Slashdot Mirror
Woz Says Android Will Dominate
cloudcreator writes "Woz [said] that Android smartphones, not the iPhone, would become dominant, noting that the Google OS is likely to win the race similarly to the way that Windows ultimately dominated the PC world." Update: 11/19 04:54 GMT by T : Apparently, Woz's words were taken slightly out of context.
Use what you want and leave the "I win"/"you win" dogma aside.
Gone!
Part of the reason Windows was successful was that it supported a lot of hardware, with only one API. Android needs to insure that it's not difficult to write a single application that will run on every decently modern ( 2 year old) android phone, or else it would give up what is probably its biggest advantage.
All that matters is that it's open to third party hardware and third party developers in general. The exact nature of that openness is irrelevant as far as the consumer is concerned. All that matters is that there is competition among hardware and software vendors to drive down the price of systems and increase compatibility, and people will buy it in ever-increasing numbers. This obviously will never happen with Apple's OS since there is no hardware compatibility or competition.
Everything we've always said here about avoiding monocultures and the need for competition remains true. The phone market is actually much bigger in volume than the PC market, so a number of cultures could flourish and still have good economies of scale. So long as standards are enforced on security and the actual radio and phone parts, it shouldn't matter.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Woz is arguing that it's the featureset that will lead Android to victory. I don't agree. Features don't sell the phones. So long as it covers all the most common bases the extra stuff is just nice to have, it's not a key decision point. Any smartphone could become dominant at the moment so long as it has a good interface, looks ok, gives the user access to the software they want and, crucially, is marketed well enough. Even if iOS lags behind on features Apple won't be lagging behind on marketing. It's what they're good at, and ultimately it's what will keep them on top.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Windows didn't dominate because of random events. It piggy-backed on the popularity of the hardware, specifically the IBM PC. When the PC won, so too did MS-DOS and its overlay called windows. If the PC had died, so too would have DOS and windows.
Android doesn't have the advantage of sitting on the #1 piece of hardware like windows had.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
While I kind of agree with you, your example is preposterous. Try upgrading a computer of the PSX era (Say, Pentium II at 400MHz with a Voodoo 2 card) to run a game of the PS3 era (say, Half-Life 2) and you'll find it a frustrating experience. Or you'll basically be replacing everything in the case, and you'll have an ugly computer by modern standards. Which is OK, but you probably won't save any money as compared to buying a complete refurb if you're not looking to build the ultimate computer.
But you can upgrade your computer to run newer games, or if you aren't too into games, you can keep your old PC running for years to just do regular tasks.
You can keep the PSX running for years to play PSX games, too, if you're willing to replace the laser assembly periodically; and there's a continuing supply of replacement parts being made to fill the substantial demand.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As long as both platforms keep making their customers happy I don't see why they won't both continue to do well. If neither knocks the other to irrelevance it's not "dominant".
Apple does great holding the line on the "premium" phone, making lots of money for their shareholders. Android does great at providing a vast array of choices at varying levels of cost.
The concern with domination is that a dominant player will crush all opposition and bring progress to a halt to protect its monopoly. I don't see that happening with either of these players. The player in the field that plays that way is having a hard time getting his game on.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
It's hard for me to look at Apple as a loser in this battle. They may not win the marketshare battle, but they are very profitable and influential. People generally love their products.
Not bad for coming in second place.
The difference is that if Android wins then the community can assemble a working Android clone from the Android kernel itself and a cobbled-together userspace, because Android is documented and itself assembled from Open technologies (even if there is some debate over how Free they are, which I hope and suspect will turn out to be pure FUD.) But Apple has substantial closed-source componentry above the kernel layer in their operating systems, so while it's probably possible there too it would probably be much more difficult.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
BS. Hardware manufacturers in the cell phone market do NOT compete on price. All the smart phones are priced the same INCLUDING the iPhone. Android may outsell iOS in the future mostly due to user preference. Not of the OS, but of the hardware. There will never be a iOS device with a physical keyboard. The iPhone will continue to be the most popular individual handset. Android will also find a home on quasi smart phones that lack the all the features.
iOS is JUST as open to third party development as Android. iPhone hardware is just as open to hacking as any Android phone bought in the US. The average American is never going to order the unlocked version from overseas. The only thing closed on iOS is App distribution. And, if you really care about that, get a developer licenses and load your own apps manually. Sad fact is, the average user shouldn't have the ability to install anything. Windows and the Internet taught us this.
I think hardware architecture has a lot to do with this, too. Any good embedded engineering focus company can design their hardware and work with it with Android. Why? Because everyone knows the OS capabilities of the Linux kernel and how portable it is, that makes it easy. Woz has a point, but just a small one, Windows was dominant because it worked across the multitude of PC platforms and wasn't tied to specific hardware (al la RISC and Apple) Although Apple did have it's selling points, anything that's more encompassing that doesn't lock a consumer down is going to get tried and, more times than none, chosen over the competitor that doesn't.
Today, however, Apple makes some pretty bad-ass and inferior products that 'wow' you on functionality and usability from a UI perspective. I myself own a few device with iOS on them and their UI experience alone is worth the product. Android OS is just too portable not to use and it's using the Linux kernel; that alone gets you over the barrier and into competition because anyone can slap it on whatever hardware they want with for less reason and stand up a working product.
He is a techie. Jobs is the business genius. Apple does not need to dominate to make a tidy profit. It's like that saying, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, or all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." Microsoft does all of the people some of the time. Apple does some of the people all of the time.
Microsoft dominates the desktop. Does Apple care? Not as long as some folks are still willing to pay a premium for their desktop products. Nokia dominates cell phones. Apple says, "So, what?", as long as some folks make them a profit. If Android dominates smart phones, Apple will not care for the same reason. Why do some folks pay exorbitant prices for a Harley Davidson when compared to a rice burner?
And no, I'm not an Apple FanBoy, but I live with an Apple FanGrrrl. I only bought her an iPhone when I could get it re-imported, unlocked. And the UK uses some crazy-ass plugs on their electrical devices.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Linux has already won over proprietary unix, anyone remember SCO unixware or BSDi?
All the other proprietary unixes are relegated to niches on their own hardware (AIX, HPUX) or dead (Tru64, Ultrix, DG/UX, IRIX)
Windows has inertia and lock-in behind it, but windows has already proven that open technology will win out over proprietary - software was always considered a very cheap component of an expensive hardware purchase so windows came along for the ride in the drive towards the open x86 compatible...
Proprietary hardware has also been driven into small expensive niches despite being massively superior to the open x86 hardware of its day..
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Linux has pretty much won over closed source. Appliances run Linux, supercomputers run Linux, servers run Linux. About the only place Linux as an OS doesn't dominate is on the desktop.
Now, with Android, Linux is dominating in phones.
Free Martian Whores!
Sega tried that with the Mega-CD and 32X...
But the whole idea of a console is that it stays the same so you are guaranteed the games will run and not require any additional hardware you might not have, or won't run in a low detail mode or very slowly.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I thought Woz and Jobs got along pretty well even now, but I can't imagine this sort of thing making their relationship any better.
Every once in awhile you can find comments from Woz about what its like having a friendship with Jobs. Or Woz's opinions on Apple products. Woz tends to put forward a generally positive view of most things he comments on - to include both Jobs and Apple. But he has said that Jobs can be difficult for people to get along with at times. And he's spoken against the expected Apple line in the past. And its not the first time he's made comments that could be perceived as negative towards the iPhone.
In the end, when you talk to Jobs, you're talking to Apple. When you talk to Woz, you're not talking to Apple. You're talking to a guy who likes technology and practical jokes. A guy who's an Apple insider that isn't in the inner circle of Apple. You're talking to someone who's linked deeply to Silicon Valley and Apple culture. And you're talking to a hacker who's hacks were part of a revolution. But you're not talking to Apple.
Or you can keep your old computer running and play PSX games for years... and every other console that's more than a few years old.