that make development waaaaay easier, but if you can't run Eclipse for some reason, nobody is stopping you from writing the source and compiling it with make.

Re:Show some evidence

[Ghost Hedgehog]

Android applications are writen in Java, with the shortcomings this brings with it (anybody want to write a game and see how the GC kills the framerate by processing stuff that has nothing to do with your application? it's *really* fun)

When I look at the game Armadillo Roll for Android, I must say that the frame rate is no problem. I was actually quite surprised that my HTC Hero could produce such graphics.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

as far as I know, the Hero is slightly more powerful than the G1 though.

Re:Show some evidence

[FatAlb3rt]

so what are the numbers, A. D. Hominem?

Re:Show some evidence

[Americano]

all in all, yes, it's far friendlier to developers, but it's also a highly frustrating platform to develop for.

I'm having trouble parsing this statement. How does "highly frustrating" equate to "far friendlier" in your estimation?

Re:Show some evidence

[RevoltingX]

I'm developing an Android game, and it pains me to hear all these unfounded complaints.

For Android you typically write applications in Java. Java has TONS of libraries. Granted you may not be able to use all of them because the VM is missing things like SWIG. (AFAIK)

The API is pretty solid. I've never written a line of Java before (perl/c++ programmer) and had a working realtime 2d game with a couple of days using OpenGL ES. (Of course I avoided most pitfalls by researching how game programming is usually done in Java.)

Integration with Eclipse is solid. Of course command line control is easy and reliable. The command line tools and Eclipse detect when you have your device plugged in and routes log messages accordingly.

Java has a real good Thread/Message Passing model. Decoupling components is a must. Learning to separate components is essential in Android, and getting good at this is really helpful when developing Desktop applications.

I suspect that most iphone devs are simply greedy. Frankly, I don't want to browser through thousand of useless fart type apps, or yet another useless web portal application. I want a few key apps in my phone and games I can play when I'm bored and away from my computer. This is why most apps in the iphone never get used.

These devs don't want to create something exciting, or hard.
They want to create something that'll give them a quick rep boost and money. It's not surprising that because the iphone has a higher market share, it has the most VCs helping the funding of applications. This is akin to the dot-com-bust era of funding useless websites.

However, we see that only good websites made it out of the dot-com-bust era. And these were usually sites that did something useful and meaningful.
Because of this, good Android apps are slow in the coming. Without funding, and without a good system (AFAIK) in which to meet fellow Android developers and collaborate and share any profits obtained. I suspect that some interesting applications are coming for Android, but they should promote and work on the community so that development can be properly co ordinated.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

It's very easy (and cheap) to start developing and publishing for Android. Personally (knowing that I wrote games, so not ~standard~ applications for Android), the OS itself is frustrating to write for, but that doesn lessen the first point.

Re:Show some evidence

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Why would I want to even try them when xCode is OS X native and has integrated tools for the iPhone? And what makes you think your criteria for "really good" is the same as mine? As for submissions, I know what I'm in for. I already said I disagree with it. But the truth is that for most developers and their applications, it won't be a problem. At the end of the day, the iPhone is the only platform I'm interested in developing for because it's currently the only platform I'd consider buying as an end customer. The other platforms just aren't finished yet, IMHO. I guess you could argue that the iPhone was unfinished for a while, and still is, but Apple know how to get the basics right and build up from there. Everyone else seems to rush, compromising important things such as the GUI (although Palm has done well here).

Re:Show some evidence

[BlackCreek]

Android is much easier to develop for because, among other things, it uses Java.

Java is a /much/ more ubiquitous language than Objective-C. So most developers have less new things to learn when starting with Android.

Re:Show some evidence

[oblivionboy]

WRONGO. Setting up a Hackintosh these days on a "PC" is trivial these days. SIK (someone I know) does tonnes of iPhone development on his Acer laptop, and has a Dell and HP at his place running OS X. Just to make that CLEAR.

Re:Show some evidence

[garote]

I'm not sure if you've ever dealt with real support from a company but having someone on the phone who knows wtf they are doing and works with you until its resolved is a little different than posting to newsgroups.

I'm not sure if you've ever dealt with a real support from a developer, but having someone on the newsgroup (or IRC) who knows WTF they are doing and works with you until it's resolved is a little different than phoning tech support.

Yeah. For one thing, it's not just "tech support". It's "developer support". It's the person on the phone's JOB to help you solve your problem; they've been practicing it eight hours a day nonstop; they have direct contact with the people who wrote the APIs and even the people who designed the hardware, and when you're speaking to them, you have their FULL attention.

Especially when there's no limit on the number of "incidents" you can get help with, and especially when your questions can be answered by fellow application developers in addition to the people who wrote the library you're trying to use.

Sure is great to have both!

With android you get left standing naked in the middle of a field with nothing, not even a pair of shoes and told that if you look around and dig around you can find information on how to build some shoes, cloths, eventually maybe a compass and a map to find your way out of the field to your destination.

That's a nice glib stereotype of all things Linux-related, and there's even a grain of truth when it comes to, say, getting your Wi-Fi working in Gentoo or whatever.

You want to make this about Linux, then get offended at your own proffered stereotype? Have fun with that.

But that stereotype is hilariously inaccurate when it comes to Android development, as anyone can see if they spend a few minutes browsing the SDK documentation, reading tutorials, or looking at the official support forums. It's too bad you didn't do that before posting.

Indeed. A shame. Because the differences kind of jump out. Just to pick a few at random:

* The Android SDK sample code is incredibly bare-bones.
* It also offers near zero guidance in creating 3D OpenGL ES content.
* And it's not sprinked through with "Programming Guides" that provide an ordered tour of the API sections, like Apple has. (The Cocoa Fundamentals Guide, and Web Kit Objective-C Programming Guide spring to mind for me.)
* It's also not as well integrated with the rest of their IDE, which is not as well integrated with their UI construction toolkit.

"Developer friendly" may be their intention, but unless they actually deliver better tools, they're just spouting empty words. Reams of source code and the keys to the kingdom do not constitute better tools - they demand them.

Apple has been writing API docs for decades. Give Google two more years and maybe they'll have foundation docs as good as what was shipping with Xcode before the iPhone even existed.

But why am I wasting my breath - if you honestly think an open IRC channel is superior to a developer phone-support incident, then you're probably not a software developer, you're a hobbyist with a shiny new underdog to root for, at the expense of common sense.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

and OSX is free since ... ?

Re:Show some evidence

[Mr2001]

Yeah. For one thing, it's not just "tech support". It's "developer support". It's the person on the phone's JOB to help you solve your problem; they've been practicing it eight hours a day nonstop; they have direct contact with the people who wrote the APIs and even the people who designed the hardware, and when you're speaking to them, you have their FULL attention.

"Developer support" is still more "support" than "developer". While you're settling for a middleman who has "direct contact" with the people who wrote the iPhone APIs, Android developers can have their very own direct contact with the people who wrote the Android APIs. And again, they aren't limited to two incidents.

Sure is great to have both!

Indeed it is. But, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't Apple make you choose between them? Contact Apple privately or post your question in a public forum where no one from Apple will see it.

You want to make this about Linux, then get offended at your own proffered stereotype? Have fun with that.

If you don't think the GP was repeating a tired old Linux stereotype, then what do you think it was? It certainly has no bearing on the reality of Android development, so do you think it's just a coincidence that the analogy he made up happens to be exactly the same as what trolls say about Linux, the OS that Android is based on?

But why am I wasting my breath - if you honestly think an open IRC channel is superior to a developer phone-support incident, then you're probably not a software developer, you're a hobbyist with a shiny new underdog to root for, at the expense of common sense.

Actually, I've been developing software professionally for a decade.

And yes, I do honestly think that IRC channels and newsgroups where you can have unlimited direct contact with developers are better than a couple of phone support incidents with someone whose job is talking on the phone, not writing code. If you disagree, I can't help but suspect that you're the hobbyist here, more comfortable with dialing 800 numbers than speaking to developers as peers -- or perhaps just one of Apple's favorite customers, the kind who thinks everything is better when you're paying for it.

Re:Show some evidence

[garote]

What I'm seeing here is that you're arguing a false choice. You're asserting that the only contact a developer is "allowed" to have when developing for the iPhone is with an ostensibly inferior tech support agent or a public forum devoid of Apple devs.

Thirty seconds of your lazy ass in a search engine would invalidate your claim.

You want to make this about Linux, then get offended at your own proffered stereotype? Have fun with that.

If you don't think the GP was repeating a tired old Linux stereotype, then what do you think it was? It certainly has no bearing on the reality of Android development, so do you think it's just a coincidence that the analogy he made up happens to be exactly the same as what trolls say about Linux, the OS that Android is based on?

Yes, it is a coincidence. Compared to the major device platform players who have their stuff together, the Android SDK docs are like being airdropped into a field with only your wits and perhaps a wooden spoon for digging.

But why am I wasting my breath - if you honestly think an open IRC channel is superior to a developer phone-support incident, then you're probably not a software developer, you're a hobbyist with a shiny new underdog to root for, at the expense of common sense.

Actually, I've been developing software professionally for a decade.

Then you should have enough brains not to present a false dichotomy as a real argument, and not to conveniently delete the valid critique of this craptastic SDK in favor of extending your truculent rant about "Linux stereotypes". The docs are inferior, the support, as it is offered and as it exists in the real world, is inferior, and the distribution infrastructure is incredibly inferior.

And yes, I do honestly think that IRC channels and newsgroups where you can have unlimited direct contact with developers are better than a couple of phone support incidents with someone whose job is talking on the phone, not writing code. If you disagree, I can't help but suspect that you're the hobbyist here, more comfortable with dialing 800 numbers than speaking to developers as peers -- or perhaps just one of Apple's favorite customers, the kind who thinks everything is better when you're paying for it.

Type "iphone developer forum" into google and look at the first three hits. The point is, as I said before, you get mixed and unmixed forums AND direct phone support. Also, if you think Google would waste their actual API coders' time by shoving them onto an IRC channel for hours a day, you're deluding yourself. Google would use the same intermediates Apple does, except their time would not be not spent as efficiently, because it's pissed away in DCC chat sessions instead of documented, searchable, user-rated forums.

Now quit playing politics.

Re:Show some evidence

[Mr2001]

The docs are inferior, the support, as it is offered and as it exists in the real world, is inferior, and the distribution infrastructure is incredibly inferior.

You mean the distribution infrastructure that lets you post applications at your own discretion, without fearing that they'll be rejected for arbitrary reasons or "held in review" indefinitely, and all for less than Apple charges? Yeah, really inferior.

Also, if you think Google would waste their actual API coders' time by shoving them onto an IRC channel for hours a day, you're deluding yourself. Google would use the same intermediates Apple does, except their time would not be not spent as efficiently, because it's pissed away in DCC chat sessions instead of documented, searchable, user-rated forums.

It's funny how you use the word "would" here, as if this is all purely hypothetical: as if Android coders don't already respond to app developers on IRC (as well as "documented, searchable, user-rated forums"). Your theory about what Google "would" do is invalidated by real-world evidence of what they actually do.

Re:Show some evidence

[jrumney]

Any ideas?

Try gcc. It can compile for arm-wince targets too, and you won't need to jailbreak your device to use the results.

Re:Show some evidence

[aschran]

For the iPhone, you can develop in assembly if you want to. You can certainly use C or C++. You aren't tied to the horrible monstrosity that is Java

You can also code in C or C++ on Android. But I wouldn't have expected you to check on that before spreading this misinfomration.

Re:Show some evidence

[Teriblows]

or to get to the point, open source users can be cheapskates. there goes your incentive to develop anything really innovative right there.

Re:Show some evidence

[sammyF70]

I don't see what gives you that impression. The applications are not open source, and for the end user, the fact that Android itself is open source is pretty much irrelevant.

Re:Show some evidence

[Trogre]

The applications are not open source...

Mine are.

More Android on the way

[teopatl]

Moto's releasing a couple Android phones (Sholes on VZW and Morrison on T-M) by the end of the year. The "leaked" photos don't look abortions, fwiw.

Re:More Android on the way

[teopatl]

look like*

Better Marketing

[moore.dustin]

This is an easy one.

The only person to ever see my phone and know what it was just happened to be another G1 owner. Not another soul knew in nearly a year now. Instead I was met with, "What is that?"

Little Premature

[javacowboy]

Let's wait until the end of the year to declare Android dead. After all, there are (as far as I know) only three Android phones being sold in the U.S. right now, with far more announced for sale before the end of the year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_android#Forthcoming

Also, the U.S. isn't the only market for mobile phones. There's also Europe and the Far East.

HTC, the seller of 80% of Windows Mobile phones, was the first provider to start selling Android phones.

What's likely to happen is that, since it's free, Android will supplant Windows Mobile, which Microsoft charges for.

Because the phone is bad and the network worse

[belcoop]

In the US, only T-mobile (known for the worse connection anywhere) offers an android phone. Moreover, the phone they offer costs as much to the client as the iPhone, while feeling, looking and acting cheaper. Bad starting point. Once a decent network offers a decent phone competition can start.

Android T Mobile

[axx]

Reading the comments I got the feeling I was reading a 9 months old article, I actually went to check the date on comments a few times.

Might I remind you that Android handsets have been released around the world, not only in the USA.

In France for instance, the HTCMagic (the G2 I believe) had advertisement in the metro and was labeled as a Google Phone (it's the Android name that doesn't pushed get out there, not the Google name). In Australia there are also ads for the same phone in phone shops.
Also, they are about 4 phones available right now running android (HTCDream, Magic, Hero and Samsung Galaxy).
Always going back to the T Mobile G1 is a little backwards looking and sort of like complaining about how the iPhone 1 doesn't have 3G.

The HTC Hero has an entirely revamped UI for instance, so things are also evolving outside the hood as well as under (even if the Hero's hardware admittedly isn't good enough and not future-proof).

So although I agree that Android lacks a killer app and the I want one factor that the iPhone has, saying that Android has problems because T Mobile's network sucks is really USA-centric.
From the different reports we've seen, the Magic has sold a million units since it was released in May. Now we're nowhere near iPhone numbers, but it isn't exactly a failure commercially speaking.

Considering another 15 or so phones running Android should come out before the end of the year (probably quite a few Samsungs, at least one Sony-Ericsson and some more HTCs), Android is gearing up.

I'm not saying it doesn't need a whole lot more marketing, a lot more see how easy it is to do this on Android type ads on TV to explain to non tech-savvy people why it's good, better form factors and gadget lust or some unified branding to avoid having a same phone have 5 different names, but it's nowhere near the catastrophe some seem to see it as. As someone said, it's going to gain momentum slowly, not become the next big thing overnight.

I am amazed nobody mentioned that yet

[walterbyrd]

The Android just came out.

Re:Android T Mobile

[axx]

The title was supposed to be Android [not equal] T Mobile.
Also, my french quotes were stripped.
What's up with "unusual" characters Slashdot ?

The weak minded are those who cannot see

[SuperKendall]

Most Apple users believe they are somehow better than everyone else and that they are somehow elite because they own an Apple product.

You know what? I've never met an Apple user like that. All the people I know who use macs are very friendly. Most have a lot of experience with Windows too, out of necessity at work. They know the good and the bad of each.

So who are the people who really think they are better than anyone else? To a man, I'd have to say the Apple Haters. They are always posting missives like yours, deriding people for falling under some kind of "marketing spell" because there's just no way they could simply find the devices useful, right? These people thus broadcast loud and clear that they are superior to you, the weak minded Apple user, because they have the strength of will to keep doing what they have always done!

So stay in that shiny rut sir, and admire the many mirrors around you... you seem too far gone to be able to survive outside your chamber of self-admiration.

You Have To Be Joking!

[Anonymous Coward]

"One of these days it's going to be significant. Probably right after Linux is ready for the desktop."

Are you actually that clueless?

I find it impossible for someone to actually be posting in a story about cellphones, claiming to actually have worked at a company focused on cellphones, and yet...is pretending to be ignorant that

THE ENTIRE CELLPHONE MARKET is rapidly standardizing on Android.

Every damn cellphone manufacture in the world other than Apple, Palm, and Blackberry are coming out with Android based phones.

Android is so popular with hardware manufactures it is spreading out into media devices, netbooks, sub-netbook devices, etc.

Companies like Motorola have created a 200 person team dedicated to...you guessed it...Android.

Google's Android has effectively wiped Windows Mobile right out of the market and taken its place as the default cellphone OS.

So, yeah, nice story about the startup. Has absolutely nothing to do with the reality that Android isn't just a success. It's an astonishing success to have taken over so quickly.

 

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[jellomizer]

Interesting trends if true. However I am to lazy to fact check so I will take you word for granted.

Now we can look at this in 2 ways.
Like back in the Early PC erra.
We got big Names.
Apple, Commodore, Amega, and the IBM PC
Comparing History the IBM PC and Android are roughly in the same spot. Not Quite Number 1 but there is a lot of other people making compatible products...

Now will history repeat itself or will Apple, Blackberry, Palm really hold out and keep android as the poor mans Smart Phone.

Apple and Blackberry have a good head start. Apple like in its original fashion had moved a business only device (smart phone) and made it good for the general public. Causing Blackberry to try to catch up as well as Palm. However knowing the similarities in history we may make choices that will prevent it from repeating.

Going with Google Android will like be choosing DOS a generation ago. While preventing hardware lock-in we get software lock-in. If we choose Apple/Blackberry/Palm we are pushing for hardware and software tight integration and a lot of duel features. Preventing the Beige Boxes of SmartPhones, and Google becoming a bit more Evil over time will restrict what can be done on hardware. Now if we choose to not switch to IBM PC and buy Amega, Commodore and Apples. We will probably have a world of better Cross Platform application and far better hardware products that are not limited on backwards compatibility.

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[unoengborg]

Yes, I have to agree, I work for the third largest IT company in the world and they send as many people as they can to attend Android courses. It is a very long time since I saw something this big. Given that there have been very few devices available to consumers I would say 3% market share is amazing.

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[hao3]

you left out nokia. ya know... the biggest phone manufacturer in the world. they have more than twice as much market share (38%) as the next biggest manufacturer (samsung - 16%). and they're using symbian, not android. not really a standard is it?

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[hao3]

cross platform applications? apple, blackberry and palm have different and entirely incompatible software platforms..

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[jellomizer]

You fail to see the progression. If this continues. Coding software will focus on better cross platform developing code once compile thrice. Just recently for software development we getting to that level. It a bit more time software development for phones will reach that level if we have a good amount of competition across some major lines.

Re:You Have To Be Joking!

[PeelBoy]

Don't be so sure of your self.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/jul/06/nokia-mobile-internet-phones

Re:Hello? .. Android is far friendlier to develope

[StreetStealth]

Why is parent modded flamebait?

Look, it's a tradeoff. If you think the loosely-documented Android is an easier development environment than the fastidiously-documented and streamlined Cocoa Touch environment, you're probably deluding yourself and modding people down out of insecurity. However, when it comes to publishing, the reverse is true -- Make an Android app that Google doesn't like and you'll probably have a lot better chance of it getting into users' hands than if you make an iPhone app Apple doesn't like.

Both can be improved. Google can move toward a consolidation of developer documentation and resources, and Apple can loosen up about its functionality prohibitions.

They shouldn't be emulating Apple.

[Lord Kano]

I have no interest in the android because it's not open enough for my liking. If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gone out ant gotten an iPhone.

LK

Re:They shouldn't be emulating Apple.

[curmudgeon99]

And wait until somebody has a brilliant idea and then you go: "Why didn't I think of that" but you were not even in the game...

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[curmudgeon99]

I have a great idea that I'm not going to give away. The point is not the platform, it's the app. And after I do the hard core development and multiple prototypes on Android, I can always port the final version to the iPhone. I just see going back to worrying about memory management in the manner of Objective C as a step backward. I can develop and prototype much faster on Android. I know Objective C might run faster but if your app relies on the speed of the phone for its processing, you have bigger problems. If your idea is so tiny that it can run 100% inside the phone, that sounds to me like a iToy.

The Apple App Store With Cydia Vs. Google

[SuperKendall]

I imagine that Google will have a much more lenient application 'store' or method of downloading applications to your phone.

You can imagine what you like, but they have also blocked some apps. Of course GV is not going to be one of them...

Of course anyone can download and install your app on Android - so you have the freedom to be ignored.

At least with the iPhone there is a viable alternate channel for sales, Cydia - totally outside the realm of Apple's control, the Diagon Alley of apps. They claim over a million devices jailbroken, which places the total size of the market near the viable Android market!

Some people claim Jailbreaking does not count because it's "illegal" or "is not shipped with the phone" or all sorts of other reasons that basically amount to bunk. Any advanced user is going to do things to a computer that were not included in the box. Similarly advanced users can easily jailbreak and thus run all those cool apps Apple would not allow, and at this point it's so simple I wouldn't even balk at recommending it to less technical user if there was a Cydia app compelling enough for what they wanted to do.

As for it being "illegal", come on. It's not even at level of jaywalking it terms of moral questionability and what are they going to write a ticket for? Dangerously wild consumption of mobile resources?

Re:The Apple App Store With Cydia Vs. Google

[Mr2001]

At least with the iPhone there is a viable alternate channel for sales, Cydia - totally outside the realm of Apple's control, the Diagon Alley of apps. They claim over a million devices jailbroken, which places the total size of the market near the viable Android market!

There's a viable alternative to the Android Market, too. See SlideME.

As for it being "illegal", come on. It's not even at level of jaywalking it terms of moral questionability and what are they going to write a ticket for? Dangerously wild consumption of mobile resources?

Not quite. As you surely know, Apple has claimed that jailbreaking violates (1) copyright law and (2) the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Re:The Apple App Store With Cydia Vs. Google

[n3r0.m4dski11z]

Id rather use anything other than an iphone personally. Why should i have to constantly hack something that i presumably own and be "in jail" unless i break the law?

I am sure motorola - when they get off their ass in q4 - will release a real competitor. Apple can only survive on hype and exclusivity for so long. Smartphones wont be apples game forever, and for whatever reason that currently seems to be 'thinking different' to everyone.

Re:The Apple App Store With Cydia Vs. Google

[SuperKendall]

I am sure motorola - when they get off their ass in q4 - will release a real competitor.

I, sir, have used a RAZR before. I laugh openly at your statement.

I'mm sure we'll see a great Android phone, but - Motorola?

Why should i have to constantly hack something that i presumably own and be "in jail" unless i break the law?

You hack it once per update, about twice a year. If that's too difficult for you I have a secret - Android is way beyond your ability.

And it's not "breaking the law" because Apple says so. Are you honestly this afraid of everything? From now on instead of "Apple Haters" I guess we'll have to label you "Groundlesshogs" because of the fear of your own shadow... and the baseless nature of your concern.

Never downloaded a torrent or MP3 too? Or crossed against a light? right.

Apple can only survive on hype and exclusivity for so long.

Yeah that time was about ten days after launch, after that they've been carried by features and usability.

Smartphones wont be apples game forever

Totally agree. Probably no longer than the iPod remained on top.

Honestly, I don't even understand why people feel Apple must be "dethroned". There will be a big place in the market for Android and even Palm, Apple will probably just have a majority for a while.... Who cares? I don't. As a former Java developer I'm pretty happy to see Android rise as it has, and as a former Palm V enthusiast I'm thrilled Palm has managed to pull a very big rabbit out of... well let's just say they didn't even have a hat left to pull from. Amazing.

But lets all be clear headed about strengths and weaknesses, instead of claiming the iPhone is only marketing, take a look at the consumer satisfaction surveys and realize there's something real there people do in fact appreciate.

Really?

[npsimons]

Google went wrong by giving handset manufacturers and carriers too much control

Really? As opposed to Apple's completely open, won't ever delete your app for any reason AppStore. No, it's pretty obvious to anyone with half a clue that the iPhone's success is due in no small part to Apple's marketing. Sad but true, decent (even superior) competing products won't gain market share for the simple fact that people can be brainwashed (ie, advertised to).

Yes but

[coryking]

Every damn cellphone manufacture in the world other than Apple, Palm, and Blackberry are coming out with Android based phones.

The iPhone and the Blackberry are the two phones that every single other manufacture seeks to emulate. They set the gold standard for cell phone interfaces.

It's an astonishing success to have taken over so quickly.

I don't know of a *single* person in my circle of friends who owns one. I dont know a single person who has ever mentioned wanting them, thinking about them, or seen them. In fact, outside of slashdot, I've never really heard about the Android. Pretty popular indeed.

Re:Yes but

[Sparr0]

Probably because no one calls them "Android Phones". There are 5 phones on the market in the US right now that run Android, made by 2 different manufacturers. There are a half dozen more phones coming out by the end of the year, made by 3 more manufacturers, and that's soon enough that people have seen advertising and may be considering them for purchase. Can you name more than 2 of the phones? Conversely, would you know they were Android phones if a friend talked about getting one?

Re:Yes but

[mindstormpt]

Over here we have phone ads on TV that really emphasize the fact that they are Android-based. I guess it must be an European thing...

Re:Yes but

[dangitman]

Probably because no one calls them "Android Phones". There are 5 phones on the market in the US right now that run Android, made by 2 different manufacturers. There are a half dozen more phones coming out by the end of the year, made by 3 more manufacturers, and that's soon enough that people have seen advertising and may be considering them for purchase. Can you name more than 2 of the phones? Conversely, would you know they were Android phones if a friend talked about getting one?

So... isn't that a problem that should be dealt with? It's basic communication/marketing. One would think that a company whose profits come primarily from advertising and communication should know a thing or two about that.

Re:Yes but

[jesset77]

Hey, there's an interesting bit of anecdote. :3 Per previous comment, 3 of my colleagues now sport G1's (I run a used MDA/Wizard on account of being v. poor :D) and I know tons of people on the Palm Pre, but have yet to see an "iPhone" in the flesh.

And.. I don't know why shiny trumps keyboard for people these days. For real, you would have to pitch me pretty heavily to trade my MDA for an IPhone 3Gs straight across due to that (pretend I can't just resell it for the sake of illustration, also pretend I magically wouldn't have to switch networks..) I text a lot! I also do email and data stuff on my phone. Virtual keyboard for the lose! :P

I guess It's all Status Symbol. Status Symbol all the way down.

Re:Yes but

[Sparr0]

There are plenty of other phone software platforms that no one knows by name. How many of your friends could tell you if their phone runs Symbian or J2ME apps?

I think that Android WOULD be more successful if google put their name behind it for real, letting/requiring carriers to brand it as "The T-Mobile G1, by Google" or whatever.

Re:Yes but

[PeelBoy]

That's funny, because my non-tech savvy co-worker saw my phone on my last visit to our Shreveport office and commented about how his wife has exactly the same phone, and loves it.

One of the women who was in my defensive driving class last night also had one.

I don't see nearly as many Android based phones as I see iPhones, but they're still pretty popular.

Re:Yes but

[mcvos]

It's an astonishing success to have taken over so quickly.

I don't know of a *single* person in my circle of friends who owns one. I dont know a single person who has ever mentioned wanting them, thinking about them, or seen them. In fact, outside of slashdot, I've never really heard about the Android. Pretty popular indeed.

I know someone who has one, and I know several iPhone owners who are aching to switch to an Android phone.

Re:Yes but

[dangitman]

There are plenty of other phone software platforms that no one knows by name. How many of your friends could tell you if their phone runs Symbian or J2ME apps?

But they can tell me if they have a Nokia or a Motorola, and what model. But a HTC? Who the fuck is HTC?

Regardless of the platform, they could at least try to create some sort of brand identification with the handsets.

Re:Yes but

[Sparr0]

What does it being a Nokia or Motorola have to do with anything we are discussing? There is nothing that all Nokia phones have in common (except the logo). Ditto Motorola.

Re:Yes but

[dangitman]

What does it being a Nokia or Motorola have to do with anything we are discussing?

I believe we were discussing marketing and brand recognition in the Smartphone market. The fact that Nokia and Motorola are household words compared to HTC or Android is extremely relevant to the discussion.

Which raises the question - just what the hell did you think we were talking about?

Re:Yes but

[Sparr0]

Marketing and brand recognition in the Smartphone *OS* market. A few manufacturers also market their own OS (Apple, RIM) but there is no comparison between Android and Nokia/Motorola because they are not competitors or even in the same market. The other players in Android's field are Symbian, Maemo, etc, and those aren't household names either.

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[curmudgeon99]

Once again, somebody who's looking for a glorified PSP. Can none of you imagine something so different that it is nothing like what you've heard of before. This is 0% a phone.

Too Slow!

[codepunk]

Developer Friendly? Not, I spent some time a few months ago trying to port one of my games to the G1. The game requires some fairly heavy physics, it runs
blistering fast on the the iphone. The G1 however just is not up to the task, face it the IPhone is just a much better performing device. When it comes
to squeezing performance out of these tiny devices get java out of my way, I need to be able to program against the metal.

Re:Too Slow!

[binarylarry]

The Android NDK may be what you're looking for:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.5_r1/index.html

It allows you to run native code on the phone.

The Dalvik VM for Android is like a Java VM from 10 years ago, so I don't think adequate performance is going to show up in the managed code for a long time.

Re:Too Slow!

[covox]

I second this. Furthermore, if you want to get gasp-inducing cool stuff running on small embedded platforms, you need a language which can leverage existing multiplatform libraries and content. Namely C.

This is why the iPhone app count exploded after the SDK opened, they released C*! With OpenGL! Suddenly it's not a case of writing your own crappy library in Javobfuscript to handle parsing or physics, because there's one already! You don't have to reinvent the wheel with the world's slowest framebuffer, as there's direct access to the 3D chip! I can't believe companies are finding this hard to grasp! If you can get cool games running on your platform, you can get cool anything running!

I would buy a Palm Pre in a heartbeat, if only they'd hurry it up and release some C/OpenGL bindings. Well, that and release a 3G version so Australian stores can stock it.

* Okay, some might say mandatory Objective C may inspire you to gouge out both eyes with a rusty toasting fork and spend the rest of your life as a blind luddite hermit. Suck it up like a man, write some C/C++ glue code, then drink to forget

Re:Too Slow!

[keean]

Try using OpenGL for the graphics, as the phones have hardware for this it is much faster than trying to scale and rotate by hand.

Re:Too Slow!

[keean]

Dalvik is fully compiled on the Android, so no byte code, no need for a JIT compiler. Most definitely not like Java from 10 years ago...

Re:Too Slow!

[keean]

You're right, it compiles to Dalvik byte code... My bad.

Re:Too Slow!

[Dog-Cow]

You are not required to write Objective C for the iPhone. It's just about eleventy-billion times easier than the alternatives :)

Re:Too Slow!

[gsgleason]

I thought this discussion was about android? What does the inferior hardware of one certain phone have to do with the OS itself?

Re:Too Slow!

[don.g]

Ah, to live in a time when "bare metal" is a high level graphics API and an OS with multitasking and memory protection.

In my day we took the data bus uphill both ways in the snow. With no shoes. Also the bus had only one wheel.

Killer feature for users

[SuperKendall]

But the biggest reason why Android is going to thrive is no approval process, if Apple had a decent, sane process it wouldn't be as big of a deal, but with the headaches of the app store I can see the lack of that being the killer feature for Android developers.

That's great for developers.

But what about users?

Everyone can point at Apple app store acceptance mishaps. But you know what? They are also actually catching stuff, en masse, that really should ship - crashing bugs, UI bugs where the screen goes wonky, etc.

Yes they block some stuff us technical folk find annoying for philosophical reasons we consider absurd. But the apps that are there are better for being held to even some minimal level of quality.

What about the guy recently banned from the Apple store for having 900 apps that were basically typosquatting kinds of applications? Is the Android world really better off for letting him clutter the store with hundreds of such apps, or as many as he cares to make?

Back to the technical users, at least we have an outlet - either get a developer account and then write what you want to run on the phone (or get source from elsewhere to do so), or simply jailbreak the thing and be done with limits if the wall Apple is driving you up is too high.

I don't think he gets it

[Simulant]

The reason I don't have an Android is a) I've got a year left on my contract and b) my carrier doesn't offer one.

Just wait a year or three.

Re:HTC seems like the best bet to make a porsche

[Brian Feldman]

Those poor saps stuck on Verizon can use a Palm Pre, actually.

...that iPhone users also have

[SuperKendall]

Tethering, VOIP, and Google Voice alone would far outpace the iPhones selection of farts and beer glass pouring apps.

The iPhone has VOIP apps in the store (WiFi only, but there they are). You can control Google Voice via web app (remember kids, GV is not VOIP) or by native app on Cydia.

As for tethering, AT&T in theory does not sell it yet but all you have to do is download a file (read the update at the end) to the iPhone and boom, it's enabled in the U.S. - other carriers already offer it. Or again Cydia has "An App For That" but it's honestly way more of a pain to set up and use.

Talk about citation needed...

[SuperKendall]

compared with the gen 1 iphone the gen 1 Android phone (HTC Dream) is far superior and HTC failure and DOA rate is far lower then that of Apple (this is why HTC phones are so expensive).

I actually agree with all of the points you make about the Android growth curve. I think it unfair to criticize Android before a few more years have passed, and it's not like the market cannot thrive with three or four top tier smartphones.

However, this point to me makes no sense. The only 1st gen iPhones I've heard of dying were from the usual traumatic combination of gravity and hard surfaces - but even then they are pretty tough, my first one survived three or four trips to the sidewalk from chest height and still worked fine (though the last one seriously dented the top and made the top button very hard to use). The HTC Dream has all kinds of sliding and other mechanical parts like the keyboard, there is simply no way it's more durable no matter how much money you pour into construction.

I don't think Android is competing with Windows Mobile though, that platform is pretty much dead already. They are just seeing what percentage of the void they can fill, and to some extent I think lure away Blackberry users with a more advanced phone that still offers a physical keyboard.

Re:Talk about citation needed...

[dafing]

Trying not to troll here, but I have an imported Jailbroken Original iPhone, and would like to know exactly what was failing on original iPhones? I could understand if they had a bad case of Sony Battery (TM) etc, but I havnt known anyone personally to have had an iPhone thats died. I looked online and found a few odd cases, but nothing that seems to be a plague?

I think its funny you mention sliding phones breaking in half etc :) Its a funny image. Theres basically nothing to go wrong with the iPhones "candybar" form factor , except perhaps if you get chewing gum stuck in the headphone jack?

Nothing against you, just would like to know more about mass1st gen iPhone failures.

Re:Talk about citation needed...

[mjwx]

Nothing against you, just would like to know more about mass 1st gen iPhone failures.

When I said iphone failures I was talking about DOA/Failed iphones in general (across all three gens), admittedly Gen 2 and Gen 3 had higher rates of failures (mostly DOA/warranty replacements), 10% is not a low rate of failure. I find Apple's QA to be lacking and this has been in the news a bit more lately, HTC on the other hand depends on business users who will not stand DOA's or significant HW failures. As for the hardware, the argument we got stuck with was that electronic components are more fragile then mechanical ones, which is true as a mechanical component will survive submersion, which is why electronic components have greater protection built around them.

When I was comparing the Gen1 iphone to the Gen1 android phone (Dream) I was talking about the phones capabilities, for example the HTC Dream was capable of HSDPA 7.2 and Quadband 2G, the iphone was a dual or triband 2G with no 3G capabilities (I'll assume 3G for the sake of argument). There are many other differences between the two.

Hopefully this explains my view a bit better.

Kendall got stuck on the word failure because of some perceived slight against his phone.

BTW, youre not trolling, just asking for an explanation.

You are all overthinking it.

[thatkid_2002]

Apple stuff is what the cool kids have so that is what the majority of people want. The majority of people are marketing whores.

TFA does make a good point that manufacturers having too much control over Android usage and divided the mindshare is probably the reason that it is not selling as well as it can/should.

App market size is only a tiny problem that the minority of consumers even notice. This is all quite simple.

Blackberry exists! But what about other phones?

[mdwh2]

Indeed. And I had to laugh at this gem in TFS:

none of them even seems to be trying to match the capabilities of the iPhone, let alone to knock us down with features that far surpass those of Apple's device

Wait, what now? All of a sudden it's okay to compare on features? What happened to all those people saying it doesn't matter that another phone has far more features than the Iphone, because that's just on paper, and features don't matter - that's just "grumpy featurism"?

But now an Android phone (allegedly) has fewer features (though we aren't told what the Iphone has in addition), features are suddenly worth comparing?

I'm glad that at long last, a Slashdot article actually acknowledges the existence of another phone - the Blackberry. For once we're not just faced with the false dichotomy of Iphone vs Android (artificially set up to make the Iphone look like it's the only phone worth having, by only comparing it to a phone that's even more of a niche product).

But even with the mention of the Blackberry, TFS still has to go on about the Iphone as if it's the only phone in existence.

It's also misleading to only look at the ill-defined market of "smart phones". In the mobile market as a whole, there are far bigger names (e.g., Nokia). The days of "phones for phoning, and smart phones for running programs and Internet" are long gone, as all but the cheapest phones can now do what was once the domain of the smart phone. And arguably, the Iphone is not well placed in the smart phone category, with it lacking features that even non-smart phones have. The only reason for putting it there is either due to its cost, or to artificially inflate its market share figure.

ActiveSync support?

[TurtleBlue]

Seriously - this is the only firm requirement my employer had - "We have an exchange mail system, and we'll buy you any mobile device you want - so long as it can use ActiveSync." We were poised to use Android OS phones because iPhones were thought of as toys - with the exception of Exchange we're still mostly a *nix shop - but that one caveat changed the purchase of all our mobile devices.

I had high hopes after seeing the HTC Magic demos, but it turns out that was all smoke and mirrors. Trying to explain to my senior management that "it's a google phone but not really but it still has android but I'm not sure it's supported we'll see they bought the license" vs. "yes, the iPhone has ActiveSync capability" - guess who won?

Re:ActiveSync support?

[CodeBuster]

I find it interesting that they chose iPhone when something like 70%+ of business users, according to a recent CNBC report choose BlackBerry (which is well known for its Exchange support). The iPhone is mostly the choice of the consumer market (with a much smaller 20% share of the enterprise market) and BlackBerry still rules the roost in most businesses.

Re:ActiveSync support?

[mrjohnson]

Depends who you get it from. My Rogers Magic came with QuikOffice and Exchange/Active Sync.

Re:ActiveSync support?

[NiteShaed]

We were poised to use Android OS phones because iPhones were thought of as toys - with the exception of Exchange we're still mostly a *nix shop

Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way, but since the iPhone OS is a scaled down OSX, which is UNIX, why would a mostly *nix shop consider it a toy? I can think of other reasons to go with something other than an iPhone, but as far as pedigree goes it has a decent lineage.

And before I get called an iPhone fanboy or shill, I use a Palm Pre, so I really have no stake in the iPhone vs Android thing.

Re:ActiveSync support?

[LanMan04]

I have a TMobile MyTouch (HTC Magic). It has Exchange support. I use it on a daily basis.

The market is saturated

[Angst Badger]

It could be that the market for smartphones is just saturated right now. Google is coming late to a market where nearly everyone who wanted something like this already has either an iPhone or a Blackberry. Everyone else -- and that would be the vast majority of the population -- just wants a phone to make and receive phone calls and, below a certain age, send text messages, so the extra cost for a smartphone is a non-starter. The situation isn't likely to change until someone comes up with something much, much better than an iPhone. Merely being as good as an iPhone is not enough.

It's also worth considering that there is some element of a fad or fashion craze in this situation, too. What was the next big thing after the hula hoop? It sure wasn't a better hula hoop.

Re:The market is saturated

[hollywench]

Everyone else -- and that would be the vast majority of the population -- just wants a phone to make and receive phone calls and, below a certain age, send text messages,

Say what? Texting is not age limited. I'm 46 and I bought my Sidekick for the sole reason that it has a full QWERTY keyboard. My husband and (grown) daughter and I use text messages literally all.the.time. They work in jobs where they can't answer their cell if it rings, but texts aren't a problem. We almost never make voice calls.. everything is text. I like my Sidekick, despite its software limitations. TMobile didn't have the Android/Google phone 3 years ago or I'd have one of those. And for those of you who have never seen one, it's called the Google phone because it has a Google logo on the faceplate.

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[SuperKendall]

It has to be an idea so radical that its specific implementation can be patented and licensed in a proprietary manner because it requires the use of extensive parallel back-end processing for each front-end client. In addition to that, it requires a sort of database that is unique to each client--in every way except for the raw materials used to create its shape.

I don't see why this is necessarily just a killer Android app though, as it sounds a lot like you could also easily create the client on an iPhone using Core Data for the storage... totally dynamic and malleable system for data storage with a sqllite backend (on the phone). (For those interested take a look at the Core Data Utility Tutorial that builds a model using only code, then populates the objects it created).

Do I want to try to replicate all the client code in this new curiosity, Objective C?

Objective-C has been around since the early 80's, widely used by NeXT in 88 and on. I was using it (to a small extent) in college in 1990... it's not a "curiosity", because the language has been upgraded to be pretty modern, and the foundation classes Apple includes are at the same level Java's are (and in some cases more advanced, like Core Data or Core Animation).

One well-kept secret is that a ton of developers have shifted over from Java to ObjC development. If you ever do get the urge to learn a little more about the syntax, I highly recommend this document:

From C++ to Objective-C

Even though it states C++, you can easily follow and it contains a number of Java examples too. It doesn't cover the frameworks though.

No there is no garbage collection, but just like Java what you really end up worrying over are the leaks that you aren't reclaiming even though the exact reasons differ between the two languages.

Do I want to put my energy into learning how Objective C compares to C or C++, or is my creativity better spent completing this idea in Java-friendly Android, knowing that all it will take is something really cool that people are talking about and using and that they want assurances from the company that this data structure they've built in it is safe and backed up.

That depends, do you want your creativity to be admired by a few hundred thousand or by potentially tens of millions? If you really think the app that important, shouldn't you make it available to as many people as you can?

As for the backup story, again the iPhone is a perfectly viable platform since all application data is backed up every sync to the computer, and can be restored (along with your app) if the phone dies or the user gets a new one..

I'm not going to attack your idea because who knows, you could in fact have something amazing and you have a bit of that mad scientist vibe about you that might be for real. But a truly amazing idea transcends mere platforms and the iPhone does have the frameworks that make your ideas more than viable to find a home there based on what you have said.

Apple Rokr All Over Again

[BondGamer]

Google repeated Apple's mistake. They relied too much on carriers and let them dictate the terms. Without Google in the name no one is going to take notice. The Andriods phones turned out to be what people claim the iPhone to be, a toy which people buy to look edgy. While Google flounders around Apple is 3 generations ahead and poised to take the world by storm again when the iPhone goes cross-carrier.

Re:Apple Rokr All Over Again

[dafing]

that "rokr" sucked eh? Its the Vista of phones!

I find it odd Apple put their software on it? Isnt it just "iTunes" on the thing though? With a 100 song limit or something? Crazy. Its not like Apple sold it as their retails stores? Correct me if Im wrong. I dont even know if it were for sale outside America?

Re:Apple Rokr All Over Again

[CrackedButter]

Remember back in the Aple Keynote in 2007? Jobs said, we're making a leap frog product that is going to be 5 years ahead of anything else. It's now been 2.5 years since he said that, and so far he hasn't had to eat crow for saying it. But I'm hopeful for the next 2.5 years to see if other companies can get their act together so that what Steve said was just marketing bullshit and not the sad truth.

Re:Apple Rokr All Over Again

[dzfoo]

>> 5 years ahead of anything else

I don't think that means what you think it does.

He did not mean that there would be five years from its release until someone could create something that compared to the iPhone. He meant that the device they were going to release then, in 2007, was going to contain technology that would have taken five years for any other competitor to bring to market.

Had the iPhone not been released by Apple, Jobs posited, it would had taken about five years for the industry to get its act together and create a workable touch-screen, multi-finger-gesture-driven phone.

Obviously, once they released the iPhone, competitors could copy it faster than having to come up with the original concept and design from scratch.

        -dZ.

Re:Apple Rokr All Over Again

[CrackedButter]

I think how I interpreted it is what he meant, its your opinion against mine unless you have something that backs up your point of view. Either way, I want to see the state of the phone market in the remaining time we have.

Its the hardware stupid

[jonwil]

Why is it that current Android devices (at least those that are out here in Australia) all have crappy screen resolutions compared to phones like the Nokia N-series (N97 etc), the iPhone and the top end Windows Mobile phones?

If someone released a phone with hardware specs that matched or beat the iPhone 3GS in every way and stuck Android on it (and then marketed the hell out of it), Android might start making a dent in the market.

Re:Its the hardware stupid

[mykro76]

Working for a company that produces hardware with embedded software, I can attest that it takes a while to change horses especially if you've been producing a particular range for years. The HTC Touch HD is a case in point. They would have had the Winmo OS shackled to their 800x480 device a while ago. My guess is the better resolutions will be here within 6 months.

Andorid is just insurance for google.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Google is worried a dominant player like iPhone will make too heavy a demand for giving google access to its customer base. Android Chrome etc are all just basic insurance policcy for google. The marketshare target for google is not >50% or market dominance or anything like that. All it wants is to force other players to stay interoperative. It needs a marketshare big enough to do that. That is all.

Saturated market? Oh and smartphones suck

[w0mprat]

I've come to the conclusion that smart phones suck. Or at least there's a good fraction of people who are quietly thinking this heresy in the back of their minds.This is not exactly my point I'm going to make but bare with me.

I almost bought a iPhone 3Gs when the day before my girlfriend came home after a shopping spree, having bought a netbook, a cellphone (which happend to have a mp3 player and sdcard slot) and 3g, and a dedicated 8gb mp3/video player all for less than the cost of buying an iPhone 3GS outright. A smartphone is rather deficient and at all these things, except, oh, perhaps matching the laptop in battery life.

Breaking it down, when you roll too many features into such a tiny package you end up with a compromised device that is difficult to call 'good enough' at any particular task, and easy just to plain say it 'sucks'.

So you buy a iphone 2g/3g/3gs or a HTC G1/G2/Hero. Your new smartphone will be:

Not a very good media player. iPhone does this best, but has it's own drawbacks (iTunes).
Not a very good computing platform (currently generation are barely able to multitask).
Full web browsing is a diminished experience on such a small device. Mobile versions of sites don't smooth this over either. (No flash/or flash like on the HTC hero barely works).

Finally the worst feature of a iPhone/Droidphone: Entering anything of length on a on-screen qwerty keyboard is excruciating. It requires far more precision and concentration than a real qwerty or keypad+predicitive where you can get some speed up. Try doing it while walking, while on a bus or a train that is jiggling you, or while your drinking. Infact being able to actually use your phone at all while rolling drunk is a oddly good metric of usability.

Some or all this is apparent to some people, perhaps makes the case in many people minds that they don't *need* a smartphone to improve their lives since would replicate alot of what they can already do with their existing gadgets. Unless there is a huge run of much cheaper Android phones out there, I don't see any room left for Android to gain market share. Basicly, it's just glutted at the high end.

That said... there are a metric assload of android phones due to be released over the 18 months..... will choice win out?

Re:Do Telcos (in Aust) really want to sell Android

[Grieviant]

If the following article is to be believed, the Samsung Galaxy has been selling quite well in Europe (> 100000 units in the first month). Not sure about their claims of outselling HTC's combined offerings though.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2009/08/24/100000-samsung-galaxy-android-handsets-sold-in-europe-in-a-month/

Porsche? BMW?

[Philip K Dickhead]

Business needs a fleet of Crown Vics, or Geo Metros.

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[curmudgeon99]

I know, the NS initials in front of everything for NeXT. But you know that the language has been in hibernation until now.

Features

[ShaggyZet]

A lot of posts are pointing to this feature, or that feature. The fact is, Android 1.0 was may be 50% done. 1.5 is starting to come out of beta. I was annoyed with Sprint when their CEO said that Android wasn't ready for prime time, but he may have been right. Maybe 2.0 will actually be something worth getting behind. I hope so, because I have a couple apps in the market and a couple more in the works.

The thing I find most ironic is the comparison between iPhone and Android. They both lack a lot of the same things, but for some reason Apple is being heavy handed, but with Google it just hasn't been implemented yet, which is somehow excusable. Calendar and Bluetooth APIs (prior to iPhone 3.0) are the best examples. Android doesn't have either of these, and in fact removed them from 1.0 even though they were in the betas. On either device, the end result for the developer and end user is the same. Want a calendars or events in your app? Write your own in a walled garden or require your users to hack their phones. But iPhone is at least making progress, gives developers reasonable early access, and keeps its promises.

Uninformed Story.

[mykro76]

This smacks of a completely uninformed story from someone who has only ever played with an iPhone.

I've had my Android HTC Magic for 3 months and it has repeatedly stood up and traded punch for punch with my friend's iPhones.

In ONE area it was beaten - There is no X-Plane port. So Android lacks a cool flight-simulator, so far.

In SEVERAL areas, it came out the victor.

1. Many Augmented Reality platforms (Layar, Wikitude, Gammaray) are deploying on Android and really pushing the boundaries of this new technology. Quote from iPhoner upon seeing Layar in action: "Now, THAT's an application".

2. Google Sky Maps. Nuff said. Quote from iPhoner: *drool*

3. The openness of Android Market. The ease of getting apps into Android Market vs App store is well documented. In addition, third party websites can re-package the contents of Android Market, offering their own view of apps, searching, etc. I can share links about cool Android apps with others ( http://www.cyrket.com/package/com.sprx.layar ) . Conversely, if I want to see the entry for an interesting iPhone app, I cannot access the App Store without installing iTunes. FAIL.

4. The openness of Android in general - when Google and Facebook had their spat, yanking FB apps briefly, I went to a developers website to install their FB application with one click. You cannot install an application outside of App Store. FAIL.

5. Much more is possible on Android without rooting. It's fair to say that if you consider yourself a geek in any shape or form, you HAVE to jailbreak your iPhone in order to access the nuts and bolts of the platform. Quote from iPhoner: "huh, you can do all that and you haven't had to root it yet?"

6. I have already started developing apps for my phone with the really slick free Eclipse plugin and emulator that runs on Windows, Linux, Mac. It's a lot of fun. Quotes from iPhoners who are devs: "ehh, i have to pay to digitally sign it", and "eh, i don't have a Mac".

I could go on. But this is enough to make the point that the Android phones do not need to "match the capabilities of iPhone". They already do.

That said, I do agree that the Android platform has its problems.

And the biggest by far is Brand Name Fragmentation.

Google and the handset manufacturers need to present a much better brand identity. I know each corporation is honor-bound to try and force its own stamp on the product. But come on!!! Stop using different names in different countries!! HTC Magic, MyTouch 3G and G2 are all the same freaking phone, with cosmetic OEM differences. And there's only a few phones so far, how bad will it get when the forecast "18 Android phones" hit worldwide by the end of the year? Why not enforce a single name for each phone, and allow a carrier prefix? Vodafone Magic, Verizon Magic, T-Mobile Magic. What's so hard about that?

Don't get me wrong, the iPhone 3GS is a nice piece of kit. If there was no Android, it is the phone I would have.

But there IS Android, and there is a better way.

Again, where is the citation

[SuperKendall]

I was referring to failure of electronic components. Electronic failure is more common and severe then mechanical failure

That goes totally against common sense.

Apple are using cheaper chips then HTC and have a higher DOA rate then HTC.

A link to verify any of this? Were it true, why is the iPhone approval rating so high with users? I have literally NEVER heard of an iPhone being DOA out of the box.

Also the sliding mechanism in the Dream is remarkably simple compared to other slide phones

It can be as simple and amazing as you like, mechanical systems will eventually fail and are more prone to forces that make them fail (like angry users or simple sand).

WinMo is very much alive in Europe, Asia and Australia.

It's alive now, but no-way is it staying that way. They are back in the game way too late to matter. My prediction is they buy out Palm after a few jigs trying to make either the new Windows Mobile or even the Zune gain traction (they were looking for iPhone developers willing to port popular apps to the Zune).

Re:Again, where is the citation

[CrackedButter]

Then literally hear this: My first iPhone kept wanting to shutdown, it behaved as though somebody had the home and sleep buttons pressed constantly. It would work for 5 minutes then ask if it wanted to shut down. I swiped 'no,' and 2 seconds later it would ask again. That phone lasted an hour in my possession and I returned it. Thats DOA right?

Re:Again, where is the citation

[SuperKendall]

Yes, close enough. But again overall the satisfaction surveys show a pretty high rate of happiness, which I don't think would be the case if a bunch were truly failing - and the OP failed to provide a single link of proof to back his claims that the iPhone had a high failure rate. When he offers up "proof" from one guy in an internet forum, you know he's simply pulling data out of his ass - and as noted, there's no way adding a mechanical system to what is otherwise a solid state device adds reliability... in your case it was the same thing, the mechanical aspects failed (button inputs) not the device itself!

Re:Again, where is the citation

[CrackedButter]

That is why I bought another one instead ;).

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[curmudgeon99]

I have been looking at SQLite, with its few curious omissions from SQL92. And the client-side memory needs are trivial so in this case SQLite would be fine for the client--even on Android. I've worked my way through the Stanford Podcasts. I have no doubt that Objective C is a mature, full-featured language. That is not my objection--leveraging my long friendship with Java is. I have been looking at Objective C. Thus, my opinion. Once again, I was not talking about the client when I mentioned the bit about users being so thrilled with the app they wanted to make sure their server-side data is preserved. My whole point is this: a cool enough app will completely obliterate the advantage of the iPhone--given a killer app. Remember how invincible the BlackBerry was? It still dominates but it's doomed. Why all this focus on the hardware, anyway? You remind me of guys telling me how much more productive they were going to be on their new Pentium computers. Now you are all enamored with the iPhone. But after we get a few thousand versions of piddly video games or tell-me-where-I-can-buy-organic-arugalla-in-Queens apps, then people will realize that it's now just a phone or another internet browser or email vehicle.

The API sucks

[Gunark]

The honest truth is, the Android API sucks. You're given the worst of both worlds -- doing simple things (like storing simple application settings) is tedious and awkward -- but neither are the tools powerful enough to do anything interesting.

As a developer, I found the whole experience of building apps for Android extremely disappointing. The potential is there, and it shines through in (for example) the Eclipse-based IDE tools, but the API itself absolutely sucks. Why is there no built in abstraction layer for persisting data? I have to manually create SQL databases and write SQL queries just to retrieve a simple application setting? Seriously??

Re:The API sucks

[IamTheRealMike]

What was wrong with the SharedPreferences object? Or just using Java serialization?

What needs to be broken

[xzvf]

The current cell phone oligopoly needs to be broken the same way the Bell system was busted. There was a time when you could only buy your land line phone from Bell, there was only one directory (Free -white pages, advertised - yellow pages), and they owned the system from handset to handset. Costs were high, service was slow, and innovation was non-existent. There was a time when having two phones in the same house was the province of the ultra-rich. Then it was broken, you no longer had to rent your phone from Bell, but could go to the local store and buy one. Plug into an rj-11 jack and go. Soon every house had a phone in every room, you could buy answering machines, plug in a modem.... heck it wasn't too long before phone companies started to innovate and provide other services like caller ID. Sorry for the history rant, but we need the major cell and network providers to stop owning us handset to handset again. Apple shouldn't have had to convince AT&T to carry its phone, there should be a generic standard like RJ-11 where we can plug our phones into their network, and they move the bits. If they want to innovate on top of the bit moving, great, but don't their ownership of the devices is the problem that is stifling the market.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Sparr0]

There IS a generic standard. You can buy any unlocked quad-band GSM phone and use it on pretty much any GSM network. The problem is, people don't want to pay full price for the hardware. Is the iPhone worth $600+ to you? It sure as hell is not a $200 device, by a long stretch, but that's what people want to pay for it, and they are willing to take provider lockin for the discount.

Re:What needs to be broken

[EvilJoker]

The problem with that, at least in the US, is carrier support. The vast majority of carriers here are CDMA- Verizon, Sprint, Cricket, Alltel, US Cellular, Revol, MetroPCS, and a few others.

Nextel is iDEN (Similar to GSM, but different enough to be incompatible).

GSM is really only covered by AT&T, T-Mobile, Cincinnati Bell, and other small regional carriers.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Rand310]

I would absolutely pay $400 for it if my service was $20-30/month.

Re:What needs to be broken

[BitZtream]

Apple didn't 'convience' AT&T to carry its phone, AT&T gives apple all sorts of shit to be the lucky bastards who GET to carry the iphone. Verizon and TMobile would love to carry it in the US if they could but Apple won't sell it to them due to the deal AT&T gave them.

They were courting for the biggest slice of the pie before AT&T sealed the deal, can't remember which one it was but I do recall being upset that AT&T won it as they aren't the best in my area (Cingular at the time)

Re:What needs to be broken

[js_sebastian]

(...) Apple shouldn't have had to convince AT&T to carry its phone, there should be a generic standard like RJ-11 where we can plug our phones into their network, and they move the bits. If they want to innovate on top of the bit moving, great, but don't their ownership of the devices is the problem that is stifling the market.

There is such a standard, in fact multiple such standards such as GSM, UMTS, etc. I for one would be in favor of giving this a big regulatory kick (like: forbid phone exclusivity deals, sim locking, etc). But unless that happens, the only other way to get an open network is to not buy the closed one. I have never bought a carrier-locked phone, and in fact never subscribed to a contract with a mobile carrier. Here in austria i bought my phone at a shop, my SIM card at a supermaket (in cash) and I spend about 5 euros per month on calls/sms (no internet since the only time I would need it is when I am abroad, and no one is yet offering reasonable rates for worldwide or at least europewide coverage). Prepaid options are probably not as attractive in the US, and swapping the SIM when you go abroad isn't as much of an issue (given geographic isolation of the US.. you know, an ocean or two). But still, people should simply refuse to buy carrier-locked phones.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Chonnawonga]

And it doesn't help that most North American cell carriers set themselves up with CDMA instead of GSM. We have a whole continent of Beta.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Thing 1]

There was a time when you could only buy your land line phone from Bell [...]

Actually, it was even worse: you had to rent your phone from Bell; I recall my parents being warily convinced that we should purchase a phone, so we could remove that line-item from the bill. (They were concerned that any issues with it, Bell wouldn't cover it, or worse, an issue with the line Bell could point to the owner-owned phone and say "sorry that voids the warrantee" or something similar.)

Re:What needs to be broken

[Thomas Miconi]

The current cell phone oligopoly needs to be broken the same way the Bell system was busted. There was a time when you could only buy your land line phone from Bell, there was only one directory (Free -white pages, advertised - yellow pages), and they owned the system from handset to handset. Costs were high, service was slow, and innovation was non-existent.

Except for discovering / inventing information theory, the transistor, the cosmic radiowave background, Unix and the C programming language. Among other trifling, Nobel-prize winning discoveries.
No private company has given more to the world than Bell. Bell Labs defined the Golden Age of American science and engineering. Reading that there was "no innovation" at Bell in a /. comment is pretty depressing.

Re:What needs to be broken

[DuckDodgers]

I understand your point, but Bell could afford to sink mega-bucks into its research because it was reaping the financial rewards of a complete monopoly. Look at all of the phone and phone-related innovations since Bell was broken - now instead of one company using a portion of immense profits for research, you have dozens of competing companies spending resources on research to stay competitive.

Competition forces investment in research. It's as true when you're competing with business competition as it is when the US was competing against the USSR in the Cold War.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Mac_D83]

I agree completely that the competition among the US cell phone carriers is too weak. Here in Denmark(Europe) GSM has been the only technology in use for quite a while. There are no exclusivity deals, you can usually buy a phone with or without a plan, and plans are only allowed to last for six months. This have driven down the cost of using a cell phone and spread the usage at an astounding rate. The addition of network less cell phone carriers have accelerated the drop in price beyond what many thought was possible. The state mandates that carriers must carry network less carriers at a cost that is "reasonable". What is a reasonable price can of course be debated. The carriers don't like it, but there is no reason that they should be making huge profits, as a consequence of their natural monopolies, when they could easily survive on medium profits. The network less carriers don't earn money on the networks so they have to be very efficient in order to make a profit on the margin. Their pricing structures are much simpler than the typical carriers, in that they don't have strange artificial limits, where you get hit by a hefty price hike after reaching a certain limit. They instead use fixed flat low rates. This means that you don't get any surprises, as the price goes up linearly with your usage. Another good thing about these new network less carriers, which is not intuitive, is that they often provide a better customer service experience than the old carriers. Maybe this is because they're often small and very efficient?

I my opinion the following has to happen for the US cell phone carrier market to become competitive:
1. GSM only: Competition will increase when consumers can move freely between the carriers without any technical barriers. It will cost the carriers a lot of money to replace equipment, so they should have a long warning time and receive some form of compensation.
2. Shorten the contracts: If customers are bound by shorter contracts, then they can move faster to another carrier if they don't like the one they have. This will again increase competition as customers don't have to put up with a poor and expensive service.
3. No exclusivity deals: This will make customers choose the carrier on its merits, and not by which phone they like. This will avoid situations where people a forced to use a specific carrier, that they don't like, because they really like the cell phone they're offering(the Apple iPhone is a good example of this).
4. Simpler plans: There way plans can be structured has to be regulated. This seems very invasive, but it's at this point not possible for customers to compare two offers from two competing carriers and conclude which one is the cheaper. Simpler plans with flat pricing models will allow the customers to easily choose the cheapest carrier.
5. Network less carriers: This is in my opinion the most controversial suggestions of them all. The specification of a reasonable price for carrying other companies traffic will be very hard, and it will probably be seen by many as a too invasive form of regulation from the federal government.

I think that competition between the cell phone carriers will flourish in the US if points one through four is enacted. Enactment of the last point would be the cherry on the top, but I don't think it's very realistic to suggest regulation of prices in the US without a big uproar from the carriers. I really hope that things will change, as I'm soon moving to the US and will have to suffer with the poor competition.

Michael Mc Donnell

Re:What needs to be broken

[JakartaDean]

If you're right, then people are dumb (perhaps not a big revelation there). Most of the world doesn't have these tied deals, thank $deity, and I would never sign up for one. I buy the phone I want, and plug in the SIM card I want, and pay for the calls I make and the SMSs I send. Why Americans put up with this crap is beyond me -- don't you think you're paying for it in the end anyway?

Re:What needs to be broken

[Reaperducer]

Most of the world doesn't have these tied deals, thank $deity

Spoken like an American Slashnerd who's never been to most of the rest of the world and gets his information from blogs.

Back in the 1980's that would have been true, but two and three-year contracts for carrier-subsidized phones are the norm in most countries these days, from Europe to Asia and even in parts of South America.

The places where it's not the norm are places like Russia and India and Brazil, which is why iPhone adoption is low in those regions -- because people have to pay full price for the phone.

Now go ahead and spew some falsehoods about how "superior" Japanese phones are compared to the ones available in America. They're not. Haven't been in years. But that's off topic.

Re:What needs to be broken

[hazydave]

Actually, an iPhone works very well in the market as a $200 device.. that's about what you pay for an iPod Touch, which of course is the same device, sans phone. And some people might even buy an unlocked iPhone, particularly if offered by Apple, just as people buy the fairly pricey unlocked Nokia high-end smart phones.

Re:What needs to be broken

[hazydave]

While true, it could be worse. And it once was.

Back in the 1990s, GSM was virtually unknown here. The lone company providing GSM was VoiceStream, which had virtually no coverage. I was working quite a bit in Germany in the mid-to-late 1990s, and really looked around for a phone that could be universal. VoiceStream coverage was more myth than reality, so I would up buying a dual-mode Nextel phone, IDEN here, GSM there. In theory.. it was pretty much still an alpha-test unit... the GSM would always cut out after a few seconds of connection. Great for money making, since you got charged for making the call, but useless for communications purposes (naturally, I got all charges removed, sent the phone back twice, but they never got it working). VoiceStream was eventually bought by T-Mobile, owed by Deutsche Telekom, and currently the third largest multinational wireless company.

The alternative to CDMA (and the tiny bit of Nextel IDEN) was the D-AMPS sytem, also just called TDMA.. nearly the same as GSM (also a TDMA protocol.. that's why it makes all that noise if you're phones near a stereo-system speaker), only different. Nothing like re-inventing the wheel, poorly, but hey, that's what they did --- at least there's a technical advantage to CDMA (which is why all the 3G and 4G technologies are CDMA). This was still in use until this year... part of Altel's network was D-AMPS until last year (from Western Wireless), and US Cellular just shut down their D-AMPS network in February.

AT&T had been the largest D-AMPS provider, but began the shutdown of D-AMPS in 2007, to open that spectrum for increased GSM use.

Re:What needs to be broken

[hazydave]

Actually, Apple did quite a bit of convincing AT&T to carry the iPhone the way Apple wanted it to be carried. And to get their kick-backs from the AT&T fees charges, and even to be able to charge as much as AT&T ultimately did. AT&T's 3-year exclusive deal was payment in return for everything AT&T did for Apple.

It's easy to say, today, they'd all love to carry the iPhone.. of course they would. And Apple would love to have that, even enough to crank out a CDMA version if need be. But that's after the fact.. there was no guarantee that the iPhone would be as popular as it turned out to be. And much of that success is based on having made the iPhone a well supported SmartPhone.. something it didn't even do at launch.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Sparr0]

Yes, but it's not a $200 device. That's like saying a Porsche would do very well in the car market as a $15k car. Sure it would, but whoever was subsidizing it would be getting SOMETHING out of the deal.

AT&T believes that over the course of 2 years they can wring an extra $400 out of you via a contract. How do I know this? Because they are a business, and if they didn't think it made profitable sense to give you a $400 discount on the phone then they wouldn't do it.

Re:What needs to be broken

[hazydave]

Currently, GSM is about 80% of the world's wireless market.

IDEN carriers are sill active in the USA (Sprint/Nextel, Boost Mobile, others), Saudi Arabia (Bravo), Singapore, India, China, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Morocco, Jordan, Mexico, and most of South America.

There are a number of very small providers using CDMA in Eastern Europe and Asia. China Telecom uses CDMA, and has 42 million subscribers.. but that's pretty small, for China. India has several CDMA providers, with over 100 million total subscribers. Japan has no significant GSM providers.. they're mostly PDC and CDMA (one tiny company does UMTS but not standard GSM 1G/2G stuff). Korea is nearly all CDMA.

In short, while GSM is the predominant standard, there are dozens of non-GSM providers still out there in the world. You need to update you definiton of "the world" to including something other than the USA, Canada, and Western Europe.

Re:What needs to be broken

[Uberbah]

Nice list, but it's nicely irrelevant. None of those inventions - Unix, C, etc - were innovative for the customer.

Another M$ Stooge

[bbmaniac]

So tiring reading the tirades of these M$ stooges. Hmmmm, I wonder why gravity boot sales haven't taken off more? Oh right, you can't buy them!!! Freakin idiot! Only T-Mobile has Android phones for sale and the G1 has had GREAT volumes in sales. The true test will come in the 4Q when handset makers actual come out with the handsets to buy. Xmas is the test for Android. For the moron author to this article, is your next article about why hasn't the 2015 Mustang not sold more? Hmmmmm, there are less 2015 Mustangs sold than 2009 Acuras, so there must be something wrong with the Ford company. Nice, how about posting a useful article next time.

If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.

[Zach978]

If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.

This isn't the point of Android. The point of android is to have high end, and inexpensive low end handsets. Google wants more people using smartphones...which means they want to drive the price down with a large range of handsets.

If Apple is BMW, Android can be Porsche, Ferrari, Toyota, Kia, Honda, etc....

Re:If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.

[Another, completely]

I think the "you" in that statement referred to the company adopting Android for their niche phone, not Android itself.

I don't know how far Mr. Gruber wanted the metaphor to go, but Porsche recently overreached itself in an attempt to take over Volkswagen, and ended up getting swallowed for its ambition. If you take the statement a little farther, it brings to mind the vulnerability of small, high-quality products to poor management decisions.

Two points

[sjdude]

Two points to consider:

• Only developers give a shit if a platform is "friendly to developers". If a platform market is big enough, they will kiss the vendor's butt and even learn a new programming language to gain access to the market. Objective C, anyone?
• Apple has always done something infinitely better than anybody else in the markets they compete in: industrial design. In the laptop business, for example, only Sony even tries, and their stuff sucks compared to MacBook Pro's. When another vendor makes a smartphone with ID as good as an iPhone, things might change. Until then, the iPhone is "it".

Because it SUCKS

[wampus]

As an owner of a G1, I can't WAIT until 2010 when my contract expires so I can get the hell out from under this failtastic piece of shit. Randomly powers off? Check! Loses network connections whenever? Check! Crashes when I try to answer the phone? Checkaroo! Takes 3 minutes to become usable after restarting? Oh, that's a check! Interface slow like molasses in winter? You'd better believe that's a check! Broken accelerometer? Outside of warranty, CHECK! Shitty, tinny speaker? Check! Poor battery life? Check! Headphone jack? No check here.

I'm thinking about a netbook with someone else's data service and prepaid cellular. Fuck HTC, T-Mobile, and Google in their collective asses.

Re:Because it SUCKS

[speedtux]

Apple's iPhone had similar (actually, worse) problems in its first release.

As with iPhone, newer Android models are fixing the initial problems.

Re:Because it SUCKS

[wampus]

I suppose I can see how staying on could be tough to get right.

Re:Because it SUCKS

[sjdude]

Apple's iPhone had similar (actually, worse), problems in its first release.

I call complete bullshit on this. No way Apple would have sold as many iPhone's as they did if this was even remotely true. They would have sold about as many as the immensely popular (by comments in this topic) Android phone if it was! How the fuck did such a bullshit comment get mod'ed "2"??!!

Re:Because it SUCKS

[dafing]

I asked before, what were the initial iPhone problems? It seems to be some imaginary thing to bash the iPhone over "oh, I know its sexy as hell, and that everyone haves them, that apart from the iPod, its the device of the decade...but it had initial product failures so I'll stick to my clunky Windows Mobile piece of crap...".

Just would like to know, since I have an Original iPhone. I have never heard of them having mass faults, googling I didnt see anything that suggested that?

Thank you for your time

Re:Because it SUCKS

[speedtux]

I have never heard of them having mass faults,

Neither the G1 nor the iPhone have "mass faults". Both of them have had some rough edges: mediocre battery life, lack of video recording, some missing functionality in the software, some bugs.

And in terms of sales, the iPhone and the G1 have been following very similar curves in terms of absolute sales numbers. Given that the G1 started from scratch while Apple started with an existing platform and channel, that's quite an achievement for the G1.

wrong assumption

[speedtux]

iPhone and Android have had similar growth, measured from their release dates. And that's based on basically a single, unattractive phone--the G1, without any kind of iTunes tie-in, and without the hype that surrounded the iPhone.

So, Android has been growing just fine, and it will do better and better relative to the iPhone as new devices and new applications come out.

Freedom != Friendliness

[sjbe]

What part of "don't have to pay Apple money to develop for Android" and "don't have to get Apple's permission to distribute" did you not understand?

Free (as in beer) is nice but that doesn't prove "friendliness" or the lack of it. Being cheap doesn't cause something to be of good quality or well designed or well documented. It's not hard to find crappy software and being free doesn't make it less crappy.

As for needing permission to distribute, that is potentially annoying I'll grant you though to be fair it's not without some benefit to both developers and users. It has the potential to keep a lot of bad software and (probably) malware out of the platform which is a good thing on balance. Nevertheless I'll agree that it has the potential to be frustrating. Does Apple abuse their position sometimes? Yep - so that is one strike against Apple but not by itself conclusive proof that Android is more friendly to developers.

on the Android platform, replacing core apps with your own version is *encouraged*, and in fact *designed into the platform*.

Again, none of this *necessarily* means "friendlier" to developers. Freedom (as in speech) is only a part of the equation. If the development tools suck or the platform is hard to write for or the documentation sucks, developers won't care whether you can replace the core apps or not. You are talking about how open the platform is which is just one factor in determining how friendly a platform is to developers. Android might be the best thing since sliced bread but you are providing little evidence to prove that assertion.

...but as a developer platform and ecosystem, the only thing Android is missing is higher handset sales.

Really? Are the development tools better and/or more mature? Is the interface easier and/or faster for developers? Is the documentation thorough, easy to read and clearer than the documentation for the iPhone? Is the hardware platform more stable and well understood? Are there more developers actively developing for Android than the iPhone? You assert that it is "better" but you provide almost no evidence to back up your argument. I'm willing to be convinced either way but please make a decent argument.

I have a theory....

[grocer]

mostly Google's complete lack of support for Exchange...I would have considered a G1 if it would have played nice with Exchange like the iPhone or Blackberry or Windows Mobile. I have T-Mobile (for the past 6 years) and deemed the G1 unacceptable from an enterprise standpoint, not for its apps or openness. It just wouldn't work like I needed it to with Exchange. Doing IT for a small business, it came down to what can I support as a standard across pretty much every carrier...and guess what, it's a Blackberry or Win Mobile phone.

It's simple.

[jmerlin]

It's not just one thing. The phones running Android by comparison with the iPhone are bad. If you want to write games, enjoy your OpenGL ES 1.0/1.1 which is quite limited in capabilities. The hardware is diverse, to the point where your app may need to be capable of changing how it operates to function to capacity on several different phones (!!!!!!!!! WOW! THAT IS WHAT THE OS IS MEANT TO STOP! BUT IT STILL HAPPENS, EVEN WITH JAVA!!!!). And T-Mobile just ... well.. sucks. A triumvirate of fail that makes me wonder why Google developed Android if they weren't willing to put up a good product behind it to set their own "gold standard," or at least be a little more picky with their partners.

Hopefully someone will make an amazing phone and run Android on it. That will definitely help greatly with the success of the OS, but writing games for a platform with variable hardware just makes me want to say "screw it, I'm writing this for an iPhone" since I know the app I test runs GREAT on my iPhone, it'll do the same on yours. No need to test 10+ phones and tweak for each.

Software is great, Hardware not so much

[Cyberllama]

The hardware is lacking, thus far. The best part of android is that anyone can make a phone with their OS. The worst part is that ANYONE can make a phone with their OS.

Re:Software is great, Hardware not so much

[dunkelfalke]

That's why I wonder why HTC doesn't just port Android to one of their better devices (like Touch HD). Would even save them money because of the economy of scale.

The OS will be important to all consumers

[j5Chicago]

You know, we can debate the service of specific US Carriers and the sexiness of certain devices only allowed on certain carriers but at the end of the day the operating system is what is going to become more and more important when it comes to usability in a device, especially for smart phones. In fact, I hesitate to call them "smart" anymore, because they're really more about keeping us in touch with what's important to us and delivering media content. we're the smart ones controlling the device. As the market grows, and carriers expand, people will recognize, just as they have with computers, that the OS makes the difference. I own a mac and a pc. I've had a Treo and a Blackberry. The more people use the device the more they figure out what works best for them. This will hold true for hand held devices in the future too. SIDE NOTE: But I do have to say, that this name calling and fanboy crap has gotta stop. I mean, this constant back and forth about which phone's OS is superior and this service and that service. Everyone needs to just chill out and find what's best for them. The technology will double in 1.5 years anyway and these debates will still be going on but they'll just be about a different device. I think the best thing that we can do as consumers or developers is to work with the technology and help companies drive it to a place of our liking. There will always be game changers and there will always be followers and early adopters and startups... but that's the exciting part, everything keeps on changing.

My Android app development is halted

[Fizzl]

I was through design, specs and had implemented IPC and task control for my application, when I decided to have a look at the Android app store. I paid the $25 to get my rights to publish. Curiously I CANNOT CHARGE FOR MY APPS! Android store only supports google checkout as mediator for the money. And google checkout merchant accounts are not available in my country.
So what to do? Basically, according to the help docs, twiddle my thumbs untill they make checkout available in Finland. I wonder if Google knows how big mobile development is here? Because of our pride in Nokia, pretty much every coder has some kind of experience in Symbian development. And thus, basic understanding of mobile development.

Well, to get some feeling of the engine room, I started researching the lower part of the Android stack while I wait.

'If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.'

[v4vijayakumar]

Have you ever looked at an open source project, and exclaimed "Holy Porsche"?! Never, right?

Re:'If Apple is BMW, you can be Porsche.'

[dafing]

LOL.

I'm a jailbroken iPhone user and couldnt imagine NOT having one, but I do hope Android does better, if only for more competition to keep Apple hard at work, monopolies always end up bad for the consumer.

I'd say the iPhone were more like a Private Jet, sure it has massive fuel bills (AT&T lockin) and makes you look like a wannabe big shot, but its something to aspire to, even the hoi polloi can buy a used BMW for a few K.

People buy hardware not software

[Rsriram]

Phone buyers buy the hardware. Computer buyers care more about software. On slashdot, users talk more about the phone's software but general users do not differentiate.
That is why buyers are not queuing up to buy "android" phones. Maybe Google should have a reference architecture and work with manufacturers to sell the Google Phone. It might work then and all the marketing dollars will go to build the "Gphone" brand.

Re:Forget citation, how about basic engineering.

[SuperKendall]

Basic engineering, the more complex something is the more likely it is to fail.

Exactly - sliding things are far more complex. Chips are just silicon, and the whole board in a device goes through a burn-in - it's just simply going to work until something alters it mechanically, since there are no moving parts to fail.

As for it still working as a phone - unlikely since usually devices with sliding keyboards rely on them to function.

Or think of it this way. The iPhone has circuits. The HTC has circuits plus moving parts. By definition it has more complexity - which as you note leads to more failures.

My HTC has survived a trip to a hardwood floor

Unimpressive since all hardwood floors have some give and are softer than metal casings.

The accepted failure of the iphone rate is 10%

The "accepted rate" is by SOME GUY IN A FORUM? And you couldn't even find modern figures at that, you had to go way back to the original launch from years ago in 2007!

I give up, you are obviously a troll. No-one is really that stupid. You can post the final response, I've stopped reading as I'm sure everyone else has. We had a good laugh at your expense though with that whole "electronics are more prone to failure than mechanical devices" thing though. Classic.

They should have learned from Apple...

[dreamer.redeemer]

They should have learned from Apple and not made the same stupid mistake they made with the first "iPod phone," the Motorola E790 Apple iTunes phone. Further, there are other phones that have features worthy of competing with the iPhone; just the other day somebody was showing me high-speed video of surprising quality (of a stray flying remote hitting someone in the face, incidentally), taken with their phone.

No, its because they botched the launch

[endus]

The truth is we really don't know how Android is going to do, because there are hardly any Android phones on the market. Supposedly there are quite a few coming, but we'll see whether they actually materialize or not.

The real problem with Android, though, was the launch. They released an incomplete OS with no real application support on one phone on one second rate carrier. Then there was nothing. No new phones, no new carriers...nothing. Google should have waited until the OS was done and they could get at least two or three hardware manufacturers on board to release phones. There was plenty of buzz over Android BEFORE it was released, but not after. They rushed it out the door in a package that not too many people were really interested in. Android could be the greatest mobile OS ever but who would know?

I guess since it was google they figured we would all just fall at their feet. Either that or they figured they could roll it out on a shit carrier on one phone in order to work out the bugs. Keep it low profile so that anything that went wrong was just small deployment stuff...shaking the bugs out before the bigtime. Then, later on, start the full court press once it has a reputation good enough to get larger manufacturers for bigger carriers interested...and once they are sure they are delivering a solid product.

To me it seems like they just wasted the Android buzz that they had before the launch though. If this was an OS that was really targeted at "regular" cell phones I would think that their strategy was good...but this is an OS for smart phones which are a premium product with an audience that wants what is hot and what is current. They took the buzz that seems like it is EVERYTHING in selling a product like this and pissed it away on an extremely limited market. IMHO Android's first deployment should be the 10(?) phones that are supposedly on the way now. We should have all been salivating all this time rather than saying "oh yea I have one friend who has one but I haven't really seen it".

Re:Forget citation, how about basic engineering.

[mjwx]

Exactly - sliding things are far more complex. Chips are just silicon, and the whole board in a device goes through a burn-in - it's just simply going to work until something alters it mechanically, since there are no moving parts to fail.

Again how?

Average life expectancy for silicon? average life expectancy for an aluminium or even plastic spring.

I assure you that the spring will last longer. Electronic components are more fragile then physical ones.

Or think of it this way. The iPhone has circuits. The HTC has circuits plus moving parts. By definition it has more complexity - which as you note leads to more failures.

Assuming all other factors are equal, like QA. HTC's are manufactured in Taiwan, Apple in China. HTC has far more in-depth and comprehensive QA.

The accepted failure of the iphone rate is 10%

Despite the headlines, 10% (low estimate) is quite high for a mobile phone.

Doesn't Matter

[coaxial]

Google has the iPhone.

Re: Who is the 2nd rate carrier?

[colinnwn]

I consider AT&T the second rate carrier, that likes to give their customers the shaft at regular intervals. They are also really expensive. But if you live/travel in T*Mobile's not great coverage area, or your company pays your cell bill without question, I understand going with AT&T.

I'll tell you why

[__aavevi421]

I have put down my SE P910i and bought the HTC Magic. No animated gifs No flash Very few movie codecs Stupid proprietary connector Woeful camera Abysmal battery life No bluetooth file receive I hope the new Xperia X3 is more P910 lke and less G2.

Well, The GOOG could be better

[synthespian]

Likewise, other products by The GOOG kinda aren't half of what they could be, such as Google Docs (the other day I was trying to do a Gantt chart on the spreadsheet). Can I sort a column skipping every two cells? Can I do regex search or them? Can I do crazy things? No, The GOOG does not allow crazy such as why, why, oh why there ain't no official Ruby support on The GOOG? etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.

Because it's painfully limited?

[Craig Ringer]

I investigated Android 1.5 when looking at upgrading my phone recently, so I pulled down the SDK and fired up the emulator with an Android 1.5 instance. I was amazed at how limited it is - even more than the iPhone.

SSL/TLS support is painfully, cripplingly limited. You simply *can't* use mail providers that have self-signed certificates or (more likely) have certs signed by a company private CA. Android doesn't support importing CA certificates at all. Android also lacks any support, of any sort, for managing user X.509 certificates (via the common PKCS#12 transport format or otherwise) so if you need to access web or mail services that require you to authenticate with a client certificate, you're out of luck.

Even if your mail provider happens to use a cert signed by one of the pre-installed trusted CAs you'll discover you can't even delete messages or mark them as read using the IMAP client, so you're wasting your time anyway. Guess they want you to give up and use GMail.

The whole thing is built around Google services and things like decent IMAP support are a hopeless afterthought. File manager? Nope, not in any useful sense. Open local HTML documents, PDFs, etc? Not really ( there's a clumsy workaround for the browser that kinda works, but doesn't provide dir indexing so it's pretty useless ). Decent desktop sync? Nope (you're using Google's address book, right? Right?).

Google seems even less interested than Apple does in making it a flexible phone for general use. I'd say part of the reason it's not doing great is because it doesn't do very much, doesn't do it very well, and really has few attractions or distinguishing features over cheaper mid-to-low-end S60-based handsets let alone high-end S60 phones and the iPhone. The SDK and dev tools aren't awful, but can't touch the iPhone, and just don't give you enough platform access, so app development is somewhat more limited. Experienced java devs will spend most of their time swearing at the butchered and cut-down JRE and libraries, and wondering where basic things like platform certificate services are (answer: there aren't any! Too bad!).

Right now, Android seems to be competitive with Nokia's Series 40 and maybe the older Windows Mobile phones, the Sony Ericsson phones, and some of the custom ones like the LG Prada. Pretty but limited, or just limited. It's really just not a smartphone OS yet.

Re:Because it's painfully limited?

[RevoltingX]

I've not used the SSL/TLS functionality in Java/Android yet. But I remember skimming over it and reading clearly that you CAN use self signed certificates with no problem at all.

Remember that it's Java, isn't there a library you can download somewhere that can handle user certificates?
With a bit of google I found: http://jce.iaik.tugraz.at/sic/products/core_crypto_toolkits/jca_jce

I wasn't a Java programmer, so I'm used to doing things, like, oh you know, programming. I don't miss any JRE or libraries. And when I do, I've found that there is a Java library for what I need. If not, I program it.

What non-sense.

Re:Because it's painfully limited?

[Craig Ringer]

I know - how about I market a new "TotalControl" phone brand that ships without any software, so the buyer can build a whole phone OS from scratch to their taste. Because, really, it's just lazy to expect existing functionality.

That'll be successful in the market, right? (Remember the topic / article?)

My point isn't that I can't write my own non-broken mail client with a new implementation of certificate handling - it's that it's absurd that I should have to replace such basic, core functionality of an existing "smart" phone OS.

In the same way, sure, I can install a file manager app. To do so I have to (a) know they're out there, which an average user may not; (b) evaluate the various offerings, (c) select one and (d) install it. It's a basic feature that really should be there from the start if they're going to call this thing a smartphone - even Symbian S60 has a file manager.

As for self-signed certs - it could be that self-signed certs are actually OK and it's just certs signed by a CA not in the pre-installed CA trust list that're a problem. I only tested a cert signed by a private CA. However, I've seen reports indicating self signed certs are an issue as well as the inability to install new CA certs:

• Issue 1077
• issue 1016
• issue 3237

As for doing the work yourself rather than relying on libraries - how much would you enjoy working with C++ without the STL? (OK, bad example, probably a lot - the STL is ghastly). Python without most of the shipping modules? Perl without CPAN? How would you like using a Linux desktop where 2/3 of the apps and libraries didn't exist and you had to hunt down alternative implementations of questionable quality and write what you needed yourself?

Sure, you can do all that. So can I. Do you want to? I don't know about you, but I want to get on with writing useful things, not basic OS and app functionality I want to just use so I can get on with the real work. I especially don't want to find out while trying to use a library to do my real, interesting work that it's been butchered and crippled.

I can't speak for the US...

[drb_chimaera]

But here in the UK Android seems to be picking up momentum - theres finally some choice in handsets available (a few from HTC and a few others inbound from the likes of Sony and Samsung). While the initial G1 OS was a bit clunky the cupcake (1.5) update improved things a lot.

Speaking anecdotally, half a dozen of my friends have recently upgraded their phones (as in the past month). Five of them picked Android (3 Magic's and two Hero's) while the other went for a Nokia. Of course I also know more than a few iPhone fans as well.

Speaking personally, this Nokia user will be looking at Android very closely when its time to upgrade at the start of next year.

Shiny!

[Kerr]

Unshiny android?

Htc have launched an android phone with their new Sense UI
If you've ever used a Htc phone before, you'll recognize it as being very similar to their awesome TouchFlo 3D interface for windows mobile.
The G1 is too underpowered to be serious competition for the Iphone, but things are getting better.

NVIDIA will be the force that Android need

[Khenke]

After reading most in this thread it is strange that no one mention the new NVIDIA Tegra that is on the way.

I am developing (just started) apps for Android but are waiting to buy a phone until I can get one with Tegra.

Ok, Tegra is not a Android only cpu (actually more than just a cpu too) but it is JUST what the Android need. Not an obscure manufacture but one of the biggest and most know and respected.
NVIDIA is great at reference designs and that will make it fast and easy (read cheap) to make an Android phone for any hardware manufacture. Samsung is saying that next year we will see sub $100 Android phones, and that can iPhone never compete with.
iPhone is a great phone (that you can play a little with) but a Tegra phone with Android will replace 10+ gadgets for me (GPS, Garmin Forerunner, MP3/MP4 player, media computer (720p and 1080p), web surfing computer (on my 37" TV), VOIP and yes a normal mobile phone too) and with sub $100 phones everyone will be able to own a Android phone, not just us geeks.

Android will never compete with iPhone, like that a computer never compete with a fancy gold plated calculator.

Android Developer Shortage

[keean]

I have been developing for Android non-stop for most of this year. I found the SDK very easy to use (having done J2ME and Blackberry before). The API is stable, and not buggy. I found all the documentation and examples I needed on one website http://developer.android.com/index.html and found the UI classes very flexible. I was able to clone the look and feel of an iPhone app quite easily just by using the xml styling, a couple of animations and one custom layout component. The API is the best I have used, and in my opinion much better than objective-c (we develop for iPhone too), which is a bit of a cludge on top of C. Expect Android to start turning up on a lot of embedded devices, not just phones (HP photo-copiers for example, cameras). In the B2B market (selling bespoke apps to companies, handset manufacturers and network operators) there is a lot of buzz around Android. We develop for both iPhone and Android, and see more potential for Android at the moment (as we mainly are B2B, and are not too interested in writing apps that may or may not make money in the Shop/Market). We are also looking for more experienced Android developers at the moment.

Missing the point

[randomsearch]

I thought that Google's strategy was not to build a monopoly like Apple, but instead to build a diverse ecosystem that creates competition between manufacturers, resulting in long term value for customers, a robust platform, and influence for Google in directing that platform.

Therefore, comparing a couple of Android phones that are clearly initial products closer to "proof of concept" than mass market devices, doesn't seem meaningful. The only conclusion I'd draw from Android's 3% is that they're actually managing to take market share without a mature product on the market.

Whilst Apple is doing pretty well with the iPhone (I own one), I don't think Google set out to make a fast buck on this. Give it a few years, then we'll be able to see how Android is doing. I hope that when my iPhone contract expires, I'll be able to buy an Android phone next time around.

3%!!

[Aladrin]

Okay, there was only one phone with the Android OS until very recently. It's going up against the iPhone which has been out 3 or 4 years, the Blackberry which has been out 5-10 years, and many other 'smart phones' that are established with Windows Mobile.

3% is huge. Any random phone would love to have 3% in a market that included Apple and Blackberry as the main players.

Because...

[Spy Handler]

there's no app for that

Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[salesgeek]

There are 16 Android powered handsets that remain to be launched in the next 60 days. This includes models from Motorola, LG, and Samsung. The author of the article simply had no freaking clue what he was talking about, and as a result, he's missed:

* the G1 has 3% market share. Ummmmm..... that's a lot of handsets.
* The primary limit isn't the "crappy hardware" - it's the crappy network (yes, T-Mobile, your network is crappy until Indianapolis has 3G). Actually it's very good hardware, and the only rub against it is onboard storage and battery life. $25 8GB micro SDs fix the storage issue nicely and you can actually *replace* the battery, a novel idea in 1932 that Apple should have noticed by now. Oh, the primary limit might be the #3 network in the US being the only channel to get an Android in the US?
*Oh, there's also the little fact that THE CUSTOMER FOR HANDSETS IS NOT THE USER OF THE HANDSET IN THE US. The customer is THE CARRIER WHO RESELLS THE HANDSET. Openness is *not* in their financial interest, so class 3 Android (open w/Google Apps) is not in their interest. Fortunately, they see T Mobile retaining customers with the G1, and want some of that.

Here's reality:

* Android to date has been a success.
* The application base is built for future success.
* 16 new devices are going to hit the market by the end of the year from some of the biggest names in mobile.
* Android will be available on most carriers. The only question mark seems to be ATT, but they are rumored to have a Motorola handset out soon.
* Android is going to turn the smartphone into the PC market of early 90s when Wintel at Apple's lunch. There are few people (and zero would be correct) that can argue that a PC clone was better than a Mac at the time, but Windows did allow hardware manufacturers to lower costs to offset Apple's considerable advantage in technology. Oh, and Android is *a lot* more formidable competitor than Windows 3.x was.

Re:Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[farble1670]

$25 8GB micro SDs fix the storage issue nicely and you can actually *replace* the battery

the memory problem is about a lack of space to store apps and their data. apps are stored in internal memory, not the SD card and you can't increase internal memory. a bigger SD card only gets you more space to store music, pictures, etc. that is unless you run one of the "apps to SD" hacks, which will allow ample apps storage space but cripples the speed of the phone.

and yes you can replace the battery but it's common knowledge that the only thing that will help with battery life is one of the 2400mAh batteries that adds 5mm to the thickness of an already thick phone and requires a new battery cover. also, it retails for $70. the battery life on the G1 isn't just bad, it's ridiculously unacceptable.

Re:Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[garote]

You're telling me that the Android OS is going to "eat Apple's lunch" by competing on lower hardware cost? Someone appears to have stirred your brains up with a spoon!!

Re:Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[aschran]

He probably expected that you would be smart enough to extrapolate as follows:
Cost of handset = cost of hardware + cost of bundled software
Cost of iPhone = expensive + expensive
Cost of Android phone = expensive + free

Therefore, cost of Android handset< cost of iPhone.

Re:Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[garote]

That's a fair extrapolation except it doesn't actually result in Apple's lunch being eaten, because Apple doesn't compete on cost alone, or even primarily.

If another handset manufacturer wants to shoehorn Android into their hardware, their design will be confined by the software, they will still spend money customizing the software, and they will still spend money debugging and supporting the software.

In the PC universe, Apple doesn't compete with Microsoft, it competes with PC manufacturers. PC manufacturers have traditionally been hamstrung by their dependence on Windows, or in general, on OS software they didn't write and don't employ the talent to develop.

If handset manufacturers strike the same deal, what makes you think the outcome will suddenly reverse? Especially since, just as Apple had in the PC market, it now has a whopping head-start in terms of integration and developer support, and has acquired all the hardware and software talent it needs to custom-design everything from the CPU on up?

Re:Article Searching for Problem where None Exists

[salesgeek]

I seem to recall Apple running really cute commercials with some guy acting like he's a Mac and a schmuck acting like he's a PC.

Seems Apple *does indeed* compete with Microsoft. PCs generally don't run without and operating system.

Re:We've been here before....

[agnosticnixie]

Android is Windows/PC

That would be Symbian...

It was never Google's or HTC's plan...

[cbraescu1]

It was never Google's or HTC's plan to take the market by storm, they intended to bleed Android in slowly rather then try to shove it at everyone at once a la Apple.

So basically it's not a bug, it's a feature, right?

I have an HTC Magic (MyTouch)

[LanMan04]

I really, really like my HTC Magic through T-Mobile. Have VoIP, tethering, google voice, etc installed. Works great, nice interface, beautiful screen, etc. No complaints whatsoever.

Re:Apple Does It

[Dog-Cow]

I don't usually comment on moderation, but how the heck is the parent to my post a troll?

The factual portion is 100% correct and the opinion is neutral. Is it really a troll to not care to collect sales tax?

I don't think it was botched

[Synn]

I really don't see Android as a platform for the user, I see it as a platform for phone makers. As a user, I don't care what OS my phone uses. I ran an iPhone for a couple years, I use a G1 now, I prefer the G1 but recommend iPhone for most people I know.

It's just a damn phone, they both work real well, the differences for the end user are pretty small.

But if you're a phone manufacturer... well, you obviously can't make an iPhone. But, there's this free, well designed, already-has-a-market(the start of one anyway), already has a SDK, already has a market place full of apps smart phone operating system you can build your phone on. That's the people I think Google was going for.

The first version of Android was pretty much limited to G1 type hardware. It didn't have an on screen keyboard, you needed a flip out one, so that really limited the type of device it could be on. I also think the screen resolution was locked in too. 1.5 changed all that and we're just now starting to see new phones come out based on that release. I really see the launch on the G1 as more of a public beta test. It rolled out the market place, worked out some kinks, proved that Android is a stable working phone OS. Any manufacturer today can build on Android knowing that it'll just work, it's not a risk to use it.

And for the end user... well who cares if most people are using iPhones? It's a great phone. But there needs to be "another" phone and I think Android is pretty well setup to be the platform most of those other phones use. It's a pretty win-win scenario for end users.

Easy anwser...

[DarthVain]

I can't buy one you insensitive clod, I live in Canada!

Yet another reason to re-examine how our telecommunication companies up here operate. They are actively degrading the telecommunications and technological advancemnt of Canada. This is plainly not in our best interests, and quite possibly a national security risk. In short, they suck.

Re:Easy anwser...

[SuiteSisterMary]

Ummm, what? Rogers carries a few HTC-made Andoid phones, as well as iPhone, Blackberry, N95, WinMo, and what not.

Bell is about to start selling the Pre.

Re:Easy anwser...

[DarthVain]

OK to respond.

Rogers carries 3 HTC Android phones.

A) They only came out in like the last month.
B) The "Three" are 1) With Keyboard Black. 2) Without Keyboard, and 3) With Keyboard White. All other features are the same.

If you want an iPhone you MUST sign with Rogers.

Winmo is on Pre, and Pre isn't available yet.

The N95 and various blackbarries are available. I could care less about the N95, which leaves the blackbarry as Canada's choice... seeing it is made by RIM a Canadian company that's sort of a nice thing.

Anyway I still think they suck. The US is also bad, but not as bad as Canada. Look around the world, we are being left in the dust, and I am not simply talking about silly cell phone selection. However for the average consumer, that and the cost is what is most apparent.

Similar to Palm's fate?

[GrantRobertson]

This may be similar to what happened to Palm. There were so many supposedly Palm compatible devices - all of them slightly different - that it became difficult for developers to keep up.

Of course the biggest reason that developers aren't flocking to Android is that consumers aren't flocking to Android phones. Development isn't a religion. People do it to earn a living, especially all those developers who jumped on the iPhone bandwagon. The people who bought iPhones were obviously people who had money to spend and wanted everyone to know it. It stands to reason that that consumer mentality would translate to their software purchases as well. Because Android came out quite some time after iPhone, now the only developers left are the "religious" developers, those who choose a platform base on principles instead of money alone.

Google Voice

[fulldecent]

Google Voice is the game changer. And if they implement VOIP to originate and terminate calls without POTS, this will be the real iphone. (I'm talking about the Linksys iphone, no the iPhone.) This would completely dominate the current voice/sms offerings available today. Apple (ATT) would never allow this.

You buy the phone and a data contract, all calls go through Google VOIP. Oh, and international calls are 2c/min. SMS is free.

The phone number and service is the worst part of your phone.

I considered an Android but it was painful

[pyite69]

I did a little bit of research, but it didn't seem like a good open source platform to play with. I couldn't find a site with publicly downloadable dev tools and there were app-store-like restrictions. If it isn't any better than my Motorola Ming (cool phone in its day but a huge disappointment) then why bother?

As a hard core open source advocate, I don't see any reason to use Android - I am going to wait for the Nokia N900 to compare.

Re:I considered an Android but it was painful

[farble1670]

I did a little bit of research, but it didn't seem like a good open source platform to play with. I couldn't find a site with publicly downloadable dev tools

http://developer.android.com

Re:I considered an Android but it was painful

[gsgleason]

I did a little bit of research, but it didn't seem like a good open source platform to play with. I couldn't find a site with publicly downloadable dev tools

http://developer.android.com

Seriously. Couldn't find the tools? How hard did you really look?

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[Dog-Cow]

If you worry about memory management in Objective C, you don't understand the framework. I suppose you can write your own allocators, but if you use NSObject, like, you know, all Objective C app developers, you get memory management for free.

On the flip side, if you don't worry about memory management in Java, you don't understand programming at all.

John Gruber's piece is spot on except for battery

[dara]

I really enjoyed and agreed with almost the entire piece by John Gruber linked to in the summary (http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/the_android_opportunity). My problem with the G1 was my impression of the hardware, I actually returned it and got an iPhone 3G. I coworker kept his G1 and is now complaining that he can't load as many apps as he wants due to the restriction of where apps can be loaded (not on the SD card). Android itself seemed OK, definitely not polished enough for my tastes, and I know Google can do better - I'm mostly satisfied with search, email, Picasa, Google Earth, etc.

However, the comment that the high end Android phone to knock the iPhone 3Gs off the throne should have a built in battery is crazy. If the only reason is to prevent a creaky case, I'm sure there is a solution that uses screws that would at least allow users to replace batteries without having to go somewhere or send their phone in the mail. Better yet is to allow a battery on the back that goes on with a single recessed thumbscrew or bayonet that can be made snug (e.g. my Garmin eTrex has no creaking) AND allow for multiple 3rd party options for battery packs that run the gamut from thin low life to very thick, very long life.

My other thoughts on what I want in a high end phone are:

- a very high resolution large screen: 3.5" 480x320 isn't doing it for me. I want at a minimum 4.5" 854x480 and even better would be to go all the way to a 720p HD screen for watching video (1280x720, 60 Hz refresh or better, enough bits for a good color gamut). If a phone can be made with very thin borders on either side of the width of the screen (say 3 mm) and only moderate borders on the length (say 8.5 mm), then a 5" display can fit in a phone that is 128x68mm which is smaller than a Nokia 810 (with only a 4.1" screen). If bigger borders are needed, scale the diagonal down a bit to still fit in the 128x68 mm form factor (just a bit narrower than a 3"x5" card).

- some powerful ports: with such a nice display, I'd like a tethered camera with a lens that is much nicer than anything I can fit into a phone and then plug it in to take a picture. This way I can a) hold the lens part high in the air to shoot over people's heads or low to the ground to shoot kids from a better vantage point while still standing comfortably as well as face the display any direction I want even with a jacket over my head if the sun is too much for the display.

- add a radio section (software radio if possible) that is optimized for medium distance (a mile or a bit more) data communications on unlicensed bands between two devices without using any cell phone towers. I'm often out of service when in the backcountry and sometimes need to coordinate with a partner (sometimes the partner is only 50 meters away on a climbing rope and I can't yell to them or get rope tugs to work very well)

Dara

Re:I tried to get an Android phone, really I did..

[mrjohnson]

Rumor was they were supposed to get something called the Lancaster in August. Last I had heard, ATT rejected it (something about the phone not having a "standard" ATT experience). The Lancaster wasn't exciting anyhow though, I didn't wait for it either.

You are UNDERthinking it

[NDPTAL85]

Apple stuff is for people who want products designed for regular people. Other tech companies design products for people who are geeks. Many of the benefits listed of the Android platform are things the general public doesn't even care about to begin with. What the larger market wants is an easy to use powerful device. With Android you just get the powerful part.

No wonder Apple's mopping the floor with them.

Re:You are UNDERthinking it

[thatkid_2002]

That does not change the fact that if the "cool kids" had Android based phones the rest would follow suit even if they are easy to use and powerful or if you had to use assembly code to make a call.

Re:You are UNDERthinking it

[NDPTAL85]

Actually yes it does as there are limits to everything, including lemming like behavior.

iPhone is Ford in 1903, not BMW

[digibruce]

Farhad makes a lot of good points, but he underestimates the transformative nature of the iPhone. I agree that Google should build its own phone, but it's not about making yet another bespoke handset, it's about building another mobile computing transformation that Apple, with its walled garden approach, cannot even contemplate. It's not nearly enough to be a bit better than the iPhone - any serious competitor will need to take the next gigantic leap forward, and do it before Apple does.

Mod Down - Re:Well in Canada...

[nude_noot]

Informative? You obviously haven't looked if you haven't seen one.
As many others have said, Rogers not only sells them for a lot less than an iPhone (on term contracts), they don't tie you to specific plans like they do iPhone. They have been marketing the Android phones a lot.

MTV

[dbcad7]

Money for nothin and your chicks for free.. No, actually Google Checkout deals with collecting sales tax, when and if required.. Phone apps aside, they wouldn't be much of a payment service if they didn't have this ability.

Metal Detector

[Boawk]

Can your i-phone be used as a metal-detector?
If I had a nickle every time someone's asked me that...

Samsung Galaxy i7500

[tholomyes]

Yeah, HTC phones do suck. The Samsung Galaxy is the one I'm waiting for, personally. It looks like it has none of the shortcomings of the HTC phone, and I've never had a Samsung phone that I didn't like (okay, maybe individual gripes, but they makes solid gear). Hopefully they'll be out in the US sometime soon.

Re:All It Takes is ONE KILLER APP

[curmudgeon99]

I'm not fluent in Objective C yet--that was one of my points. While I won't claim to be a Java guru, I do feel that I understand every corner of the language. And the kind of project I'm describing does not need any special language hocus pocus. Did Google require any special technological wizardry? Not at first, they just grew into what they are. Facebook is just another web app. Killer Apps don't often rely on cutting edge technology--they rely on cutting edge creativity.

Toche'

[xzvf]

I didn't focus my comment clearly. I wanted to target the lack of change in consumer products and telephone service. The innovations of Bell labs were turned into products when they got into the hands of others. Unix and C didn't thrive until they made a mistake and let it loose in the academic space. Up into the 70's most of the phone infrastructure was more mechanical than electronic. Not to belittle their contribution, but nothing deployed from Bell labs that would disrupt their phone monopoly, at best only changes that reduced their cost of delivering the same service would see the light of day. To expand the subject, Microsoft won't deploy any product that will compromise Windows or Office unless forced by competition. They only embraced the internet when Netscape became a threat and when Netscape was beaten, IE6 was never upgraded. Xerox had great research, but their only desire was protecting the copier monopoly.

How about good local search huh?

[scottmace2002]

If I buy a Google phone, it had damn well better perform easy/quick search on the phone's own data, or the data stored in the local calendar, etc.

Lack of Software

[Jewbird]

I've got a great idea. Why doesn't Google harness the power of all those PhDs they hired to actually write software? Unless that would cut too much into their quality time of sitting around the cafeteria telling each other how smart they are.

Hardware

[cjb110]

The original problem with Android was the HTC hardware. It was severly lacking esp when compared to the iPhone, Pre and Symbian S60 devices. Slow processors with not enough memory, same as their Windows Mobile phones.

Take the Hero, good build quality, fancy and polished GUI, but not enough memory to use those 7 'desktops' with the widgets that they advertise!

I think Android really needs a Arm Cortex 8 based phone with a decent amount of RAM.