Slashdot Mirror
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.
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
Will take time till Android matches the market share of IPhone that way.
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
Have you read the Moderator Guidelines
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.
...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.
If you aren't angry, you aren't paying attention.
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.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
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.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
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.
They all have a lowercase i in them.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
[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]
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?
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.
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).
No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
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
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
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.
-- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
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.
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?
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.
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
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.