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.

17 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. open vs closed by nomorecwrd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't it obvious?
    Open technology will always win over closed

    Just like Linux....

    er, hmm, never mind.

    1. Re:open vs closed by robot256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:open vs closed by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:open vs closed by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 4, Funny

      The three major video game consoles are less open than even an iPhone, yet consoles beat PCs in sales in several genres.

      Yeah, but bread is more open than an iPhone, and bread has outsold PCs and iPhones hand-over-fist for centuries .

      This is why we should never have gotten rid of analogies on the SATs.

    4. Re:open vs closed by donny77 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      iOS is open provided:

      1: You develop on Macs only. Hackintoshes do not count because the BSA comes down hard on people using pirated operating systems for commercial gain. Android code is happily written on Windows, OS X, Linux or BSD.

      Apple does not provide iOS development tools for non OS-X computers, correct. Third parties do provide such tools.

      2: You have your ducks in a row 100% before submitting the app for approval. If something causes it to be rejected, your app won't be in the new apps list and will have no visibility in Apple's App Store. There is also a delay when getting critical updates out. Your app has a show stopping bug that is causing customers to demand refunds from Apple? Expect to wait 1-2 weeks if not more time before your update gets on the store to fix things. Android, initial app submittal and updates are immediate. In fact, one of the cool things about Android's store is how often and fast devs update their apps. Some devs are *extremely* responsive, and I've seen apps take a suggestion one day, and have it in the app the next.

      This is a pro/con. The great thing about Marketplace is any app can get in. The bad thing about Marketplace is any app can get in. The good thing about App Store is not every app can get in. The bad thing about the App Store is not every app can get in. As a user, I have never been in a situation I could not get functionality I needed from the App Store. As a user that is all I care about.

      3: I do not need to jailbreak for basic functionality. Say an app crashes and I need the files it is storing. On Android, I can just fire up adb, tar off the files. On iOS, unless I jailbreak and ssh in, all my work would be lost.

      Everyone has their own definition of basic functionality. I can't recover data from an encrypted OS Hard drive either. If data is important, back it up in multiple locations, same as it has always been. I haven't jail broken my phone, and I have rarely wished for additional functionality.

      4: I have to JB iOS devices in order to get widget functionality. To some, it is ugly, but to others, being able to see weather, a snippet of E-mail, tasks, and maybe the latest FB gossip is a good thing.

      Again its a pro/con thing and user preference. Customization is great, until you try to walk someone through something and they've customized beyond the point of being able to follow the same steps. Apple is a "whole picture" company. They make decision based on this. User experience drives repeat business.

      5: Android devices don't need to be tied to one single PC. All they really need from a PC is perhaps to have the memory card backed up once in a while, or music copied to the device. iOS devices will not work unless they have a "home" machine that activates them and copies music. Of course, there are third party utilities to help with this... for now. Apple can easily change the connection spec between iTunes and the iPhone to render those products irrelevant in a heartbeat.

      iPhones are activated in the store. You never have to plug it into a computer. If you have it shipped to your house, you can go to AT&T store and get it activated. No computer needed.

      Of course, jailbreaking is what a lot of people do and as of now is a solution... but there may come a time where the iPhone is so difficult to jailbreak that it does not get Cydia on it until the next model is out.

      And you have to jail break android in the US to install a non carrier supported ROM. You trust the carriers to never modify android to the point of removing its openness? They already have. Tethering is not available in carrier supported ROMs without paying for it. Same as iOS.

  2. Who cares? by schnikies79 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Use what you want and leave the "I win"/"you win" dogma aside.

    --
    Gone!
    1. Re:Who cares? by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Funny

      However, he then conceded that, "Android phones have more features," and offer more choice for more people. Eventually, he thinks that Android quality, consistency, and user satisfaction will match iOS.

      In the news, an Apple fanboy ran up to Mr.Wozniak, starting beating against Mr. Wozniak's chest and exclaimed "You beast! You beast! You beast! You beast!You beast! You beast!You beast!" and after exhausting himself, broke down in tears. Mr Wozniak then held the fanboy and said, "There there. Shhhhhhhh. It's OK. It'll never be Apple. Shhhhhhhhhh."

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    2. Re:Who cares? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But I do not want one or even two to dominate.
      Really that sucks.
      Right now we have multiable consoles and that works out pretty well.
      I would like to see IOS, Android, MeeGo, QNX/Blackberry, and WebOS all have about equal shares.
      That would drive competition and improvements.
      Let's face it before IOS the state of MobilePhone OSs was pretty bad. Apple brought new ideas and fried everybody else up.
      WebOS for those that have not used it is IMHO has the best UI out. It has the best multitasking interface out there.
      BTW I own an Android phone, develop for IOS, and my wife has a WebOS phone so I have used all of them a good bit.
      Android brought a compass to the list of standard hardware on a smartphone. Apple is now bringing super dense displays and gyros.
      Microsoft brings it's name and a pretty UI. IMHO it is still lacking a lot of manditory features for a phone OS but that is just my opinon.
      So no I want everyone to have a nice sized slice of the pie. That will be the best possible outcome. I do not want to be stuck like we are with PCs where one OS has 70+ of the market and one ISA has 100+ of the consumer market.
      Oh and I want a new ISA for phones that isn't based on the ARM. PPC, MIPS, SH-4... Come on folks.
       

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  3. Maybe by swimin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Maybe by bemymonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How does that help people buying current 1.6 phones because they don't know any better, and then wondering why so many apps are unavailable on their devices?

      If Google doesn't start forcing carriers/vendors to upgrade their handsets in a timely manner, no amount of SDK wizardry is going to help.

  4. More Certain Than You Think by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    No it doesn't. That would certainly help but it's not necessary. If you read the very short article:

    However, he then conceded that, "Android phones have more features," and offer more choice for more people. Eventually, he thinks that Android quality, consistency, and user satisfaction will match iOS.

    Emphasis mine. You're mostly right about Windows (I think marketing should be mentioned) but Android could fail on 5% of the phones that ship with it and I think it will still be okay if it can match iOS in the above categories. I think everyone knows that two or three years from now Android will be the clear winner. There would have to be earth shattering changes made on either Android or Apple's part in order to shake off course what has been set in motion. Even the market analysts have been saying this.

    Let's face it, there's going to be some applications written on Android that demand multitouch support or the screen resolution of a tablet. And they won't work on the vast majority of smartphones that don't offer that kind of thing. That's not a bad thing, it's just the reality of targeting all the devices made by the Open Handset Alliance. That's a lot of devices. That's a lot of choices. They're doing the best they can but at some point you just can't magically give hardware support to a device that doesn't have the hardware. And I think that problem is inseparable from the choices Android wants to give consumers.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  5. Re:Take that, Steve! by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.'"
  6. More hardware than open source software by adosch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  7. Woz was never the business genius by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!
  8. Re:So, Apple is the loser? by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe, but then again, maybe not. Look at Nokia. They absolutely dominate the global smartphone market. Much, much larger marketshare than Apple. And still, nobody is developing for them.

    A large number of phones doesn't necessarily translate into more profits unless the attach rate (to borrow a term from the game console market) is there. I can't find the source right now, but I recently read that the average iPhone owner is much more likely to pay for apps than the average Android owner. Apple and Apple developers might find that a smaller group of affluent customers is plenty profitable.

  9. Re:Take that, Steve! by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  10. Re:Just so long as by grub · · Score: 4, Informative


    Heads up, all.

    Woz was misquoted.

    .

    --
    Trolling is a art,