Slashdot Mirror
Android Companies Keep Pretending That Android Doesn't Exist (theverge.com)
Europe's biggest tech show IFA is underway in Berlin currently. Companies from around the world are showcasing their new smartphones at the event, chearleading the advancements they have made on the hardware side. Pretty much all these devices are running Android, but the way they are presented, you wouldn't be able to tell if that really is the case. The Verge's Vlad Savov writes: Sony would have us believe that buying an Xperia phone grants us a pass into the exclusive Xperia experience. The stuff actually differentiating the Xperia brand is junk and bloatware: the Xperia assistance software is a mobile version of Microsoft's Clippy. Huawei is even worse in its Android omerta, deathly afraid to utter the green giant's name. I understand that hardware companies want to spend more time talking about their hardware, but all these launches feel lobotomized without a proper discussion of the software driving their devices. Tell me about your implementation of Android. Tell me why you think it's okay to launch a phone without the latest software. Reassure me that I won't be left behind the way that many 2014 Android flagships already have been, and explain to your users why they don't need smarter multitasking, improved notifications, and baked-in VR support. Yes, those are harder issues to discuss, but dodging them is what makes customers untrusting of Android manufacturers.
LG devices have standard connectors, microSD cards, removable batteries, and best of all: they are well supported by Cyanogenmod. My devices are always up-to-date and functional the way I want them.
This has been done for a Long time.
Branding the Crap out of Windows so far as long as MS will not sue them. Adding additional stuff to give you the company X advantage.
Heck I remember on my Amstrad CPC1512 it came with MSDOS (Red disk) labeled in such a way that you really didn't know it was MSDos 2.x And they prefered that you booted with the Blue Disk that brought you into GEM Desktop using Dr Dos. I think the Yellow Disk (Perhaps the Green One) loaded Dr Dos alone.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Reassure me that I won't be left behind the way that many 2014 Android flagships already have been
The are telling you what they plan to do; which is exactly the same as they have been doing. There will be no updates.
Just because you don't like the message doesn't mean they are not being clear.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Why would Sony want to market their phone by talking about how awesome Android is? Any smartphone you get (that's not an iPhone, obviously) will be running Android. If Sony's sales pitch is, "You should buy an Android phone!" it doesn't differentiate them from other phone manufacturers. It doesn't tell you why you should buy an Xperia phone.
So every phone manufacturer is trying to differentiate itself. They want to make their phone different from the other Android phones, and then their sales pitch is going to focus on those differences. For some manufacturers, those differences might be good, and for some they'll be bad, but there is a need to be different. Even Google's Nexus devices are, to some extent, marketing themselves on the premise that they're the reference design. You're getting the true, pure Android experience without all that pesky manufacturer interference.
I always thought that the reason why the makers of computers with pre-installed Microsoft Windows advertised their products as computers that run Windows was Microsoft paying them to do so. Am I missing something?
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
Why advertise that which your product shares with your competition? You emphasize it's advantages. Simple marketing.
Have gnu, will travel.
Android is clunky, has a history of terrible security, and invades your privacy thanks to Google. If I was trying to sell a smartphone, I wouldn't want to be associated with Android, either.
"Clunky" is subjective, personally I find stock Android to be very intuitive compared to iOS.
Android's security has historically been just as good/bad as iOS's as well. The difference is that carriers and OEMs prevent upstream security updates from being installed for Android. Blame them for that.
I don't know of any datamining that Google does that also isn't done by Apple.
Completely disagree. As a long time iOS user who switched to Android about six weeks ago I'll say it's been a great change. It's not as polished as Apple's walled garden but it is hardly clunky. Perfectly usable and I feel like I'm using a computer instead of an appliance, plus I'm running all of the same apps as I did on iOS.
Try ANYTHING non Android and you will see how clunky and ridiculously sluggish Android really is.
I have a Nexus 5X. My mother has an iPhone 6. For what it's worth, doing assorted things seems faster on my phone than hers.
Many of the handset OEMs have direct experience with being box-stuffers for Wintel PCs; and the ones that don't have had plenty of time to observe the ones that do.
Moral of the story, you are a low-margin, interchangeable, and largely expendable partner if you don't provide either the OS or the high-value components; with conditions moderately better for companies that can at least make money on SoCs or screens or batteries.
Plus, some vendors still cherish the delusion(despite 'smartphone' having been a thing for some years now) that phones are just 'consumer electronics' and so consumers will dutifully consume them based on the 'features' the vendor shoves in to differentiate the product, rather than just loading the applications that provide the features they want, as with a real computer.
Now, while I can't exactly blame the handset OEMs for wanting to avoid being just board stuffers who basically exist just to install Google's OS on Qualcomm's hardware; they have the crippling little problem that you can't put yourself in the position of being a value-added software contributor just by wanting to, or just by shipping software. You have to not suck at it. And that...hasn't exactly happened. Even after years of trying, OEM bloatware is considered to be doing atypically well when reviews describe it as 'subtle' or 'inoffensive' compared to stock Android.
Smartphones are clunky, have a history of terrible security, and invades your privacy thanks to EVERYONE. If I was trying to sell a phone, I wouldn't want to be associated with Smartphones, either.
FTFY.
But seriously, folks.. my first impression about this? That manufacturers marketing departments think like this:
Android, LOL, we don't make that, right? That's that skeezy 'open source' thing, isn't it? LOL, don't even mention it, downplay it as much as you can, and talk up what we put on the phone, that's what the customers are paying for, otherwise they'll know we're ripping them off by charging them for something that doesn't cost us anything
Basically, I think manufacturers use Android like a $20 whore and DGAF, and try to make it look like their shitty bloatware apps are what are running the phone. That's what the average consumer sees, not the underlying OS, so that's what they think is running the phone. It's like your grandparents thinking that the monitor is the computer, not the box next to it on the desk.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
My android has become somewhat slower as more OS updates have come through. Potentially I am also using more features as time goes by. But the same thing happened to my iPhone, so...
You want new features, buy a new phone. There is no money to be made supporting old handsets.
You mean "features" like security updates? Or existing features that don't work quite right out of the box? Yeah I don't really give a crap if the vendor makes money on those or not. If they don't provide updates I won't buy their product in the first place. So at least from me there is no money to be made in NO supporting old handsets.
false.
I have the misfortune of having to carry my employer's Apple phone when on call
my Android phone is much faster at any task
I find my employer's iphone to be inferior to my android in every way, why people pay 2X the money for something half as good I'll never understand
I have got my smartphones from small, relatively unknown companies. Why? First, because they do most, and have most of the capabilities, of what big brand, snazzy phones do, at a small fraction of the price. Two, because they tend to keep customizations and bloatware down to a minimum. The price to pay is less frequent OS updates - but, then again, they are such good value, that buying a new one every so often is not a big deal. The likes of Samsung, Sony, etc. won't get a single cent from me any time soon, when it comes to smartphones.
Yes, but the grandparent is right: while some manufacturers make smaller phones, they are usually stripped down versions. The Moto G is not exactly small - the Moto E is, but it is also anemic. The same applies to the Galaxy S mini series. Sony is the only manufacturer producing small phones with decent spec: the Compact Z series was legendary. Of course they cannot pack the same components in a smaller case, so compromises are necessary. Sony balanced that really well in my eyes. (Shame they discontinued the Z series - X does not quite seem to reach the same top performance range).