Yeah, and the Chevy Aveo should've been competitive with similar entry level vehicles from Honda, Hyundai and Toyota, but, GM still went bankrupt.
I have zero faith that Symbian^3 and MeeGo can compete on any front with iOS or Android or even WinMo and BlackBerry 6. OPK going away is a huge bad omen for Nokia, and his replacement really doesn't inspire faith in me either. Nokia needs a guy who understands devices and people, not yet another over promoted middle manager.
Having marketshare is -nothing-. GM had massive market share, but profits blew. If Nokia keeps this up they're going to quickly become nothing in the mobile market. It's not going to be worth it to Nokia shareholders to keep making Nokia handsets. The margins on nokia handsets are pretty razor thin as it is.
Well yeah, but, the point here is that this SVP's ideas are beyond "Your OS Sucks" stupid, it's "your interpretation of what open means" is incredibly stupid.
There are tons of competent and incompetent open and closed source applications out there, my point was that one doesn't mean the other.
I guess this is where the conversation ends. Google had the golden opportunity to merge open with stable and free(as in beer) and deliver a user centric product if they required OEMs to not be shitty in their licensing agreements.
You're not addressing the points made on OEM lousiness and Google's encouragement of it.
OEMs aren't required by Google to be competent or forward thinking. This is bad for the consumer. I am citing apple because they are the only handset vendor who is being forward thinking and trying to put together a reasonable ecosystem.
This is probably the best argument I've heard *for* Android.
There's comfort in no choice and if comfort was my preference Apple certainly does it well with smooth integration, frequent updates, quality builds, impressive displays and a lot of things that others aren't doing.
However, after witnessing the last two years of Android hardware, I've seen *good* Android hardware come out on all levels; but the problem is, is that OEMs aren't required to be good, or even consistent and it's a little annoying. Anyone can slap together lousy hardware or inconsistent hardware and launch with out Google necessarily getting in the way. They'll keep you from preloading certain Google apps like Marketplace, but, they won't make sure that if you're shipping Donut, FroYo must be an available upgrade path, and from a technological standpoint, that's unacceptable to me. It feels like Google's not even trying to reign in their brand and make sure that the market won't be flooded with lousy Android devices. It seems Google has made a short-term decision to allow Android to get a foot hold in the market place by sheer volume, not by hardware that exemplifies the brand. Which in the long term may bring the brand down.
Why can't you tether your iPhone without an extra fee out of the box? Can you install apps from a source other than the App Store by clicking a box? Why isn't IOS open-sourced,, as it's derived from BSD code?
These points are moot, because no one's advocating how "open" iOS is.
Besides, it's not like Android where some Android devices are more open than others.
(If you're on Sprint or AT&T, go ahead and try using Skype. Oh wait, you can't because Android is open.)
How much RAM is enough? How would HTC plan for two generations of Android in designing the Dream?
By coordinating with Google and other OEMs as to the future of the Android platform? Perhaps in some sort of alliance, with other handset vendors who may be producing hardware to run open software. Some sort of Open Handset Alliance perhaps?
Either Google had no vision of the future and they're stumbling around or HTC completely somehow missed the point of their last 10 years of operating history. Either is extremely unacceptable and completely horse shit.
The choice between iPhone and Android is not about good v evil.
You're absolutely correct. The choice between iPhone and Android isn't about good versus evil, it's about competent hardware versus incompetent hardware. It's about how well the hardware has to be before it ships. Every new iPhone's going to be top of the line and has as good as the company can make it. When the next generation comes out, the previous generation is still top tier in terms of design.
When HTC launches yet another Android device, all they have to do is make sure it runs SenseUI and some flavor of Android; and possibly not even 2.x. I understand that a low end phone isn't going to be as powerful, as expandable and as feature rich as a cheaper phone, but, I shouldn't be punished because I didn't want a giant screen, and a camera that rivals my point and shoot and a gob smacking powerful CPU. If Android is free, then why do G1 users need to buy another phone to get OEM supported FroYo and Gingerbread?
You completely ignored my point that OEMs are slacking off and lazy when it comes to designing forward compatible hardware. The HTC G1/Dream issue shouldn't have snuck up on HTC. HTC's a big boy company that's been making phones for over a decade when the G1 came out. They theoretically should have more experience in the phone hardware business than Apple, but, they fucked up. It shocks me to think that WinMo, BB and Android users are willing to put up with new phones that are intentionally neglected in less than a generation because "That's just how things are". I'm poking Android users harder in the eye on this because this is what open gets you. Abuse. And lots of it. Yes, your 2.2 install was reasonable for you because if something went wrong you knew how to handle it. I've got friends who I wouldn't trust to flash router firmware, much less go through that mess Who *really* *needs* SenseUI? Who really looks at Sense and says, "Yes, I *need* that?" It's good, it's a huge improvement over the standard Android launcher and home screen, but did the UI for Android need to be fixed?
Why are HTC users letting their OEM hold FroYo hostage in the name of corporate narcissism? Why isn't SenseUI open sourced under a license that prevents other OEMs from using it?
While I don't begrudge HTC for it's decisions it's made, these problems are largely Google's fault and their licensing scheme has flooded the market with useless, generic devices and does nothing to make life better for the consumer. Choice is a good thing, but, who gets to choose what? Clearly when the OEMs get to choose, you lose and the OEMs and their real customers, the carriers, win, and win big, at your expense.
You got two from HTC. 1.5 and 1.6. The others you shoehorned in thanks to CyanogenMOD's work.
I understand the attraction of Android for the geeky, hacker types(it'd be more appealing to me if I had more spare time; I might pick up a used HTC device if the price is right to play with), but my complaint isn't about open. Open's fine. The problem is the OEMs and Google. OEMs seem to think that "open" just means that they can sell you a piece of hardware and not work very hard to integrate it very well or be forward thinking with it. The G1 is proof of this. It wasn't forward compatible with 2.x with out significant pruning of the OS and extensive modification. On the other hand, the iPhone 3G still works with iOS4. It has some issues, but, I've used my brother's 3G after he installed 4.0 on it and it's not that bad. OEMs aren't forced to be thoughtful with their hardware. Google's not requiring it as part of the license, and that's a huge turn off to me when thinking about what long term mobile OS to invest my time and money into.
Your G1 is newer than my old(now my brother's) iPhone 3G, and to get iOS 4, all that was needed was to click on, "Check for Firmware Upgrade."
More importantly, handsets, tablets and other doodads running Donut are still ON THE SHELVES. Apple is selling nothing with out an OS that launched this year(yes, iPad's still on 3.2, but, 4.2's due in two months and will be in sync with iPhone/iPod Touch in terms of OS version).
I think this is just me being spoiled by the iOS ecosystem, but, doesn't it bother you that handset vendors are basically rather fucking lazy when it comes to OS updates?
Choice isn't a bad thing. Too much choice is. What can Android 1.6 offer me that 2.2 can't? It's a little ridiculous. Why should cheaper phones be stuck on 1.6 when they're fully capable of running 2.2?
Slashdot Mirror
This clear enough for you?
Yeah, and the Chevy Aveo should've been competitive with similar entry level vehicles from Honda, Hyundai and Toyota, but, GM still went bankrupt.
I have zero faith that Symbian^3 and MeeGo can compete on any front with iOS or Android or even WinMo and BlackBerry 6. OPK going away is a huge bad omen for Nokia, and his replacement really doesn't inspire faith in me either. Nokia needs a guy who understands devices and people, not yet another over promoted middle manager.
Chart says all.
Having marketshare is -nothing-. GM had massive market share, but profits blew. If Nokia keeps this up they're going to quickly become nothing in the mobile market. It's not going to be worth it to Nokia shareholders to keep making Nokia handsets. The margins on nokia handsets are pretty razor thin as it is.
Geolocation off that bad? I'd assume they're being handed Samsung Galaxy Ses...
When I did taxes this year, before deductions, I owed the Federal Government something like 120 bucks in taxes.
I make $12 an hour. This is wrong.
wrong
so wrong there's a graph.
The number of "small businesses" that would break that $200k mark?
%2.
Objective-C doesn't have #include, it has #import.
I got Be working just fine on x86, but, again, that's x86, and well after the Jobs takeover.
Apple gave us, in terms of innovation, Grand Central, Webkit, Aqua and made the decision to make WiFi ubiquitous in it's offerings.
Microsoft has given us IIS and Clippy.
How about no.
I kind of agree but this is seriously a dick move.
At least in older times they took the effort of cutting the traces or removing the units all together ala 486SX/DX chips.
#Worsttwitterimitationever
Ahem
500? More like over 8000.
Windows Phone 7 could sell, 9, maybe 10 thousand units. Which given their previous outing, would be a success.
Problem was they couldn't move DVD-A players
I don't know. Should I go with, "point of entry was too narrow" or should I say that "market penetration wasn't deep enough?"
DVD-A had to be the most unfortunate initialism of modern media playback.
Well yeah, but, the point here is that this SVP's ideas are beyond "Your OS Sucks" stupid, it's "your interpretation of what open means" is incredibly stupid.
There are tons of competent and incompetent open and closed source applications out there, my point was that one doesn't mean the other.
Yeah, given their slides, I'm surprised they're not introduced as, "Advertising Brokerage firm, Yahoo!"
I see the OEMs freedom as a feature.
I guess this is where the conversation ends. Google had the golden opportunity to merge open with stable and free(as in beer) and deliver a user centric product if they required OEMs to not be shitty in their licensing agreements.
They blew it.
More like War = Tomato
I've seen a lot of competent closed source applications, and a lot of incompetent open source solutions.
Your particular ideology doesn't dictate when, how, or why your executable will crash.
You're not addressing the points made on OEM lousiness and Google's encouragement of it.
OEMs aren't required by Google to be competent or forward thinking. This is bad for the consumer. I am citing apple because they are the only handset vendor who is being forward thinking and trying to put together a reasonable ecosystem.
This is probably the best argument I've heard *for* Android.
There's comfort in no choice and if comfort was my preference Apple certainly does it well with smooth integration, frequent updates, quality builds, impressive displays and a lot of things that others aren't doing.
However, after witnessing the last two years of Android hardware, I've seen *good* Android hardware come out on all levels; but the problem is, is that OEMs aren't required to be good, or even consistent and it's a little annoying. Anyone can slap together lousy hardware or inconsistent hardware and launch with out Google necessarily getting in the way. They'll keep you from preloading certain Google apps like Marketplace, but, they won't make sure that if you're shipping Donut, FroYo must be an available upgrade path, and from a technological standpoint, that's unacceptable to me. It feels like Google's not even trying to reign in their brand and make sure that the market won't be flooded with lousy Android devices. It seems Google has made a short-term decision to allow Android to get a foot hold in the market place by sheer volume, not by hardware that exemplifies the brand. Which in the long term may bring the brand down.
Why can't you tether your iPhone without an extra fee out of the box? Can you install apps from a source other than the App Store by clicking a box? Why isn't IOS open-sourced,, as it's derived from BSD code?
These points are moot, because no one's advocating how "open" iOS is.
Besides, it's not like Android where some Android devices are more open than others.
(If you're on Sprint or AT&T, go ahead and try using Skype. Oh wait, you can't because Android is open.)
How much RAM is enough? How would HTC plan for two generations of Android in designing the Dream?
By coordinating with Google and other OEMs as to the future of the Android platform? Perhaps in some sort of alliance, with other handset vendors who may be producing hardware to run open software. Some sort of Open Handset Alliance perhaps?
Either Google had no vision of the future and they're stumbling around or HTC completely somehow missed the point of their last 10 years of operating history. Either is extremely unacceptable and completely horse shit.
The choice between iPhone and Android is not about good v evil.
You're absolutely correct. The choice between iPhone and Android isn't about good versus evil, it's about competent hardware versus incompetent hardware. It's about how well the hardware has to be before it ships. Every new iPhone's going to be top of the line and has as good as the company can make it. When the next generation comes out, the previous generation is still top tier in terms of design.
When HTC launches yet another Android device, all they have to do is make sure it runs SenseUI and some flavor of Android; and possibly not even 2.x. I understand that a low end phone isn't going to be as powerful, as expandable and as feature rich as a cheaper phone, but, I shouldn't be punished because I didn't want a giant screen, and a camera that rivals my point and shoot and a gob smacking powerful CPU. If Android is free, then why do G1 users need to buy another phone to get OEM supported FroYo and Gingerbread?
You completely ignored my point that OEMs are slacking off and lazy when it comes to designing forward compatible hardware. The HTC G1/Dream issue shouldn't have snuck up on HTC. HTC's a big boy company that's been making phones for over a decade when the G1 came out. They theoretically should have more experience in the phone hardware business than Apple, but, they fucked up. It shocks me to think that WinMo, BB and Android users are willing to put up with new phones that are intentionally neglected in less than a generation because "That's just how things are". I'm poking Android users harder in the eye on this because this is what open gets you. Abuse. And lots of it. Yes, your 2.2 install was reasonable for you because if something went wrong you knew how to handle it. I've got friends who I wouldn't trust to flash router firmware, much less go through that mess Who *really* *needs* SenseUI? Who really looks at Sense and says, "Yes, I *need* that?" It's good, it's a huge improvement over the standard Android launcher and home screen, but did the UI for Android need to be fixed?
Why are HTC users letting their OEM hold FroYo hostage in the name of corporate narcissism? Why isn't SenseUI open sourced under a license that prevents other OEMs from using it?
While I don't begrudge HTC for it's decisions it's made, these problems are largely Google's fault and their licensing scheme has flooded the market with useless, generic devices and does nothing to make life better for the consumer. Choice is a good thing, but, who gets to choose what? Clearly when the OEMs get to choose, you lose and the OEMs and their real customers, the carriers, win, and win big, at your expense.
You got two from HTC. 1.5 and 1.6. The others you shoehorned in thanks to CyanogenMOD's work.
I understand the attraction of Android for the geeky, hacker types(it'd be more appealing to me if I had more spare time; I might pick up a used HTC device if the price is right to play with), but my complaint isn't about open. Open's fine. The problem is the OEMs and Google. OEMs seem to think that "open" just means that they can sell you a piece of hardware and not work very hard to integrate it very well or be forward thinking with it. The G1 is proof of this. It wasn't forward compatible with 2.x with out significant pruning of the OS and extensive modification. On the other hand, the iPhone 3G still works with iOS4. It has some issues, but, I've used my brother's 3G after he installed 4.0 on it and it's not that bad. OEMs aren't forced to be thoughtful with their hardware. Google's not requiring it as part of the license, and that's a huge turn off to me when thinking about what long term mobile OS to invest my time and money into.
Two points.
Your G1 is newer than my old(now my brother's) iPhone 3G, and to get iOS 4, all that was needed was to click on, "Check for Firmware Upgrade."
More importantly, handsets, tablets and other doodads running Donut are still ON THE SHELVES. Apple is selling nothing with out an OS that launched this year(yes, iPad's still on 3.2, but, 4.2's due in two months and will be in sync with iPhone/iPod Touch in terms of OS version).
I think this is just me being spoiled by the iOS ecosystem, but, doesn't it bother you that handset vendors are basically rather fucking lazy when it comes to OS updates?
This is the old fragmentation debate.
Choice isn't a bad thing. Too much choice is. What can Android 1.6 offer me that 2.2 can't? It's a little ridiculous. Why should cheaper phones be stuck on 1.6 when they're fully capable of running 2.2?