Slashdot Mirror
The Android Invasion Cometh; Is Resistance Futile?
DeviceGuru writes "Last month, we learned from Gartner that Android will probably be the number-two worldwide mobile OS this year, and may lead the pack by 2014. With Android's growing use as the OS embedded in phones, in tablets, in set-top boxes, and in LCD HDTVs, it seems like the Linux-based OS could end up dominating the entire non-PC consumer device operating system space. What do Slashdot readers think: Is resistance futile?"
Is resistance necessary?
The Android Invasion Cometh; Is Resistance Futile?
Look both options have their benefits. But I happen to agree with a recent survey that finds developers think Android is the long term solution while iOS is basically the immediate choice because of its dominance it has enjoyed with being the first. Given that the obvious is already happening, it's just going to take two or three years for developers to really unseat anything else in favor over Android. I was never given a chance to tinker or code for iOS so of course I'm biased towards the one technology out there that is actually trying to empower me without restrictions.
In the end, that sort of empowerment is going to trump any sort of assured device capability or graphical power that Apple can offer me. You may have a different opinion (BWJones did) but I simply cannot see how Apple will retain their lead in this fight.
Resistance is never futile. You could stick to your guns and enjoy immediate sales then moderate sales then fewer and fewer sales. Or you could enjoy moderate sales and then increasingly more and more sales. You might have to do more development if you want to target both TVs and handhelds (inputs get tricky) but I think investing in only iOS at this point is not a prudent decision.
My work here is dung.
I think Apple might have a thing or two to say about that...
Apple doesn't sell competing products to this, Microsoft does.
this is exactly what statistics are for, it's way better than your anecdotal evidence.
did you forget to take your meds?
I honestly don't care what wins as long as I can install anything on my phone that I want without needing to get "approval" from some corporate app store with "Christian" morals as part of their app approval policy. Personally, I'd buy a technically inferior product if it was open and the makers didn't try to shove restrictions down my throat.
The way I feel about it is: It's my phone, I payed for it, if you don't like what I'm doing with my own property, well, that's just too bad for you.
There will be resistance from me as long as I am able to purchase WebOS devices. I *MUCH* prefer WebOS over Android.
And people with jobs actually working with data. I work in local government. Call me crazy, but I just don't see a future where our permitting clerks are sitting at the counter entering new permits and printing invoices from a phone screen. I don't see us entering tax payments on that either. The same applies to most existing industry.
Now, those devices certainly DO have uses. For instance, we have building inspectors that I'd LOVE to setup with touch screen phones or pads so that they could do inspections in the field and upload the results back. Same with property appraisers and possibly even our EMS people.
You have to stop trying to look at it as one technology "winning out" over the other. The simple fact is that for a ton of things the desktop is a better UI. For a ton of other things handheld touch devices are. If you try to shoehorn either into working in all situations, you're going to end up being terrible in many situations.
Consider it this way: a wrench works pretty poorly for driving nails. You can make it work, but it's aggravating. Once you finally get a hammer, everything might start looking like a nail for a while, but realistically, there are still a lot of things you're going to need that old wrench for - don't throw it out.
The desktop will continue to be relevant for decades - quite possibly for as long as we have a technological future. The only change is that it won't be the ONLY thing that's relevant anymore.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Are we sure we want Android taking over all of that? I don't. I think a single OS dominating is a bad idea - like growing nothing but potatoes. I'd like to see Android doing SOME of that.
Don't say that on Slashdot. This site demands that the most used and popular programming language of this time is nothing more than a bad fad which will die away leaving people the open space to write Perl scripts just like they way they used to.
Hmm. Write back when your vision is no longer 20/20, particularly for near-vision. You'll probably get there sooner than you think. Not everybody can or will get Lasik (or even bifocals). Small-screen devices have their purposes and a growing audience, but it is short-sighted (pun unintentional) to imply that users of larger devices are dinosaurs. Unless you propose killing everybody who passes the age of 40, of course.
Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
It's kind of hard to compete with market share when the other guys are doing 2-for-1 specials.
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
I don't think so.
I am an iOS fanboy and I will talk a lot of smack about Android. The reality is though, for it's flaws, Android is very good but it's so close to being great it's frustrating.
What Google needs to do is set some pretty basic UI guidelines for apps or make better UI APIs and to crack down on handset lock down(I'm willing to put up with Apple's walled garden approach because they deliver what they claim. Google can't be hollering about how their OS is open and at the same time require people to root their phones). Desktop OSes suck on mobile devices(see Windows Mobile) and Android is probably the best commodity OS out there. Although WP7 looks promising. Haven't used a WP7 device yet.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
...this "either/or" mentality. That if Android succeeds, everyone else has failed.
Let's look at computers. Microsoft and OEM's that use Windows have about 90% market-share, while Apple and OS X has a bit under 10%. Does that mean that Apple has "failed"? Not really. They seem to be having highly succesful computer-business, happy users, and lots of profits. Apple earns more money on their computers than HP, the market-leader, does with theirs. yet for some reason some people say that Apple should be like HP and Dell, since licensing OS from someone else is "the way this business works". Even though it seems that the OEM's are not earning that much, while Intel and Microsoft are the companies that reap the profits.
If we look at phones, we can see that Apple is earning lots of money there as well. More than Nokia is earning, even though Apple is a lot smaller. It seems that people are expecting Apple to gain iPod-like dominance in the phone-business, and if/when Android overtakes iOS, people decide that iOS has "failed", since history did not repeat itself. Well, Symbian dwarfs both iOS and Android, yet no-one is calling iOS or Android failures because of that fact. And gaining iPod-like share in a mature market like phones is quite hard, if not impossible. When Nokia was at it's biggest, it had something like 60-70% share of the market. But that was a market that wasn't all that mature yet. and they managed that for only few years.
What if Android gets 50% share in few years? Great! Android is a good OS, and we need more good phones. does that mean that everyone else has failed? I don't think so. It seems that people have this strange idea that there must be a clear winner and a clear loser(s). We got that in computers, when Microsoft ended up dominating the market. So we MUST have something similar elsewhere as well, right? I don't think so. And even in computers the "niche player" is earning quite nice profits. Even though they have single-digits market-share does not seem to be hurting them. You do not need to be big, biggest or dominating in order to have a good business.
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
The last time, the Board forced Steve out of the company and Apple stopped creating dramatically new products, favoring incremental improvements instead.
If it was an apples to apples comparison then maybe it would be something Apple should worry about, but the mobile market is NOT the same as the PC market of 25 years ago. That's not saying Apple will dominate nor Android, but then again who cares. I buy Apple products because I like them. If someone else doesn't then they can buy something else. Why is it necessary for one to dominate? To be honest, I think those days are gone, I don't think any phone maker is going to dominate any more, there will always be many choices.
there are 20 million people here during the workday, it's a pretty good sample of the US. i know more people with android phones than iphones, but overall i see a lot more iphones in the street here
Yes, and overall, 80% of all cars in the US are probably yellow Crown Vics - I see a lot more of them on the street in NYC than any other car ;-)
Call me crazy, but I just don't see a future where our permitting clerks are sitting at the counter entering new permits and printing invoices from a phone screen.
No, but they could be easily be working on an Android, ChromeOS or iOS tablet/nettop entering data into a web-based application. Far easier to administer than a separate instance of your software on every single workstation.
I think this is the real target market for ChromeOS (which is no good for mobiles until mobile internet gets far more reliable).
Thin-client computing is a jolly good idea which has, so far, been blocked because everybody and their dog wants to run MS Office.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
2-for-1 specials are basically equivalent to selling at half the price. Being overpriced compared to the competition is no virtue, though I can understand how Apple fans would see it that way (or, rather, I can see how people who see it that way would tend to become Apple fans.)
We aren't that far from crazy Tony Stark phones that can wirelessly interact with any screen that is in the room while being plenty fast for 95% of computing tasks (and the ability to offload the rest to some other computer).
'Normal' people have already moved to laptops, if it were easy and seamless to have a phone that, when placed on a desk, took over the screen, keyboard and mouse on that desk, plenty of people would be switching right over. You could even have a laptop shaped peripheral that provided your phone with a screen, keyboard and touchpad.
There are issues with things like storage capacity, but that can be accessed from a widget you plug into the wall at your house or whatever, and those issues get less frustrating on a rather aggressive schedule.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Or are you referring to just the US?
From the FAQ: Assume the United States market unless otherwise specified. Among industrialized anglophone countries, the United States has two-thirds of the population.
The problem now is that carriers have been slow to get their phones updated to 2.2. That makes the system much smoother, and even the default interface is both functional and attractive. Android doesn't have the power of the iPhone where it can force those kinds of updates across the board, but in exchange for that you get a much more powerful and flexible phone. It's a matter of priorities. Yours are obviously with shiny, walled gardens that control the user experience to a high degree. I'm not sold on that, which is why I have a Nexus One.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Not all geeks drink from the everything OSS is great cool aid bowl, thank you. Most of those geeks are just OSS sheeples. Real geeks use the best tool for the job because it works well.
It's not years and years behind iphone in basic reliability, it doesn't freeze/crash or have data loss. If you aren't using a stock Android device, you can't blame Android itself. I have been using Android since Jan of 2009 and have become highly educated in this platform. I see more of these incorrect statements all the time. These phones also are not just for geeks. I've heard nothing but praise from non technical people I know irl, and they have been totally happy with the *EASE OF USE* Android provides. I'm going to just pretend I never read this comment as it is filled with tons of FUD and inaccurate information. Thanks
Think potato blight (and famine) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
yes, but to obtain this geekdom paradise,you need to *jailbreak* the device. You have to jump through hoops to get the device do stuff that its makers don't want you to do. And you're at the mercy of the next update bricking your phone.
this doesn't make much sense,specially when there are perfectly valid alternatives.
systems which are homebrew friendly out-of-the box,and let you instal stuff out of the walled garden if you want (HP/Palm webOS has tonnes of interesting stuff you can instal on them. Including SSH, Bash, an XServer etc.)
systems which ALREADY feature all the goodies of a computer-in-a-pocket, (like the Nokia N900).
all these work without jailbreaking/exploits/or othe such non-sense.
the fact that android provide a little bit less features out-of-the-box, doesn't mean you must jump on the most locked up device and go through complex unsupported/unapproved/discouraged procedure that could backfire next time Saint-Jobs decides to Fart.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]