Why not still get one? It's still a great piece of hardware. The ecosystem is still supported, and there's no sign they'll be abandoning it any time soon. In fact, they recently expanded the Zune marketplace into Canada.
Are they not doing any of that? I'm not a sprint customer, but I've been thinking of switching. They seem to be the only carrier left with an unlimited data plan, their rates seem fairly competitive, and at least in my area coverage is complete (although I don't know how it is around the rest of the country). Considering the iPhone's popularity, perhaps not having it really is limiting their growth. Perhaps maybe $20B is a comparatively cheap way of growing their market share (compared to infrastructure improvements, for example).
Honestly, PURE android is a good thing, but the crap the phone companies do to it is what causes problems. Why cant google tell HTC that they cant use android anymore if they do not install a PURE android?
Because one of the reasons manufacturers like android is the ability to customize it. They don't want you to want Android; they want you to want an HTC android, so that the next time your contract is up, you get an HTC android again instead of Samsung or Motorola or anything else. If they were required to run stock android, their ability to differentiate their product would be lowered.
Now, I'm not saying the consumer appreciates things like HTC sense or Motoblur. The tech crowd certainly doesn't. But I do know this is the manufacturer mentality, because I remember reading concerns they had with WP7 and Microsoft's refusal to let them skin it. Honestly that's one thing they got very right about the platform.
I've read many things from different people, all of which make no sense and are full of FUD themselves.
Everyone seems to start from the assumption that Microsoft is screwing HTC and Samsung, and reason from there. I'm saying it doesn't make sense given that Apple is also doing the same to both companies and HTC and Samsung are fighting back. Maybe it stands to reason for Samsung that they don't want to disrupt their relationship with Microsoft (although they are a component supplier for Apple and have a relationship there as well), but it does not stand to reason for HTC, who sells 99% Android devices.
Okay... But then why would htc and sanding fight apple but not microsoft. By your logic, it's that they both realize Microsoft has a high chance of winning (legit patents) and apple does not.
What about HTC? They're playing ball and the only Microsoft products they seem to buy are Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile 6.5.... not exactly cash cows compared to Android. Why wouldn't they just ditch their Microsoft offerings and take them to court if the patents are flimsy?
The way WP7 is selling compared to Android, it would have to be pennies per phone for the math to work out. It seems like most analysts believe it to be in the tens of dollars per phone. Of course I guess there's no way to know for sure.
But Windows Phone obviously makes up a small percentage of their sales compared to Android. Why wouldn't HTC and Samsung just tell Microsoft "You can have your windows phone, we'll see you in court" if the patents really are flimsy?
According to Google, HP Touchpad costs $306 to make while the iPad costs $260. Of course it's all approximate, but at $499 it's clear they're being sold with about a $150 - $200 margin, which is pretty hefty in the consumer electronics market.
Now it's speculated that Amazon is taking a $50 loss on each Kindle Fire. And you know what, they're going to sell a ton. A quote from my friend just now: "dunno why i want the kindle fire so much." I'll tell you why, because it's in impulse buy range. And if Amazon can make that $50 back in content sales then they're going to do well with these.
I don't know about that. They priced it the same as the iPad, and then when it wasn't selling dropped it $100. I dare say, if they released it at $100 less it would have sold better, since the perception after the price drop was that no one willing to buy it.
Uh, what makes you think they went to a judge? This sounds like a deal between Samsung and Microsoft, no courts involved. Why would Samsung, a company with as much financial clout as Microsoft, just rollover and pay royalties on bogus patents? Obviously looking at their battle with Apple they're willing to fight.
That's kind of the point of patents... you patent something and sell it so no one else can. If someone else wants to sell something with your patent they have to pay you. If someone uses your patent without paying you, you sue them. A patent troll is someone who patents something just to license it, and does not actually produce it themselves.
The patents in question here aren't specified, but since Microsoft is actively engaged in the same market at Samsung, they're probably producing goods using their own patents.
Don't you think a company as big as Samsung (US$ 294.5 billion in total assets, almost 3x Microsoft's) couldn't fight Microsoft in court if these claims weren't substantial? Do you honestly thing MS went to Samsung and said "We have some patents you're infringing. We're not going to tell you what they are but they're really good." and Samsung just rolled over? That makes zero business sense.
No. Most likely Samsung knows exactly what they're dealing with, decided it would be more expensive to fight in court and they'd probably lose anyway, so they made a deal.
But what about somebody like MY DAD, he hears about linux from the guys at work, decides to try it on his new, factory-built Windows PC? Where does this leave him?
Right, because computer novices decide to install new operating systems all the time as it is. Must be why Linux has such a high market share. Now UEFI is his only hurdle! No. The reality is no one cares to install Linux, and the people that do care will know how to, UEFI or not.
But I do use it occasionally for a particular plugin that downloads flash videos. Last time I ran firefox I made the mistake of upgrading and it broke that plugin. Turns out the same plugin works in IE, so instead of turning to FF, I'm now instead turning to IE. Thanks for nothing Mozilla!
so that other people can go to school to get a degree meant to increase that other person's personal wealth.
No, that degree is meant to educate that person so that they can gain the requisite knowledge to become a doctor, engineer, or scientist. That we pay these people more than a typical highschool graduate is reflective of their value to society.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not still get one? It's still a great piece of hardware. The ecosystem is still supported, and there's no sign they'll be abandoning it any time soon. In fact, they recently expanded the Zune marketplace into Canada.
Are they not doing any of that? I'm not a sprint customer, but I've been thinking of switching. They seem to be the only carrier left with an unlimited data plan, their rates seem fairly competitive, and at least in my area coverage is complete (although I don't know how it is around the rest of the country). Considering the iPhone's popularity, perhaps not having it really is limiting their growth. Perhaps maybe $20B is a comparatively cheap way of growing their market share (compared to infrastructure improvements, for example).
Honestly, PURE android is a good thing, but the crap the phone companies do to it is what causes problems. Why cant google tell HTC that they cant use android anymore if they do not install a PURE android?
Because one of the reasons manufacturers like android is the ability to customize it. They don't want you to want Android; they want you to want an HTC android, so that the next time your contract is up, you get an HTC android again instead of Samsung or Motorola or anything else. If they were required to run stock android, their ability to differentiate their product would be lowered.
Now, I'm not saying the consumer appreciates things like HTC sense or Motoblur. The tech crowd certainly doesn't. But I do know this is the manufacturer mentality, because I remember reading concerns they had with WP7 and Microsoft's refusal to let them skin it. Honestly that's one thing they got very right about the platform.
I've read many things from different people, all of which make no sense and are full of FUD themselves.
Everyone seems to start from the assumption that Microsoft is screwing HTC and Samsung, and reason from there. I'm saying it doesn't make sense given that Apple is also doing the same to both companies and HTC and Samsung are fighting back. Maybe it stands to reason for Samsung that they don't want to disrupt their relationship with Microsoft (although they are a component supplier for Apple and have a relationship there as well), but it does not stand to reason for HTC, who sells 99% Android devices.
Window Phone has had cut and paste since march.
Btw iPad autocorrects samsung to sanding. Thought that was pretty funny.
Okay... But then why would htc and sanding fight apple but not microsoft. By your logic, it's that they both realize Microsoft has a high chance of winning (legit patents) and apple does not.
Yes. Google "htc vs apple" and you should have everything you need.
What about HTC? They're playing ball and the only Microsoft products they seem to buy are Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile 6.5.... not exactly cash cows compared to Android. Why wouldn't they just ditch their Microsoft offerings and take them to court if the patents are flimsy?
The way WP7 is selling compared to Android, it would have to be pennies per phone for the math to work out. It seems like most analysts believe it to be in the tens of dollars per phone. Of course I guess there's no way to know for sure.
Well what about HTC? They don't make desktop computers.
Signing an NDA for licensing agreement talks is standard industry practice, not "massive amounts of trickery."
But Windows Phone obviously makes up a small percentage of their sales compared to Android. Why wouldn't HTC and Samsung just tell Microsoft "You can have your windows phone, we'll see you in court" if the patents really are flimsy?
According to Google, HP Touchpad costs $306 to make while the iPad costs $260. Of course it's all approximate, but at $499 it's clear they're being sold with about a $150 - $200 margin, which is pretty hefty in the consumer electronics market.
Now it's speculated that Amazon is taking a $50 loss on each Kindle Fire. And you know what, they're going to sell a ton. A quote from my friend just now: "dunno why i want the kindle fire so much." I'll tell you why, because it's in impulse buy range. And if Amazon can make that $50 back in content sales then they're going to do well with these.
I don't know about that. They priced it the same as the iPad, and then when it wasn't selling dropped it $100. I dare say, if they released it at $100 less it would have sold better, since the perception after the price drop was that no one willing to buy it.
Current and planned Windows Phone devices have pathetic hardware.
And yet they are performs generally better (scrolling, zooming, animations, loading times) compared to those "modern" phones.
Windows 8 is over a year away. Perhaps Windows Phone 8 will be out by then which will allow this kind of capability.
Uh, what makes you think they went to a judge? This sounds like a deal between Samsung and Microsoft, no courts involved. Why would Samsung, a company with as much financial clout as Microsoft, just rollover and pay royalties on bogus patents? Obviously looking at their battle with Apple they're willing to fight.
That's kind of the point of patents... you patent something and sell it so no one else can. If someone else wants to sell something with your patent they have to pay you. If someone uses your patent without paying you, you sue them. A patent troll is someone who patents something just to license it, and does not actually produce it themselves.
The patents in question here aren't specified, but since Microsoft is actively engaged in the same market at Samsung, they're probably producing goods using their own patents.
Don't you think a company as big as Samsung (US$ 294.5 billion in total assets, almost 3x Microsoft's) couldn't fight Microsoft in court if these claims weren't substantial? Do you honestly thing MS went to Samsung and said "We have some patents you're infringing. We're not going to tell you what they are but they're really good." and Samsung just rolled over? That makes zero business sense.
No. Most likely Samsung knows exactly what they're dealing with, decided it would be more expensive to fight in court and they'd probably lose anyway, so they made a deal.
Do you know what the patents are? How exactly are you qualified to call this extortion if you have no insight as to the facts of the situation?
But what about somebody like MY DAD, he hears about linux from the guys at work, decides to try it on his new, factory-built Windows PC? Where does this leave him?
Right, because computer novices decide to install new operating systems all the time as it is. Must be why Linux has such a high market share. Now UEFI is his only hurdle! No. The reality is no one cares to install Linux, and the people that do care will know how to, UEFI or not.
I've suggested to the author that he contact the developers and try to get it working in Google Docs, but no success thus far.
And why should he? Obviously it works on what 99% of the people use it for, why should he put in extra effort so that a fringe group can use it?
But I do use it occasionally for a particular plugin that downloads flash videos. Last time I ran firefox I made the mistake of upgrading and it broke that plugin. Turns out the same plugin works in IE, so instead of turning to FF, I'm now instead turning to IE. Thanks for nothing Mozilla!
so that other people can go to school to get a degree meant to increase that other person's personal wealth.
No, that degree is meant to educate that person so that they can gain the requisite knowledge to become a doctor, engineer, or scientist. That we pay these people more than a typical highschool graduate is reflective of their value to society.