The fault is not android or HTC, this is exclusively and explicitly the fault of the carriers.
If Apple was able to say "No" to the carriers when the carriers wanted to put their branding on their phone and install crapware, why can't Android manufacturers?
That's like blaming the carriers for not updating phones to the latest OS.
I do one better than notification triage. I keep my iPhone on Do Not Disturb and have it set to only allow calls through for select people or if you call more than once within three minutes.
I do something similar with Android phones using a third party app - AutoRing.
which interacts only with your smartphone, requiring you to always the smartphone with you. This whole idea is so fundamentally flawed, and almost unfathomably stupid - as stupid as buying a mini remote control for your main remote control. Why on earth would anyone bother with a "smart" watch if they can just as easily use the phone with a much better experience?
Just because the Surface devices come in one hardware profile doesn't mean Microsoft spent years fine-tuning the OS to take advantage of that hardware exclusively. Which is exactly what Apple does with OS X.
To expand on your point, there is a separate iOS image for every device that iOS supports. So an iPhone user running iOS 7 doesn't have code that's needed only for the iPad.
It means that everybody cheats on benchmarks, so the "benchmarks that aren't cheated" assertion is meaningless. Was that really too hard for you to figure out?
And in other news...Apple must be equally as dishonest since the founders use to steal long distance in 1975......
Citation? Google said they wanted to use Motorola to explore and demonstrate how to tightly integrate the Android OS with hardware. It was to be Android done right, just like their Chromebook was to be ChromeOS done right.
"Motorola Mobilityâ(TM)s patent portfolio will help protect the Android ecosystem. Android, which is open-source software, is vital to competition in the mobile device space, ensuring hardware manufacturers, mobile phone carriers, applications developers and consumers all have choice. "
As far as "Motorola to explore and demonstrate how to tightly integrate the Android OS with hardware. "
How is that working out for them?
1. Motorola's volumes are so small that they are not even in the top 5. 2. Google is still "beholden" to other manufacturers to make Nexus devices.
The Kindle and other non-locked-in Android devices are still a big win for Google
How is that? The Kindle devices don't use any Google services.
You seem to be grabbing at straws and non-sequiturs in an attempt to spin Android's incredible success as a massive failure. Have you considered a career as a political consultant?
The whole purpose of buying Motorola was not that they wanted to get into the hardware market, they were trying to protect Android from patent lawsuits from third parties and ironically enough from Motorola suing other Android manufacturers.
Saying that Motorola has nothing to do with Android is like saying that you shouldn't include the cost of a $20,000 security system to protect a $10,000 investment.
The sole purpose of Android was to increase service revenue, but their are millions of Android devices that don't use any Google services especially in countries like China and India. Even in the US, Amazon has a successful Android ecosystem that doesn't use Google.
Even worse, Microsoft can get a per device fee from many Android devices but Google can't.
Google beat earnings estimates. Google's Android OS drastically beat expectations on how soon it would totally dominate the smartphone market.
What good is "dominance" if you're not making money? Android has been a net loss for Google when you count the acquisition cost of Motorola and the fact they have been losing more money every quarter.
On top of that, Google bought Motorola mostly for their patents which they can't use either as a weapon or a defense since most of them are FRAND and courts worldwide have been coming down on companies that try to use FRAND patents to sue every one.
Google's plan for Android was to make sure they would not get shut out of the smart phone ads business. The plan far exceeded expectations all around.
Yes by paying Apple $1 billion a year for being the default search engine on iPhones....
Plenty of low end phones sold on prepaid carriers ship with old OS's just go to metropcs.com or cricket.com for example. The rest of the world doesn't buy subsidized phones.
Why is everyone talking like there even is a problem? In August Android had almost 80% of the market. Yeah, it must be incredibly boring and horrible to use if so many people want it.
Or maybe people just want a cheap smart phone an Android is the only choice? Most people in the world don't buy subsidized handsets. In the US, when given a choice between the iPhone and Android phone at the same price (thanks to the higher amount the carrier is willing to subsidize Android), over half are choosing the iPhone.
But even with 80% of the worldwide market -- where are most development efforts going first?
The true history is that the labels forced DRM on Apple and over time, Apple's DRM along with the popularity of iPods and iTunes gave Apple negotiating leverage over the record companies since it sold 70% + of the digital music and no one else could sell DRM protected music for the iPod.
When they asked Apple to license their DRM, Steve Jobs said no and told them if they wanted interoperability with iTunes and iPods with other vendors let everyone sell DRM free music,
You're right, the OP should have said iOS 7 is their Windows 8. I've heard literally nothing but complaints from users about the new iOS 7 UI, much like you'll hear people complain about Windows 8's new UI
So I'm sure you've asked a valid statistical sample of people who have upgraded to iOS 7 to rank their experience from 1 to 5.
But barring that, if people are unhappy with iOS 7 they either won't upgrade their current devices and/or you will see Apple's volumes decrease year over year.
So out of 7 patents that I'm sure you read very carefully along with the judgement, you think it is only aboyt "rounded rectangles" based on a summary on Wikipedia?
Apple is not the exception. They just fudge the numbers in a different way. Really, they're all bastards though and I don't trust them any further than I can throw them.
And a little deeper analysis will show....
a) Apple accounted for numbers the same way they always did. b) Apple does not count phones as sold if they are still in Apple Stores inventories. c) If Apple were channel stuffing, phones would readily be available at carriers.
The fact is that the "analyst" were wrong and are trying to cover their tails.
Do you really believe that there is not enough of a demand in the launch countries to sale 9 million phones in one weekend?
Do you think that Apple will be forced to take a write down (like MS and BlackBerry) for unsold inventory in the channel?
"- using what practically amounts to slave labor at Foxconn"
The same company that a dozen other companies use
"- dodging taxes by claiming residence in ireland"
Do you take every tax deduction you are eligible to take?
"- suing everyone and their moms with bullshit claims and patents"
Every company is suing everyone. Do you know that Motorola basically blackmailed Google into buying them by threatening to sue other Android manufacturers?
" false advertising (it should be named the Idiot Bar, not the Genius Bar)"
Example?
"- overpricing all their stuff"
There is no such thing as something being "overpriced" in a capitalist economy -- especially if it not an essential good.
"- suing everyone making compatible hardware into bankruptcy"
????
"- putting in a clause into OSX's license prohibiting using it on anything but official Apple hardware"
How is that unethical? Is it unethical that I can't use GPL 3.0 license software in the method I want?
I actually like my iDevices and I don't believe that I'm saying this. But why iPads? They are limited use devices and once you add a keyboard you might as well provide them laptops. But even that is pushing it. Get them a bunch of cheap Kindles and provide better computer labs at schools and libraries with extended hours.
They've definitely made a lot of dumb errors over the years. They are most definitely chasing Apple in terms of innovation in consumer market. But I'm also saying that it's a mis-characterization that they're just burning piles of money for no reason. I actually respect that they're at least trying to work on a long-term strategy rather than just trying to shore up their numbers for next quarter by cutting costs. You can't build long-term market dominance by worrying about what happens next quarter. If you try, you end up like US car companies in the 1980's
So how do you explain that Apple has been able to introduce retail stores, iPod's, iTunes, the iPhone, and the iPod without years or probably even a quarter of losses?
That's the weird thing to me. Within my social circle of a couple of hundred folks, no one is tweeting, facebooking, or otherwise announcing that they've run out and bought the new phone. In fact, I've seen a few folks writing about this being the first upgrade cycle they might sit out, e.g., "hoping the '6' gives us something to look forward to"
Well since Random Slashdot Poster (565205) took a pulse of his 200 FB friends it must mean Apple is doomed.....
Slashdot Mirror
If Apple was able to say "No" to the carriers when the carriers wanted to put their branding on their phone and install crapware, why can't Android manufacturers?
That's like blaming the carriers for not updating phones to the latest OS.
I do one better than notification triage. I keep my iPhone on Do Not Disturb and have it set to only allow calls through for select people or if you call more than once within three minutes.
I do something similar with Android phones using a third party app - AutoRing.
Or selling a phone with a second phone.....,
http://mobile.theverge.com/2013/1/25/3915700/htc-mini-tiny-phone-companion-for-your-oversized-smartphone
And you base that conclusion on debate you're seeing on Slashdot for an Apple product?
To expand on your point, there is a separate iOS image for every device that iOS supports. So an iPhone user running iOS 7 doesn't have code that's needed only for the iPad.
And in other news...Apple must be equally as dishonest since the founders use to steal long distance in 1975......
And a 10 year old computer benchmark has exactly what to do with a phone?
http://www.google.com/press/motorola/
"Motorola Mobilityâ(TM)s patent portfolio will help protect the Android ecosystem. Android, which is open-source software, is vital to competition in the mobile device space, ensuring hardware manufacturers, mobile phone carriers, applications developers and consumers all have choice. "
As far as "Motorola to explore and demonstrate how to tightly integrate the Android OS with hardware. "
How is that working out for them?
1. Motorola's volumes are so small that they are not even in the top 5.
2. Google is still "beholden" to other manufacturers to make Nexus devices.
How is that? The Kindle devices don't use any Google services.
The whole purpose of buying Motorola was not that they wanted to get into the hardware market, they were trying to protect Android from patent lawsuits from third parties and ironically enough from Motorola suing other Android manufacturers.
Saying that Motorola has nothing to do with Android is like saying that you shouldn't include the cost of a $20,000 security system to protect a $10,000 investment.
The sole purpose of Android was to increase service revenue, but their are millions of Android devices that don't use any Google services especially in countries like China and India. Even in the US, Amazon has a successful Android ecosystem that doesn't use Google.
Even worse, Microsoft can get a per device fee from many Android devices but Google can't.
What good is "dominance" if you're not making money? Android has been a net loss for Google when you count the acquisition cost of Motorola and the fact they have been losing more money every quarter.
On top of that, Google bought Motorola mostly for their patents which they can't use either as a weapon or a defense since most of them are FRAND and courts worldwide have been coming down on companies that try to use FRAND patents to sue every one.
Yes by paying Apple $1 billion a year for being the default search engine on iPhones....
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/mobiles/news/apple-charges-google-1-billion-per-year-for-being-the-default-search-engine-on-its-devices-analyst-330228
Where the majority of their mobile profits are earned....
http://9to5mac.com/2011/09/21/google-23rds-of-our-mobile-search-comes-from-apples-ios/
And sinking billions in Motorola....
Plenty of low end phones sold on prepaid carriers ship with old OS's just go to metropcs.com or cricket.com for example. The rest of the world doesn't buy subsidized phones.
How many new PC's ship with old versions of Windows by default?
How many PC makers muck around with the internals of the OS?
Or maybe people just want a cheap smart phone an Android is the only choice? Most people in the world don't buy subsidized handsets. In the US, when given a choice between the iPhone and Android phone at the same price (thanks to the higher amount the carrier is willing to subsidize Android), over half are choosing the iPhone.
But even with 80% of the worldwide market -- where are most development efforts going first?
except with the record companies.
The true history is that the labels forced DRM on Apple and over time, Apple's DRM along with the popularity of iPods and iTunes gave Apple negotiating leverage over the record companies since it sold 70% + of the digital music and no one else could sell DRM protected music for the iPod.
When they asked Apple to license their DRM, Steve Jobs said no and told them if they wanted interoperability with iTunes and iPods with other vendors let everyone sell DRM free music,
http://www.apple.com/ca/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
Most people back then didn't care about DRM as long as they could play their music on iPods and burn their music to CDs,
So I'm sure you've asked a valid statistical sample of people who have upgraded to iOS 7 to rank their experience from 1 to 5.
But barring that, if people are unhappy with iOS 7 they either won't upgrade their current devices and/or you will see Apple's volumes decrease year over year.
Which one do you think will happen?
So by which measure are you measuring that by?
1. The rate at which users upgrade their current phones to iOS 7?
http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/19/ios-7-adoption-already-as-high-as-35-in-one-day-apple-and-developers-reap-the-rewards/
2. Year over Year growth of iOS device sales (we will know in about two weeks)
3. Third party developer support?
http://furbo.org/2013/08/02/app-updates-for-ios-7/
So out of 7 patents that I'm sure you read very carefully along with the judgement, you think it is only aboyt "rounded rectangles" based on a summary on Wikipedia?
And you don't see a problem with that?
I bet you also believe that Al Gore said he invented the Internet based on what you heard on the Internet?
And a little deeper analysis will show....
a) Apple accounted for numbers the same way they always did.
b) Apple does not count phones as sold if they are still in Apple Stores inventories.
c) If Apple were channel stuffing, phones would readily be available at carriers.
The fact is that the "analyst" were wrong and are trying to cover their tails.
Do you really believe that there is not enough of a demand in the launch countries to sale 9 million phones in one weekend?
Do you think that Apple will be forced to take a write down (like MS and BlackBerry) for unsold inventory in the channel?
"- using what practically amounts to slave labor at Foxconn"
The same company that a dozen other companies use
"- dodging taxes by claiming residence in ireland"
Do you take every tax deduction you are eligible to take?
"- suing everyone and their moms with bullshit claims and patents"
Every company is suing everyone. Do you know that Motorola basically blackmailed Google into buying them by threatening to sue other Android manufacturers?
" false advertising (it should be named the Idiot Bar, not the Genius Bar)"
Example?
"- overpricing all their stuff"
There is no such thing as something being "overpriced" in a capitalist economy -- especially if it not an essential good.
"- suing everyone making compatible hardware into bankruptcy"
????
"- putting in a clause into OSX's license prohibiting using it on anything but official Apple hardware"
How is that unethical? Is it unethical that I can't use GPL 3.0 license software in the method I want?
http://androidandme.com/2013/07/devices/last-years-nexus-7-may-get-lag-fix-in-4-3-ota/
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/27/project-butter-improves-android-4-1s-speed/
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/27/project-butter-improves-android-4-1s-speed/
I actually like my iDevices and I don't believe that I'm saying this. But why iPads? They are limited use devices and once you add a keyboard you might as well provide them laptops. But even that is pushing it. Get them a bunch of cheap Kindles and provide better computer labs at schools and libraries with extended hours.
Where were you during MapGate and AntennaGate?
So how do you explain that Apple has been able to introduce retail stores, iPod's, iTunes, the iPhone, and the iPod without years or probably even a quarter of losses?
Well since Random Slashdot Poster (565205) took a pulse of his 200 FB friends it must mean Apple is doomed.....