Slashdot Mirror
Android 2.0 — Competition Against the iPhone and the Rest
GMGruman writes "Every few months, it seems, there is a new 'iPhone killer.' Android 2.0, in the guise of the Motorola Droid, is the latest such 'killer.' But what will it really take to beat or match the iPhone (single page), and does Android or any other mobile OS have the right stuff? There's a lot more to the answer than is usually discussed. This article takes a look at the strengths that may allow Droid and Android 2.0 to provide strong competition to devices like the iPhone and the Blackberry, as well as the obstacles it continues to face that could inhibit adoption."
Really. There will always be some number of viable devices competing. Each will appeal to some group that values its strengths over what the others have to offer. The only way iPhone can fail is to lose to several competitors, not just one. The iPhone isn't the market leader now. So how can one phone or O/S kill the iPhone or anything else?
Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
What all the Android fanbois don't know, or tell you, is that Android has a 256 MB app storage limit. While Apple limits you to 2 GB for your maximum app size download. Google, just WTF where you thinking?
I don't think it will be an iPhone killer. At best, it will slow Apple's growth to a significant degree. However, with it's exchange integration, etc, it could take a measurable chunk from Blackberry.
And, as a long-time Palm user, this will likely be the last nail in the coffin for Palm. I'd decided months ago that the replacement for my 700p was not likely to be another Palm, but nothing was really grabbing me. I was resigned to go to a crackberry. Now though, I may end up an early buyer of the Droid.
My wife will almost certainly get one, since she was on the edge of buying a GPS device.
I hope there's no single 'killer'. Diversity is a good thing, it gives choice and keeps competition driving things forward. It won't be too many years before pretty much all phones are smart phones, and there's a lot of room in the phone market for a lot of vendor's to exist and profit.
So here's to hoping we see a nice market share for iPhones's OS, Android, Maemo, WebOS, and Windows Mobile.
It comes down to carriers, and Verizon Wireless does have excellent coverage. I'm on an expired contract so I could have jumped to AT&T without any penalties, but the Droid has got what I've always wanted: a phone that's open enough to let me hack for fun, while also polished enough that I don't have to hack it just to make the basics work.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
is to market yourself as a 'iPhone killer'
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
2 Things bothered me
1) It forgets to mention the 1 major thing that gave the Iphone such a major push forward. Marketing! *well image too but takes part of Marketing* It talks briefly how Verizon isn't very Market Savvy *serious... Can you hear me now? No matter how annoying... got you thinking Verizon* which seems like totally BS and made my brain shut off for the rest of the article.
2) This article also overlooks what the Droid and Android 2.0 do, that other smart phones don't do. It skipped over how it innovates and simply compares features that exist. What about Google Navigation? Voice recognition? What about what the Iphone lacks like... a KEYBOARD. The only thing they didn't compare was App stores *seriously if someone says over 100,000 apps again I will strangle you with strangulation.ipa*
Overall the article stank of... HEY Android is gonna fail cause it's not a Iphone *make out with 32 GB 3GS*. It was laced with jabs at how Symbian is Old and Rim is no good on the web. It felt like secret Apple love...
I really hope the Droid is a massive success just so in 2 years we can have a Slashdot article listing everyone who was terribly wrong, this can be number 1.
I hate to say it, but it just made no sense and backed up almost none of the opinions it presented.
You can't kill the iphone by trying to copy it. You have to:
1) Find a way to steal it's best customers in a way it can't keep up with.
2) Wait for it to get big, fat, and lazy.
Just copying the leader may get you investment dollars, but it won't get you market share.
If you really want to beat apple come with a hashlife implementation of conways life like golly. Isn't this obvious? Goggle should be paying me to develop Android.
This happened before, with Windows. Any platform that doesn't run the enormous legacy app base will have a hard time getting market share.
The situation is now even worse- there is an entity which controls the hardware (AT&T, not Apple!), far different from the free-for-all PC ecosystem.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Wouldn't their time be better spent showing off the product rather than badmouthing the competition?
Look who's talking. As SanDisk and Motorola dis Apple in their "iDon't" ad campaigns, Apple continues to dis Microsoft in the "Get a Mac" series. iDon't Care examines the badmouthing on both sides.
One problem killing the iPhone, is that most of the iPhone's weaknesses are one policy change away from disappearing.
Enough people want background apps? Well there they are.
Enough people want customizable lock screens? Alright, that's easy enough.
Enough people want shared file storage? There, done.
Enough people want post-hoc approval of apps, like Android? No problem, it'll save Apple time and money to boot.
Enough people want unsigned apps distributed outside the app store? Ok, here you go.
Enough people want Flash, or other browser plugins? Fine, Adobe has been clamoring to put Flash on iPhone since it's inception.
Enough people want root access? Fine, administration is their problem.
Apple keeps those measures of control because they help to protect their platform's image from incompetent or unscrupulous coders, and their negative impact on most users is relatively minor. If that balance ever shifts, either due to more competent coders (supposedly Flash 10.1 is heavily optimized) or more demanding users (with friends whose phones do some or all of the above), the rules can change in an instant.
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
Even Nokia is abandoning Symbian for maemo http://maemo.nokia.com/
Yeah this machine have 256M of memory. But for this cpu architecture that's fine.
The device will include a microSD with at least 16G to store all your apps. (my low end phone have a 1G...)
Oh and by the way, the same chipset run quake3 smothly...
There is no true competition in phones. If you want an iPhone you must go AT&T, if you want Android you currently will go T-Mobile, and so on.
Once all phones are available on all networks, you will be able to have a valid feature comparison. Until then, choices will always be a combination of (how great the phone is) + (how much the carrier sucks).
IPhone killer doesn't mean IPod killer but you read want you want....
I however don't confuse frosting with function, and while the Iphone IS very stylish, I prefer substance over style and the Iphone was harder to use without looking at it, slower to do the things I really needed it to do and tethered to a crappy phone company with LOUSY coverage. Granted the coverage issue might just be in my area but that is what counts in my book.
I have a fully functioning PDA that does what the Iphone does better fatser and with a longer battery life. All in one devices just seem to fall short in too many areas.
Every few months, it seems, there is a new 'iPhone killer.'
Well, duh. Every new product generates hype, and to trend-conscious techies, the most obvious hype is that it's the "killer" of whatever product is already trendy. And, as you may have noticed, most new products these days are cell phones.
But have you ever heard of the latest blivet killer actually killing off the blivet? You have not. Market shifts don't happen that way. This "killer" meme is content-free marketing noise.
Why is the iPhone not dominant in the land they term "Asia"?
Well actually it is.
In Japan, the iPhone is now #1 in market share for smartphones.
In China, they actually don't sell it at all (which is why they say it doesn't register in "Asia") but they will be shortly as they have partnered with a Chinese company to sell the iPhone. We know there is demand there as there have always been a lot of unlocked iPhones heading into China. And it has one of the better handheld input mechanism for chinese characters I have seen.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Look, there is nothing special about the Iphone OS any more.
Neither the hardware or or the OS is the significant factor, as both platforms have achieved rough parity.
The Apple APP store defines the difference these days.
With 90,000 apps (75,000 of which are redundant "Crapps") it has the clear lead in developer mind share, monitization infrastructure, and deployment.
When someone writes a wrapper for these App store Apps that allows them to run on Android, its game over for this particular advantage.
Apple is entrenched and the clear leader. But lets face it, the hardware has no particular advantage any more, and the User Interface is pretty much Windows 3.1 looking with a desk top full of random icons with no organization.
Its not Apples fault. The iPhone OS was never designed with all of those app in mind. If/When Apple re-works the interface, with categorization of apps, (folders if you will) they can maintain the lead.
But Android has the advantage of youth, and none of the baggage of middle age.
Still, its the Apps. Android doesn't need as many apps to make it a complete user tool, because so much is bundled, but they still need more than currently exist.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Guys, life is short. Apple iPhone, Google Android...who cares? It is just a telephone. We use them to talk to other people. That is all.
Now, let's spend our time on more useful or pleasurable things, okay?
The G1 would have been more successful if it wasn't tied to T-Mobile.
I knew a lot of people--non-techies by the way--that wanted it, but T-Mobile doesn't cover where we live.
T-Mobile is great if you live in a major city (I think, I've never had them), but rather crappy if you don't.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
I have an iPod touch and and HTC Magic ( T-Mobuile version - myTOuch).
The real difference is the design of the UI and the functionality of they UI and the smoothness of the UI interaction with the hardware. The Android needs to come with better UI widgets. Maybe there are better ones, but even Google's own apps suffer from lousy design use widgets. Not just lousily implemented functionality, but also look. I have seen way better from Google than what I see in 1.6.
Android 1.6 reminds of the linux distros from a few years ago and to some extent even now. The UI has a noticeable lag in 90% of the circumstances and often does not provide feedback that there may be activity in the app. The on-screen keyboard is too cramped and successful key-hit recognition is way lower than on the Touch/iPhone ( and I actually prefer the on-screen keyboard over a physical keyboard.)
The browser is pretty much useless on the Android as compared to Safari.
I haven't seen an advantage of being able to run multiple applications on the Android. after more than 4 or 5 apps running, it gets even more laggy. The iPod touch has never asked me if I should force quit an app or wait because it takes to long to get to the home screen, when quiting an app ( I always try to quit apps now ( but how to is not always apparent) - otherwise one has to frequently use very popular utilities like Taskman or TasKiller).
In general I like Google and use many of their apps on the net and on the PC. But the Android has left me underwhelmed.
An iPhone killer is someone who chains a faggot to the back of a pickup truck and drags him for 2 miles.
iPhone will never be dominant as long as it is sold by a single carrier. So if/when apple and VZW ink a deal, the subsidies paid will be much smaller than AT&T pays today. This will essentially double the cost to the consumer of the iPhone.
Be interesting to see what happens to iPhone sales if/when that happens.
MobileSafari uses Google for search results, and there are a lot of mobile searches being generated by iPhone users. Google is eroding marketshare everywhere else. If I'm Apple, I'm not scared of Google. If I'm any manufacturer representing another platform (Nokia, for example), I'm terrified.
Spoken like a review from a windowshopper.
Look, there is nothing special about the Iphone OS any more.
That just isn't true. Android 2.0 is pretty attractive on the surface, but it's still plagued with UI and usability kinks that have yet to be worked out. Multi-touch still isn't quite right, nor is it fluid. Android's interaction on the desktop is much better than most of its competitors, but it still lags behind the iTunes experience. There are plenty of advantages to the iPhone platform, including the iPhone OS.
When someone writes a wrapper for these App store Apps that allows them to run on Android, its game over for this particular advantage.
That's what they said about Linux and Windows in 1996. Easier said than done. We're still waiting.
But lets face it, the hardware has no particular advantage any more
The pile of hardware components was never the advantage to begin with. The devil's in the details. It'd be a trivial effort to out-spec the iPhone's hardware, but that doesn't get you anywhere on its own. Look at the terrible state of video playback at the time on smartphones even with the same muscle as the first generation iPhone.
Whether you love the iPhone or hate it, it's indisputable that it was a kick in the pants for everyone else. Now they're actually trying to make good products, and competitors are addressing their failings and adapting what they can from Apple's lead. That's how it should have worked, even if the iPhone never existed, but it just didn't. Even Windows Mobile, while still painful to use, is at least easier to look at these days.
But Android has the advantage of youth, and none of the baggage of middle age.
Drama much? The iPhone is "middle-aged"? What does that make RIM/Blackberry? A pensioner?
I have to admit, I have an iPhone, and I have had a G1, recently lost at an airport... yeah sure, they turned it in, and for the last month, a G2, Mytouch3G tmobile. The Mytouch actually does considerably more than the iphone, and I enjoy using it that much more. I dont give a rats ass what Leo "paid for by apple" Laporte has to sy about it, The Android phone wins, hands down. I can scan business cards right into my address book, google maps, NON DRM (thats enough by itself to switch) music, it plays more video formats, yada yada yada... I like it, nuff said.... Oh, did I forget to mention the microsdhc slot? I can add what I want, memory wise....
"Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
As a hardware and OS platform the Droid is far more appealing than my current iPhone.
But from what I've seen of the user experience so far, it's a no go. I've been spoiled on OS X on the desktop for years, and now on my phone. As much as I want to like the Droid and wish my iPhone had a slideout keyboard, I'm sticking with Apple for the time being.
It's a testament to just how good Apple is at user interface design that Microsoft and Google with all their resources can't hold a candle to it.
It's ludicrous to think that software only is going to "kill" the iPhone (and the iPod Touch, which I'm including here for reasons that will become obvious.)
My company recently developed a game called Star Rangers. It's a space warfare game, and it makes extensive use of the accelerometer features of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Without that hardware capability, the game simply wouldn't be playable (like a bunch of other successful games and apps exclusive to the iPhone and iPod Touch.)
Quit thinking that any given Android-equipped device is going to beat the iPhone on software merits alone -- you've also got to have hardware features that equal or exceed the current iPhone's (and iPod Touch's) capabilities. Until you have standardized Android-compatible phone hardware that permits you to play games or develop sound/music apps as you can on the iPhone (because of its inherent hardware features giving you physical tilt control), then any other Android-running device is going to play catch-up. It's that simple.
In the past, I have asserted that social popularity trumps technical superiority. Beta was superior to VHS and yet VHS won. Why? It was more popular... some would argue that it was more popular because porn was not allowed on Beta. Whatever the case, VHS was more popular and so it won.
iPhone is ridiculously popular. I don't care to go into why it is popular, but I will say I don't fully understand it because I tend to measure things by a different set of metrics than non-nerds. Whatever the cause of its popularity, iPhone will not be toppled as "king" of whatever market it rules with attack/smear ads and it won't be toppled by technical superiority or versatility. It might be toppled by convenience if that were possible and it would have to be convenient to leave it behind and/or migrate from it.
iPhone isn't just a phone. It's a hand-held computer with software applications that people use. In the past, moving from one phone to another was a matter of exporting data and importing that same data into the next phone. iPhone has applications for which there may not be equals on other phones. iPhone has applications that many have spent significant amounts of money on and people aren't willing to dump things like that so easily.
Another means of entrenchment iPhone enjoys is the connection it has with a person's identity. In much the same way people build self esteem rooting for their favorite teams in sports, the iPhone enjoys a strong fan base.
Microsoft calls what they have "critical mass." Microsoft isn't getting toppled because they have critical mass. Other reasons don't play into the current state of Microsoft nearly as much as that. People are not happy with Microsoft, but not unhappy enough to move to something else.
iPhone has not achieved critical mass, but many of the factors that contribute to the state of critical mass are present in iPhone and it is certainly moving in that direction.
Still, the iPhone doesn't rule in the way the hype and attention would seem to suggest. A recent trip through an airport showed me that Blackberry outnumbers iPhone 10 to 1. That's just an estimate I pulled out of my ass, but it's probably not far off. iPhone is limited by its exclusivity to AT&T (in the U.S.) and many people aren't interested enough in iPhone to change their carrier, but since the odds are that their non-AT&T carrier will carry an iPhone competitor, people are more inclined to give those competitors a try. Provided that the alternatives are good enough to capture an audience the way iPhone has (and that's not likely in my opinion) the iPhone's primary weakness can be exploited successfully.
To be clear, the primary weakness of the iPhone is its exclusivity to AT&T. It limits its growth potential and its flexibility. There are other factors contributing to its weaknesses, but its close ties with and influence under AT&T are at the very least holding it back and quite likely to be the most significant factor that will lead to its death.
Having four or five different OS's - iPhone, Android, Maemo, WinMobile etc mean the cost of application testing is to quadruple, and the cost development about the same too. Or application will be restricted to smaller part of the market. Big software developers can sustain multiplatform development more easily, but for small/independent developers that's a problem. One of the biggest strength of the iPhone app market is that there is only one current device and application have to be tested only for one device. Android phones could be Java compatible (that's still remain to be seen), but native android code (now legitimized by NDK) will hardly be transferable between devices.
I'm still waiting for the iPhone to catch up to my now-3-year-old Samsung i760 running Windows Mobile 6.1.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Its not Apples fault. The iPhone OS was never designed with all of those app in mind. If/When Apple re-works the interface, with categorization of apps, (folders if you will) they can maintain the lead.
You mean the free categorisation of apps into separate sections on the home screen? You mean, like, swiping your finger and getting a new home screen with new apps on it? You mean like it already supports and has done since years ago?
With 90,000 apps (75,000 of which are redundant "Crapps") it has the clear lead in developer mind share, monitization infrastructure, and deployment.
I doubt this assertion for several reasons. While the number of applications appears to be impressive, it is hard to compare the number of iPhones available in the Apps Store with the number of apps available to the WinMo and Blackberry platforms because both have multiple apps stores between the offical platform stores, sites like handango and crackberry, and independent vendors who sell their own software.
As for the app store, it is nothing special. Handango has been doing the same thing for multiple platforms since 1999. All Apple did was take similar functionality and add it to iTunes. Its nothing special.
My Sysadmin Blog
Two months ago I got myself an Android phone. It does everything I expected it to do. And more. Around me there are several people using iPhones and, so far, I have not seen anything on the iPhone that matters to me and which I really miss. I actually like the couple of extra buttons on my phone. My criticism to Android is that it is almost too good and that I can and will do parts of my work while commuting on a crowded bus.
If there is a difference, it's in the details. One of which is Apple's marketing campaign.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
You mean the free categorisation of apps into separate sections on the home screen?
Not at all. A bigger heap is still a heap. Cutter that expands to fill multiple desktops is still clutter.
I mean the categorizing apps by function, as well as by any other category the user wants.
Take a look at the menu system of any modern linux distribution. If you are a windows user you will be shocked to learn that the category structure is simple, well organized, and automatically maintained, but still allows users to customize it.
I'm not talking about the graphical layout on the screen. There many ways you can arrange things on the screen IF, and ONLY IF you have some meta data to deal with in the first place. Otherwise its just a heap.
I'm talking about organizing applications into groups so that you can find them when your collection of apps exceeds more than just a few.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_uGeBM7SoqcQ/SQrgc9tDmNI/AAAAAAAAEQU/gtmLj_XA99c/s1600-h/kmenu.png
My iPhone has 9 pages. It takes forever to find something, and searching does not help if you don't remember the name of a seldom used app.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Not at all. A bigger heap is still a heap. Cutter that expands to fill multiple desktops is still clutter.
Except that it's not a heap, it's a stack of lists, the screens contain ordered applications, not randomly jumbled ones, and they do not have to be full before you move onto the next one. Users typically have a screen per category of apps, though it would be *really* nice to get smart folders as well as just folders here.
True there are alternative sources for apps on other platforms, including the possibility of "side loading" them on memory, or from your computer. You can often buy these on company web sites of the developer.
Of course you have to find them somehow, and Google can be your friend in this. I suspect not one in 10 Blackberry users has ever heard of handango.
But you do bring up another aspect of the problem. As long as Apple insists on maintaining total control there is an avenue for competition by other platforms by simply being less controlling and making it easier.
We don't need Either of the STEVEs permission to install software on our computers, unless that computer fits in your pocket.
So there is CLEARLY an opportunity there for Android to make some inroad. But I suspect its largely squandered at this point because the absurd prices at Handango and the obscurity of these sites. If the apps are either too expensive or hard to find, Joe Android user will sooner or later succumb to the All In One Place shopping mentality of the App store and just buy the next iPhone.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Ask to look at any friend's non-jail broken phone.
Page thru the apps. They are a mess. You can't find anything. You are looking at little pictures but nothing sinks in.
Give your phone to any 5 year old and two minutes later it will look just like that friends phone.
It takes time to figure out how to arrange them by function, so you can find them. Then you end up searching all over for the ones you use frequently. So you put the frequent ones all in one screen and page all over looking for the one you need every other day instead of every day.
Whats wrong with structured lists of apps? Especially when apps can appear on more than one list, and can come with some built in suggested lists as well as the users list structure.
I can't seriously believe any intelligent person would argue for the status quo here. The current method is unworkable beyond a couple screens.
Mark my words, when Apple's next iPhone OS 4.0 comes out you WILL find lists and menus, and you WILL remember this slashdot thread and you may even recall how you scoffed.
Somehow when Apple does it, the fanboys fall in line, but if anyone else suggests the very same thing its like disparaging Islam, and the Apple Jihadists come out of the wood work.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Of course, it could not have anything to do with the fact that few would want to be "partners" that have to build&bet their businesses on someone else's proprietary quicksand (nor is Symbian going open for a reason as well), so the article wouldn't have been complete without unwarranted stabs at all things FLOSS and Linux (conveniently sweeping under the rug the fact that Android actually is both).
Oh well...
So ... if i have a 1st gen phone with Android 1.x i can now upgrade-it to 2.0 with just a mouse click ? And will i be able to upgrade-it to Android 3.0 when it comes out ?
If not - thank you - i will keep my iPhone and get new features and functionality for free.
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
I bought the original Razr when it just came into market. It was a great phone. Beautifully designed, sleek and stylish even by today's standards.
I had one for a few years also. It was everything everyone claims Apple products are - style with little substance.
As you noted, the software was ghastly. But frankly I had issues with the hardware alone as well.
The buttons, were the worst I ever had on the phone as far as being easy to type. I was always missing numbers with those damn slanted keys with hardly any feedback as to where you were.
But the worst sin, was making a flip phone with BUTTONS ON THE SIDE. This totally eliminated the advantage of the clamshell where you couldn't accidentally hit buttons. I hung up on people pulling the phone from my pocket and often slightly changed settings getting it out.
It did feel good in the hand when talking or just holding it but like I said they had issues with both hardware and software.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The other poster beat me to it with the link I was basing my statement from (or close enough based on the same survey), but you can see the iPhone is doing quite well in Japan. It turns out they like good UI as well, and if you'd ever seen the character input gui, well it's pretty good even compared to what they are used to.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
When someone writes a wrapper for these App store Apps that allows them to run on Android, its game over for this particular advantage.
Like that's ever going to happen. You have no idea how many frameworks and other components you'd have to get in line to replicate the default libraries on the iPhone.
And as for "nothing special" anymore, well there are tens of thousands of developers who disagree with you, along with countless accessory makers that sell product in just about any store in the world that works with the iPhone (and as it happens, iPods too). Your hand waving is not so vigorous as to dismiss this very large advantage.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Its very simple to come up with a Iphone killer.
Open developemet platform that costs nothing to develope in (IE dosen't require a Apple computer or money to get development liceneses) and a open application store that is available across carriers and phones.
Both of thse are available through the Android and will kill off the Iphone. Not this year, or next year but as the platform for the OS and development takes off the Iphones controled app store that is only available on the Iphone will get killed off, and the Android will take over in popularity. Apple had their chance and they dropped the ball, and Google wont make the same mistakes.
TruePunk | Games
Truly nothing iPhone did was revolutionary. Almost anyone working in the smartphone business could've laid down the design principles for an iPhone-like phone. It really was so glaringly obvious.
Now, iPhone is a well-done exercise in packaging and marketing. But for the most parts technically it's inferior to a 5-year old Symbian phone. The UI is much nicer, though.
Nokia, Google, Samsung, etc. here is a message to you:
ASK the people who make the phone, ask them what they think would be the best things to have, what do those people envision for a future phone and so on. No, DO NOT ask only the CTO, some middle manager or tech leads, but go straight to the developers, UI designers, testers, etc. and allow no one to aggregate or simplify the message. Get raw data from people who have their hands in the dirt daily, then analyze it at the top and THEN give the raw data to experts to go through.
It is important to not let people fighting for their territories distort the message, they will only tell you things which are beneficial to them, not to the company or the consumer.
If you had done this let's say 6 years ago, and understood that the current UIs are shit, and done something about it, you would have had an iPhone 3 years before Apple!
Despite Apple's insane press coverage and a Silicon Valley-centric view of reporters, the iPhone is still only 1/6 of the market in smartphones. A spectacular success for a newcomer, but not market domination. Even iPod, Apple's most successful product, has less than 1/4 market share. Apple has never managed to dominate a market. At best, they hit a peak at 15-20% and then slowly decline. In the end, there are only so many people willing to pay $500-$900 for an iPhone (and that's what it costs, whether it's hidden in subscription fees or paid up front).
Android, on the other hand, has the potential for some really low-cost devices ($100-$200), and its greater openness both towards carries and towards applications mean that it will likely overtake the iPhone in a couple of years.
Of course, the iPhone won't be "killed", just like the Mac won't be killed. Apple's market share dropped from an all-time high of 15% to a couple of percent and now is back at 3-4% worldwide, but it never disappeared.
Many companies have tried to beat the iPod but none of them got it quite right.
With Apple having produced iPods and the iPhone with the same OS it's pretty hard for anyone else to produce anything with such a large user base.
Alternatively:
1. Realise Apple aren't more or less "evil" than Google
2. Buy an iPhone
3. Enjoy using it
the formidable marketing machine that apple uses to promote its products to the unwashed masses. Without this, Android will remain a geek's toy.
At least in the sense that iTunes would run on Wine. Actually this is the reason I am still hesitating about buying iPhone. :-)
On the other hand, Android usability still suck as of yesterday. I went to a shop the very salesguy there spent 5 minutes to figure out how to get a widget back on the screen of an Android phone. Can it be worse? (I know it can
...a stunned silence fell upon the hall.
Apple sucks
You do realise that Android comes with a 'market' application built in, that provides a wide selection of free and to-buy applications that can be downloaded to the device?
Oh, and that you don't have to use a PC (Windows, Mac or otherwise) to do this, or to update the OS, or to find and install applications that aren't on the market?
And that nobody prevents applications appearing in the market because they may impact on the profitability of the device manufacturer?
Apple has the apps at the moment, but it's a transitory advantage at best.
I can't believe that no-one here seems to have pointed out the elephant in the room - price. The iPhone is a really nice gadget, but it costs a fortune.
The Palm Pre is also a really nice gadget, with numerous cool features (at least one of which is that it's not controlled by Apple). But, in the UK at least, it's being launched for the exact same price as the iPhone! Are Palm completely batshit insane?
I'd love a smartphone, but I'm not paying in excess of 700UKP for one. Get them under 100UKP, no contract crap, then maybe they'll take off. Maybe I'm unusual in that I don't need or want 30UKP worth of calls every month, but I doubt it.
you can change it you Yahoo if you want
I belive its better discussion than "what will kill the iPhone".
You guys must bear in mind that the iPhone is just the most famous smartphone, but not the most popular.
I would rather wait for the N900 anyway ;-)
The market is still not fully mature with 40% of Americans owning Smartphones but over the next year or two there will be many more people replacing their current smart phones than entering the smart phone market. Those unsatisfied with their current offering are the ones most likely to move to something new. Therefore, it seems the Android is much more likely to kill off market share from everyone except iPhone. Since most smartphone manufacturers need to use someone else's software (I mean the # of manufacturers since they only have 23% market share between them), I suspect this means Window Mobile.
This is of course a US View and the market is much more open in most of the World. The key to maintaining market share is customer satisfaction. How many sidekicks would be sold now even if T-Mobile had them up for sale?
Source of data
NON DRM (thats enough by itself to switch) music
So you claim to have had an iPhone - but you're still perpetuating the myth that iPhone/iPod/iTunes somehow forces you to use DRM music? Did you ever take the iPhone out of its box?
Lets get this straight: iTunes/iPod/iPhone work perfectly well with DRM-free music. You can import any unprotected MP3 or AAC file into iTunes; iTunes can rip CDs to unprotected AAC or MP3 and these files sync and play seamlessly on iPod/iPhone.
In other news, although you can't easily copy tracks back off an iPod/phone, the desktop iTunes software stores your music library as regular files, clearly named, numbered and arranged in folders, with an easily interpreted XML file containing the metadata.
The only DRM or "lock in" comes if you choose to purchase your music from the iTunes store (and I believe that even that offers a DRM-free option now - can't say for sure because despite using iTunes and iPod, the only thing I ever bought from ITMS was an iPod Touch firmware upgrade).
Oh - and the same goes for video, too: of course, using "unofficial" software to rip DVDs means that some poor movie exec will go without his daily line and you'll go straight to hell - but iTunes/iPod won't stop you playing the result.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
From the article:
"not to mention the fact that Palm and Microsoft have yet to give up on their respective WebOS and Windows Mobile visions."
When I saw that, I almost stopped reading completely. Yet to give up? WebOS? Palm just released the Linux-based WebOS a few ( 5) months ago! Why would anyone expect them to already "give up"???
"The first is that Android has taken four versions over two years to reach the same ballpark as the iPhone; WebOS did it in a dot-one upgrade a few months after its release."
There, that is more like it.
"the mobile equivalent of desktop Linux: just a plaything for open source community."
Desktop Linux is only a plaything?? Yeesh.
It seems to me that every article about an iphone or ipod "killer" is written by Apple fanboys or enthusiasts. I normally see it as an attempt to keep talking about Apple products even when people want to talk about something else.
My take on Android 2.0? What is clear to me is that Android (as a software platform) has the fastest evolution rate among all smartphone platforms (given its release rate), and that this new Droid and the Xperia Rachel will address one of the IMO biggest limitations of my G1: screen size, and resolution.
Other than that my dream wish list for upgrading to a new phone would be:
Oh, and I need to still get root on it one way or another....
> But what will it really take to beat or match the iPhone
.if you jailbreak it. Unfortunately, however, most people who own the iPhone don't really use it as much more than a status symbol. Sure they'll put a few apps on there, but they're not using it for much beyond what most of the other smartphones could do.
.except for me. I chose a Lenovo Thinkpad because personally I'm not a huge fan of Apple Inc. and the Thinkpad I customized was more powerful for a better price. Soon people at work began to snicker, and I was in the out group again.
.there's a very large number of people who won't buy it because it's not made by Apple. Possibly enough to prevent anything from "killing" the iPhone.
An apple logo. seriously, that's it.
Being an iPhone owner myself, I must admit -- it's a pretty great device. .
As soon as I gained employment at my current job (which is a design job), I fit right in instantly because I had an iPhone and so did everyone else at work. Things went amiss quickly however, as the new Macbook Pro came out and everyone that had an iPhone got one of those. .
Yes, the iPhone is nice, but even if something nicer comes out. .
I agree, it would be nice if the iPhone/touch does it. Sometimes I do get lost in trying to find one of he 60 or so apps I currently have. Other than my first screen with most frequent apps, i tend to search for them, but I do know all the games are in the last 2 screens.
But then my Android phone does not do any categorization out of the box either, as far as I can see.
The iPhone OS has one particular advantage in that it's existed in the cell phone market for longer. Yet, it also has one major flaw. It isn't an open OS. It's not only an Apple only OS, it's a one cell phone OS. This OS won't be applied to multiple phones by multiple companies.
This gives Android a leg up as it gains market share. While the iPhone itself may be the top seller, Android may be added to 10 different well selling phones that when combined, topple the iPhone sales. Market share is based on the number of OS sales... not on the sales of a particular phone.
The linux and windows comparison won't hold up in this case. I think it's already showing that Android apps are catching up... and once people realize how many more sales of their apps they can get, they will all want to develop their app for the Android OS. In fact, in the near future, I can see people developing for the Android OS first because there's so many more phones it can apply to.
The iPhone OS may be more polished for now... but we'll see how long that lasts.
Hey its still Apple and thats an advantage.
>But Android has the advantage of youth, and none of the baggage of middle age.
You mean like long battery life...
And that nobody prevents applications appearing in the market because they may impact on the profitability of the device manufacturer?
That "nobody" is apparently the telephone carrier - if you want tethering or VoIP over wireless instead of 3G or... well anything the carrier dislikes.
http://phandroid.com/2009/04/02/tethering-apps-are-back-not-with-t-mobile/
So how is this any different from what we have today?
I mean, say Android is deployed on every smartphone in the world that isn't an iPhone. Some are large and fragile, some are gold-plated, some with touchscreens, some without, some with keyboards, et cetera et cetera. To do this, every manufacturer and carrier needs to write custom firmware, apps, and UI elements to work with their handsets, on top of Android, ... so let's just say they did, and they work just fine, and here we are.
How does that in any way constitute a threat to the iPhone?
Here's another scenario: Let's take every computer in the world, from the toughest HP rig to the crappiest mini-ATX, and make them all run the same OS. Let's call this rival OS something suitably generic, like, "windows". By sheer numbers alone, it will totally crush Apple and their puny OS X! Except not.
What magic sauce does Android promise that will counteract the crushing weight of a zillion competing handsets and their chump code monkeys clamoring to distinguish themselves with blingy but utterly unusable interfaces?
I'd really like to know.
Well said. For some reason a lot of people on Slashdot don't seem to understand the need for polish and quality. That's exactly what Apple delivers in their products, and it's *hard* to do, which is why most of their competitors fail to do it. Attention to the small details matters to the end user.
How is it that Apple fanboys and so many /.ers are missing the big picture and main point? Do we need to review computing history to establish the fact that openness wins? That open source software running on a multitude of hardware platforms is a winning hand? Do we not understand why Linux is a success?
The Android O/S has already been made to run on a variety of smartphones and laptops and even full servers. Android is even being used on discreet single purpose devices like music players. And with the smartphone we are witnessing a disruptive platform, a full blown computer in a "new" smaller format. More people are going to be buying these computer devices than "regular" computers. For many it will even displace the need for a "regular" computer. The rate of adoption amongst a variety of devices is greater for Android now than it was for Linux at this chronological stage.
Openness wins. Apple will be in a battle it cannot win. What we're seeing is somewhat analogous to the PC and mini-computers and mainframes. Apple might as well be trying to sell DEC/VAX servers. But an even more disruptive event is taking place... The separation of the phone device from the network service providers who will now have to compete on service. It's coming to this... Do you want to change to a more competitive phone network offering? Click here on your open systems device which we support.
The iPhone is a single form factor premium product that has a pretty small market share and is defended by aggressive fanboys. Why would anybody focus on killing it, and why would anybody care?
The real targets for Android are Symbian, Blackberry, and WinMo. Is Android better than them? I think pretty clearly yes.
I know I should have posted a link before, but it was pretty prevalent on Google and someone already posted another link in response to a question... here you go.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The market of course shifts week by week, but it appears the iPhone is still #2 (and that's the 32GB model, the 16GB model is also on the list at #9):
Japanese phone market
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
One thing and one thing only is what I would like to see, on mobile and even DECT phones:
that they have a configurable screen lock, to enable what I'd like to call 'toddler mode', alongside a regular lock mode, which avoids the phone doing stuff (draining the battery) whilst in a pocket or bag.
Every parent knows that toddlers really really want to have the phone, if only for a short while.
Now if only the phone could do something the toddler will find interesting, like the fake phones that make some bleeping sounds, have some voice going 'hello' and 'byebye' and such.
Naturally, one should be able to select this mode instead of regular lock-mode, and if possible, it should be made easy to set up the phone to give various responses, between playback of melodies, speech fragments and whatnot, heck, include fireworks to be shown on screen.
This should be easily doable on an Android phone - if only someone would implement it..!
That's sales for July. This is not the same as marketshare.
Sales is marketshare.
And I also provided a second link with current data, which shows it at number 2 (though really more since another iPhone is in the number 9 slot).
I wouldn't go throwing stones when you have not even finished building your glass house...
It's really a shame eight year olds like yourself don't have to pass some kind of test to post here, it would keep the quality up to where it used to be. Even your insults are pathetic. Next time I'll just ignore requests for a link so it'll just be another bumbling ignorant fool like yoruself, and why bother to help someone who hasn't figured out how to use Google yet?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is indeed googles biggest weakness, while it is way better than winmo, I see the same problem plaguing android as usually Microsoft does, for heavens sake Google get a designer, some of the screens look so bland that you feel yourself brought back to the VT220 era.
The other thing is that some things while it is getting better are inconsistent as hell.
(Not as bad as winmo though) but if you want to run against the iPhone you have to do one hell of a job regarding user interfaces.
While everything is ok on the desktop and apps side, things become nasty if you have to diver deeper!
T-Mobile [...] I'm still not sure if they get decent coverage where I live.
There's a map for that ;-) (The commercial alludes to AT&T, but I've read anecdotes elsewhere that T-Mobile's U.S. coverage is even spottier.)
But at least Verizon's iDon't commercial implies that it plans to offer an Android-based phone that allows open development: "iDon't allow open development. [...] Everything iDon't, Droid does."
Whoa - Android doesn't give just iPhone a run for their money...Blackberry too... (What! no more battery pull!!??)