50+ Android Phones Expected In Near Future

wiseandroid writes "It's not even a year ago that the HTC Dream G1 became the first Android enabled phone to be released publicly (on October 22nd, 2008) and now we have listed more than 50 Android phones expected in the near future." Of the 51 phones on this list, 12 (from nine manufacturers) are currently available.

Comments

Any have a decent Camera?

[thefirelane]

Seriously. Why do Android phones seem to ignore the camera? I'd really like to see one with a very good camera, something like an Android version of the N86

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[WhiteSpade]

The newly released (in the US) HTC Hero has a 5 megapixel camera (http://www.htc.com/www/product/hero/specification.html). I just got the Hero and it takes surprisingly good pictures in low light too. The screen lags quite a bit behind what the camera is seeing, but I'm told that Android 1.6 is supposed to fix that (whenever HTC gets around to releasing the update). ---Alex

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[ircmaxell]

I'm running the official version of 1.6 (HTC Dream Developer's edition phone), and I must say WOW. SOOO much smoother and more responsive. The new camera interface is eih, but the display is much better with it (A lot faster and smoother)...

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[japhering]

As someone who frequently has to be in secured areas.. I hope at least some of the models never, ever have a camera, as is it a pain to either have to lock my phone in the car or to hand it over to some $10 an hour security guard prior to entry or have it confiscated by the same guard on the way out if I forget to hand it to him on the way in.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[SSCGWLB]

The Motorola Droid (not out yet I think) is supposed to have a 5 megapixel camera, auto focus and flash. I have not heard much about the picture quality. On the up side: the camera GUI, auto focus, and responsiveness have significantly improved on my G1 with every update. In good light on a mostly still subject the G1 takes acceptable pictures.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[cerberusss]

That's pretty interesting, because I find the current integrated cameras sorely lacking even for simple pics. I have a 3G iPhone and recently, I snapped a couple of pictures of my girlfriend's Master's thesis defense. I let them print on standard 10x13 cm (4x5.1in) paper by a photo printing service and boy -- what a disappointment. They looked blocky with lots of artefacts. Anyone who defends the iPhone camera should really send a couple of his pics to a photo printing service and be appalled by the result.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[KlaymenDK]

The camera in my Galaxy is actually surprisingly good. However (and unsurprisingly), it doesn't have red-eye reduction and such photography modes.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[YouWantFriesWithThat]

i agree. honestly, and this isn't a troll, i think that the iPhone 3G camera is pretty horrible. didn't the 3GS introduce autofocus to the iPhone? maybe that one will be better because of that. i have an older LG that has autofocus and the shots (when set to max resolution of 1600x1200) are pretty good for a lens the size of a pinhead. they look good printed about 4x6 and okay on a screen up to about 1024x768. a smartphone should have results at least that good, since my phone was $80 when new and about $40 now.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone claimed that this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nwENZ388XY&feature=player_embedded was taken with the Droid. Not sure if that's true or not though. Excellent video quality for a phone.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find the current integrated cameras sorely lacking even for simple pics.

Don't overgeneralise: the 3G camera is pure crap but there are camera phones that are quite usable (many new Nokias are excellent, even the iphone 3GS is pretty good).

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[dingen]

There is no such thing as a decent camera on a phone. Seriously, I'm not trolling. It doesn't matter if it offers more megapixels, auto white balance or a Zeiss lens. Compared to any decent camera out there, pictures from a phone will always look like crap. I rather have fewer megapixels, so at least the crap consumes less disk space.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[LordVader717]

Photographing documents is always terrible with phones because they have no variable focus. So they use a pinhole camera for infinite focus, but it fails at less than about 3 meters.
I always thought that a camera specifically for scanning documents would be great on a phone. They could have two cameras, one with infinite focus and one for photographing documents up-close.
You could attach an apropriate lens in front and get the same result I guess.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

did you transfer them through the computer to the photo lab, or email. emailing photos from any iPhone sends only the screen resolution pix (unless you have a jailbroken phone and use sendPix) and will look like crap. I have actually gotten a few decent outdoor bright light pix from my 1st gen iphone.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[beelsebob]

You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.

For reference though, an 8MB camera in a phone is likely to be *worse* than a 5MP one, which in turn will be worse than a 3MP one (which is about the optimum).

More pixels in such a small area == less light falling on the pixels == higher sensitivity pixels == worse signal to noise ratio.

The result of that is that phones with high resolution cameras have to apply a noise reduction filter, which is essentially just a blur, and none of these cameras can manage a sharp focus.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[MBCook]

The 3G is fixed focus, and not great for stuff close to the lens. The 3GS is variable focus, and the reviews I saw (I'm a 3G owner), it's camera is head and shoulders better than the 3G.

The 3G camera is OK. With lots of light, it takes some pretty good pictures, especially color wise. But with lower light levels (such as room lighting, often) or things closer than 2 feet or so... it's just a cell phone camera.

The 3G takes better pictures that most camera phones, about the same as or slightly better than many smart phones (from last year or so). But it's still a cell phone with a camera. It won't compete with a $150 point and shoot.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[mcgrew]

Just hold the lens from a pair of reading glasses in front of it. Geezer eyes don't focus either.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Chris.Nelson]

It'd be nice if the camera optics were in a removable little bit that you could leave in your car or with the guard. I imagine something about the size of a 2x2 Lego brick that snaps in and out easily.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Andy Dodd]

My site eventually changed policy to allow employees to carry cameraphones if they took appropriate training, which was basically, "Don't use the camera on site."

There are areas we can't even bring cameraphones, but we're not even allowed to bring non-camera phones into those areas.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Sobrique]

Agreed. I've worked on 'secure' sites, and getting hold of a decent smartphone, which also did not have a camera was a complete nightmare. I do kind of like having a camera, but it's hardly a 'killer feature' in my book. But ... I'd really rather be able to keep my phone when on such a site.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hellasboy]

Sony Ericsson's upcoming X3 is running Android and has an 8 megapixel camera. And it being SE, I'm sure the camera will be quite good (maybe not as good as the N86 - f 2.4 is really nice for a 'phone'). biggest issue so far is when is video recording going to improve on Android? (I think it's 320x240)

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Sexy Commando]

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22883

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I'm concerned the more choice of phones I the better as far as I'm concerned.

The number of businesses(inc schools) that won't allow visitors to bring camera phones on site is increasing. You know the mantra 'Think of the Children', Men with cameras are atuomatically 'paedos' etc etc.

I frankly don't see the all conquering need to have a crappy camera on my phone. I carry a decent P&S in my car at all times.

I'm getting by using a Nokia circa 2003 at the moment but it is on its last legs so a decent choice of phones would be great when it finally gives up the ghost.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[theJML]

There is a case for the 3G that has a sliding lens for just this thing. and it work's GREAT (I've got it on my 3G). It was about the same price as all the other hard cases and it protects the camera's lens when you've got it slid over it.

You can hold the camera about 3" from what you're looking at and it'll take a crisp pic with readable text.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[macshit]

A thesis "defense" is an event where one defends one's thesis, not the document itself.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Zebedeu]

Some phones feature cameras with auto-focus.

My Android-based Samsung Galaxy is one of them.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

A phone with an opensource OS is really somenthing, add a good camera with opensource firmware... sweet

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[DJRumpy]

A damn sight better than yours. Now get off my lawn!

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Zerth]

I've got a blackberry with focus that actually does better at macro shots then a point&shoot(not saying much there).

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[poetmatt]

do you really expect any cellphone to have a very good camera? N86 even has a shitty camera. This was the first google result for N86 camera.

N86 is not a good camera, it just adds some megapixels. More megapixels doesn't mean a better camera, it just means a bigger picture. Most android phones are 3-7 megapixels.

Better software, better telephoto capability, these things will add some better quality. Meanwhile, the flash will still be limited, and the fact that you can't have a telescopic zoom like a normal camera (barring a couple phones), means that basically, your phone's pictures are not likely to compare to even an inexpensive camera's photos.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Sparr0]

I am with you, but there is a minimum bar. I like being able to take photos with my phone that are at least high enough resolution for the following tasks:

A) contact pictures in the phone
B) crime documentation

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hatta]

Sounds like security theater to me. Cameras are small. Unless they're doing strip searches, it would be relatively easy for an attacker to smuggle a camera in.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[yincrash]

g1 has autofocus and takes pictures of documents reasonably well. here's one i just took.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Jared555]

Is it a case where permanently damaging the camera would be good enough?

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Jared555]

Actually read once where a cell phone store (I think it was one of the specialized att or verizon stores) employee persistantly tried convincing him that their awesome cameraphones would be just as good or better than his digital camera..... He had thousands of dollars worth the SLR equipment and they still wouldn't keep using the MP to MP comparison.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're barking up the wrong tree if you want a "very good camera" in a mobile phone, it just can't be done, the optics aren't good enough.

Oh yeah?

Granted, it's more like a camera with a phone built in, but still.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

The best camera is the one you have with you.

There are many, many photographs out there that don't rely on specialized optics or super-nice sensor specs for their artistic value. Often, the value in a photograph is just managing to capture a moment in a way that communicates the meaning of the experience. There's nothing about this that precludes using a cell-phone camera to take the picture.

Look at it this way: our expectations for good photographs haven't changed much in the past 20 years. Sure, new things have become possible that we hadn't seen back then, but ultimately the human eye sees the same as it always has, and Ansel Adams or Cartier-Bresson are still legends for the work they did even though they didn't have a tenth of the technical sophistication we now enjoy. So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude. At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Belial6]

The back of my myTouch is replacable. If someone would just sell a back plate without the camera window, the problem should be solved.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Antique Geekmeister]

It also means more likelihood of _detecting_ the photons with which to record and generate your data. The trade-off is not so obvious as you portray it, or actual film cameras with coarse grained film would produce superior pictures.

One underlying issue is the stability of the camera: without a large body, and without the intensity of a flash, the pixels need a longer temporal sample to record a reliable signal, one that won't be "smoothed out" by such averaging algorithms. Unfortunately, cameras tremble, with the trembling of ordinary muscles, with your pulse, with the swaying of our body that you do to stay upright. a finer resolution can make the wiggling more apparent. This is why tripods can be so helpful, and heavier cameras easier to keep focused than light ones.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[japhering]

Sounds like security theater to me. Cameras are small. Unless they're doing strip searches, it would be relatively easy for an attacker to smuggle a camera in.

Not when you are having to go through metal detectors and electronics detectors to get into the space.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[japhering]

Typically not, as the persons doing the security check aren't sufficiently technical to determine that the camera is non-functional.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Zelucifer]

Any chance you'd upload a photo or two? I'd love a new phone that doesn't cost 500 dollars, and can take decent pictures.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[japhering]

The back of my myTouch is replacable. If someone would just sell a back plate without the camera window, the problem should be solved.

Probably not, as you pointed out the back is removable. Thus, there is nothing stopping you from walking in and removing the back, taking a picture or series of pictures and then putting the cover back on.

And yes, I've been through sites where the guard actually had internet access and would look up your specific model of phone before allowing passage.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[MemoryDragon]

Actually the Hero has a lousy objective so the pictures even with 5mpix could be better.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Zelucifer]

I agree. Its the incredibly small sensor inside the phone that causes it. I really wish some manufacturer's would realize, not everyone wants a phone the size of there pinky. If I had a smart phone, maybe 50% bigger then a blackberry, it'd still fit very comfortably in every pair of pants I own, and it could have a bigger battery and a better sensor.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[aztracker1]

That would be pretty cool... though to be honest, I almost never use the camera on my phone.. my hand isn't nearly steady enough...

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Optic7]

The photographer counts for a lot too, and sometimes a mobile phone camera is the only thing you have handy. Check out photo 7 of 8 in this list: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/8314105.stm

It's the winner of the landscape photo of the year (UK only?) in the Mobile category.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[aztracker1]

B is probably the best reason for a camera in every phone... I had my car dented in a parking lot, and the officer took the evidence pics with his phone of all things.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[hkmwbz]

A 4 megapixel camera, and no camera light or flash. That's rather pathetic. Other than that, yes, I'm drooling over it.

By the way, that list of "50 phones to be released in the near future" has 13 phones that are already available, so why on earth are they claiming that 37 == 50?

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

keep a cheap non-smart-phone in the car for these situations...

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[FunkyELF]

Yeah... then you could upgrade your camera too!

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[cawpin]

That's one of the things that excites me the most about the Droid. I have a Samsung Omnia running WM6.1 and the 5 MP camera is pretty decent. It's one of the things I was worried about losing whenever Verizon finally got Android. With the MotoDroid, I no longer have to worry about that.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh..the un-indoctrinated.
Security rules are rules. Created in large part for the security of the jobs of those who create/enforce the rules, as near as I can tell.
But just the same, learn the rules, follow the rules, don't think. You'll be fine.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[AmiMoJo]

There are plenty of samples from the 5MP camera in the Motorola DEXT (CLIQ in the US) on the web:

http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=5&Id=8032

It's slightly above average for a phone camera, about on par with the iPhone 3GS. Lack of variable focus and what seems like a lot of over-compression always makes phone cameras produce far lower quality shots than even a basic point-and-shoot model. It's a real shame as I would happily accept a thicker phone is the camera was even half as good as an already pretty thin proper digital camera.

My plan is to use it to take a few snapshots of places I have been tagged with GPS coordinates and then use my main 7MP Cannon for proper photos. Maybe one day I'll upgrade to a camera with GPS.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Alef]

Putting it in other words: The resolution bottleneck is not the pixel size, but the optics. The extra pixels are probably meaningless (unless maybe in a bright scene) since the actual resolution in the image content is lower, and this is reflected by the fact that you remove high frequencies (noise) immediately after capturing the image, effectively reducing the number of pixels.

Another interesting fact is that the pixels size is approaching the wavelength of the light it is trying to absorb. Putting 3000 pixels across 6 mm means you get 2 microns of space for each pixel, which is less than three times the wavelength of red light (~700 nm). However, in reality you will never have 100% fill factor so the actual pixels will have to be something like 1,4 microns. Already we are down to only twice the wavelength, and this would be for a 5 MP camera.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't it the transmitter that they don't allow, not the camera?

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[msgyrd]

I'm pretty sure a government or corporation intent on espionage can provide you with a non-electronic, non-metallic camera. May not be a digital camera, but it would work. Or a step further....just conceal it in "approved" electronics. Unless they're doing complete teardowns of everything you bring in, you can hide a pinhole camera just about anywhere. Almost all security is security theater. It's there to make fearful people feel better, prevent good people from doing normal things, and does nothing to stop a sufficiently driven enemy from doing anything.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Stuntmonkey]

C) taking legible pictures of whiteboard notes/drawings after meetings, so I don't have to sit there and transcribe everything to my computer

(my #1 use case)

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hurricane78]

Depends on your definition of "decent". If you compare e.g. modern Nokia or Sony-Ericsson (K series) camera phones to cheap digital cameras, they are practically equal. Which is to be expected, since they use the same parts. But if you define decent as DSLR, as I do, of course all those mentioned are not decent. :)

Point is: For most people, the normal camera in the phone suffices. They can't see the difference anyway. Or it does not matter enough.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hurricane78]

There is no reason, optics in a camera can't be good. There is just one lens in it anyway. Put the best one in that you can get, and you have good optics.

It's the tiny chips the put in there. Which makes sense, because it's only a phone. There simply is no space.

There is a great site out there, showing and proving, that 4.6 MP are the optimum for such (non-DSLR) devices. Unfortunately I can't remember the URL or find it on Google.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[cheshiremoe]

It seems like there are some decent camera phones on some symbian phones from nokia, samsung and sony ericson. like this one: http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/satio?lc=en&cc=gb android does seem to lack some megapixels. I think that most of the people here are right that the lack of optical zoom makes for shity pictures in most instances accept portrait photos, but for a phone that's all you need to snap a quick picture and post it on flicker or facebook for family and friends. Nobody is printing them out at poster size. Even my 2MP photos from my 3 year old sony ericson phone are only seen at a quarter of the original size most of the time.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Sparr0]

Meh... In that situation, I usually have a better camera (even if just the one in my laptop) with me already.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[wiredlogic]

Been done.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[mcgrew]

I think not; I had a focusable lens implanted in my eye when I was 55, young man.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[tibman]

It would be worse if cameras were allowed in a secure area with the understanding that you can't take pictures. It is better to try preventing all cameras from entering the area. If someone smuggles in some sort of spy camera and get caught, it is immediately apparent to everyone that it wasn't an accident. Or even a regular camera would reveal the spy's intentions.. just look at what was photographed.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[DJRumpy]

lol..ok, you've got me on the age side. I had HD Lasik. Couldn't afford the intraocular lens ;)

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[MBGMorden]

It has to be a bit less than 3 meters. My cell camera (on a Motorla Krave) isn't too good (2MP), and having just confirmed, it'll take a completely legible picture of text down to about 2 inches from the document, and pulling back far enough that the full page is in view a letter sized piece of paper with size 12 Arial is still completely legible.

Archival quality? No, the lighting is a bit uneven (phone has no flash), but it's certainly good enough to read and I'd wager still clear enough to run OCR across.

Reason the statement even perked my interest is that I've used my phones quite a few times to snap a picture of a sheet of paper if I wanted some piece of information off of it "just in case".

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you thought of taking pictures outside of the bathroom?

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[leighklotz]

Photographing documents is always terrible with phones because they have no variable focus. So they use a pinhole camera for infinite focus, but it fails at less than about 3 meters.

This is not the case with all devices. The HTC Dream/Android G1 has an autofocus lens. You can hear it focus. It beeps and uses a red/green framing indicator to show whether focus worked. It seems to focus down to about 3".

Here's a sample of as close as I could focus on an LCD screen:
Reduced from full resolution: http://twitgoo.com/4ffwh
the 1.5MB file: http://graflex.org/klotz/2009/10/g1cam/cam.jpg

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Random5]

You could just (very delicately) drill the lens out and fill it in with epoxy, they might accept that if you cleared the idea with them first. God help you if you try to take it back on warranty though!

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[mcgrew]

I had to have it, they prescribed steroid eyedrops for an infection, and the eyedrops gave me a cataract. When you get a few years older, you're going to need readiong glasses, because the lens gets hard and won't focus, just like your cameraphone. The reading glasses focus to a close distance, and it would work on a cameraphone.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[japhering]

Agreed. The more security paranoid the institution is the longer it takes to get in and out. Thus, the longer one's day becomes.

When I started working in secured areas, it was 30 seconds to get in and out.. now some places I go it is 30-45 minutes each way. Utterly, ridiculous and a complete waste of my time, but unfortunately, is the way the security standards are going.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[amoeba1911]

Yep...I got a G1, you can hear it, and you can even see it: the tiny little lens moves back and forth to adjust focal distance.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

The G1's camera can do this, I use it on a regular basis instead of copying down any important notes etc

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[ragefan]

A thesis "defense" is an event where one defends one's thesis, not the document itself.

Sounds like you have an idea for the Fox Reality channel!

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

Phones have had variable focus since before 2005, just look at most sony phones, (w800i, for example) or any current nokia smart phones.. (n95, n82, n97).. or even Iphone 3GS on the apple side.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[recharged95]

Checkout the Motorola/VZ droid. 5MP with AF/flash. End of this month.

There, happy now?

And don't worry, SE's going to likely release a 8MP phone with CZ lens and Sony tech.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

The camera in the HTC Hero is rather good for scanning A4 documents (if it's not too dark) or 17" TFT monitors, i.e. you can read them without problem. It's not so good in my opinion for moving objects in bad lighting.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

bullshit. my samsung i8510 produces crystal clear pictures with sharp edges at 8.1Mpx. the 12Mpx pixon is also very good.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hucko]

So you wouldn't attempt to predict the most of the arguments against your thesis and write defenses against those arguments? I've never written a thesis but that is what I'd do.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[beelsebob]

There is just one lens in it anyway
Which is one of many reasons it's not gonna be as good. Real cameras use lenses with many many optical elements, usually 8 or more even in the most simple, to reduce vingetting, reduce barrel/pincution distortion, reduce colour variation throughout the image etc.

Put the best one in that you can get, and you have good optics.
Not at all, a lens is only as good as the material it's made out of, a large lens, collecting light from a large surface area is not particularly susceptible to small inacuracies in the surface makeup, a small one however must be *perfectly* formed, and that begins to hit the limitations of the materials. Even full frame DSLR cameras often have more problems with the resolution of the lens than with the resolution of the sensor (hence why no one is going beyond 25MP)

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Hucko]

Sorry buddy, I could have sworn I attached my other post to the GP.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[zary]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsxCPMpRRK8 Q.E.D.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're on a GSM netwrork, just buy an el-cheapo phone and swap the SIM card when you need to enter such areas.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[BikeHelmet]

Most phones have such crappy lenses that it doesn't matter if you have a 5mp CMOS sensor. You're still getting pictures no better than 2.0mp upscaled a lot. The difference is the upscaling isn't done digitally(by the processor) - it's done by the sensor, so they can advertise the full amount of megapixels. In the end, that difference adds up to a whole lot of nothing. Resize down to 1600*1200 (roughly 2mp) and your 5mp phone probably won't compare to pictures taken by an old 2.0mp camera. It's all because of the lenses.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[mattack2]

Why does that say:

Video and Picture Taking: The Motorola A820 is not equipped with a camera or a video recording function.

?

I thought the hole in the top middle was the camera lens.. The page doesn't mention any addon camera/lens either.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[mrchaotica]

...why on earth are they claiming that 37 == 50?

They're not; they're claiming that in the near future, 50+ Android phones will have been released.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's nothing about this that precludes using a cell-phone camera to take the picture.

I take it you're not an action photographer. Burst modes allows you increase your chances of capturing that moment. Some cellphones have improved the situation with live buffers to eliminate the shutter lag, but that's not quit the same.

As for Ansel Adams, many of his best photos would have been taken with large or medium format cameras. Something that only high-end digital cameras are capable of reproducing. Current cellphone cameras just wouldn't capture the detail and wouldn't give you the same image.

If detail has artistic value to you, then the equipment makes all the difference.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[cboslin]

I had not looked into why they use the cameras that they do...thanks for the info.

I wish I had at least a 10 megapixel on a Nokia Nxxx running Maemo or Android...something Linux that would allow for more options.

When I went from a 6 megapixel to a 10 megapixel camera, the results were incredible. A huge improvement. However with those pinhole cameras and without a lens to auto focus, I wonder how much of the quality of the picture is in the megapixels and how much is in the lens quality (and of course hardware/software making the image)?

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[karnal]

My HTC Fuze (ATT branded) WM phone has a variable focus lens. I'm assuming a lot of the other HTC devices have similar functionality.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[swillden]

So, even though standards have stayed more or less the same, the capabilities of even our worst cameras have increased by orders of magnitude. At some point, even a cell-phone camera is good enough to do what needs to be done, and any more technical improvement is just for dick-waving and specialized cases.

The fundamental problem with cell phone cameras is size. You just need bigger lenses to get good image quality. Ansel Adams may have used cameras that were technically far less sophisticated, but he had cameras that were much LARGER. In optics, size matters.

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[islisis]

How about a 3x optical zoom lens?

Verizon Casio Exilim

Or move to Japan? A camera with a WVGA OLED
KDDI Casio Exilim CA004

Re:Any have a decent Camera?

[phision]

Totally agree. My current phone has a 8 MP camera and the quality of the photos is almost the same as my old phone's 2MP camera. The optics are the limiting factor here, and the phone size optics allow no more than 3MP-like quality.

And, to the grandparent - we are far from the limit of the human eye yet.

Just 50?

[gmuslera]

Will take time till Android matches the market share of IPhone that way.

Re:Just 50?

[buchner.johannes]

With 50+ they almost reached the number of Mac users :-P

Re:Just 50?

[schmidt349]

See, it's funny because if there were only 50 Mac users then their average contribution to Apple's revenues for the last fiscal quarter would be $245 million. In case you were wondering, that will buy you 245,000 entry level MacBooks, or one seriously decked-out Mac Pro.

Re:Just 50?

[Chris Mattern]

Really? There's only been six iPhones ever (counting iPod Touch), and only four are still available.

Re:Just 50?

[jellomizer]

We will have to see... Apple could repeat old history and make the first popular mainstream smartphone (like they did with the Apple II) Get good market share then have a competitor with a more open solution take over the market. Or what could happen is all the carriers who wants to make sure they don't blow it like IBM did. Will keep Android Locked down and each version incompatible with each other, so in essence keeping a bunch of branches of Android which won't work seamlessly. Allowing Apple to keep the main market share. As the carriers keep their control by keeping every android version locked to themselfs.

Re:Just 50?

[Tubal-Cain]

...or one seriously decked-out Mac Pro.

That's a bit misleading. Only a few more million and you might be able to buy two Mac Pros.

Re:Just 50?

[John Betonschaar]

iPod, iTunes :-P

Re:Just 50?

[Abreu]

It is well known that Mac users overpay for their hardware

Re:Just 50?

[Anonymous Coward]

*whoosh*

Think "phone model" vs. "phone."

Re:Just 50?

[Xtifr]

Yes, and nothing says quality like market share. That's why Windows is widely acknowledged (especially around here) to be the best OS ever, and McDonald's to be the greatest cuisine of all time. :)

Re:Just 50?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's funny because Microsoft makes more PROFIT every year than Apple net's.

Re:Just 50?

[david_thornley]

The Apple II was as open as the IBM PC, and was leading only when small computers were a niche market. The IBM blessing dramatically expanded the market, pushing out non-IBM computers. The Macintosh never was as established as the iPhone is, never had a chance at #1, and is very comfortably at #2.. The iPod still is dominant.

In other words, Apple hasn't lost a major market (I'm not counting the Newton here) except by having the market redefined.

After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[the_crowbar]

I have had a BB Storm for a few months I like a few features and loathe a few others.

Likes:
- Easy web page viewing most anywhere
- BB Messenger is good and beats SMS/MMS anyday (plus its cost is included in my plan unlike SMS)

Hates:
- Speed of the device (it feels slower now than when I first got the device and can take a few seconds now to come from locked screen to usable mode)
- Battery life ( I don't know how any of the Androids stack up here)

I have briefly used a G1 and I thought it was a nice device. The touchscreen keyboard on the Storm is ok, but when typing quickly it lags several keys behind. I did not experience that on the G1, plus with a physical keyboard you can type without looking at the phone.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Anonymous Coward]

If you haven't tried one of the OS5.0 leaks, I highly suggest it. Fixes a lot of the lag and general sluggishness of the device.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[KlaymenDK]

Regarding speed, you will find Android on the slow side as well, especially if you let your SMS app become bogged down with hundreds of old messages (to show previous chat log), and when your calendar and phone book get lots of entries. I'm not saying it takes *several* seconds, but it's a damn cry from being instantaneous.

Regarding battery life, expect one full working day, or two whole days TOPS, from *any* modern device.

If you want fortnight-long battery life, grab a Psion Series5 MX Pro and have it refurbished (yes, I'm being serious). If you want instant application starts, grab either that or a Palm Treo and have that refurbished. For *phone* capability, forget the Psion, that's "just" a pda (in quotes because it's a damn proper one).

Do NOT expect an Android device to be a pda. It's a smartphone.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[SCHecklerX]

Just got a palm pre myself. While being on sprint sucks, the phone is amazing. Very open with an active homebrew community. Easy to 'root' (even from linux ... I don't even own a windows computer). Changing the phone's behavior is usually just a matter of editing some javascript and CSS (most of the things you'd like to do there is already a patch for, and you don't need to fully install optware just to install the patches). This is all done in a familiar linux environment.

I was on the fence about getting a 'droid on verizon and the palm pre. After a few days with the pre, however, I am VERY HAPPY with my decision. WebOS is the most open thing I've ever seen on a phone. Messaging is still a little better on the blackberry, but WebOS does it as well as any other platform. And palm / sprint seem to be quite ok with it (other than tethering. *sigh*).

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have The Weather Channel app installed? If so uninstall it and see how your speed changes.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[MemoryDragon]

Actually the speed of android becomes better with every release, and I think one of the big issues in the default installs is the default install itself, the what you describe is a problem of no proper swap space. There are several hacks regarding adding a swap space on the SD, that + a fast SD should to the trick to speed up the messages.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[oakgrove]

I'm using CyanogenMod on my G1 with all of my apps on a class 6 sdcard and the CPU clocked to 528 MHz. The phone is blazing fast. It compares very favorably to an iPhone 3GS. Like my sibling poster mentioned, there are certain apps that either use a lot of the phones resources like the Weather app and there are other apps that wake the phone up a lot to check things on the net, etc. that will hammer your battery. Try experimenting with uninstalling some of your apps and you might be surprised on how fast your phone can be.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry messed up that URL somehow. Try this . Yay for previewing.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[raddan]

That's interesting because on my Blackberry 8830 (and indeed, my last two BBs-- a 7350 I think and before that... something old) I typically get 2+ days on a charge. I browse the web, do email, listen to music, and watch the occasional movie clip (stored on my microSD card). I find that when I use it lightly, and I'm in areas of good reception, I've been able to get up to 4 days on a charge. My original Blackberry got a week at a time.

Maybe I just don't use mine as heavily as you guys...

BTW, I'm not saying that BBs are great phones (there are many things that drive me crazy) but in my experience, they do have pretty good battery life. Good enough that I rarely think about it.

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Hurricane78]

Uuum, the (Nokia) devices that I had, usually required recharging once a week! With normal usage. No idea what you bought or how you use them...

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[KlaymenDK]

Yes, exactly. My old 6310 and 6310i required charging every 7-10 days, tops. But those had small monochrome screens and weren't able to run all sorts of apps apart from some Java applets (to say nothing of pda-like features).

I wonder if there's a market for a battery-friendly *monochrome* Android-based pda-cum-phone?

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Anonymous Coward]

Because no one called you and there was no reception in this basement.

With Love,
Your Mother

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[IorDMUX]

I've been using the BB Storm for the past few months, as well. I love the phone hardware, the browser is quite nice, the e-mail/message access is very convenient, and the apps store is beginning to become something worthwhile, but I despise the Blackberry OS.

The OS seems to have an unusual bug where, about once every 2-3 days, the phone will simply stop receiving new messages until the battery is pulled. There is no warning of this, and you would not know that it is happening unless you check your e-mail account with another method and see the message disparity. There are some memory leaks and javascript bugs [I'll pull out my phone to check the time and see that a null pointer error has been caught, but it won't tell me from where and no apps are running...], but they are of secondary importance to this temporary loss of communication and connectivity.

Has anyone else seen this occur? I talked (conversationally) to a Verizon sales guy who tried to tell me that it was a feature of some sort. The Verizon techs I've talked to have said that it is a known issue and that RIM is working on a fix, but nobody knows when that update will roll out. (The bug has not been fixed in the past few OS updates.)

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[jareth-0205]

Yeah, the CPU in the current crop of Android phones isn't that impressive. It looks like the next generation coming out this year should have the more modern ARM Cortex which is the same CPU behind the iPhone 3GS and the Palm Pre.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/14/core-values-the-silicon-behind-android/

Re:After BlackBerry Storm I am ready

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a palm treo 755p and can get 4 days out of the battery. The only way I get this though is to keep it disconnected from the internet. What I do now is connect only when I need to (which is almost never) and disconnect when I'm done. I regularly go 2 days without using more than half the battery.

Diversity of features

[YouWantFriesWithThat]

there is not enough information released as of yet, but i really hope for a greater diversity of features and hardware. i really want a better (sturdier) piece of hardware than the G1 that has a keyboard and an SD slot. (or 2!)

i googled the ones on the list that were bold (which apparently indicates they are currently for sale) and i didn't see any that had a keyboard. they all appeared superficially similar in design: touchscreen iphone lookalikes. that is really too bad, i like keyboards.

Re:Diversity of features

[swimin]

Take a look at the upcoming motorola droid coming to verizon. Probably hitting stores on Nov 6th, Possibly online/telephone sales the end of this month. It has a slideout qwerty keyboard, 3.7inch capacitive touchscreen, 5MP camera, and will be the first Android 2.0 phone. It's also only .5in thick.

Reportedly It's made of metal and has a very sturdy feel to it.

Re:Diversity of features

[Enderandrew]

There are supposedly 50 Android phones in the works. I'm sure some will have keyboards. The Motorola Calgary has a keyboard for instance.

Re:Diversity of features

[IBBoard]

that is really too bad, i like keyboards.

[Marketing-exec]No, I'm sure you're just confused. Yes, you're familiar with keyboards. Yes, the tactile feedback can be exceedingly useful. Yes, it means you're not hiding what you're about to click on. Yes, it means your screen doesn't get greasy. But what you really want is a touch-screen. It's what we're designing our phones with, because "customers" want it, and you're a customer so you must want it.[/Marketing-exec]

Re:Diversity of features

[YouWantFriesWithThat]

nicely played, but i think i want a Pre with a horizontal layout that i can dual-boot to android. but maybe that's just me :)

Re:Diversity of features

[IBBoard]

I want a phone that does phone calls and texts, but these days your options are limited if you don't want to pay for the camera :D

Things like Android and the Palm Pre look interesting, but a) I don't miss most of the features and wouldn't use them much after the first month and b) I don't have the money to spare (£10 of top-up credit lasts me 3-6 months! Land-lines and company phones are much cheaper ;) )

Re:Diversity of features

[SSCGWLB]

I second this comment, the Droid looks like a pretty sweet piece of engineering. Thinner, lighter, faster processor, camera with flash, etc. My only problem is how to get rid of my G1 (and T-Mobile) without getting screwed!

Re:Diversity of features

[YouWantFriesWithThat]

i have heard that the moto f3 has a cult following of bare-bones phone users. probably can find it cheaper than on amazon, but here it is with a decent write-up.

the eInk screen makes it kind of sexy and 300 hours of standby time is pretty nice for people who don't use it much.

Re:Diversity of features

[chewy_2000]

My first phone was a moto f3. It was pretty cool, I liked the e-ink screen.

Indestructable, massive battery life. Just don't try and send texts or have a contact list with more than about 6 name, due to the very, very low res screen.

Nice

[stoolpigeon]

I was just reading the press release for Alex from Spring Design. This is still vapor ware, but if they don't make it to market someone else will. It is a dual screen e-reader running Android. If I were going to be rolling out any device that was going to sport the kind of connectivity that people are coming to suspect, Android would have to be in the running as a free, open platform. So I think along with a lot of new Android phones, we will be seeing a lot of Android devices in general.
 
The Economist did a special report last month on mobile tech in emerging markets. They say in 5-10 years everyone in the world that wants a phone will have one, and the service to use it. I think that is totally amazing. At the same time I've been working with some research folks at the University of Central Florida and they think smartphones will become the norm in the next 5 years or so. I think this all combines to paint a picture that gives Android a bright outlook. I don't think it's inevitable but I do think the odds are good that Android will be massive. On a side note, the UCF folks are doing education software for smart phones. They started with iPhone and Android as their platforms but they've dropped iPhone and moved purely to Android.

Nice, but need more info

[Anonymous Coward]

For example, when will I be able to get a phone like the Motorola Droid / Sholes on AT&T? The chart shows that the networks will support them, but here in the US we have this really lame setup where phones go "exclusive" on one network for awhile before you can even get them on the others. I understand I could get a Droid if I was a Verizon customer sometime in November, but I need one on AT&T. I haven't seen any Android phone on AT&T yet - even a not so good one. I'd switch providers, but the whole family is on AT&T.

Re:Nice, but need more info

[sadler121]

iirc, Rogers in Canada uses the same spectrum allocation as at&t here in the US. Thus you could get a G1/G2 unlocked from Canada and use it on at&t's network.

Re:Nice, but need more info

[Anonymous Coward]

I think AT&T is so in bed with apple right now they aren't doing anything in the way of android.

Re:Nice, but need more info

[42sd]

AT&T was supposed to release one(HTC Lancaster) at the end of July, but backed out with little fanfare. I dealt with a Blackberry with a non-working 0 for a month in order to get that one with my upgrade.... only to end up with another blackberry.

I wouldn't count on anything from AT&T until you can see it in the store.

Just phones?

[phonewebcam]

Meh. Our Japanese friends have moved onto fridges.

More choice means more flexibility

[TwistedGreen]

This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS. With Android, you have one OS but many different phones. While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone. Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete. Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market. It seems that Google is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable. I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Enderandrew]

Exactly.

Some people want real keyboards. Some people want expensive phones with the best possible features and tons of storage. Some people want cheap phones.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[fermion]

It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled and certain featured added to create specific profit centers. I see this as the PC market several years ago. No profit in the PC, so deals were cut with various software vendors to pre install products on the PC. Even customer data was sometimes sold. Same thing for the emerging DSL market on PCs. MS Windows did not have automagic connecting software, so many vendors, for instance SBC, would have the user install software that also did other unknown functions.

The cool thing about android is that it should, in theory, allow end users to get the exact phone they want. The reality it, since the end user is not really buying the phone, that the mobile service providers will continue to design they phone they need, and the collude to provide limited functionality to the United States market. We onlu have to go back to the Motorola Razr and look at the Nokia situation to see that mobile providers in the US will not provide anything that is not centered around them.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dingen]

Or, more choice means it's more difficult to develop for the platform, leading to fewer apps and a less interesting platform for both developers and consumers. This is already a big problem with Symbian and Windows Mobile.

I read a reply from a Symbian user a week ago in which he stated that the most interesting app he had purchased for this phone was a better clock. This is a perfect display of the sad state of affairs the platform is in.

It would be a shame if Android would suffer the same fate.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[sribe]

Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Android to compete...

A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[cabjf]

I think the only real rub comes with the apps. For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options, a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones. And if it was the app store that really catapulted the iPhone to greatness, it's not an issue to take lightly while trying to expand the market.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[tomzyk]

While I agree, I think the big drawback with having different hardware comes from a programming/user-interface standpoint: how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied?

Anyone that has done a lot of HTML design knows about the headaches this can cause.

ie. You want to make your site look pretty for someone who runs their OS in 800x600 as well as someone who runs at 1280x1024. While you COULD just develop it for the more popular [higher] resolution, you could be ostracizing a large user-base who opted for the more compact screen. Then you also possibly need to add in the complexity to design your UI for when they turn their phone 90 degrees and want to run your app in portrait mode too...

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[tzhuge]

That's great for some people, but personally I find the amount of options overwhelming. Same thing with computers as well. Once upon a time I would've researched parts and looked at spec sheets and read reviews to figure out exactly what to get. However, it seems like I would inevitably be slightly disappointed in the end. I think I enjoyed the process of the 'shopping' more than the final product and in the end it is the final product I have to live with. Choice is good for consumers, but I suspect there are many out there like me that will go with the one easy good choice over many possibly horrible to excellent choices.

For people like me, Apple is generally a good option. They make basically quality products with very good usability and design. The iPhone is an excellent phone and will remain an excellent phone even if products with better feature sets at lower price points exist. I know many times /. posters like to dismiss shoppers like me as being 'stupid' or 'vain' or something, but quite frankly I find a lot of those people either disingenuous or delusional when they try to argue the iPhone is selling purely on 'style' or try to compare product using purely specs.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[sootman]

Sometimes having a million choices helps, sometimes it doesn't. It'll be interesting to see which way this goes. I have my suspicions... ;-)

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[GooberToo]

It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled

People keep saying this but there hasn't even been a hint this is even remotely close to reality. The reality is, with so many phones on so many carriers, gimping a phone means pushing sales to your competition. Even Verizon has publicly stated then will not be gimping their Android phones. This means carriers are forced to compete based on hardware features and value added applications and services.

Until there is at least a hint that carriers intend to screw over their users with these phones, statements like this only serve to provide misinformation and scaremonger.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[brunes69]

Right. Just like more choices among PC hardware has led to it having the smallest number of available applications, and the Mac platform, with it's more defined hardware base, has more.

Oh wait!

The apps come to the platform. The platform with the most users is going to have the most apps written for it.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dingen]

The apps come to the platform. The platform with the most users is going to have the most apps written for it.

Then why aren't there a lot of apps out there for Symbian? It's by far the most popular phone operating system out there. And Windows Mobile used to be pretty popular too... so where are the apps for that one?

Yet the iPhone only has a very small percentage of market share, yet there are more apps for iPhone than for any other mobile platform out there.

Somehow your statement doesn't make a lot of sense.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[sarhjinian]

More choice also means "too many cooks" syndrome. We saw this with Windows Mobile, where the core system (which, admittedly, had problems of it's own) was further crippled by vendor- and carrier-specific addons, some of which changed the UI significantly and many of which didn't integrate at all well with the base system (HTC TouchhFlo comes to mind).

Android is seeing something similar: HTC's offerings use a different UI depending on their version (some use the base Android system, some use HTC's Sense UI). Motorola uses something different. Not all phones use Android's mail client (some use HTC mail; and no, not all HTCs use HTC mail). Many phones bundle additional applications to manage the dialer, the radio, and more. And then the carriers get their grubby hands on it and pervert it further, such that otherwise identical phones on two different carriers behave quite differently. Android, to it's credit, is nowhere near as bad as WM is, but it's still young, and the cracks are starting to show.

The hardware platform may be shaping up into something like the PC market, but the software market is committing the same kind of marketing hari kari that killed UNIX as a unified platform and continues to cripple Linux today. Choice is good for some users, but by and large these devices are going to end up in the hands a "normal people" who have no patience for the complications that this value-added crap brings. And then there's Google's haphazard implementation (you can't buy apps in some countries, or under some carriers; some apps are restricted per-carrier) to further hamper things.

Then there's the significantly weaker marketing effort: instead of a unified "Google Phone" which is a strong brand, you have HTC, Samsung, Motorola and others, all with different branding and marketing. Few, if any, making any effort to promote the Android or Google brands; heck, many users are likely unaware that they have a common platform and app store. Even Microsoft does a better job than this, and RIM and Palm certainly do.

By comparison, an iPhone is an iPhone is an iPhone. The marketing is strong, the platform unified and the carriers keep their sticky fingers off it. The app store is well understood and universal. There's choice, but it's nicely balanced against complexity---which is important, since this isn't 1985 and we're dealing with a different market: it's not hobbyists and businesses and early adopters, it's millions and millions of schmoes, and trying to duplicate the Microsoft/Intel strategy of nearly three decades ago isn't necessarily a good idea.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[schon]

how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied?

The same way you develop PC software that has to run on ALL computers when the screen real-estate is so varied.

Anyone that has done a lot of HTML design knows about the headaches this can cause.

Actually, anyone that doesn't understand HTML believes the headaches it can cause. If you understand HTML, it's not an issue.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Zebedeu]

Then why aren't there a lot of apps out there for Symbian? It's by far the most popular phone operating system out there. And Windows Mobile used to be pretty popular too... so where are the apps for that one?

I suspect that there are many, many more apps both for the Symbian and the Windows Mobile platforms than for the iPhone, they're just not conveniently centralized in an app store. And that's without even considering JavaME apps.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Zebedeu]

The new Android SDK attempts to solve this problem by allowing developers to specify screen size profiles. Check out the blog post.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dingen]

There is absolutely no proof at all to back up your claim. Nobody even comes close to 85000 apps.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[mdm-adph]

...like he explained, not that there's any way to prove it. Windows Mobile and the BlackBerry world have only just now gotten centralized app stores -- there's apps every bloody where for the BlackBerry, for instance, they're just not collected up in any one place.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[babblefrog]

That's how Apple came to dominate the PC desktop market, and why IBM-PC compatibles have the small market share they do today.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Anonymous Coward]

You are assuming they are all phones. A couple of those devices listed are netbooks.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[FrigBot]

I think most people buying these phones (or any phone, except maybe the IPhone) don't care what operating system they are using. Most mortals care about the coolness of the phone itself and its ease-of-use-ness. If it happens that the phone runs Android, well, ok.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Anonymous Coward]

This is one of the biggest ways that Windows Mobile and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS. With Windows Mobile, you have one OS but many different phones. While the iPhone already has a huge number of apps available for their one device, not everyone wants a big touchscreen for a phone. Appealing to a broader audience by letting people choose their phone with a broad range of prices and features could be the most effective way for Windows Mobile to compete. Smartphones are still only used by a small percentage all mobile phone users--it's still a growing market. It seems that Microsoft is using this opportunity to make smart phones more accessible and more affordable. I think this is a far more sustainable strategy than Apple's one phone philosophy.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[0xdeadbeef]

how do you develop applications that will run on ALL of these phones when the screen real-estate can be so varied

Easily. You don't assume a specific screen size.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[MemoryDragon]

I rather doubt it the android api is really extensive and becomes better every release.
The biggest problem J2ME made was to limit itself too much and to rely on third party extensions which added incompatible apis, so far android has avoided that mistake.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Dragonslicer]

A dozen phones would be healthy competition to appeal to a broad audience; 50+ phones is confusion that will drive consumers away.

You honestly expect someone to think, "I really want an Android phone, but there's just too many of them. I guess I'll get an iPhone instead." Anyone that knows enough to be looking specifically for an Android phone will not be confused by their choices.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Dragonslicer]

For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options, a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones.

For keyboard input, I would assume that the operating system abstracts away whether the phone has a physical or touchscreen keyboard. You have a point about the screen size, but it's not like that's a new problem in software development, so any competent interface designer and/or programmer knows how to deal with it.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[oakgrove]

I don't know what the problem is or isn't with Symbian but as for Android, I see the variety of handsets and the openness having a very interesting side effect if it is exploited properly by the handset makers. Think about it. Android is open source so as opposed to WinMo, for example, where although you can pretty up the interface some, what you're left with underneath is essentially the same thing as what all of your other umpteen competitors have. Contrast this with Android, where you can actually work on the internals of the OS itself to differentiate it from everybody else. Things like an improved scheduler, apps to SD out of the box, built in Debian bootstrap, root OOTB, the possibilities are practically endless. Hopefully, the handset makers will use this to one up each other more and more and since it is open source, when the OEM's release their code, upstream can take patches and make vanilla even better. They are already taking stuff from amateurs like Cyanogen and adding it to the main tree. I know, I know, citation needed.

As far as the detrimental effects of possible balkanization goes, I don't see it. Manufacturers will be compelled to maintain application compatibility as what good is the phone for many normal users if they can't download cool stuff from Market. It's kind of akin to a far off post-human future where humans and machines converge, most of us are still going to be physically recognizable as not too far removed from plain old homo sapien sapiens as nobody is going to want to have sex with you if you look like a crock pot.

I think we're in for some exciting times.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[edmicman]

Are those 85000 distinct apps? How many roughly do the same as how many others?

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[raddan]

On the other hand, it is precisely this property that makes the web such a success.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[IamTheRealMike]

Symbian Signed + lack of good distribution mechanism.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Anonymous Coward]

what we have here? Looks like a typical apple fanboi.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[NoOneInParticular]

No, there's no way to prove it, but, do you have any indication that Symbian has up to 85,000 apps available for the platform, or even 8,500? My guess would be that 850 is of the right order. Why do you think it's more than 85,000?

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[rufus t firefly]

For all those different models with different screen sizes and different input options, a developer will have more work just making sure his or her app works for the wide variety of phones.

For keyboard input, I would assume that the operating system abstracts away whether the phone has a physical or touchscreen keyboard. You have a point about the screen size, but it's not like that's a new problem in software development, so any competent interface designer and/or programmer knows how to deal with it.

Relating to screen sizes, it's not that big of a deal. It's all handled by XML layout descriptions, so you can either use relative sizing or specify different XML layouts for different screen sizes.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Are those 85000 distinct apps? How many roughly do the same as how many others?

Why, are other platforms immune to this?

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dr.newton]

I believe the salient point here is that as the number of apps increases, the average value provided by each new app decreases.

1000 apps is MUCH better than 1 app.

10000 apps is somewhat better than 1000 apps.

100000 apps is pretty much equivalent to 10000 apps.

The Android Market has around 25000 apps, I believe, so I certainly don't feel left out in the cold as an Android user.

Granted, there will always be the occasional app that provides much more value than Twitter App #73, and is only available on one platform, so some people will always find their needs better covered on one platform than another. E.g. Google Voice available on Android but not on the iPhone, and I'm sure there are examples that go the other way.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dangitman]

The same way you develop PC software that has to run on ALL computers when the screen real-estate is so varied.

In other words, badly? This is still a big problem with current desktop GUIs. If your screen is too big or too small, the interface suffers.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dingen]

The Android Market has around 25000 apps, I believe, so I certainly don't feel left out in the cold as an Android user.

It's actually about half that number. Not saying there's nothing out there for Android, but let's stick to the facts.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[Dal Platinum]

TouchFlo was a dog. I was so glad when I disabled it.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[TwistedGreen]

Yes, that is the biggest obstacle with this approach. A large number of phones can also mean a big possibility of poor compatibility among phones despite running the same OS. This could be especially problematic when some carriers insist on locking down their phones; a developer may not be able to depend on the availability of certain functions and this would break compatibility. It certainly is a double-edged sword but barring any major issues, I think in the end this will still be a more effective strategy.

Re:More choice means more flexibility

[dr.newton]

I stand corrected, sir.

On a related note...

[keatonguy]

...I saw the Android TV ad last night. I think it's the only time seeing an advertisement for something has make me verbally cheer.

It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.

I really hope to see more well-coordinated advertising like this for OSS! This is the first, maybe the second time in my memory that any OSS has had any kind of TV spot, and this one was really solid.

Re:On a related note...

[stoolpigeon]

I first saw it on youtube - linked from an article at Ars I think. I thought it was pretty awesome. Then this week-end I'm watching football and see it come on national t.v. I was surprised, I didn't know they'd be pushing it with the kind of money that took. I enjoyed it too and thought it was pretty awesome. The rest of my family was less impressed.

Re:On a related note...

[swimin]

That's not an ad for android ... it's an ad for a specific android phone. The Motorola Droid (previously known as sholes/tao)

Re:On a related note...

[Sockatume]

That's not for "Android", mind you, it's for "Droid", Motorola's swanky new huge QWERTY slider handset. I have to wonder if the ad's going to be better for Android than for Motorola: lots of people are going to say "hey, I want Android", and realise they don't have a child to sell to buy it, and go for one of the older HTC models instead.

Re:On a related note...

[itsdapead]

It lampooned the Apple ad format, complete with the black text on white and indie music listing off stuff the iPhone can't do, then making a sharp cut to an android logo with a URL.

Hmm - what about the things than an iPhone *can* do, like connect to my work WiFi (which needs a web proxy), reliably re-connect to my home WiFi after its been "slept" and provide a music player that isn't a joke compared to the iPhone player?

Sorry that's a bit troll-y: I have a HTC Hero and an iPod Touch - and while the former probably has more features and is more "open" it still lacks Apple's attention to detail - plus the iPod/Phone has a better screen and is much faster, while all the Android phones so far have been underpowered.

Re:On a related note...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was watching Monday night football and eating dinner in a dining hall at my university when one came on.

Either everyone thought it was cool, or they were confused but afraid they were the only one who didn't know.

A lot like lectures with ESL TAs, actually.

Momentum

[hattig]

It seems the momentum is with Android for "OEM handsets", the handsets that would previously have used Windows Mobile have migrated en-mass to a cheaper, more modern, sellable phone OS.

It just convinces me that Windows Mobile 6.5 is too little, too late, and it doesn't offer much anyway. Windows Mobile 7 - presumably their next-generation mobile OS - is horribly delayed and will be feature-poor (generation 1) in comparison to Android, WebOS and iPhone OS. Maemo is on the sidelines too, for Nokia.

Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[monoqlith]

Discuss.

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[$1uck]

Android:iPhone::Linux:OSX would be more appropriate. personally I think android > iPhone OS. iPhone hardware is probably better than any existing android phones thought (for the time being).

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[buchner.johannes]

They all have a lowercase i in them.

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[keatonguy]

Could be, but I'm inclined not to think so. Linux came around long after Windows had already ingrained itself in the market and in the consumer consciousness, and even then after more than fifteen years it's still rougher around the edges than it's proprietary contemporaries as far as user-friendliness goes. Arguably this is just from the difference in design philosophy forcing new users to learn a new way of working with thier computer, but I digress.

The iPhone has only been around a few years, and it's really the first mobile that's truly comparible to a desktop or laptop's functionality (Browser, media players, apps, etc). The great divide between them is that the iPhone places very hard restrictions on not only what software you can get, but what software can be developed. This may be invisible to the user, but once Android builds up momentum I hold out hope that it will have a true explosion of apps available for it, most of them free (true to it's OSS license!).

iPhone isn't an implacable competitor, it's only been in the market a few years. Android, if it's name is given strong presence in the mind of the consumer, has a chance to do very well comparatively, maybe even match it.

Obviously, I may have a bit of a bias here, I'm not exactly a scientific researcher here, but I'm optimistic.

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[sootman]

Happy Slashdot pageviews:Angry Slashdot pageviews::Money in Taco's pocket:Money in Taco's pocket :-)

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[RiotingPacifist]

stop drinking the kool aid (or anti kool aide or w/e)

it's still rougher around the edges than it's proprietary contemporaries as far as user-friendliness goes

This is true of desktop distros*, however for embedded devices & phones, it's unfounded.

The iPhone has only been around a few years, and it's really the first mobile that's truly comparible to a desktop or laptop's functionality (Browser, media players, apps, etc)

Apart from all the smartphones that came before it, from 2002 there have been "smartphones" that could compete with laptop functionality and by 2007 most had 3rd party apps, 3G and bluetooth. The iPhone is good but it wasn't the first at anything.

iPhone isn't an implacable competitor,

Indeed it's the blackberry that's the real #1 smartphone, but the real mistake is thinking that the smartphone market is "full" and to get users you have to take them off the competition, in reality it is an emerging market, you just need to sell your product to people who were previously happy with "dumbphones" (or if your nokia, get the phone companies to upgrade thier existing users to your smarphones for you)

*i think mint and distros specialised in being user friendly address most of the issues

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

And a lowercase n, I sense a Monty Python reference here.

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

start a discussion by contributing value to it, not by imperially telling others to discuss.

Penis.

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

Comments like yours do not understand the average end-consumer at all.

I feel I'm an "average" end-consumer of cell/smart-phones. When I go out to look at what I might like in an upcoming purchase, I see two options (for example):

a) Buy an Android Phone PLUS an iPod.

- OR -

b) Buy an iPhone.

The point is, I'd like to have a device that plays my music library. I'm not interested in run-of-the-mill MP3 players. I want something that works seamlessly with iTunes and the music store, because it is the easiest to use service out there. I don't have to go through some idiotic nonsense to rip my own CDs. I don't have to go through idiotic nonsense to buy single tracks or music and have to go through some esoteric procedure to get it onto my portable music player. It just works.

Which brings me to my second point: if I have a choice between one device that does what I need it to or two devices, guess which one I'm choosing? That's right, I'm not carrying two devices around with me. That's ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure that until someone comes up with a complete, vertical service offering like Apple has, there won't be a device that will replace the iPhone. (BlackBerry remains compelling in enterprise environments due to its email and calendar integration.)

Re:Android:iPhone::Linux:Windows

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Apart from all the smartphones that came before it, from 2002 there have been "smartphones" that could compete with laptop functionality and by 2007 most had 3rd party apps, 3G and bluetooth. The iPhone is good but it wasn't the first at anything.

It was the first to make browsing the web usable. I could browse the web on my Treo 600, but it was a joke, so I never used it. It was the same story for all of them. Having the technical functionality is just part of the story.

Too expensive

[cellurl]

When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr. Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!
I entered the ADC2, and if you took a poll, you would find that 1/2 of the entrants don't actually own an Android (including me), because its financially unjustified.

IMHO, Three things are needed, one of which has almost occurred.
1. A superbabe (not Whoopi sorry) needs to hold an Android on T-Mobile site.
2. Skype or such needs to work as well as T-Mobile voice, better would be nice.
3. The phone must cost US$99.

Back-Seat-Driver

Re:Too expensive

[stoolpigeon]

With the vast majority of the growth in mobile happening in emerging markets - I don't think cheap phones are far away. If you'll see them in the U.S., I don't know. I think that depends on if anything is ever done to fix the mess we are in with the whole telecom industry in this country.

Re:Too expensive

[bigstrat2003]

With a contract, you can get the HTC Magic from T-Mobile for $150. That's not quite your asking price of $100, but it's not exactly $1000 either.

Re:Too expensive

[LordVader717]

When I see any of these, I say to myself $1000/yr. Thats what these things cost, a vacation to Mexico!

Why? An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300, and even the latest and greates phones rarely are mre than $600. If you pay for an expensive data plan, then that's what you're paying for.
It's the same with the iPhone.
If you want to use it as a mobile computer, you can do just that.

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

I meant including the monthly fees. Everyone I speak with pays >$100 month in service fees....

Re:Too expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

After everything (minus a slight corporate discount) my G1 plan costs $55/mo, $660/yr. I got the phone used for ~$180. Drop the data plan, stick to wifi ... $30/mo $360/yr. The only way to break a grand is to buy a dev phone, which you don't actually need if you're just developing apps.

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

plus 2 year plan at $100 / month, is > $1000/yr like I said. I was including all costs...
Q: Do you know any plans that boil down to $30/month which I currently have. Like I said, its cool, but for me, an unjustified expense....
CHAO!

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

1. Can you provide a link? I would buy that!
2. Where are there $180 Androids? ebay > $280...

Re:Too expensive

[bigstrat2003]

That's not a reason that the phone won't become prevalent. AT&T requires you to get a contract to get an iPhone, but that hasn't hindered that device much.

Furthermore, it's inaccurate to say that a cell phone plan is part of the cost of the phone. You're paying for a plan whether or not you get the expensive phone, so that's gonna cost you either way.

Plus, $100/month? Seriously? What the hell kind of cell phone plan is that, the one where they give you blow jobs when you pay your bill? I see plans that cost like $50/month, not $100.

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

hey tolerance.
Put up the link.

Re:Too expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

No link, got it on craigslist. I see them regularly for 200 and under though (upstate NY).

Plan is national business 300 (300 minutes, free weekends, 100 txts) plus data (400 txts, unlimited data)

Google Voice means I don't use any of the txts

Re:Too expensive

[Kelson]

$100/month?

I'm paying $85/month for two lines from T-Mobile, including unlimited data on my G1 and messaging on my wife's phone. Admittedly it doesn't have unlimited calling (except for calling each other), but there are enough minutes on the plan that we haven't gone over in...actually I'm not sure we've ever gone over. (Obviously YMMV depending on how many minutes you need.)

Yeah, $85/month adds up to around $1000/year -- but again, that's for two phones. I haven't looked at prices recently, but I suspect a comparable plan for just one phone would be around $50/month including data.

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

you made my day!

Re:Too expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Buy an unlocked phone and use a decent prepaid carrier*

*Such a thing may not exist in the US. I don't know. If you can't get 5GB of data for $20-25/month, you're being screwed.

Re:Too expensive

[bigstrat2003]

Huh?

Re:Too expensive

[LordVader717]

That's an expensive data plan. You also have to pay that for the iPhone. But even without a data plan, a portable computer with built-in WiFi, music player and the ability to make phone calls is incredibly useful.

I'd want one just for the purpose of taking notes, instead of using Nokia's crippled and useless POS which can't display ASCII text without screwing it up.

Re:Too expensive

[cellurl]

whats the name of your plan? I could swing that!

Re:Too expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

perhaps he meant that $80/mo * 12mo/yr = $960/yr ~1000/yr

Re:Too expensive

[markkezner]

An unlocked HTC dream will set you back about $300

Are you talking about the Android Dev Phone 1?. That's $399 for the phone + $25 for the developer account required. However, it's not bad if you want to avoid signing up for a service contract.

Re:Too expensive

[Kelson]

FamilyTime 400 w/ unlimited nights & weekends, $50/month for two phones. I don't think this particular plan is still available, though.

For the G1, T-Mobile offers two data plans to go with whatever phone plan you have: $25 for unlimited data or $35 for unlimited data WITH unlimited text messages. (At the time I bought my phone, the $25 plan also included 400 text messages, but I think they're itemized separately now unless you get the $35 plan). I assume it's the same for the MyTouch, Cliq, etc.

So if you got a really basic, say, $30 single-line phone plan, you could add $25 for data and use an Android phone for $55/month (probably closer to $60 with fees).

Why?

[sootman]

I mean, I'm all for choice, but why so many? Why, in particular, are a few manufacturers in particular releasing so many models? Half of the phones (25 out of 51) come from just three companies--HTC (9), Motorola (9), and Samsung (7). I can see why a manufacturer would want some variety in general--slider, bar, flip; big with good battery life or small and thin and light--but aren't all Android phones big, touchscreen smartphones? I don't want to start googling every name (hasn't wiseandroid.com ever heard of links?) so can anyone clue me in on the differences?

I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines. The stereotypical Slashdotter hates having their choices limited but everyone in sales, marketing, and product development should know about the disadvantages to offering too many options. Make one phone with as many or as few features as you care to cram into it and the choice becomes a simple one--take it or leave it. Start offering them with minor differences--this one has WiFi but no GPS, this one has GPS but no WiFi, etc.--and people will start to say "screw it, what else is there?" Plus every time you offer more models you're increasing the cost of your R&D but with less and less improvement in sales.

If anything, we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch. Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.

Re:Why?

[$1uck]

the iPhone is a piece of hardware. Android is an operating system. Repeat it to yourself. Hardware != software. so stop drawing false equivalencies.

Re:Why?

[dingen]

The iPhone, just like the Mac, is completely about the software in a nice looking package. The key factors of the iPhone have to with the OS and the way apps are developed and distributed for it. Everything else is secondary.

Re:Why?

[$1uck]

Ok, then why can't I put OSx or the iPhone OS on some other piece of hardware? Clearly the hardware is not a "key factor." No its about control of the hardware/software. Mind you I have a mac at home and I like it, but Apple is a bit on the control-freak side of things.

Re:Why?

[jhfry]

You don't understand what is happening at all.

Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS. Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.

Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android. Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon. Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.

The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold:
1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.
2. compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets, so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.
3. features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them. If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.

Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code. Android changes that.

Re:Why?

[dingen]

You call it control. I call it a way of creating nice working and looking products.

So what if you can't install iPhone OS on other phones? Nor can I install the Wii operating system on my XBOX360. You could call creators of gaming consoles "control freaks", but what they're really doing is just creating a product that works. And so is Apple.

Re:Why?

[sootman]

Thank you for half-answering my question. Now, does anyone know, do these handsets really have that much variety? Aw, fuckit, I'll find out for myself by searching for each one in Google Images.
HTC Click - Fiesta - Tattoo --- big touchscreen slider, physical keyboard
HTC Desire 6200 - October --- unknown
HTC Dragon - Zoom 2 --- only screenshots, looks like a big touchscreen
HTC Dream - T-Mobile G1 --- big touchscreen slider, physical keyboard
HTC Hero - G2 Touch --- big touchscreen, looks like non-sliding, no physical keyboard
HTC Lancaster --- big touchscreen slider, physical keyboard
HTC Leo --- big touchscreen something, maybe flips open like a tiny laptop?
HTC Magic - Sapphire - T-Mobile myTouch 3G - Google Ion - Dopod A6188 --- small-ish (Pre-sized?) touchscreen non-slider, no physical keyboard
HTC Passion --- big touchscreen, possibly non-sliding with no physical keyboard.
HTC Predator --- big touchscreen, possibly non-sliding with no physical keyboard.

So, um, yeah. Back to my original question: why? If I were a manufacturer I'd make at MOST three models: huge with everything, a slightly budget version, and one that is physically small. MAYBE the two bigger ones would be available with and without keyboards. Still, even that only takes us to five models. Are the other five a repeat of this but sans phone? That's what I'd really like to see--a non-phone Android device. Play media, browse the Web, maybe be an eBook reader too.

PS: rats, I miscounted the first time around. I missed one of the HTCs. They offer 10 models, not 9. So OVER HALF of these 51 new phones come from just three companies. Again I say, WTF??!?

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately once you own an iPhone and realize it's limitations, mainly Apple imposed like bluetooth file transfer (as well as others which I don't care to mention right now), you start to appreciate the options available by Android. No, 20 apps that partially implement a solution that is standard on every other phone just doesn't make much sense.
 

This will be the second time Apple has had a lead and they will shoot themselves in the foot and become a second player in the market.
 

p.s. I am an Apple fanboy and can't comprehend the iTunes tie in.

Re:Why?

[rockout]

While that's true, it has nothing do with the OP's equivalency of Android and the iPhone software. He didn't even say iPhone, he said Apple's "made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines." Which is true. The fact that Apple put their software on just an iPhone and and iPod Touch has been a winning strategy for them. You being able to put their software on other devices is kind of irrelevant; in fact, one could argue it would confuse consumers more and make the iPhone software MORE like Android.... which, as the original point goes, is available on a vast variety of different phones and that could end up working against it.

Re:Why?

[jo42]

the iPhone is a piece of hardware

This is the part that people don't fully grok about the iPhone. The iPhone isn't just a piece of hardware, it is the hardware + the software + the infrastructure behind it. The App Store and iTunes are a huge part of what makes it what it has become. Not to mention the absolutely wonderful Xcode development environment and the functionality of the iPhone OS itself. And then there is the iPod touch - it is basically an iPhone without the phone and camera bits. Over 60 million units of iPhone + iPod touch have been sold to date - over 7 million iPhones in the last quarter alone. If you where a developer wanting to make a living off of mobile devices, which platform would you choose?

Re:Why?

[jhfry]

Ok... on that point.

First of all... some of the phones on that list have already been released, so we can assume they are being replaced with a newer model.

Next, there are more things that differentiate a phone than the fact it has a big screen and/or keyboard. One might have multitouch, another doesn't have a touch screen at all. One may not have a camera, some of us work in places where camera phones are not allowed. One may have a 3.5mm headphone jack, a memory card slot, a larger/smaller battery. And of course, they probably range in cost by a substantial amount.

Variety is good, what is good for you might not even be an option for me (especially if you want a camera on your phone). I couldn't care less about a 3.5mm headphone jack, or bluetooth, but I desperately want WiFi.

Re:Why?

[hkmwbz]

Isn't the HTC Leo a Windows Mobile phone?

Re:Why?

[sootman]

Which, sadly, partly negates one of your points: "compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets, so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available." -- the more the hardware varies, the more compatibility suffers. (Not to mention quality, as QA becomes a bigger job.)

I'm not saying choice isn't good, I'm just saying it has its downsides, and 50 new handsets sounds like kind of a lot. And, honestly, it's just not that good for the manufacturers. Compared to things like CDs and movies, where people might own dozens or hundreds, the market for cell phones isn't quite that dynamic. Even if the market grows by 10% per year and people get a new cell phone every six months, people will still own, generally, one at a time. So the size of the pie is still relatively fixed, and they're all killing themselves to keep their slice the same size, when they could probably keep a similarly-sized slice with much less effort by making fewer models.

And companies often forget they ARE allowed to ignore markets. Is the size of the I-want-a-smartphone-but-work-doesn't-allow-cameraphones market really so large that it's worth the R&D expense to make an additional model of phone without a camera? Surely SOMEONE should make one like that, but do they ALL have to?

Re:Why?

[jhfry]

Now that is a good argument in favor of less variety, and I agree that if HTC or Samsung, or whoever were to take their entire R&D budget and put it into a single phone, they may come up with an alternative that would out-sell a 10 phone lineup. Unfortunately, that is a lot of risk to take (what if it bombs) and the savings wouldn't be that substantial (most of the HTC phones have nearly identical circuitry, so they don't reinvent the wheel each time).

As far as compatibility is concerned... yes, more variety means fewer eyes on a single model which means there will be a few compatibility issues because a developer didn't consider that their app would be used with a trackball rather than touchscreen for example. However if a developer designs to the documented Android "Best Practices" http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/ui_guidelines/index.html then their application should be compatible with 99% of the Android phones.

Finally, the 50 handsets is 50 total across all carriers and markets. Many of the phones will have slightly different names and features and only be available with a single carrier. My guess is, if you go into a mobile store you won't find more than 2 Android phones from a single manufacturer for a given carrier.

Re:Why?

[jdgeorge]

Why should these companies choose a different strategy for Android-based phones than they do for any other phones? A very quick glance at their websites reveals the total number of mobile phone products they produce:

Samsung: 166
HTC: 39
Motorola: 107

So, in answer to your question of "why", these companies are doing the same thing with Android that they do with other mobile platforms. Is it a good idea to make a huge number of different phones? I think Steve Jobs would agree with you that it isn't. However, HTC, Samsung, and Motorola are not doing anything new. This is their "tried and true" business model. In fact, it would be strange to expect them to do something different just because their new mobile OS of choice is Android.

Re:Why?

[MemoryDragon]

Actually there are not too many big phone manufacturers left worldwide.
From what I can think of, there are mainly, Sony Ericson, Samsung, HTC, Apple and Nokia left.
All of them except Apple and Nokia have Android phones in the pipeline.
I am not sure if Acer is going to do its own phone, it just could be an oemed HTC.
Dell definitely wont do its own phone it will be oemed.

Re:Why?

[chocomilko]

If anything, we should see more Android devices--Android technology without the phone, like the iPod touch. Clearly there's a market there, and you get around the whole pesky "tied to the carrier you hate" issue.

THANK YOU.

Know why I chose iPhone for a dev platform? Not because I have an iPhone (I don't), but because I have an iPod touch, and so do a lot of other people. I write an app, and not only can iPhone owners use it, so can all the people who don't have/want an iPhone, but happen to have an iPod touch (most of my friends fall into this category).

I don't want to sign a three-year cell phone contract, and I certainly don't want to pay $700 for a phone without a contract. So I bought an iPod touch (less than $250 at the time), and a cheap phone that works. And guess what? It's great. If we start seeing more android-powered devices that aren't phones, but are just media players/web browsers/game and app platforms, we'll start seeing more people start to develop quality apps.

Re:Why?

[GravityStar]

Just look at Nokia's lineup. They sell something like +60 devices just by themselves. Anywhere from a classic candybar phone to a linux smartphone.

Throwing a whole lineup at the consumer seems to work for them.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about Maemo? Other than it being tablet oriented.

Re:Why?

[dangitman]

Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS. Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.

And look at how well that's working for them, with profits of most mobile phone makers dropping through the floor.

Re:Why?

[khchung]

Agree, I got the same reaction, sometimes less is more. Unfortunately, my similar post http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1411079&cid=29807997 got modded as troll instead.

Maybe I did not put it as eloquent as you did, I hope it is not because Android has become the sacred cow of /. and no criticism against it is tolerate.

Re:Why?

[R3d M3rcury]

I like Apple's stuff and you might call me a "fanboi" but you have to admit they've made some good decisions in the past decade, especially with regard to simplifying their product lines.

Well, the simplified product lines were good for Apple because there was less wasted manufacturing (Apple was always having problems projecting demand with less popular machines collecting dust while more popular machines were impossible to find), less problems with cheaper computers cannibalizing more expensive computers (What's the difference between a "high-end prosumer" and a "low-end business" machine), and allowed Apple to create a clear message in regards to marketing the computers (this computer is for home, this computer is for business). I'm not as convinced they were good for Apple's customers, unless you consider being forced to pay for things that you didn't need to be a good thing.

But that's just an aside.

On the more interesting question of why are a few manufacturers releasing so many models. It may have to do with what the network providers want for capabilities. There may be little difference between the HTC Dream and the HTC Lancaster from a features standpoint. However, the HTC Dream is a GSM phone sold by T-Mobile whereas the HTC Lancaster is a GSM phone sold by AT&T. So when you walk into your T-Mobile Store, you don't have to worry about choosing between an HTC Dream or an HTC Lancaster, because the HTC Dream is not a choice.

It's sort of like how you can't have an iPhone on T-Mobile. You can't have an HTC Lancaster, either. You might be able to go to AT&T and buy an HTC Lancaster (or get it off eBay or something) and have it work, kind of, on T-Mobile (like people have done with the iPhone). But why would you do that if the HTC Dream is basically the same phone?

As for why do different companies have what is basically the same phone, it's called "competition" and it's actually a pretty cool thing. It can mean that you don't have to pay excessive prices for a phone that you want. I know, as a Mac person, that this is really a hard thing to get your head around. You'll just have to trust me...

Top Spot

[whisper_jeff]

To me, this is why an Android phone will never take the #1 sales slot. Android, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 phones. That's not to say that some of the better phones won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Blackberry's best sellers nor the iPhone. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the phones - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...

Re:Top Spot

[KlaymenDK]

So what? If we'd all rush to buy electric cars, would it matter that we wouldn't *all* be rushing for the EV-1? Wouldn't it, in fact, be better if we had dozens or more options to choose from -- any electrical vehicle is going to "promote the cause", as it were.

Re:Top Spot

[keatonguy]

Right, you're precisely right, and for this reason Android will probably never have the kind of ubiquity in the consumer mind that the word iPhone has. What's really important is that the OSS community, particularly the Linux dev community, rally around Android too. Like with any OSS endeavor, if you don't have a community of volunteers helping to make the software better, it'll just fade into obscurity and obsolescence.

But if the community jumps on it and starts building the apps we want to see for it? Then we'll have our OSS superphone.

Re:Top Spot

[Hadlock]

All this competition between phones, with a wide variety of them available, means Android OS 3.0 should kick some ass. Android is set to explode here come December/January, and the next (3rd?) generation of phones should be pretty rocking, with less slowdowns. I don't see this as a bad thing at all, and may force Apple to finally include some sort of real multitasking that doesn't hamper performance.

Re:Top Spot

[jhfry]

No, Android will never have #1, because it free.

I know what your trying to say, but I have to disagree. I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future. Why? Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.

At some point, the public will consider Android phones to be equal to the iPhone in features and capability, but they will have choice (Querty keyboard, carrier, camera, form factor, size, screen, cost, etc.). To many people that freedom, coupled with the features and usability they want, is more than enough to keep them away from iPhone.

For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business. The good news is, that because Android is open source, and most contributors have real jobs, its capabilities in business will quickly surpass the Blackberry. Honestly, I have been with several companies that standardized on Blackberry, and other than mail and policy managment, the phone is a waste. If Android 2.0 gets the mail part right, RIM should be worried. If they introduce a policy management server... then RIM is in trouble.

Re:Top Spot

[FatAlb3rt]

When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an Android phone

How many people are interested in a phone because of its OS? I think features & price are what the vast majority of people will be looking at...

Re:Top Spot

[Culture20]

Android, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Android phones, will prevent an individual phone from taking a dominant position

Yep. Android phones will eventually outsell iPhones as the iPhone hardware is shown as stagnant. Why do/did IBM PC clones outsell Apple PCs? Diversity and openness.

Re:Top Spot

[LordVader717]

So what? The best selling PC model is surely a Mac, and probably was ever since the likes the commodore. Did that save them from near-extinction, neglect and abandonment in the 90s?

Re:Top Spot

[Hatta]

To me, this is why a Windows PC will never take the #1 sales slot. Windows, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst Windows PCs, will prevent an individual PC from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in a Windows PC, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 PCs. That's not to say that some of the better PCs won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Mac. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the PC - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...

Re:Top Spot

[chrb]

To me, this is why a PC computer will never take the #1 sales slot. PC, as a platform may quickly rise in dominance, but the competition, just amongst PC computers, will prevent an individual computer from taking a dominant position. When there's 51 possible choices for someone who's interested in an PC computer, it will result in diluted sales for all 51 computers. That's not to say that some of the better computers won't enjoy strong sales - I'm sure several will - but it is to say that I don't believe they'll compete, on an individual basis, with Commodore's best sellers nor the Atari ST. This, of course, is regardless of the quality of the computers - it's purely an opinion about market forces and the resulting outcome...

Re:Top Spot

[Dog-Cow]

The PC won because it started with business and because competition drove the prices into the basement.

On the flipside, Apple's prices for the iPhone are in line with all other smartphone prices and each iteration of the OS has included more business-friendly options and features.

Re:Top Spot

[Rinikusu]

I disagree.

Look at the iPod. There's hundreds of competitors, all fighting for the tiny slice of pie that isn't iPod. I can go down to the bodega down the street and buy a $15 mp3 player, and yet iPod still has the lion's share of the market.

Choice in and of itself is over-rated. You have to have a compelling product (or brand, even) to get people to notice.

(I have a Cowon D2 as my PMP, btw. People look at me like I'm retarded when I pull it out. "It's not an iPod?")

Re:Top Spot

[mjwx]

RIM OS.

FYI, Blackberries use a customised version of WinCE.

For Android to compete with RIM, it needs to get serious about business.

Android is already serious about business it's just not entirely about business. The inbuilt VPN and numerous exchange applications (Nitrodesk's touchdown being the best) are better then those on Symbian (Blackberry never really made it down here in AU, its all Symbian and WinMo) and far above that offered by Apple. All this being said it does need to get better but remember Android is still in it's infancy. The great thing about Android is that you can create a custom ROM specifically designed for business, there could be a market in cooking custom Android roms for companies geared towards management and security.

Re:Top Spot

[Anonymous Coward]

I fully expect to see an Android phone take #1 in the future. Why? Because once these 50+ phones are out, and the 100's that follow, there will be far more users of Android phones than phones running the Mac or RIM OS.

So basically you're arguing that what the iPhone did to Symbian won't happen again, because shut up is why.

Re:Top Spot

[R3d M3rcury]

The interesting question is will this matter?

I'm looking in my Crystal Ball at smartphone market share for 1Q 2011. I'm seeing a list of numbers and names and operating systems...

1. Apple iPhone (iPhone OS X) -- 22%
2. Motorola Wombat (Android) -- 16%
3. HTC Yowsa! (Android) -- 14%
4. RIM Blackberry Slice (RIM) -- 9%
5. Microsoft PinkFon (Windows Mobile 7) -- 2%

Now, if you do the math, you'll see that Android phones have 30% of the market. But the title of this article that I'm reading from the future?

"Apple #1 Cellphone Maker in the World!"

It ain't fair. But that's how it'll read...

Re:Top Spot

[True Grit]

Look at the iPod.

Wait, how does comparing a music player to a cell phone (and the very different consumers of each) actually help here?

Choice in and of itself is over-rated.

And yet, you can take it from me only from my cold, dead fingers...

You have to have a compelling product (or brand, even) to get people to notice.

I think you missed the main point of the GP: Android is no-cost to the manufacturers. No licensing fees or whatever to use it, and a cooperative development style which effectively means the effort of maintaining/improving it is shared, meaning less of a burden, or cost, on the companies that use it (its probably no accident that Nokia is going a similar route with their stuff, with their fully open Maemo software). It isn't just about the consumers, in fact, the GP is suggesting that consumers will have little or nothing to do with its success. Its a "win-win" for the phone makers.

Re:Top Spot

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Wait, how does comparing a music player to a cell phone (and the very different consumers of each) actually help here?

Are you saying people don't want music on their cellphones? If so, perhaps that's because many of the manufacturers have done a poor job at integrating the two, unlike Apple.

Re:Top Spot

[Anonymous Coward]

> Querty keyboard

Nice typo!

Re:Top Spot

[True Grit]

Wait, how does comparing a music player to a cell phone (and the very different consumers of each) actually help here?

Are you saying people don't want music on their cellphones?

No I'm not.

A market for a smartphone, which may or may not also play music, shouldn't be compared to a market for a music player, which only plays music (thus a very different kind of consumer).

My point? Don't compare apples to oranges.

Re:Top Spot

[Rinikusu]

/* Wait, how does comparing a music player to a cell phone (and the very different consumers of each) actually help here? */

It's the commodity, consumer electronics market. If you don't see the similarities between the markets and this, well, you're being obtuse. Android presents the exact same sort of situation that "playsforsure' introduced to the market in an attempt to capture marketshare from Apple. How well did that go? I imagine it will be Apple leading the way here, and everyone else fighting for the scraps. /* And yet, you can take it from me only from my cold, dead fingers... */

No one gives a shit about what *the geeks* think. Unless you plan to buy 10 million phones, it means nothing to the consumer market. /* Android is no-cost to the manufacturers.*/
Linus is no-cost to the manufacturers. Other than a few niches, I'd say we can learn that cost isn't the major deciding facter in the production of consumer hardware. I will say that I find it ironic that Android will be more instrumental in advancing Linux in the consumer space than any other initiative thus far. Go Android. But then again, OS X was able to do what Linux still hasn't been able to do: UNIX on the average user's desktop. OS X isn't exactly reknowned for "choice", either. /* Its a "win-win" for the phone makers. */

Only potentially. If it devolves into a million forks that have to be independently maintained by each manufacturer, then it could become the nail that cements iPhone as "the" phone.

I will be highly, albeit pleasantly, surprised if Android overtakes the market the way iPhone has in the manner that you suggest.

Re:Top Spot

[Rinikusu]

bah, formatting. And I meant Linux, not Linus. I'm sure he's a freed-man by now.

Re:Top Spot

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

But it is you who has created these completely separate theoretical markets. They aren't necessarily as separate as you assume them to be because the real world is a more complicated than that. I'm sure you know that, so I'm not sure what your point really is.

I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem

[dingen]

The main thing the iPhone's got going for it in my view is the enormous amount of application available for the platform. Android has the same potential with a nice centralized distribution channel, while allowing more open development. It would seem to make sense that this will result in many more Android apps in the future, but I wonder if the huge amount of different phones will be of any help at this or maybe in fact create a barrier for developers.

It seems to me that one of the reasons there aren't as many apps out there for Symbian or WinMo is the fact that the hardware which runs these operating systems is so incredibly diverse that it's almost impossible to create an app which runs on everything. Some phones offer multitouch, other's don't. Some phones offer an accelerometer, other's don't. The same goes for pretty much every feature... recording video, a second camera, GPS, you name it. Not to mention the different screen sizes and different UI widgets. These differences make it more difficult for a developer to create an app for these platforms, resulting in fewer apps on these platforms.

Now I know Android doesn't suffer from all of these difficulties... but still I think 50 different phones make it harder to create an app for Android than for the iPhone, where basically only 1 model exists (although in 3 versions).

Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem

[KlaymenDK]

Yes, it will be 'harder' to code for a *class* of devices rather than targeting a single model, but not necessarily harder than you choose to make it yourself.

If you want to code a game for the PS3, you know *exactly* what the hardware is -- but it'll be limited to that, and X-Box owners can't play along unless you port your game.

If you make a website, by simply sticking to the standard, you can support *any* browser out there.

Similarly, in Android, the OS framework is going to give you a lot of assistance, for instance with laying out the screen (for whatever dimensions, aspect ratio, resolution, colour depth), and features relying on model-specific features will degrade gracefully (a Galaxy doesn't crash because you ask it to turn on its (nonexistent) notification LED).

The problem, as evidenced with the somewhat painful browser example, is whether or not device manufacturers will in fact build their devices to spec -- and there is talk that HTC has pulled a classic "IE" by misinterpreting the compass sensor, causing other manufacturers to have to make the same misinterpretation or supply incorrect readings to the OS. (rolleyes)

Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem

[Anonymous Coward]

First, WinMo, just like PalmOS, probably have way more apps than the iPhone. The problem is that most of them sucks and good ones are difficult to find. Good thing is that you don't have to pay MS a 30% tax, and that you can run your own apps without "jailbraking" your phone/pda.
Second, the iPhone is new. Wait 5-10 years. You will see apps that only run on the latest iPhone2 5G SSS with OS 9.0.

Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem

[dingen]

First, WinMo, just like PalmOS, probably have way more apps than the iPhone.

There is no proof at all there are over 85000 apps for WinMo. The last estimation I saw was around 25000, but nobody really knows, as there is no central distribution.

Second, the iPhone is new. Wait 5-10 years. You will see apps that only run on the latest iPhone2 5G SSS with OS 9.0.

The reality is the iPhone is now 3 years old, the latest operating system runs on every model and most apps do as well, while you can't update a WinMo device without hackishly uploading a new ROM onto it.

Re:I wonder if this will help the app ecosystem

[MemoryDragon]

Actually the reason there are so many apps for the iphone has the tremendous gold rush hype apple was able to start. Android already has a load of applications around 9000 many of them free, I dont think the problem is a s big as windows. The main issue in Windows and J2ME is the API diversity there have been so many vendor extensions that it became really hard to provide a load of applications. J2ME was more prone to this than Windows, in windows the issue was the lack of a central marketplace. WinCE also has a load of applications (probably 20.000-30.000) but there is no central place to download them.
Google has the huge advantage of having good control over the APIs unlike Sun with J2ME hence they can keep the API stable, the also dont have to deal with backward compatibility so they can tackle things like 3d resolution indepdendend widgets etc.. from the beginning, and so far they have done a good job!

Carriers

[Enderandrew]

Wired had a great article on this a year ago or so. Every carrier was afraid of touching Android. They said if they used a common OS between phones, they were afraid they would become dumb carriers, and it would remove the potential to advertise each network provider having unique phones.

In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones. They can't customize the OS. So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&T. Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android. It makes zero sense.

I desperately wanted and Android phone. I contacted customer support for several providers telling them they could have my business if they put out an Android phone. (T-Mobile basically has no coverage in Omaha, so they weren't an option). I waited an year. No Android phones came out.

So instead, I bought an iPhone. I'm not terribly happy that I have an iPhone as opposed to an Android phone. I'm not terribly happy I ended up with AT&T. But honestly, it seems like providers really didn't want my business. For all their supposed desire to find an iPhone-killer, they're ignoring the FREE iPhone-killer right infront of them.

Re:Carriers

[Anonymous Coward]

they were afraid they would become dumb carriers, and it would remove the potential to advertise each network provider having unique phones.

Exactly: they were afraid of having to compete on service, price, etc. rather than which ego...err, phone they have available.

These companies are predatory. Just look at what they do with text messaging.

That's the main reason I am stuck with a really crappy phone: buying a better one makes no sense because it will cost me too much to actually use it.

Re:Carriers

[Andy Dodd]

AT&T has the least incentive of any USA carrier to offer an iPhone-killer...

Re:Carriers

[Enderandrew]

The weird thing is that by sticking with the usual suspects (Blackberry OS, Windows Mobile, etc) they are doing exactly what they fear, which is offering the same phone options as the competition. With Android, they have more control over customization, allowing each carrier to provide a unique phone OS experience.

Re:Carriers

[Anonymous Coward]

In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones. They can't customize the OS. So buying a Blackberry on Verizon is no different from buying a Blackberry on AT&T. Google offers up Android for free, and tells networks that they can even customize the software so AT&T's build of Android is unique, and they reject Android. It makes zero sense.

It makes sense if those same manufacturers just want an OS and not have to diddle with anything. Its similar to Windows in that way, they just want to install and go, no tinkering that comes back to the manufacturer, but rather being able to point any configuration issues back at the software designer.

Also, if you want to bring customers over from a competitor, the fact that your crackberry is the same OS as theirs, helps soothe the transition.

Re:Carriers

[Anonymous Coward]

They can "customize" it, but not cripple it. This is why Android is not gaining acceptance. Apple seems to be able to magically convince large, stuck-in-their-way industries to make significant concessions to get Apple's expertise. See: iTunes/RIAA, iPhone/ATT.

Re:Carriers

[Anonymous Coward]

In reality, today providers PAY to put Blackberry OS, Web OS, the iPhone OS, and Windows Mobile on their phones.

Who pays to use the iphone's crippled OS?

Re:Carriers

[chrb]

Surely you could've bought a SIM-free Android phone? Personally, I'm curious to see if anyone in China starts selling the Shanzhai Tiger G3 direct to the West on ebay... for $140 it looks interesting. Mr Bunnie of Xbox hacking fame had favourable things to say recently about the Shanzhai industry, it seems that is where the real cost cutting and innovation is coming from, kind of like the way Silicon Valley used to be.

Re:Carriers

[Enderandrew]

Google offers up three versions of Android I do believe with varying levels of branding.

I'm not sure the carrier would be forced to customize it. However, they have the freedom to do so.

They claim that is what they want, but the do the exact opposite by tying themselves into platforms they can't customize.

Re:Carriers

[Enderandrew]

This is the rare instance in which an AC may have made a very good point.

I hadn't thought about that.

Re:Carriers

[Enderandrew]

I didn't know there was a cheap option. I was replacing my phone, and my wife's. I was witting on two Best Buy gift cards for $100 each. So I was able to get two iPhone 3G-S's for $200 total. When I looked into an open Android phone, I saw that Google would sell me an unlocked phone for $400 each. I just didn't want to drop $800 on phones.

just going to visit with friends at the yacht club

[Anonymous Coward]

1st, the 'friends' 'disappeared', then the yacht club closed. how annoying/inconvenient. what's next?

Apple store is down!

[Anonymous Coward]

New products today! Android sucks!

51 is hardly impressive

[Anonymous Coward]

next to the 2 million iPhones out there.

Is this necessarily a good thing?

[nweaver]

The question: Is Android trying to dethrone Symbian or Apple?

If the goal is Symbian, this is a good thing: An OS thats customed by the handset deliverer with development being secondary, because the platform ends up grossly fragmented (different screens, capabilities, processing power, UI presentation, storage, etc...)

If the goal is Apple, this is a horrid thing: Apple's huge lock is the ecosystem, with all the developers. Which would you rather develop for, a platform which has everything being the same capability, or one with a grossly fragmented market where screens, UI conventions, etc are all different?

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[metamatic]

Which would you rather develop for, a platform which has everything being the same capability, or one with a grossly fragmented market where screens, UI conventions, etc are all different?

That's why nobody develops for Windows, right?

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[Sockatume]

Both, in the sense that it's going to compete with both, and neither, in the sense that Google presumably has no interest in beating them just to adopt the approaches that it has defeated. It'd be like dethroning the king by engineering a kind of feroceous rabbit that only eats people who act in a really kingly way. When they eat the existing king, you don't declare yourself king and act in a kingly way. You'll get eaten. Declare yourself an arch-duke or something. Even if you have nothing against kings.

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[BiggoronSword]

I honestly don't think Google is shooting for a full on take down of the iPhone market. More likely expected, is a strong competitive market where both the iPhone and Androids share a good chunk of the market as a whole. Good old fashioned capitalism.

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[MemoryDragon]

Currently the only thing Android is dethroning is WinCE, Microsoft has really screwed up, they are losing all their vendors.

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[david_thornley]

When developing for Windows, you can figure that the user has a keyboard and the equivalent of a two-button mouse, often with a wheel. The screen is almost certainly big enough for whatever you're doing, and is not used for input. There will be a hard disk drive, and a certain amount of memory. The UI conventions are fixed. The same is true when developing for MacOSX, except that the mouse might not have a right click built in.

When developing for the iPhone, you can figure the user has a multitouch screen of a fixed size and an accelerometer. The small size of the screen is a pain, since it isn't easy to get everything onto it, but since you know the size and how much is taken up by the keyboard and the location sensitivity and that sort of thing you can optimize.

When developing for the Android phone, you can assume that the user has some sort of screen and some sort of keyboard. You don't know if it's a hard keyboard or a soft one (one difference being whether the screen is or isn't used for input). You don't know the screen size, so you can't hand-optimize layout.

One of these is not like the others.

Re:Is this necessarily a good thing?

[metamatic]

When developing for Windows, you don't know the screen size, so you can't hand-optimize layout.

You don't know whether the user is on Windows XP, Vista, or 7, so there are at least three possible sets of UI conventions.

You don't know the resolution of the pointing device. You don't know whether the keyboard has a numeric keypad, whether it can handle multiple simultaneous keypresses or not, whether there's a joystick, or how many buttons the mouse has.

Yet still, somehow, people develop for Windows, because that's where the market is.

And the PC got big when DOS was the core OS. Back then, you didn't know how many colors the screen could display, whether there was a mouse at all, and so on. Yet still, software developers didn't move to the more homogenous Mac platform.

What Android say to Iphone?

[gogowater]

"Watch your back, my brothers are coming to kick your ass!"

goodol'

[Anonymous Coward]

pff.. androids. Good ol' http://imaget.net/share.php?id=87A8_4ADDCB93 kicks androids a*s

Features I want First.

[mrpacmanjel]

A decent processor!

I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor. The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.
I know this will change with newer phones - Acer are develping an android phone with 1ghz processor.

A camera flash!

I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash! Maybe it is related to cost/component size but come on! - this was acceptable with older phones but today I would like to think it is essential.

A physical keyboard!

I know this will add bulk to the phone but considering what android's potential can be (with the right hardware) this will make the phone much more versatile. What about a detachable keyboard?

More memory?
The os runs in a java-like virtual machine. If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java? I also understand there is an API to bypass the vm and use native code.

As it stands I will be ordering the Nokia N900 at the end of October and cannot wait for the hardware to improve. Despite the hype I think the N900 will eventualy become a "niche" product.

On the other hand, the development of Android phones is great and appears it will dominate the mobile phone market. Hopefully it will drive competition and lead to the reduction of iphone obsession.

Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?

Re:Features I want First.

[Monoman]

Is the rumored soon to be released Verizon Droid good enough?
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/10/19/motorola-droid-hands-on/

Re:Features I want First.

[Andy Dodd]

A strobe requires:
1) Pulsed energy storage (big photo-grade electrolytic capacitor)
2) Lots of energy per pulse (eats battery - look at how much battery life of cameras drops when the flash is used)

It's basically impossible to put a strobe into a phone without making it unacceptably large or brutally killing battery life, especially with the general trend in phone design - Thinner/smaller.

As to physical keyboard - there are lots of QWERTY slider phones out there. In fact the original G1 was just such a phone (although the sliding mechanism was WEIRD and seemed extremely flimsy to me compared to other HTC sliders).

Re:Features I want First.

[jo42]

Sounds like you want a Netbook with phone functionality. Get yourself a Nokia Booklet.

Re:Features I want First.

[Microlith]

Actually he said explicitly that he'd be ordering an N900. Netbooks are exceedingly inconvenient in ways phones aren't.

Re:Features I want First.

[tronbradia]

You mean something like this phone?

Re:Features I want First.

[MemoryDragon]

?
The os runs in a java-like virtual machine. If it has any relation to Java does this mean it will exhibit memory consumption similar to Java

The memory consumption you describe is mostly related to the desktop server jvm, it behaves following:
You have a memory window which is fixed and cannot be overruled by the program, the memory is consumed and no empty memory left alone, the garbage collector is triggered once the memory is filled up.
Even the mobile editions of java did not have the behavior they were optimized for saving ram.
Android goes even further, the VM is ram optimized but also has an altered package and class file format and does some prelinking and internal compile time optimization, to save more ram and to avoid the classloader speed bottleneck java generally has. So I assume the entire java thing is a non issue on android, entirely different beast, and so far it looks like the usage of java is a non issue.

Re:Features I want First.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think most of your concerns will be solved with the droid from VZW, it's using the same CPU type as the iphone 3GS and the Pre, and it has a physical keyboard...

Re:Features I want First.

[xant]

> Speaking of iphones does the Android phones have a "Big Red Kill" switch too?

Not sure what "Big Red Kill" does, but it's either one of the following two things:

1) force power off. Yep, either hold down power for a long time, or take out the battery. (Whoops, you can't do that with an iphone. :)

2) force all wireless radios off. Yep, hold down power for a couple of seconds until you get a menu, then select "airplane mode".

Re:Features I want First.

[KillerBob]

.... you do realize that there's phones with flashes available today, right? They use LED flashes, instead of incandescent. The LED uses much less power, meaning less battery drain, and they need a smaller capacitor.

Re:Features I want First.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

If you want a decent flash, and not just some ultra bright LED, you need a big capacitor and flash bulb.

Re:Features I want First.

[Anonymous Coward]

So world + dog complains about the battery life of smart phones, and you want a flash! There's a reason that flashes aren't normally used in phones, they chew up battery, they require a sizable capacitor to be useful, and all of that doesn't fit well in a device that people will complain about if it isn't paper thin and doesn't run for more than a day without a recharge.

I think there were a few phonecameras rather than cameraphones. I remember seeing a Sony that had a flash. I remember the user having to plug it into the cigarette lighter in the car because he couldn't make it through the day if he used the camera to take pictures.

It's not essential on phones, because they are damn phones, not cameras. If you want the features of a camera buy a camera.

Re:Features I want First.

[Conroy]

Before you do that, you might want to check out the verizon droid

A decent processor!

I think the current available phones have a 520mhz processor. The Android software seems to run at an accetptable speed (since the os was updated to 1.5?) but I imagine any apps would be limited by the speed of the processor.

droid should have a 600Mhz ARM Cortex A8 processor and dedicated GPU

A camera flash!

I do not understand why many of the phones contain a 3 or 5 megapixel camera but no flash!

droid has a 5mp camera with flash, and they claim to have a "low lightcapable camera", although i'm skeptical about that one.

A physical keyboard!

I know this will add bulk to the phone

and a slide-out keyboard in a phone 2mm thicker than the iphone

Worst thing that could happen for Android

[khchung]

50+ Android phones coming?!

Is it for real? IMO, this would be the worst thing that could happen for the Android platform!

Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf! Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy). He would be confused and do not know how to choose!

Good luck sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them. It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.

Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone. With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile. It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming.

With two or three strong Android models, it has a chance of overtaking iPhone. With 50+ different models, average Joe is not going to bother to sort them out and just buy an iPhone.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[il1019]

Not necessarily. I don't think your analogy to Linux works quite the same. It would be more like someone walking up and finding 50 different versions of Ubuntu (for example). They all can run the same code, same programs. They might have buttons placed in a different place, different colors or wallpaper, maybe even a slightly different desktop experience (different/more widgets) but they are all running the same basic codebase. From what we've seen with HTC's Sense and Motorola's MOTOBLUR, there will be differentiation, but all apps will still run the same. Especially at the moment since they all have the same processor. HTC has their own on-screen keyboard, for example, but there are no compatibility problems (yet) with Android across multiple phones. Realistically, the changes between the phones are relatively small (qwerty vs t9 vs no keyboard, capacitive vs resistive touchscreen, camera autofocus and megapixels, etc). These changes don't really affect how the platform runs, just specific aspects of it. The goal of Android was to create a strong, common base where many apps can run, and I think they have done that so far. When phones start differentiating on CPU and RAM, we may see some apps which don't perform similarly across all Android phones, but Apple is already having to deal with something similar between it's own versions of iPhone models, so it basically is not inevitable. Phones will get faster and have more RAM as time goes on. I think Android really is going in the right direction, and the more models that are available, the better. A 'universal' app store under Android in my mind is much better than an app store for every phone.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[DeadCatX2]

I wonder if the free market will help naturally select Android phones with features that are popular among the most users, with possible niche phones serving niche markets (like that fellow up there who doesn't want a camera on his phone)

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[javilon]

You are thinking smart-phones, but the day you have 50+ models, they are just regular phones. So people will look at external design and at the bundled applications and that's it.

You have the same thing with Symbian. People don't say: "I am going to buy a symbian phone". They just look at the phone hardware and bundled apps and mostly forget about the OS.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[mrpacmanjel]

worst thing that could happen for the Android platform

Errrr, no. This is the best thing to happen to Android. It's about choice. Different manufacturers competing against each other to produce the "best" Android phone is a "good thing".

Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions...He would be confused and do not know how to choose.

Errrr,no. Generally people buy phones on call/usage charges, contract term, phone features and network coverage. There is already a diverse choice of phone os - e.g. symbian, blackberry's os, iphone os, microsoft... - as well as many manufacturers.

sorting out the features of different phones and the compatibility/usability of different apps among them... It would be worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC.

This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements(e.g. listen to customer) and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely). Whoever get closest to this wins. The main point of Android are these types of "compatibilty" problems (in theory) should go away. When you decide to buy or upgrade to another Android phone you can take all your donwloaded software with you. You do not have to start again and buy your apps all over again.

Having 100+ models works for ordinary mobile phones, as you mostly do not expect to install any extra software other than which comes with the phone. With a "smartphone" (I hate the term) that is practically a mini-PC, there is value in keeping a small set of uniform performance/feature profile. It is the same trade-off between PC gaming vs console gaming

This is usually called "progress" and "innovation". As devices become more sophisticated people want to do more with them - it's only natural. For example, "Non-smartphones" have smaller screens, no touchscreen and limited cpus - installing extra software is impractical. The iphone was the first mainstream mobile phone to make this easier - by your definition the iphone app store is an epic fail.

Oh and Android is Open-source, shouldn't we support it rather than put it down. Not just because it's open-source but as a product is well implemented and deserves some support.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[Anonymous Coward]

WHAT?!

It is nothing like that...

Lets say an OSX user wants to try a separate Linux distro but he has 50+ COMPUTERS to put it on. He only has one other choice of Linux distro, but he has 50+ computers to put it on. The user can select what PC benefits them the most while eliminating PCs that are either overkill or underkill (I made this word up apparently).

I'm pretty sure the average Joe doesn't even know what Android is, point is moot.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[TheGreatOrangePeel]

Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf!

But, that *is* how it's like. There really are 50+ distributions of Linux out there. DistroWatch is proof enough of that.

I have to say that I feel like you've got it a little bit backwards. It's more like the 50+ *brands* of PCs out there running Windows. That's to say many different brands of hardware, but they're all running the same OS. Granted they've all got their own tweaks and slight differences depending on how the manufacturer configures the software, but anyone used to using Windows on a Dell isn't going to have much trouble using Windows on an HP. This is more or less what Android is doing for the handheld market. Folks that have gotten used to the G1 are going to feel well enough at home on a Samsung Moment or HTC Hero.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[shutdown -p now]

Imagine what would a PC user who wants to try Linux reacts if he sees 50+ different distributions of Linux on the shelf! Each with different features, strengths and price (not free for the sake of analogy). He would be confused and do not know how to choose!

You're thinking of a wrong analogy.

Imagine what would a PC user think if he sees 50+ different hardware manufacturers that make PCs under different brands, with different designs and base hardware, but which all come with Windows preinstalled, and can all run the same software.

Oh, wait...

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[Rinikusu]

As I mentioned in another post, choice is over-rated for this sort of market. There's a billion "choices" in the Portable Media market that's not iPod: From Creative, to Sony, the korean brands Cowon and iRiver, Sansa, to the hundreds of shitty little chinese knock-offs, there's plenty of choice, all fighting to be a better iPod than iPod. And yet, iPod is still king. Even with the industry move to 256kb/s mp3s, with no DRM, why does iPod still hold sway over the market? I personally think my Cowon D2 is head and shoulders above the last gen iPod (when I purchased it) in terms of features, customization, and audio quality, but Cowon is a less than a niche brand here in America.

Choice can hurt.

Start listing a giant checklist of features and most consumers' eyes just glaze over. Then they just go with the iPod.

Open-source is a non-issue, as well. Look how awesome it's done for Linux on the desktop. I.e., not at all. If anything, Open Source apps have done more to advance Open Source than Linux has, the OS is pretty much irrelevant (witness, say, Audacity's succes on Windows, OS X and Linux) to most consumers.

Don't get me wrong, I'm rooting for Android. I've got plans to pick up a next-gen Android phone (the G1 was lacking quite a bit when I was shopping for phones), and if I had to do any sort of phone dev right now, it'd be android over iphone. But never underestimate the power of having a single, controlled platform. Sometimes Freedom From Choice is a good thing, especially in the consumer market.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[khchung]

Apple is already having to deal with something similar between it's own versions of iPhone models, so it basically is not inevitable.

That is one of the problems, but Apple could still somewhat manage the issue as they are the sole source of new iPhone/iPod models. You can already see the problem for developers as some apps need to clarify exactly which model has been tested and which model will have missing features due to missing hardware (e.g. no compass in iPod).

With Android, no one could stop other manufacturer from make one with additional hardware (e.g. higher res, extra front facing camera) which could make some apps support additional function. While some would say this is a good thing. But from a marketing pov, too many choice is only going to confuse he average Joe, especially if the choices have real impact on his "user experience" (e.g. high screen res may make apps create for lower res look ugly, either due to scaling or smaller size). If he found a good app, he cannot automatically assume his friend's phone can run it as good.

I have seen this first hand on the Palm with Sony Clie series. A Palm app is no longer simply a Palm app, I have to look at the fine prints to see if it supports the Clie's resolution, and if it supports color, etc. For me, the user, the "Palm apps" space has fragmented into many small spaces, each for different hardware spec (160x160 mono, 160x160 color, 320x320 color, etc). I can imagine the pain it caused to the developers.

Similar problems with Java MIDP stuff. The core profile is so weak you can't much useful stuff there. Move up to higher profiles and you have to worry which phone actually supports the feature set you need. Too few phones and you got too small a market, too many phones and you got a huge testing effort.

What I see with the Android is the same thing happening.

Your scenario with 50+ ubuntu linux all capable of running most apps is the best case scenario, but I cannot find the same optimism from my past experience with the Palm platform and the Java MIDP platform.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[cboslin]

This is called "choice" and encourages manufacturers to observe market requirements(e.g. listen to customer) and hopefully drive down prices(unlikely). Whoever get closest to this wins.

Most of the businesses related to wireline/wireless are simply big to care and/or listen to their customers. And the market does NOT work because of all the proprietary hardware and proprietary software and proprietary networks, etc....

If the market was free and working as you, and many others hypothesis; than we would have fiber to our homes already. (Promised by telcos in 1990s in order to get tax dollars)

By 2000 we would have had 100Mbps / 100Mbps Internet access, for less than $55 per month, via that fiber connection to our homes.

By 2006 we would have had 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps Internet access for less than $52 per month via that same fiber connection.

The market has not and does not work. The companies that play in the space DO NOT listen to customers as RipOffReports.com proves. Enter the name of your provider and search on any term: fraud, problem, billing, and you will discover that your provider and all the other providers have hundreds if not thousands of reports. One or two you might dismiss as crack pots, but not the volume that is there. Also it is pretty obvious when you are reading a report if the person is being unreasonable or not. Sadly most are not, the customers are just not interested in providing service anymore.

If they listened to their customers, no one would get an inflated bill in the mail for any reason. Especially not for the company putting random charges on it. I personally experienced that from two different providers over a 10 year period before I left cellular forever.

I do not mind paying for what I use, but I will not pay for their mistakes or other peoples charges. Both times I had in excess of three years as a good customer with the provider (obviously one time was longer than just 3 years). If I had mattered as a customer, they would have removed the charges that I did not make and proved based on my multi-year calling pattern the first time and via their provisioning mistake the second time. Both times, both companies simply DID NOT CARE. Said pay up or else. Sorry but mob style tactics do not work on honest Americans.

I churned and am much happier for it. Skype is wonderful and if they went out or got bought out tomorrow, I would provision my own VoIP server (Linux of course), use it myself and sell to my friends. There is no way I would ever settle for a total cost of ownership of over $100 per year ever again. Especially not in this economy.

These customer-no-service-tactics are really stupid. They honestly believe you do not have a choice or they would not do it. Guess what, they are WRONG!

Sign me laughing all the way to the bank!

P.S. Only Greenlight in Wilson N.C. offers 100Mbps / 100Mbps Fiber connected to your home Internet access in the USA today. It will cost you $100 per month. When they started offering service, after being invited into the community by the local politicians to do so; the telcos / Cable companies responded by attempting to push legislature through the North Carolina legislature to stop them. Yea, thats a FREE market, NOT!

The markets have not been working since 1990. So wake up and see the reality of the situation, please, before it is too late.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[cboslin]

Your scenario with 50+ ubuntu linux all capable of running most apps is the best case scenario, but I cannot find the same optimism from my past experience with the Palm platform and the Java MIDP platform.

I would not put Ubuntu or any full Linux distro on an embedded device, perhaps Lubuntu, but I have not looked into it. My guess is neither would you, so this post is more for others that do not know anything about Linux and not you specifically.

There are many wonderful Linux distros designed for these processors and less memory that would work just fine. However no one is going to go out of their way to tell you that you can save allot of money by using one. And that you will have more options with software to run.

I also would not load applications that require huge libraries to run...Java is among these. Sorry, but Java simply does NOT belong everywhere. There are multiple ways to approach embedded devices with less memory and slower processors. Many of these options have been working for well over 5 years now, some well over 10 years, its just that people do not know any better thanks to the lack of marketing and vendor lock in issues.

The truth is out there, but people have to be willing to look for it to find it. If they do not want to look for it, perhaps they should be left to pay inflated prices for their services. Call it a stupidity tax.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[khchung]

It seems you completely misunderstood my point, maybe my writing is too confusing.

What I mean is, you comparing the 50+ Android smartphones with 50 version of Ubuntu Linux, and I say that would be a true analogy only in the best case scenario. My past experience with the fragmentation of the Palm platform, and also the J2ME platform (which is unrelated to Palm), make me not as optimistic as you.

You might think paying more just so you don't have to look around is being stupid, it would be true if you have more time and interest than money. But when you earn enough money, with some to spare, but don't have as much time (due to work and family responsibilities) to compare the features of 10 or 20 similar smartphones, then you choice is (a) pick one at best guess and hope it works out, or (b) pay a premium for a brand name that you have confidence that it will work well.

Don't always discount people paying more for simple stupidity, not everyone has the time nor the interest to compare and weight the cost/benefit of slight technical details to save maybe 100 bucks (actually a comparable Android phone is not that much cheaper than iPhone anyway). The peace of mind and time saved would be easily worth ~20% of the price for many people, Apple understand this, and the huge sales of iPhone is a testament to it.

For owning an iPhone for 2 months, I have already bought maybe 20-30 USD worth of apps, and the process of buying apps is practically foolproof. My friend bought a HTC Magic, and he said when he tried to pay for an app he wanted, he found that he cannot pay because he is not living in the US! The payment system only works in some selected country (but not his), even though the HTC Magic is officially available where he lived! So basically he either has to not use the app, or he has to pirate the app, even though he intended to pay for it.

This is "user experience", it might not worth anything to you, but many people are willing to pay for it.

Re:Worst thing that could happen for Android

[lamapper]

This is "user experience", it might not worth anything to you, but many people are willing to pay for it.

I understand all too well that Marketing most certainly works, which your example points out very well. I also understand that many people value their time more than their money. Though many might argue that point, I understand where you are coming from.

The fact is that today there are Linux options in every category that just work. Right out of the box, without the need to configure or change anything, they just work. Its just not advertised and marketed very well.

Of course if you prefer the Apple monopoly, they can turn off your phone or an app (Apple can deny you the use of an app) whether you like it or not. I have read multiple articles where they have done just that, the one that stood out was a very expensive app that pretty much did not do anything productive, yet people wanted it, bought it until Apple said No. I personally would not care for that no matter how much time or money I had. I can censor myself, thank you very much.

Or you can chose a platform like Symbian, but the apps have to be "signed" before you can use them and that pretty much limits choice doesn't it. That's no good either. Their BS excuse viruses, what a joke. If someone's usage habits invites viruses than its their problem, not mine as my usage habits (beginning with Linux, which can get viruses if users have sloppy usage habits) prevent them, making it a non-issue for me. Yet I am being limited, supposedly, (can you say FUD, I do), for other peoples poor choices. I don't like that either.

Let's see, if my options are tethering/limited via a Proprietary OS (Symbian, Apple or other Microsoft derivative (CE/Mobile) vs untethered/unlimited via Android/Maemo (Linux based OS) on an embedded device, well the decision is easy. I like having options. I also think that if you have either more money or more time; you should not be ashamed to buy a product that gives you more options, not less.

If you have money you can purchase/hire the expertise you need. So that argument is lame IMO.

If you have time you can research out the things you need and apply them (assuming the platform (hw/sw) allows you too! Oh that's right only a Linux derivative like Android/Mameo allows for that. Guess your decision will be the same as mine, but wait...

Marketing works....(very true!)

History repeats itself

[paulpach]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Apple had one computer with one operating system (the mac) vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.

Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share. This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.

Re:History repeats itself

[sootman]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Well, they didn't do as well as MS--nobody did--and while they don't have that high of a market share, they're ridiculously profitable. Compared to Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway, and everyone else who was involved in or "won" the race to the bottom, they've done quite well. Not everyone who "loses" is a loser and not everyone who wins is a winner.

Re:History repeats itself

[iamhigh]

So throw out the winner, then number two looks great! Not to mention Dell, HP, etc. don't write the software, they only sell it with their hardware (sorta). You can't compare the profitability of Apple, with the iPhone, iPod, computer hardware, and the whole software stack as their own to make money off of to a hardware/resale company like dell (might as well compare to cdw). You could compare it to Dell+MS. Apple "lost" the "PC war", but they have found many other ways to make money. So has TI, Xerox, IBM, and all the other players from back in the day (well, not ALL).

Re:History repeats itself

[alen]

Except when you compare the iphone to other cell phones it's priced in the middle of the pack, not more expensive than everyone else. Most of the price of a cell phone is in the monthly bill. iphone prices range from $50 for a 3G refurb to $299 for a 32GB 3GS which is in line with other cell phones. An iphone will run you $70 a month for the basic plan. Sprint's cheapest plan is $60 and I priced VZW at $85 a month for a cheap plan.

and unlike the Mac of the 1980's the iphone has the most developer support and recent studies have shown that iphone apps make more money than the same Android app. It's too early for the Pre, but so far it makes more financial sense for a developer to write apps for the iphone rather than for Android. And Apple's recent rule changes will mean less piracy and more money for developers

Re:History repeats itself

[tlhIngan]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Apple had one computer with one operating system (the mac) vs one operating system (MS-DOS and later Windows) running on hundreds of different clones.

Eventually, the clones competed fiercely on price and features and ate away most of the market share. This happens even as apple had an arguably better product.

Is it a war that Apple wants to win? The iPhone doesn't hold a candle to the Blackberries or the Nokias in sales, and I suppose we oculd wipe out its millions sold as a rounding error compared to the total unit sales of cellphones. This applies to everything else as well that Apple does (excluding the iPods, which was more a case of good timing).

Take Mac hardware sales and the iPhone - they're big numbers, but tiny overall compared to the entire market. However, Apple's in a place they want to be - they make loads of money where they are - while everyone's competing in the sub-$1000 area (have you seen the crap they push for it? Pentium CPUs, screens sub-1024x768 on a 15"...), leaving Apple to mop up the >$1000 area, where all the decent machines live. Ditto with the iPhone - be like Nokia and sell a billion phones a month, or, sell millions, but reap up 40% of the profits of the sector.

(I exclude the iPod simply because it's a case of timing - Apple came out with a decent product at the time just before exponential growth - lots of space (though less than a Nomad), small compact form factor (pocketable, unlike a Nomad), and best of all - fast transfers (USB1.1 vs Firewire - no competition). But that's a rarity in the world - Apple was lucky. They had Toshiba wondering what to do with the new little hard drive they invented, and saw a potential there.)

Re:History repeats itself

[itsdapead]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Quick history lesson:

Apple's initial success was with the Apple 2, before the "IBM" PC existed. But when the time came to follow through, they had two massive misfires with the Apple 3 (technical problems) and then the Lisa (revolutionary but completely unaffordable, even by Apple standards).

The Mac was not released until after the IBM PC had risen to dominate the business computing market. Hence the famous "1984" ad which launched the Mac. It was playing catch-up all along.

Oh, and if you think Apple should have taken a leaf out of IBM's book: one of these companies is still selling personal computers in serious quantity today, the other isn't - having been driven out of its own market when the cloners figured out a legal way of copying the supposedly proprietary IBM PC BIOS ROMs. NB: despite the revisionist history, the PC was never intended to be an "open" system in the modern sense of the word.

Re:History repeats itself

[dingen]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Every time you touch a mouse to move the cursor on your color graphics screen and click on a window, menu or icon, you are using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to. Think about that.

Re:History repeats itself

[True Grit]

This is exactly how Apple lost the PC war

Every time you touch a mouse to move the cursor on your color graphics screen and click on a window, menu or icon, you are using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to. Think about that.

a) When I think of that, its not Jobs that comes to my mind, its Xerox PARC (see the sections on the GUI & Apple).

b) Jobs *really* only wants you using a computer that way if its an Apple computer that you're using. :)

Re:History repeats itself

[Anonymous Coward]

So throw out the winner, then number two looks great! Not to mention Dell, HP, etc. don't write the software, they only sell it with their hardware (sorta). You can't compare the profitability of Apple, with the iPhone, iPod, computer hardware, and the whole software stack as their own to make money off of to a hardware/resale company like dell (might as well compare to cdw). You could compare it to Dell+MS. Apple "lost" the "PC war", but they have found many other ways to make money. So has TI, Xerox, IBM, and all the other players from back in the day (well, not ALL).

Last I checked CDW never made their own mp3 player, nor are they creating a cell phone. Dell has made their own versions of pretty much all of those (minus the software), they just don't sell well.

Re:History repeats itself

[Anonymous Coward]

If you can only resize a window from the bottom right, can only find the app menu at the top left of the main display, can't turn off the retarded mouse acceleration, and need to reduce yourself to CLI hacks to make your keyboard work properly, they you're using a computer the way Steve Jobs wants you to. Think about that.

My Mac is a small, well-formed sack of shit. If it weren't for the fact I'm developing a game for the small, well-formed and impressive iPhone, I'd throw it back on the eBay I bought it from.

link

[RiotingPacifist]

link for the lazy

I've been wondering when the counter-apple advertising would kick in, the "only on iphone" tagline is just a bit too cocky and deserves to get demolished. I think the advertising of andriod/android phones will be key because, the SW is better than the iphone's, the HW varies but if your looking for any particular feature there will probably be an android mobile that beats the iphone, but the advertising (so far) is what android has lacked.

N900:iPhone:WinMo::Linux:OSX:Windows

[Microlith]

I'm sorry, that slot is reserved for Maemo. Until the community has real influence on the path Android takes, it's not nearly as open.

It's sad that the N900 doesn't get as much attention as all the Android based phones, what with it being considerably more open and based on existing open frameworks.

Re:N900:iPhone:WinMo::Linux:OSX:Windows

[sricetx]

Is the N900 locked down via something like Symbian Signed? I know it's not a Symbian device, but given Nokia's history with Sybmian Signed...

Re:N900:iPhone:WinMo::Linux:OSX:Windows

[Microlith]

No, it is totally open. You can even rebuild and replace the kernel if you so desired. In fact, it's trivial to install an app that grants you root (it's available in the APT-based repositories.)

Re:More choice means more headaches

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly why developers (like myself) love developing for the iPhone. Imagine trying to create an app/game and having to test it for all these devices. It's not just a matter of testing though, each one could have different means of input and different screen sizes. Absolute nightmare.

Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[Webcommando]

It would be nice if some of the items made sense. Now, I'm speaking from the consumer perspective here and not someone who reads technology sites daily:

For example, what does ability to run "widgets" really mean? I think most people get "applications" and know that Apple iPhone has a ton of them...so what is this?

What exactly is open development to the average user? Again, I can get lots of applications from Apple so what is this specifically saying to me the consumer?

I think most people will get what's the point of 5 Meg Pixel camera (for most bigger is better, right). keyboard and replaceable battery are probably dead on for a segment of the audience. Personally, I like soft keyboards and never have changed my battery. However, I think it makes a key differentiating feature highly visible.

I have an iPhone and it is a nice device and I don't get the seething hate of Apple products. However, something better comes along, I'll consider it.

Now as an aside...I really don't like the generate "hype" ads that don't really say anything about the product before release. I remember the G commercials for Gatorade last year. Is it a new sport clothing line, shoe, what...then turns out to be just a sports drink. Seen these for cars, perfume, etc. and I think they are counter productive for most viewers (bigger hype, bigger disappointment).

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[Zebedeu]

For example, what does ability to run "widgets" really mean? I think most people get "applications" and know that Apple iPhone has a ton of them...so what is this?

What exactly is open development to the average user? Again, I can get lots of applications from Apple so what is this specifically saying to me the consumer?

Maybe they're not targeting only the "average user"? One big feature of the Android platform is exactly open development, so maybe they expect to attract new devs to the platform, while perhaps taking a jab at Apple's app approval process.

Now as an aside...I really don't like the generate "hype" ads that don't really say anything about the product before release. I remember the G commercials for Gatorade last year. Is it a new sport clothing line, shoe, what...then turns out to be just a sports drink. Seen these for cars, perfume, etc. and I think they are counter productive for most viewers (bigger hype, bigger disappointment).

100% agreed. I have an Android phone and I believe that they have the right vision, but I hate these kinds of attack ads. You want to sell your product? Make it better than the competition, and people will notice.

A smear campaign makes it look like you don't have confidence in the product itself and need to resort to low blows.

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[Sockatume]

1) A "widget" is like a "gadget", those things you can shove on your Mac dashboard or Windows desktop. It's a mini-app which runs in the background that you use often. Samsung pushed them into the mobile space with Touchwiz on their inexplicably successful Tocco and everyone's pissing themselves trying to shove widgets on their phones now.
2) That part probably doesn't work. "There's an app for that" tends to trump "there are some SDK restrictions which we don't like"
3) Yeah, having your USP visible is a big boon. Nokia is in the midst of an epic fail on Ovi services which you just don't see when you walk into the shop to discuss the phone. With Apple it's "here's apps" with its menu design and Samsung's all "this phone looks a hell of a lot like a camera, hmm?" but many manufacturers don't understand the importance that visibility.

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[genghisjahn]

Remember AT&T's M-Life campaign of the late 90s? So many bill boards with "What is M-Life? Is it fattening?"

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[hkmwbz]

Widgets are incredibly useful because they allow you to customize your home screen the way you want it. I've got several useful widgets, including detailed battery info, WiFi and GPS toggling (to save battery), etc.

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I figured it was an ad for the next iphone and iignoredit.

Re:Droid ad didn't make complete sense

[dangitman]

Maybe they're not targeting only the "average user"? One big feature of the Android platform is exactly open development, so maybe they expect to attract new devs to the platform,

But why would they target developers through mainstream TV ads? Any developer who's interested already knows about Android from the web sites they regularly read, or directly from Google. Also, this isn't advertising the Android platform as a whole, it's advertising a specific phone.

Battery Life is the problem

[z_gringo]

I have the HTC Dream, and the biggest problem with it is that the battery life is so bad, there is no way I could use it for my main phone. Even with light usage and bluetooth and wifi turned off, the thing is dead in 6 hours or less. If I turn on and use wifi, it gets a lot less. Maybe 2 hours or 3.

It a nearly 500€ phone and it can't make it through a whole day without recharging. The camera isn't great either, but that isn't a big deal. The battery problem is a HUGE deal. However at a recent conference, I saw that the iPhone users had the same problem with battery life.

Re:Battery Life is the problem

[dingen]

An iPhone will last easily for a day. I don't even recharge mine daily when I haven't used it a lot. Watching streaming video over 3G eats a lot of battery power as do a lot of games, but other than that, the battery life is fine.

Re:Battery Life is the problem

[MemoryDragon]

Try to load appkiller the issue is mostly lingering background tasks, android behaves unfortunatly like winmo it does not close applications.
From what I can gather you should get 1-3 days, more likely 3 if you turn most stuff off.

Re:Battery Life is the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a bigger battery at the same time I bought my G1 because of reviews of bad battery life, so I have never used the original battery. With the extended battery it lasts about 3 days with light usage. And over 12 hours of continuous usage.

Re:Battery Life is the problem

[cboslin]

Battery life is a big issue for all WiFi enabled handhelds, including the Nokia Nxxx series. My solution was easy, plug it in at work and plug it in at home. Pretty much have phone access approx 80 - 90% of the time. If I am commuting, anyone calling can leave a message and I will get it when I connect to WiFi the next time.

Best of all, with Skype my total cost of ownership is $100 per year. I use to pay more than that per month for a cellular phone. Stopped doing that over 3 years ago and never intend to go back.

Really??

[Anyd]

My G1 lasts for like 3 days idling... I keep GPS/Wifi/Bluetooth turned off unless I need them, but toggling them is easy with the new update (add widget > power control.) GPS sucks up the battery really fast though, are you keeping that off as well?

50+ phones and still no proper package management

[BigJim.fr]

Package upgrade on Android... For starters, the "My Downloads" list is not ordered alphabetically nor in any apparently meaningful order. Then for each upgradeable package, one must first browse to the package, then manually trigger the upgrade package, then acknowledge system privileges the upgraded package and finally clear the download notification and the update notification. Is this a joke ? This almost matches the tediousness of upgrading Windows software - an impressive feat considering that the foundations of Android package management seem serious enough. Where is my APT ?

IMO Android is very impressive.

[mefdahl]

I got a My Touch 3G for $99 on the "Oprah sale" about a month ago, I live in podunk and as such have yet to see a 3G connection... I 'opted out' of the data plan, so my TCO is currently much lower than the normal smart phone user. Why would I dumb down my smart phone, it has wifi... around here just about every public building has a public wifi access point (even the grocery store), I don't use my phone while I'm driving... so it has entirely been a non-issue. It is a good phone, a definite upgrade from my old flip phone. Even the weakest aspect of the phone (the camera) is an upgrade from my old phone... I got the phone before the 1.6 update was rolled out and the improvement going from 1.5 to 1.6 was significant. If that is any indication of what is in store when 2.0 is released, I'm flat out excited. Oh and the toys, the google star map alone is worth the price of admission... I have never been so impressed with a portable device, and I've had all sorts of smartphones shoved down my throat by employers (Windows Mobile and Blackberries mostly I guess, I've only played with friends iPhones and have yet to see any new palm devices). So I for one hope that Android really does take off, I know it has impressed me.

Re:IMO Android is very impressive.

[cboslin]

Did you even look at the Nokia N800, N810s? They are fantastic Linux computers and the WiFi is great! I believe you can pick them up at great prices today, probably sub $200. They just work.

freerunner

[Anonymous Coward]

They counted the Koolu Freerunner and Openmoko GTA02 as separate phones, which they're not.

Different order of magnitude

[Sockatume]

The differences between Android installations are about the same as differences between Windows installations, not Linux distros. HTC's game-changing reworking of Android 1.6 contains... a new skin, and some widgets. Compared to the machine-to-machine variation in pre-installed crap I see on Vista Home Basic boxes, it's nothing. Everyone else's customisations are even more minor. Essentially, Android is Android.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[Microlith]

Where is my APT ?

Not being used by Android because it being Linux is purely immaterial.

If you want a phone with APT, you need to look at Nokia's Maemo offering.

App Compatibility

[Sockatume]

Right now there is one rule for Android software:

* Every app works on every handset.

That's it. That's the whole thing. All Android devices have AGPS with a compass, and an HVGA display. On-screen or hardware keyboard input is passed to apps the same way, so it doesn't matter which a device has. Likewise, access points are passed to apps according to the SDK, so it doesn't matter what kind of network access the device actually uses. GPS and AGPS with a compass is mandatory, so any app which runs on an Android handset can expect those features.

With 1.6, they'll diversify by adding an option in the SDK for two different screen sizes, one smaller and one larger than existing HVGA devices. The store automatically filters according to what resolution the device supports: higher resolution devices can run lower-resolution apps in compatability mode, but not vice versa. With the new devices, the new rule is:

* If you don't have a QVGA device, then every app works.
* If you have a QVGA device, then you can run any app you see on the store.

Now, you tell me how that's "worst than try to figure out if a given PC game can run properly on your home PC"

50?

[SnarfQuest]

I'd think that it would take more than 50 phones to get very big in the cell phone business. I'm sure that apple sells more than 50 phones per day. These must be very expensive units to recoup the development costs with that few being sold.

False comparison on many levels

[SuperKendall]

Right. Just like more choices among PC hardware has led to it having the smallest number of available applications

It's pretty obvious you've not done much mobile development.

Developing for PC hardware, you can expect:

Minimum expected screen resolution large enough to do just about anything with (1024x768 these days)
Keyboard
Mouse
Disc with lots of space

Now look at the mobile space. Screen size is far more constrained so every pixel counts - but you have varying screen sizes and pixel counts. You can't be sure there is a real keyboard or not. You can't be sure there is multi-touch or not. You can't be sure if the device has a lot of space to keep your application executable or not.

When you test on one PC with Windows, unless you are testing something that relies heavily on specific hardware you can pretty much say if it works on one system it's going to work on all of them about the same. You cannot so easily do that with mobile devices, if nothing else performance characteristics mean you have to test on a few devices. In practice Android developers will probably have to have about four to five test units to cover the most popular phones and range of abilities.

Think of it this way - where are all the games that use my SpaceOrb? That was a nice controller for the PC, but there were many different 3D controllers out around that time and the market fragmented, then they all died. I'm not saying, at all, that is what will happen to Android. I am saying that the development issues are not as similar as you make them out to be nor is the base platform you are targeting as homogenous as you make out.

I have the same issue right now in considering how to port an app to the Blackberry, and that doesn't have nearly so many devices...

Re:False comparison on many levels

[ckaminski]

I still have my spaceorb. I could smoke any of my friends with it in Descent 3 - no one with a keyboard or mouse could compete (and I'm a pretty mediocre gamer). It just went to show how powerful that full 3d six axis motion control was. Too bad it was dumped out of the marketplace, and missed the USB revolution. :-/

Re:False comparison on many levels

[SuperKendall]

I sold mine eventually, if it had been USB as you say I might have kept it to mess around with. Rather than the pretty crude motion tracking stuff MS/Sony are coming out with next year, I'd rather see a true six-axis controller again - and a new Descent to go with it!

As you might have guessed, Descent was the whole reason I owned a Space Orb in the first place (and a few other controllers but I always liked the Space Orb best). I sometimes wonder if that game alone was fully responsible for the rise of 3D controllers, and when it fell by the wayside so did they.

No way to count? Then they don't.

[SuperKendall]

...like he explained, not that there's any way to prove it.

So then you are wrong until you can prove otherwise. If we can't find them, how are consumers supposed to?

Honestly, try to find even 10k apps on any Blackberry or Windows Mobile compilation list (which is where you would look to for proof of app count since anyone who had developed an app to sell would at minimum seek to be on one of those lists). They just are not there, development for those platforms was always very niche with a pretty small number of developers - mostly because there was very little market. You casually toss aside the 85k app number as insignificant, but that took tens of thousands of developers to produce in such a short timespan.

This is also borne out from experience, Windows Mobile users I knew purchased about one or two apps (Goodmail, and perhaps Opera) and that was it. Blackberry owners has the pleasure of owning a phone where you didn't need to buy applications to replace core features of the phone - and besides, they were too busy answering work email to buy anything anyway.

Any way you do the math, there is simply no way the total of Blackberry and Windows Mobile apps COMBINED are near the iPhone count. You have to provide at least some evidence that would make it likely there could be that many apps for either platform, all evidence is against that being the case.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[PrimaryConsult]

What are you talking about? It's been a few months since I last used mine, but I recall very regularly being notified of app updates without ever having to browse to the apps in the store, and I simply needed to approve the lot of them in one go. Maybe if you want the latest and greatest the moment it comes out, but a normal user would be fine with waiting until the automatic updates push it through...

And show it working!!!

[SuperKendall]

Maybe they're not targeting only the "average user"? One big feature of the Android platform is exactly open development, so maybe they expect to attract new devs to the platform, while perhaps taking a jab at Apple's app approval process.

That doesn't make sense for an ad, at least not on any TV station. Do you think anyone remotely interested in mobile development does not already know Android has a more open development platform? That's not the kind of thing you really put out ads for, except possibly some extremely technical websites. You play it up in conferences or technical press and give a great deal of detail on your website so interested developers can learn more.

Heck, if that was the point why didn't they have any kind of link to why developers should try to target the Verizon Droid phone specifically? Not even a logoing program?

100% agreed. I have an Android phone and I believe that they have the right vision, but I hate these kinds of attack ads. You want to sell your product? Make it better than the competition

And show people how it works! It's insane to me that more companies have not copied the Apple ads in this singular respect, showing actual use of the phone. Yes it's sometimes time compressed and all that, but visually you can see basically what you are going to get.

That was a huge failing with the Palm ads I thought, that interface is really good but the ads are of little interest to anyone apart from fully-emo teens.

The point of a teaser like that should have been, to try as stop as many people as possible from leaving Verizon - either for an iPhone, or even for another Android phone on Sprint or wherever. If you were thinking about a Hero today would that ad have done anything to stop you, or would it just reinforce your feeling that Android is cool and make you buy now instead of later - on a non-Verizon network? They could have convinced a lot of people to stick with the network for just a few months more if they had something compelling. Not even an Enterprise-style beauty flyby.

The downside of that

[itsdapead]

This is one of the biggest ways that Android and the iPhone differ. With the iPhone, you have one phone, and one OS.

There's a flipside to that, though, especially when it comes to the App market.

One of the iPhone's huge hidden advantages is that there is that there is only one UI to design for: every App has to work well with just a touchscreen and accelerometer if it is to succeed.

With a diversity of Android handsets appearing, how many developers will actually test their wares on every handset? Already, I've encountered some apps written for the G1 that don't work properly with the Hero's soft keyboard (e.g. most of the terminal emulators). Some games are unplayable because the "chin" buttons have been re-arranged. So far, most authors seem eager to address this, but when these problems are multiplied by 50, will they keep up?

Its not just physical differences: HTC have tinkered with the GUI quite a bit so (e.g.) alternative music players work fine, but don't integrate with the lock screen. Again - seems trivial, but multiply that by 50.

Operating systems for "full size" PCs don't have such a big issue: most variations will include a physical keyboard, a mouse and a decent-sized screen.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[BigJim.fr]

Not being used by Android because it being Linux is purely immaterial.

Of course - it could be any package management... Just something automated !

If you want a phone with APT, you need to look at Nokia's Maemo offering.

Yes, I have noticed it and I'll certainly give it a good look.

Let me guess...

[Hurricane78]

... they mean in total! *badum-tish*

I'm here all night! Try the smørrebrød!

Re:No way to count? Then they don't.

[mdm-adph]

...try to prove to me that the majority of those 85k apps aren't iFart apps, and you'll have a point.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[BigJim.fr]

I have a bunch of applications in the "My downloads" menu, all with the "Update available" status... But they never upgrade automatically. The OS upgraded to Cupcake fine though. But I have never seen a single app upgrade notification come up without me having triggered the upgrade.

Decent screen size?

[Baki]

The smaller screen size (I think 3.2 inch is maximum) of android phones is what kept me stuck with my iphone until now. I think the iphone screen is just right: still not too big to carry arround, but just big enough for websites. I wouldn't settle for a 1/10th of an inch less, but move away from mac app-store and itunes close-in immediately.

The Big Red Kill switch in the Google cloud

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes indeed, the Android marketplace does have a "Big Red Kill Switch" of sorts, at least as it has operated up to now. That was discussed on /. last year around the release time. Never been used as far as I know. Philosophically Google says it is for prevention of "malicious apps", as opposed to Apple's "For Apps We Just Don't Like For Some Self Serving Reason". Of course this is from the same folk who say "Do no evil.", then turn right around and do some pretty questionable stuff, so lay on the grains of sodium chloride before you swallow.

OH, and you can always install apps through other means than the marketplace, so the Big Red Android Switch is significantly less hazardous.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[CompMD]

Go to Market -> My Downloads, press the Menu button, select Notifications. Make sure "Notify me when items are updated" is selected. Hopefully you're not talking about silent updates, because that's just plain silly and a terrible idea.

Market disruptor

[DrZook]

With android, google has created Apple/RIM/Microsoft's worst nightmare. They make a robust, feature rich phone OS that easily competes with Apple's iPhone OS or Blackberry and seriously destroys anything Windows Phone related and essentially giving it away for free to all the generic phone manufacturers of the world like LG, Samsung, Motorola, HTC. By doing this, they totally eliminate said generic phone companies' strongest disadvantage -- i.e lack of software and services expertise -- and they do not even have to spend any effort or R&D money on it! Besides, companies like HTC that make excellent phone hardware and was previously crippled by the sad state of windows mobile* or symbian can now offer a very competitive software-hardware package by choosing android.

Little wonder that apple asked google to not include multitouch in the first version of their OS. But why is google doing this? I find it hard to believe that their only reason is to increase the adoption of google services (not that they aren't doing a good job at it) Nevertheless, it is interesting to consider the disruption android has caused. Google killed the market for licensed phone OS, gave Motorola a reason to live, seriously dented Apple/RIM's chances to compete against generic manufacturers, and provided a good OS for geeks to play with, and to put on various random devices .

* I realize windows CE/mobile was a decent OS around 10 years ago, but there's no denying that microsoft let it stagnate for too long. Now it's just slow, bloated, not user friendly and ancient-looking.

Branding and OEM problems like Symbian and WinMo

[MMInterface]

Right now there are 100's of phones on the market, all running some sort of OS. Each of them appeal to different audiences, with different features, reliability, and carrier compatability.

The OEMs that support Android will continue to support the other OS's so this might compound that problem for average consumers.

Essentially, some of those 100's of current models are being replaced with models running Android. Android is an operating system, it does not define the device it runs upon. Just like I can run Linux using just a tty interface over a serial link, or I can run it with a 3d desktop across multiple screens; Android can be similarly used for different phones.

Yes and part of the problem are the devices that Android runs on. Another problem is the branding. If Android is just an OS it will not have the branding and luxury power of the IPhone. This may not matter to me but it will affect sales. This is great, but it is also a weakness when competing with a complete package like BB or IPhone.

The advantages of Android over existing phone OS's are threefold: 1. cost... there is no cost to the manufacturer of the phone or the carrier.

This is a benefit has not and probably will not be received by the consumer.

2. compatibility... applications for Android will be compatable with other manufacturers Android handsets,

Same thing with WinMo. But that doesn't really matter if you find Apple, Blackberry, or Nokia hardware more attractive.

so different manufacturers will compete on quality of their product rather than the amount of software available.

I don't see any indication that this is true. I wish it were true, that's the only reason it sounds good.

3. features... Android was developed to be very feature rich, of course manufacturers can disable features but if they want them it is trivial to enable them. If the public begins to demand additional features as ideas change, then Android can be upgraded to include those features.

Manufactures can and do enable disable features on WinMo easily. The problem is the driving forces behind this comes down to money. What the consumer wants is not always more profitable. Now giving this power to the consumer, in a user friendly manner would be a real benefit.

Essentially, there were no phone OS's that manufacturers could even purchase that would result in a product so refined that it could compete with Apple and Blackberry, and neither of them were licensing their code. Android changes that.

True, but the OEMs are running Android on hardware that isn't as refined and their OS customizations (ex HTC Home screens Today screens) drastically degrade performance. I think what people are failing to see is that Android has the same problems that WinMo and Symbian based OSs have. One is branding, the other is the hardware. The fact is there will always be a large portion of people who prefer an Apple or RIM device over and HTC or Samsung one, and it won't matter what features are involved. Many consumers, not the ones here, but ones that aren't as tech savvy are going to identify more with the hardware than the OS. In that case they often won't care or know which of the 3 OS's come on their new Samsung smartphone. Another thing you are forgetting is that the OEMs that make Android devices are the same ones iPhone and BB users are not satisfied with. Android will come with whatever weaknesses Samsung, HTC, Motorola, LG etc introduce via hardware and even their own OEM OS customizations. I'm an Android user myself. The platform is great, but I think people are missing the marketing power of a complete package that has luxury appeal, and these are benefits that Android does not have.

Re:No way to count? Then they don't.

[dingen]

I was just browsing the app store, looking at a few subcategories which seemed useful but niche to me, and likely would not contain complete crap such as fart generators... categories like "medicine", "education", "finance", "news", "reference", "sports", "productivity", "business" and "travel" and the app count was already over 24K.

Even without touching crapmagnets like "games", "entertainment", "services" or "lifestyle" you'll easily find more apps than there are out there for most other platforms in total.

Re:Branding and OEM problems like Symbian and WinM

[jhfry]

Agreed on all counts. Only please understand that my justifications were more for the manufacturers than the consumers.

Essentially, if Android will do the same things as WinMo and Symbian, what incentive do manufacturers have to continue to invest money and energy in those products. I'm sure they won't disappear overnight, or even completely, but I have a feeling that Android is about to become far more popular that most people give it credit for, only because it will satisfy most users and it does it more cheaply than the competitors.

I am certain there will be some horrible implementations, as there have been with every OS. However if I made handsets and could standardize on a single OS that cost nothing and would run on every phone I produced, no matter how simple or complex that phone was I would use it. Oh and if I could sell mobile pc's running the same OS, and carputers, and GPS's, and.... you get my point.

Up until now, there wasn't an OS for low power embedded processors that specifically addressed small devices with a rich UI... at least not a free one. Sure Linux was there, but you needed to tweak the OS then write all of the presentation stuff, and finally develop an API if you wanted a community to develop around the product. Now all OEMs need to do is slap Android on there, customize it to their liking, maybe write a driver or two for custom hardware, and ship... no licensing, no contracts, no negotiations, and the customer will have a huge library of apps to run on it.

Ever since google formed the Android Handset Alliance, I knew they had revolutionized the portable electronics market... this is just the beginning.

Theatrics are still effective, though!

[mcrbids]

Almost all security is security theater. It's there to make fearful people feel better, prevent good people from doing normal things, and does nothing to stop a sufficiently driven enemy from doing anything.

It's all a theater, and it works because people operate on perception, not reality. In truth, there is no security that can't be breached by somebody with enough determination. The idea of absolute security would be laughable if so many people didn't buy into it.

Most real security breaches are basically just retardedly stupid. Somebody left the backup tapes IN PLAIN SIGHT in the back seat of their UNLOCKED Ford Pinto when they went to the movies after work, and somebody else came along and swiped them. A simple factor such as throwing a jacket over the security tapes in the back seat would stop the vast majority of security breaches at this scale.

Here's another one: At large events, football games and such, the FAA issues a Temporary Flight Restriction around the stadium or whatever. Typical circumference is 5 miles. Sounds good, doesn't it - airplanes are prohibited from flying overhead. Except that a cheap, widely available Cessna 4-seater can cross the 2.5 mile radius in under a minute. Do you think jets are going to scram to stop a Cessna in less than 60 seconds? You've already spent more time than that reading my post, and that's barely enough time for ATC to notice and give a warning, if in fact they do! The net result of breaching such a flight restriction usually amounts to a slap on the back of the hand, and maybe a fine by the FAA.

Yet measures such as these serve not only to make the protected feel safer, but intimidate people who would try to circumvent them. People are social animals, and nearly everybody is, at some level, driven to be a "good boy" and protect society at large. And this protects people against a great many compromises that would otherwise happen, even if only out of convenience.

Re:Theatrics are still effective, though!

[msgyrd]

Theater is only effective when people don't know it's a sham, but everyone today knows it's stupid. You make no differentiation between types of security.

There's a difference between security through inconvenience and security through preventative measures. Typical 5 pin locks are security through inconvenience since they're easy to pick. Guarded doors with metal detectors are inconveniences pretending to be preventative measures. Once it's realized that you're only being inconvenienced, it's no longer security. Much like your coat is not security if someone watches you carry tapes to your back seat.

Any non phone, wifi type netpads with android?

[guidryp]

You know something like the iPod touch, but with android?

How do you deal with different sized screens?

[zippthorne]

The same way you always should have.

You stop assuming you can specify things in pixels. Only a very few things should directly map to physical pixels on the display, and icons, controls, text, and modal dialogs aren't on that list. Even raster images should only map to literal pixels under certain circumstances.

Google releasing their own Android smartphone

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is jumping into the smartphone market with an Android phone of its own http://slashdot.org/submission/1096923/Google-releasing-their-own-Android-smartphone Its really incredible!

But will it allow native development??

[Fuzuli]

I've been reading about exciting devices that will be released with Android for quite some time now. I am a developer and I am more interested in the device as a developer than I am as an end user. iPhone has a lot of roadblocks for me, I need a Mac to develop on it, which is a huge cost for me at the moment. Apple's policy about publishing apps is another story which has been discussed a lot.
The problem is; even if Android is emphasizing openness, its development model seems to be "we know what is good for you". As far as I can see, there is no low level access to device for developers, and you are supposed to use Java, with some JNI capabilities for process intensive tasks. Native code can only be isolated chunks which still can't access device using C/C++.
This is most likely to ensure that code runs on all devices, but this is a choice that should be left to the developer, at least if you're claiming that your platform is open. If I decide to develop something on a particular phone, knowing that it may not work in the same way on other devices, this is my choice, and I should have this option.
For whatever reason I have, I want to have native apis for C/C++ and Android does not seem to offer this. Maybe my money is not that important, but for things like gaming, which will probably be huge on the iPhone quite soon, this will be a problem.

Re:But will it allow native development??

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it really a problem. I dont think so, first of all gaming will be enabled with an opengl layer and thuse the bigger part of the infrastructure will be offloaded to the integrated graphics chipset. Secondly the integrated java is very fast.

The DalvikVM is the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

If Google would finally catch up to the speed of Suns VM and a working garbage collection (i.e. not freezing the whole app every few seconds), then I start to believe that Android could dominate the mobile market in the future.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[BigJim.fr]

No silent updates of course - the user must always remain in control. I have seen the update notification setting - but don't I still have to act on each notification to perform each upgrade singly ? Updating all in a single action ala 'apt-get upgrade' would have been much nicer.

Re:50+ phones and still no proper package manageme

[CompMD]

The reason it isn't set up that way is because you would have to implicitly trust every application developer. Unlike the Apple App Store, applications on the Android Market are not vetted by anyone. It isn't like a Linux distro package repository (which arguably the Apple App Store is). It is possible for a developer to have an application out, and then at some point add an unwanted feature. I had an app that started putting advertisements in places throughout the app after an update. Screw that. You could also have an application go rogue and become malicious. Would you want to blindly get the "delete all my stuff" update or the "send this girl's location to this weirdo developer because he's a creep" update? You have to act on each update notification individually for the sake of awareness of what is being put on your phone and security. I'm fine with that.