Duh, Flash is the poster child of proprietary technology: you are not supposed to "figure out" anything about it. People who bitch about video and sound in Linux should stop blaming the community and direct their anger at those who are directly responsible for the poor state of affairs: hardware manufacturers and content providers.
I'm confused. I thought that Flash was the greatest thing in the world?
Oh my bad, this article isn't about Android versus Apple.
I for one am fine with that. To me the bigger question is: can Linux systems cater to the average end-user who has no intention of ever understanding how the system works, without losing everything I love about Linux? You just can't do that without dumbing-down the system. Not "dumbing-down" like smart people vs. stupid people, but "dumbing-down" like technically inclined versus not technically inclined.
You're right, no one could ever be successful in selling a Unix certified operating system to the non technically inclined.......
Comparing Apple's closed ecosystem and single hardware platform to Google's "it's done, now test it on your phones before you push it out to everyone" attitude is comparing apples to oranges.
You might have a good argument if it weren't for the fact that Microsoft is also able to push updates out to all manufacturers of Windows Phone 7 devices simultaneously.
But according to stats, Android had a 27% market share last year mostly consisting of HTC, Samsung, and Motorola (25%) and "Other" (2%").
You just said that Samsung is slow at pushing updates, Motorola is definitely slow, and HTC has to modify their Sense bloatware before pushing out an update.
The only phones that get timely updates are the Nexus phones.
The bigger news today is that Apple has decided that developing for iOS or the Mac, without even submitting anything to their respective app stores, is now no longer free. Developers registered in the $99 iOS or Mac developer program get it as part of their subscription, but all others have to pay $4.99 now.
Or you know, you could like, register for a free Apple developer account here for free:
HP and RIM seem to be doing more innovating than imitating. They've already surpassed the iPad in terms of the UI. Check them out -- they can't honestly be called iPad clones.
They have? You mean I can buy a Blackberry tablet or an HP tablet now?
Apple was years late in the smartphone game. I guess that's why they haven't really been able to challenge early leaders like RIM.
I think Apple is quite happy making 50% of the industry profit in cell phones compared to 14% for RIM.
Typical fanboy response, and forgive me if you aren't one but all the same, who cares?
Like someone else said, manufacturers need to actually stfu until they can actually ship something.
Remember last years HP Slate that was announced in January 2010 and barely shipped in late 2010?
The Blackberry Playbook that was announced in September 2010 and may ship in April? I got an email from Sprint "announcing" the Playbook would ship in the summer -- no pricing details.
Apple announced the iPad today and will ship within 2-3 weeks.
The HP WebOS tablet has better hardware at a similar price point, just has no apps. Really, the main reason it doesn't look competitive is because of the apps.
And don't forget about the tiny little fact that you can't actually buy one....
1. No multitasking. The new fast task switching is at the same level as switcher for Mac OS was way back when. It is a fast improvement but not really multitasking.
So it's "not really multitasking" that:
1. Music apps work in the background (Pandora, iPod, etc.) and can be controlled by the standard music controls of iOS devices.
2. VoIP apps work in the background. (iCall, Yahoo Messenger voice chat, etc) and allow you talk and receive calls.
3. Navigation apps/Location aware apps work in the background.
4. Apple apps have always worked in the background. Safari can stream music, mail can download email, iTunes can download apps/podcasts/music.
"âoeFree is the way to go with Android. Nobody has been successful selling content on Android. We will offer a way to remove the ads by paying for the app, but we donâ(TM)t expect that to be a huge revenue stream.â"
That report is not about the "end" of 2010, it covers all of 2010, reflecting a period during which Android had something like 800% growth. Based on the growth trajectory of Android and the fact that Google opened the market for purchases to a huge number of countries only at the end of 2010 it is safe to say that nearly all the revenue reflected in that report would have come in the last few months. So yes, the picture has changed radically.
Based on what sources? You see that Google is more than happy to brag about "activations" but remains mum on the amount of revenue that the market generates
That's not really true any more. Android got a reputation for that early on because its high proportion of geeks and lack of general consumer marketshare. In the last year that has changed radically
So did that change radically since the end of 2010?
"The phones are cheaper" to "They aren't really cheaper but they have features I care about and I don't care about the missing features (higher resolution, better graphics, better battery life, 802.11n, etc.)".....
All the reviews say it gets hot (up to 90 degrees), poor battery life, not very responsive, no official access to the Android market, no Bluetooth (for keyboards),
It's a MP3 player -- who cares about graphics and apps?
See, most people by an MP3 player to -- get this -- play music!
Well, "most people" who aren't buying iPods (less than 30%) are buying the cheap units from WalMart, etc. They aren't buying them for the great sound quality.
iTunes-less upload (much easier to get music on to the player
With 70%+ market share after a decade, I think most people would disagree,,,,
actual buttons that you can feel and click (No need to look at the screen to pause/play/skip/adjust the volume, etc.)
All iPods have hardware volume buttons and headphones with controls are less than $15,
Slashdot Mirror
I'm confused. I thought that Flash was the greatest thing in the world?
Oh my bad, this article isn't about Android versus Apple.
You're right, no one could ever be successful in selling a Unix certified operating system to the non technically inclined.......
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2007/08/mac-os-x-leopard-receives-unix-03-certification.ars
So exactly how long should Apple update older devices?
iPhone -- released in June 2007, ran the most current OS until around March 2010. (iOS 3.1)
iPhone 3G -- released around June 2008, ran the most current OS until November(?) 2010
iPhone 3GS -- released June 2009, as of now still runs the most current software.
You might have a good argument if it weren't for the fact that Microsoft is also able to push updates out to all manufacturers of Windows Phone 7 devices simultaneously.
But according to stats, Android had a 27% market share last year mostly consisting of HTC, Samsung, and Motorola (25%) and "Other" (2%").
You just said that Samsung is slow at pushing updates, Motorola is definitely slow, and HTC has to modify their Sense bloatware before pushing out an update.
The only phones that get timely updates are the Nexus phones.
As opposed to some six month old Android devices still shipping with old OS's that will never get upgraded......
You should try an Android, I hear that Android users always get timely updates as soon as a new release is available from Google.....
Or you know, you could like, register for a free Apple developer account here for free:
http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/
And download XCode......
Or did not that big "Free" word by the register button not clue you in?
You see a slight problem with the tense their?
They have? You mean I can buy a Blackberry tablet or an HP tablet now?
I think Apple is quite happy making 50% of the industry profit in cell phones compared to 14% for RIM.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/30/iphone-4-of-market-50-of-profit/
Or do you think that market share is more important to a publicly traded company than profit?
You mean an existing standard like BlueTooth?
Exactly what can you actually plug into an Android device with USB?
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2011/03/02/motorola-detwiler-sees-xoom-struggling/
"
Like someone else said, manufacturers need to actually stfu until they can actually ship something.
Remember last years HP Slate that was announced in January 2010 and barely shipped in late 2010?
The Blackberry Playbook that was announced in September 2010 and may ship in April? I got an email from Sprint "announcing" the Playbook would ship in the summer -- no pricing details.
Apple announced the iPad today and will ship within 2-3 weeks.
The Xoom that Motorola announced at CES promised:
1. Flash
2. Expandable storage via MicroSD
3. 4G
1 & 2 are still not available until a software update and 3 requires you to send the device back end when it's available in 90 days.
Saying the Xoom "shipped" is pushing it. It sort of half way shipped.
HP? Isn't that the same company that showed off the HP Slate at CES in 2010?
How did that work out?
And don't forget about the tiny little fact that you can't actually buy one....
According to last quarters financial statements, the average selling price of the iPhone is still $650. The carrier just pays the difference.
So it's "not really multitasking" that:
1. Music apps work in the background (Pandora, iPod, etc.) and can be controlled by the standard music controls of iOS devices.
2. VoIP apps work in the background. (iCall, Yahoo Messenger voice chat, etc) and allow you talk and receive calls.
3. Navigation apps/Location aware apps work in the background.
4. Apple apps have always worked in the background. Safari can stream music, mail can download email, iTunes can download apps/podcasts/music.
5. A task can complete working in the background.
Let's look at what one of the most successful mobile developers have to say -- Rovio, the creator of Angry Birds....
http://technmarketing.com/iphone/peter-vesterbacka-maker-of-angry-birds-talks-about-the-birds-apple-android-nokia-and-palmhp/
"Paid content just doesnâ(TM)t work on Android. "
"âoeFree is the way to go with Android. Nobody has been successful selling content on Android. We will offer a way to remove the ads by paying for the app, but we donâ(TM)t expect that to be a huge revenue stream.â"
Based on what sources? You see that Google is more than happy to brag about "activations" but remains mum on the amount of revenue that the market generates
So did that change radically since the end of 2010?
http://press.ihs.com/press-release/product-design-supply-chain/apple-maintains-dominance-mobile-application-store-market-
Apple app store revenue -- $1,800 Million
Android Market -- $103 Million
So it went from....
"The phones are cheaper" to "They aren't really cheaper but they have features I care about and I don't care about the missing features (higher resolution, better graphics, better battery life, 802.11n, etc.)".....
OK.......
The phones I listed are cheaper, have bigger screens and have changeable batteries, and lots of the criteria for a phone you asked us to name.
iPhone 4 - $199 16GB (80211n)
EVO -- $199
Droid X - $199
Incredible -- $99 (very poor graphics chip compared to the other three)
I didn't check the other prices.
All the reviews say it gets hot (up to 90 degrees), poor battery life, not very responsive, no official access to the Android market, no Bluetooth (for keyboards),
They have less battery life than the iPhone:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3791/the-sprint-htc-evo-4g-review/12
And lower resolutions.
And the Incredible is more of a contemporary of the 3GS in terms of hardware.
Well, "most people" who aren't buying iPods (less than 30%) are buying the cheap units from WalMart, etc. They aren't buying them for the great sound quality.
With 70%+ market share after a decade, I think most people would disagree,,,,
All iPods have hardware volume buttons and headphones with controls are less than $15,
"Better" functionality:
1. without wireless
2. without apps
3. with a lower resolution
4. And worse graphics?