If making a rounded rectangular shaped tablet is a violation of a law, then I have an antique soap-box to sell you for a million bucks. And if you believe that Apple deserved a patent for such a design, then you will be gullible enough to buy it from me at the price offered.
And FYI, matters of law are not decided in your head or Steve Job's head either; it is for the courts to decide whether there has indeed been a violation.
If you believe Apple's only criterion in the design patent case against Samsung is a rounded rectangular shape then I have an antique soap-box to sell you.
Got lucky launching *a* product at the right time?
Are you thinking of the same Apple as I am? One is a fluke, any more than that and it's far more than luck. Whatever you think of Apple, attributing their rise from near-death into one of the biggest companies in tech down to luck is to severely underestimate your "enemy", if that's how you want to position yourself (given the rest of your comment).
Perhaps this is why Apple have such an easy time of it. Their competitors think it's all down to luck and fanaticism.
For the record: strongly disagree with this lawsuit.
Explain what hyperbole is? You? Of course not. If you knew, you wouldn't call my statement hyperbole.
Ok:
My argument, that there should be the option for all Android phones to be updatable by not having locked bootloaders so that users can update them to the latest version of Android if they want to.
Your response to that:
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Not only is it a non sequitur (what does Linus' opinion have to do with this, or the fact that Linux runs on supercomputers? Congratulations, you've pointed out that the Linux kernel is flexible and scalable, but what does it have to do with a discussion about smartphones?), you've also gone for hyperbole in trying to summarise what I'm arguing as a tactic for criticising it. That is, you're trying to make my position more ridiculous so you can attack it. I have not claimed at any point that I would "rather have a linux that updates every day", so criticising my argument by trying to claim that's what I said or meant is simply ineffective as an arguing technique.
It's also hilariously stupid to claim that "linux runs on 90% of the top 500 supercomputers" has any bearing whatsoever on a smartphone OS that just so happens to run on top of the Linux kernel.
I'm so sorry you have so little joy in your life that you can't appreciate it in others when they achieve something that took time, hard work and enhancing our understanding of science.
I pity you that look with derision on people who sincerely enjoy what they do for a living and dare to show a little passion as the fruits of the labour start to show up.
The fact that you think they're crying over "nothing" shows just how narrow minded you really are. It's a shame.
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Message from you , loud and clear - I don't understand open source and don't want to. But I'll nag about the variety it must of necessity cause.
Again with the hyperbole and non sequiturs. Have you ever been in a discussion before? Just curious.
you said something about google "not allowing" certain things. Illegal also achieves the same thing. . Being an analogy , it is not exact , just illustrates the point. But since you don't have a real point , it is in your interest to focus on the differences.
No, it's not the same thing. Something not being allowed and something being illegal are not the same thing at all. One is a subset of the other, but not the other way around.
I'm not allowed to take metal objects into the NMR room, and the chemistry department have it as a rule and I face consequences for breaking that rule, but it's not illegal.
There are plenty of ways to set up a system of rules and consequences without the "not allowed" things being illegal. They only become illegal if a law is made, or they leverage existing laws - for example one might argue that taking a metal object into an NMR lab is technically illegal since it would fall under the banner of health and safety, but strictly speaking it is not an illegal act per se, even though it is forbidden and I'd face a ban on using the spectrometers if I contravened it.
My points were valid, yours were not, but you don't really seem interested in actual discussion, just throwing out hyperbole in the guise of critiquing my argument.
my argument is that locked bootloaders are a bad idea
Apple devices too have locked bootloaders. Can you show me your criticism of it (in appropriate story, of course)?
I will state it unequivocally for the record: I think Apple's decision to lock the bootloader on iOS devices is a very bad idea. It is equally as bad an idea as locked bootloaders on Android phones. You can quote me on that. While we're here I'll also state that I agree with Android's app model more than that of iOS - I think the ability to sideload unofficial apps that don't come through the main ecosystem is something that should be optional on iOS. I definitely have stated that before.
I'm sorry, but I didn't think it was necessary to point out that my position applies to all devices, not just Android phones.
You were expecting me to hold a different position because it's Apple?
Not everyone who uses Android is savvy enough to understand that the should pick the Nexus
Not everyone who drives a car is savvy enough to understand that "the" should not pick the Ford, but go with Honda. Obviously selling a Ford should be illegal. Fools and their money should be made inseparable by law.
are delighted with their Android phone - but they all have things like the Galaxy S2 and S3,
In other words, in spite of selling a Ford not being illegal, Honda is still being sold. Free market has the solution in this case. Rejoice.
Your arguments are hilarious non sequiturs, but I think pointing that out would be fruitless since you seem determined to be antagonistic.
You're also the first person to bring up the suggestion that selling a certain product (I assume a phone with a locked bootloader, since that's what we're talking about) should be illegal. I hadn't considered that, but it's probably not a good idea. That's probably why I didn't consider it.
fact - the low adoption of updates due to deliberate feet dragging or outright abandonment to force new phone sales.
Right, and 99% of linux installations are less than kernel version 3.0, which came out years ago. The embedded ones (routers / TVs etc.) are mostly at a version released a decade ago.
maybe Google could try to do something about it.
And yes, Linus (and other copyright holders of linux kernel) could do something about it. License it to only network capable devices, likely to be online most of the time. In-kernel update module, license invalid if the module unloaded. Send DMCA notices to anyone distributing "illegal" linux kernel sources with the update module removed.
It would make an awesome free and Free kernel. All the washing machines and toasters would move to linux immediately. Oh wait, they won't, nobody cares.
Well, I guess the ones with Android phones who can't update them would care, but I guess if even other Android users don't give a fuck about them, as is evidently clear in this whole thread then I suppose my concern for their unfortunate situation is also misplaced. Message received loud and clear: screw everyone else, I'm fine.
You are the one trying to dictate needs, my friend. Saying that all OEM need to update their phones even if their users don't think they need it just to fit some weird notion of "ecosystem" you have in your mind.
I am just saying that whoever buys a 3GS having much better and newer options for smaller prices is a retard, but one is free to victimize oneself as much as he sees fit, you included.
Who says I'm "victimize[ing] [sic] myself"? Because you think there are better phones than the 3GS out there for less than the contract price? Again, we're back to what *you* think people should think. What if they don't agree with you, or have a different set of needs?
How do you know how much I paid for my phone? I happen to use a 3GS, but not in the US. What do you know of my circumstances that would make you believe that "better and newer" options would be available to me, or anyone like me? You're making some awfully big assumptions without knowing anything except that you personally think the 3GS is "shit".
I'm also not saying that OEMs must update their phones, I am saying that the phone should have the option to do so if the user wishes. I'm surprised you don't know what a locked bootloader is and how it affects the ability of a user to update their phone on their own terms. I assume this is the bit you don't understand, because I'm not sure how else to put that. Perhaps in bullet point form?
* Locked bootloaders bad * User upgrades to latest Android version with no blocking by carrier or OEM good * Option for carrier, OEM or user to upgrade phone as they wish * the only "dictating" is that user freedom should be preserved.
> fixed in iOS 6. Separate prompts for Location, Contacts, Calendars, Reminders,...
I know this is flamebait - but hear me out. There are many Apple fanbois out there effectively saying that Apple is justified in patenting the bleedingly obvious in its attempt to stifle competition and hurt society in general.
Should Google sue Apple's ass off for copying the prompting for confirmation of other information like Android has done for some time now?
I realize that Google is very unlikely to take Apple to court over something so bleedingly obvious - only an asshat of a company would do that...
So what do the Apple fanbois think? You're blind zealots and believe in suing for the most trivial of things... Should Google kick Apple to the curb for copying such a basic feature "on a smart phone" (ie. ignoring precedence in other environments)? Particiuarly given that it hurts the community at large, do you endorse such behaviour when Apple is not at the helm of the law suit?
You start with a false premise; that Apple fans believe that Apple is justified suing over trivial things. I for one think that suing over trivial things is nonsense. I believe Apple had a design patent case against Samsung, but that it was blown out of all proportion. I also think the lawsuits over the screen unlock and other such basic things are frivolous and annoying.
So, if Google were to sue for this I'd take the exact same position as I take for Apple suing over sliding to unlock: it's stupid.
What stops that dev from spending another $99 on another dev account? Not that hard or expensive to kill your old corporation, start another and get a new AMEX.
Apple will just write a GUI in Visual Basic and track their IP address.
It's not about floodgates it's about prevention and it's about criminal activity / value. The damage will speak for itself when normal people have their cc drained because the data was pulled out of AppStore or something akin.;
I thought Apple were already doing that to our credit cards? Surely there will be nothing left for the malware authors.
I thought the real world was more than your parents' basement. Perhaps I was mistaken!
You're also a little late. Us "Mactards" joined the supposed real world way back in the pre-OS X days. Malware on the Mac is nothing new. You're many years late to the party, presumably because you were born in the mid 90s.;)
The 3GS is only an option if you are a complete idiot, which unfortunately is true to more people than it would be good for our poor World. Or if you give them for free, which should be classified as dumping in any serious country. Worldwide 3GS sells are inferior to many individual android devices.
Ah, I see you have no argument. Pity.
Seriously, that's what you're going with? Ok, I suppose.
Dumping. Heh. You kids and your naivety. You'll note, obviously, that the phone is not "free", and that not everyone has the same needs as you evidently do when they make their phone selection. I find it amusingly arrogant that you should be the one to dictate what options people should choose when making a purchasing decision for a smartphone. I guess that'll probably subside a bit as you get older.
Wow. I just posted an apology to you for being a little irritable and snapping at some AC calling me a "fucking troll" but I take it back. Goodness. You're just being poisonous for the sake of it for some reason. Because I want to talk to people about Android but being guilty of the heinous crime of not actively using an Android device?
I *want* people to get to use Jelly Bean, and have a good experience with their phone. I have seen how good ICS is on good phones. I have personally used several different ones.
I'm sorry that offering my opinion that I think it sucks that some Android users are being denied that opportunity for no good technical reason. I guess it's totally fine that their phones are stuck on Froyo. They have the choice to buy a new one! Woo! Freedom!
Sorry for actually trying to have a discussion on a discussion forum where people are going to have different experiences and opinions.
Also, I'm not sure how it's offtopic to talk about the adoption rate of the (n-1) version of Android in a thread about the n version of Android as it applies to who in the Android ecosystem will actually get to use it. Just curious on that one.
Why does this have to be about iOS or Windows Phone?
You touchy fandroids really can't seem to get past defining yourselves by how much you hate everyone else.
You're threadjacking a discussion about an update to the Android OS, talking about how it's inferior to iOS and how Android devices are inferior to iOS devices, and you accuse everyone *us* of being 'fandroids'? Nice RDF you have there.
--Jeremy
As I stated to someone else, my "fandroid" insult was in response to being called a "fucking troll" in an otherwise civil discourse. It was late at the time and I was irritable. It was no excuse for being rude though, despite provocation.
I also didn't say that iOS was superior to Android. If you can point out where exactly I said that then I'd be willing to apologise, but I didn't say that at all. I merely compared the number of users of each platform who were on the current version of the OS - something that makes life easier for developers; homogeneity in large deployments - as a potential area that Android could address because it's largely down to a practice that works against the consumer.
I have actually been pretty positive about Android (certainly in other threads) and critical of iOS. I have mentioned repeatedly some of the features of Android that are much better than iOS (Swype and the ability to customise the UI to be able to operate common features quickly like bluetooth/wifi/gps being two of the biggest ones).
I am not trying to troll here. I think that locked bootloaders and carriers blocking updates is an issue. Not a giant one, or a crippling one, but something that I think Google should try to do something about.
Where do you get the idea that just because I use an iPhone I think that "less choice = good"?
My stance is against locked bootloaders and abandoned (by the carrier and OEM) phones. The iPhone worked for me so I bought it. That doesn't mean I think a lack of choice is a good thing - I had plenty of choices and examined them all before deciding on something that worked for me.
"Out here in reality" we don't jump to conclusions about what other people are thinking. Oh wait, the other thing.
I should make a correction to this. I stated that the 3GS was free on contract and $99 off contract - it is not, it is $375 for a non-contract unlocked new one from Apple. $99 is the price for an iPhone 4 on contract. Apologies for the error.
Those were the figures I saw, although someone else further down the thread said that more recent numbers as of July this year show that it is more like 10%.
Either way, it's low, and it shouldn't be. There's no reason that a large majority of Android handsets should be stuck on prior versions of the OS, or have just been left in a situation where the carrier doesn't want to push an update because it conflicts with their desire to sell a new phone instead.
ICS can run, according to Google, on anything that runs 2.x Android.
This is the most ridiculous claim I read everywhere regarding iPhones: the fact that even the 3GS still gets updates without cerains parts. You want to know what 'certain parts' are?
Pretty much every fucking thing that matters. Check here.
I own a 4S and an iPad 2 and I'm pretty sure next year I'll already see some stuff not being released to the 4S - hell, even the iPad 2 don't get FaceTime over celullar (yeah, a lot of technical reasons you know...)
Please stop saying that even the 3GS gets upgrades. At most it gets security updates which I agree it's good, but upgrades? No fucking way.
Yes, that's the point of the "non-premium" option - some of the new whizz bang cool stuff won't be included, but you're getting it for free on contract. What do you expect? That it has all the same features as the 4S (and whatever the new one gets)? It's a discounted, more-budget-friendly, less-feature-rich phone.
It *does* get updates though - iOS6 does add some new features and improves old ones that the 3GS *will* get the benefit from (as well as all the security updates etc). Just because it doesn't get all the same stuff as the top of the line premium phones doesn't mean that there's "no fucking way" it is being upgraded when iOS6 rolls around (or when iOS5 hit, or iOS4).
Slashdot Mirror
If making a rounded rectangular shaped tablet is a violation of a law, then I have an antique soap-box to sell you for a million bucks. And if you believe that Apple deserved a patent for such a design, then you will be gullible enough to buy it from me at the price offered.
And FYI, matters of law are not decided in your head or Steve Job's head either; it is for the courts to decide whether there has indeed been a violation.
If you believe Apple's only criterion in the design patent case against Samsung is a rounded rectangular shape then I have an antique soap-box to sell you.
Got lucky launching *a* product at the right time?
Are you thinking of the same Apple as I am? One is a fluke, any more than that and it's far more than luck. Whatever you think of Apple, attributing their rise from near-death into one of the biggest companies in tech down to luck is to severely underestimate your "enemy", if that's how you want to position yourself (given the rest of your comment).
Perhaps this is why Apple have such an easy time of it. Their competitors think it's all down to luck and fanaticism.
For the record: strongly disagree with this lawsuit.
Explain what hyperbole is? You? Of course not. If you knew, you wouldn't call my statement hyperbole.
Ok:
My argument, that there should be the option for all Android phones to be updatable by not having locked bootloaders so that users can update them to the latest version of Android if they want to.
Your response to that:
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Not only is it a non sequitur (what does Linus' opinion have to do with this, or the fact that Linux runs on supercomputers? Congratulations, you've pointed out that the Linux kernel is flexible and scalable, but what does it have to do with a discussion about smartphones?), you've also gone for hyperbole in trying to summarise what I'm arguing as a tactic for criticising it. That is, you're trying to make my position more ridiculous so you can attack it. I have not claimed at any point that I would "rather have a linux that updates every day", so criticising my argument by trying to claim that's what I said or meant is simply ineffective as an arguing technique.
It's also hilariously stupid to claim that "linux runs on 90% of the top 500 supercomputers" has any bearing whatsoever on a smartphone OS that just so happens to run on top of the Linux kernel.
This was done by a bunch of foreign nationals and not in America
Yeah, and they told me they were going to use it to permanently cast the 9/11 Ground Zero memorial in shadow.
Do I look fat with this electron?
Negative.
I'm so sorry you have so little joy in your life that you can't appreciate it in others when they achieve something that took time, hard work and enhancing our understanding of science.
I pity you that look with derision on people who sincerely enjoy what they do for a living and dare to show a little passion as the fruits of the labour start to show up.
The fact that you think they're crying over "nothing" shows just how narrow minded you really are. It's a shame.
You are the one calling my argument hyperbole / non sequiturs without giving a reason, remember?
You need me to explain what hyperbole is? I'm sorry, but I'm not doing your homework for you.
I have tried to explain how freedom and restrictions don't go together but you would rather have a linux that updates every day rather than one which drives over 90% of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Thankfully, Linus doesn't listen to you.
Message from you , loud and clear - I don't understand open source and don't want to. But I'll nag about the variety it must of necessity cause.
Again with the hyperbole and non sequiturs. Have you ever been in a discussion before? Just curious.
you said something about google "not allowing" certain things. Illegal also achieves the same thing. . Being an analogy , it is not exact , just illustrates the point. But since you don't have a real point , it is in your interest to focus on the differences.
No, it's not the same thing. Something not being allowed and something being illegal are not the same thing at all. One is a subset of the other, but not the other way around.
I'm not allowed to take metal objects into the NMR room, and the chemistry department have it as a rule and I face consequences for breaking that rule, but it's not illegal.
There are plenty of ways to set up a system of rules and consequences without the "not allowed" things being illegal. They only become illegal if a law is made, or they leverage existing laws - for example one might argue that taking a metal object into an NMR lab is technically illegal since it would fall under the banner of health and safety, but strictly speaking it is not an illegal act per se, even though it is forbidden and I'd face a ban on using the spectrometers if I contravened it.
My points were valid, yours were not, but you don't really seem interested in actual discussion, just throwing out hyperbole in the guise of critiquing my argument.
my argument is that locked bootloaders are a bad idea
Apple devices too have locked bootloaders. Can you show me your criticism of it (in appropriate story, of course)?
I will state it unequivocally for the record: I think Apple's decision to lock the bootloader on iOS devices is a very bad idea. It is equally as bad an idea as locked bootloaders on Android phones. You can quote me on that. While we're here I'll also state that I agree with Android's app model more than that of iOS - I think the ability to sideload unofficial apps that don't come through the main ecosystem is something that should be optional on iOS. I definitely have stated that before.
I'm sorry, but I didn't think it was necessary to point out that my position applies to all devices, not just Android phones.
You were expecting me to hold a different position because it's Apple?
Not everyone who uses Android is savvy enough to understand that the should pick the Nexus
Not everyone who drives a car is savvy enough to understand that "the" should not pick the Ford, but go with Honda. Obviously selling a Ford should be illegal. Fools and their money should be made inseparable by law.
are delighted with their Android phone - but they all have things like the Galaxy S2 and S3,
In other words, in spite of selling a Ford not being illegal, Honda is still being sold. Free market has the solution in this case. Rejoice.
Your arguments are hilarious non sequiturs, but I think pointing that out would be fruitless since you seem determined to be antagonistic.
You're also the first person to bring up the suggestion that selling a certain product (I assume a phone with a locked bootloader, since that's what we're talking about) should be illegal. I hadn't considered that, but it's probably not a good idea. That's probably why I didn't consider it.
fact - the low adoption of updates due to deliberate feet dragging or outright abandonment to force new phone sales.
Right, and 99% of linux installations are less than kernel version 3.0, which came out years ago. The embedded ones (routers / TVs etc.) are mostly at a version released a decade ago.
maybe Google could try to do something about it.
And yes, Linus (and other copyright holders of linux kernel) could do something about it. License it to only network capable devices, likely to be online most of the time. In-kernel update module, license invalid if the module unloaded. Send DMCA notices to anyone distributing "illegal" linux kernel sources with the update module removed.
It would make an awesome free and Free kernel. All the washing machines and toasters would move to linux immediately. Oh wait, they won't, nobody cares.
Well, I guess the ones with Android phones who can't update them would care, but I guess if even other Android users don't give a fuck about them, as is evidently clear in this whole thread then I suppose my concern for their unfortunate situation is also misplaced. Message received loud and clear: screw everyone else, I'm fine.
You are the one trying to dictate needs, my friend. Saying that all OEM need to update their phones even if their users don't think they need it just to fit some weird notion of "ecosystem" you have in your mind.
I am just saying that whoever buys a 3GS having much better and newer options for smaller prices is a retard, but one is free to victimize oneself as much as he sees fit, you included.
Who says I'm "victimize[ing] [sic] myself"? Because you think there are better phones than the 3GS out there for less than the contract price? Again, we're back to what *you* think people should think. What if they don't agree with you, or have a different set of needs?
How do you know how much I paid for my phone? I happen to use a 3GS, but not in the US. What do you know of my circumstances that would make you believe that "better and newer" options would be available to me, or anyone like me? You're making some awfully big assumptions without knowing anything except that you personally think the 3GS is "shit".
I'm also not saying that OEMs must update their phones, I am saying that the phone should have the option to do so if the user wishes. I'm surprised you don't know what a locked bootloader is and how it affects the ability of a user to update their phone on their own terms. I assume this is the bit you don't understand, because I'm not sure how else to put that. Perhaps in bullet point form?
* Locked bootloaders bad
* User upgrades to latest Android version with no blocking by carrier or OEM good
* Option for carrier, OEM or user to upgrade phone as they wish
* the only "dictating" is that user freedom should be preserved.
> fixed in iOS 6. Separate prompts for Location, Contacts, Calendars, Reminders, ...
I know this is flamebait - but hear me out.
There are many Apple fanbois out there effectively saying that Apple is justified in patenting the bleedingly obvious in its attempt to stifle competition and hurt society in general.
Should Google sue Apple's ass off for copying the prompting for confirmation of other information like Android has done for some time now?
I realize that Google is very unlikely to take Apple to court over something so bleedingly obvious - only an asshat of a company would do that...
So what do the Apple fanbois think? You're blind zealots and believe in suing for the most trivial of things... Should Google kick Apple to the curb for copying such a basic feature "on a smart phone" (ie. ignoring precedence in other environments)? Particiuarly given that it hurts the community at large, do you endorse such behaviour when Apple is not at the helm of the law suit?
You start with a false premise; that Apple fans believe that Apple is justified suing over trivial things. I for one think that suing over trivial things is nonsense. I believe Apple had a design patent case against Samsung, but that it was blown out of all proportion. I also think the lawsuits over the screen unlock and other such basic things are frivolous and annoying.
So, if Google were to sue for this I'd take the exact same position as I take for Apple suing over sliding to unlock: it's stupid.
This is true, but the summary is somewhat slanted to take an unnecessary pot shot at Android's security, perhaps to "lessen the blow"? Who knows.
The article I read elsewhere was much more informative without the grandstanding.
What stops that dev from spending another $99 on another dev account?
Not that hard or expensive to kill your old corporation, start another and get a new AMEX.
Apple will just write a GUI in Visual Basic and track their IP address.
It's not about floodgates it's about prevention and it's about criminal activity / value. The damage will speak for itself when normal people have their cc drained because the data was pulled out of AppStore or something akin.;
I thought Apple were already doing that to our credit cards? Surely there will be nothing left for the malware authors.
I thought the real world was more than your parents' basement. Perhaps I was mistaken!
You're also a little late. Us "Mactards" joined the supposed real world way back in the pre-OS X days. Malware on the Mac is nothing new. You're many years late to the party, presumably because you were born in the mid 90s. ;)
The 3GS is only an option if you are a complete idiot, which unfortunately is true to more people than it would be good for our poor World. Or if you give them for free, which should be classified as dumping in any serious country. Worldwide 3GS sells are inferior to many individual android devices.
Ah, I see you have no argument. Pity.
Seriously, that's what you're going with? Ok, I suppose.
Dumping. Heh. You kids and your naivety. You'll note, obviously, that the phone is not "free", and that not everyone has the same needs as you evidently do when they make their phone selection. I find it amusingly arrogant that you should be the one to dictate what options people should choose when making a purchasing decision for a smartphone. I guess that'll probably subside a bit as you get older.
Wow. I just posted an apology to you for being a little irritable and snapping at some AC calling me a "fucking troll" but I take it back. Goodness. You're just being poisonous for the sake of it for some reason. Because I want to talk to people about Android but being guilty of the heinous crime of not actively using an Android device?
I *want* people to get to use Jelly Bean, and have a good experience with their phone. I have seen how good ICS is on good phones. I have personally used several different ones.
I'm sorry that offering my opinion that I think it sucks that some Android users are being denied that opportunity for no good technical reason. I guess it's totally fine that their phones are stuck on Froyo. They have the choice to buy a new one! Woo! Freedom!
Sorry for actually trying to have a discussion on a discussion forum where people are going to have different experiences and opinions.
Also, I'm not sure how it's offtopic to talk about the adoption rate of the (n-1) version of Android in a thread about the n version of Android as it applies to who in the Android ecosystem will actually get to use it. Just curious on that one.
Why does this have to be about iOS or Windows Phone?
You touchy fandroids really can't seem to get past defining yourselves by how much you hate everyone else.
You're threadjacking a discussion about an update to the Android OS, talking about how it's inferior to iOS and how Android devices are inferior to iOS devices, and you accuse everyone *us* of being 'fandroids'? Nice RDF you have there.
--Jeremy
As I stated to someone else, my "fandroid" insult was in response to being called a "fucking troll" in an otherwise civil discourse. It was late at the time and I was irritable. It was no excuse for being rude though, despite provocation.
I also didn't say that iOS was superior to Android. If you can point out where exactly I said that then I'd be willing to apologise, but I didn't say that at all. I merely compared the number of users of each platform who were on the current version of the OS - something that makes life easier for developers; homogeneity in large deployments - as a potential area that Android could address because it's largely down to a practice that works against the consumer.
I have actually been pretty positive about Android (certainly in other threads) and critical of iOS. I have mentioned repeatedly some of the features of Android that are much better than iOS (Swype and the ability to customise the UI to be able to operate common features quickly like bluetooth/wifi/gps being two of the biggest ones).
I am not trying to troll here. I think that locked bootloaders and carriers blocking updates is an issue. Not a giant one, or a crippling one, but something that I think Google should try to do something about.
Where do you get the idea that just because I use an iPhone I think that "less choice = good"?
My stance is against locked bootloaders and abandoned (by the carrier and OEM) phones. The iPhone worked for me so I bought it. That doesn't mean I think a lack of choice is a good thing - I had plenty of choices and examined them all before deciding on something that worked for me.
"Out here in reality" we don't jump to conclusions about what other people are thinking. Oh wait, the other thing.
I should make a correction to this. I stated that the 3GS was free on contract and $99 off contract - it is not, it is $375 for a non-contract unlocked new one from Apple. $99 is the price for an iPhone 4 on contract. Apologies for the error.
Those were the figures I saw, although someone else further down the thread said that more recent numbers as of July this year show that it is more like 10%.
Either way, it's low, and it shouldn't be. There's no reason that a large majority of Android handsets should be stuck on prior versions of the OS, or have just been left in a situation where the carrier doesn't want to push an update because it conflicts with their desire to sell a new phone instead.
ICS can run, according to Google, on anything that runs 2.x Android.
This is the most ridiculous claim I read everywhere regarding iPhones: the fact that even the 3GS still gets updates without cerains parts. You want to know what 'certain parts' are?
Pretty much every fucking thing that matters. Check here.
I own a 4S and an iPad 2 and I'm pretty sure next year I'll already see some stuff not being released to the 4S - hell, even the iPad 2 don't get FaceTime over celullar (yeah, a lot of technical reasons you know...)
Please stop saying that even the 3GS gets upgrades. At most it gets security updates which I agree it's good, but upgrades? No fucking way.
Yes, that's the point of the "non-premium" option - some of the new whizz bang cool stuff won't be included, but you're getting it for free on contract. What do you expect? That it has all the same features as the 4S (and whatever the new one gets)? It's a discounted, more-budget-friendly, less-feature-rich phone.
It *does* get updates though - iOS6 does add some new features and improves old ones that the 3GS *will* get the benefit from (as well as all the security updates etc). Just because it doesn't get all the same stuff as the top of the line premium phones doesn't mean that there's "no fucking way" it is being upgraded when iOS6 rolls around (or when iOS5 hit, or iOS4).