This question has flooded my mind almost as much as Android has flooded the market...
Does anyone else think that Android has gone out of control? I mean there are literally dozens of devices announced / released every week, updates are a mess, developing is tricky due to all the different versions of the OS, screen resolution, cpu, gpu etc. The custom overlays is so common that the AOSP phones are almost non existant.
Manufacturers release a new phone each week since its an easy buck because its free and they know that with Android it cant keep a decent life span since its forgotten pretty much the day its released since all the new phone arriving or due to arrive, so asking for good support is a bit much nowadays. It seems like Android is becoming the new "featurephone OS" since almost every phone released runs it, so imo it loses its Premium feel since i can run most of the same apps in a crappy free budget device than a high end monster save some games and speed...
I have had dozens of android devices, from the HTC Touch port, to the EVO 3D, and frankly its hard to get exited for an android device nowadays since theres always something bigger and better almost immediatly instead of living out its life span before it gets eclipsed by something else. Thats why i like the iOS and WP7 approach since they release it in batches (cept apple because its 1) in a certain time frame, so you know you dont have to worry about being left behind or being behind the curve for a good while (i you care about that stuff like me) OS updates are a sure thing, app compatibility is all there and it just feels more integrated and organized
Android feels like mess actually, i have an android and really like the OS but honestly, its a touch friendly version of Windows Mobile in my eyes. It has all the features you would wanr, but performance is inconsistant, user experience is a mess, updates are hit and miss, and development is a headache
Sorry to rant so much, i really like Android actually, but got to the point that flooded the market with such a thing has ruined a good thing imo
Any imput?
s3nT Fr0m mY pYrAmId fLaVoReD gLaCi3r
*Fixed a few things
Well, I believe that's what android is about. Its like windows, many different computers run different versions of windows. I understand the "premium feel" aspect, but there's no alternative to Linux on phones besides android.
on the other hand, no one wants to be as confined as iphone. there is nothing unique between one iphone and another. they are both iphones whereas android has variety
It'll really be interesting to see what the future holds. Android could replace Windows and MacOS in a lot of ways.
Good post OP. I feel, as you do, that the fragmentation of the Android platform is a complete mess. It would have been nice if Google had more control over what happened to the OS on a manufacturer level. I'd have liked, at the very least, to have seen a minimum hardware requirement, an outright ban on carrier bloat and manufacturer skins too. I'm a purist though and some people buy HTC, for example, because they want 'Sense'. Personally i believe these skins should have been an optional component, perhaps available as a Market download.
Updates to the OS should have been arranged in a more consistent and controlled manner too, but with the diversity of hardware it has become a crap-shoot. Manufacturers are churning out phone after phone and most are horribly derivative. Of course, it's all about the $$.
I'm a fan of what Microsoft are doing with the WP7 platform and can only dream about a similar scenario with Android!
I think its all good.Its all about freedom.The freedom to choose you firmware,kernal,ROM or what ever.Others like iOS are to confined.Its great.
It is just because android is "opened". All manufacturers can produce and sell a phone running android. Like the computers, for example, you can't say to HP that "Why did you guys releases computers so fast? ASUS just released one yesterday!"
Also about what you think android is complicated is because of it's customizability (ability to be customized). When it can be very personalized, it gets a lot of settings. When it have a lot of settings, things get complicated. This is also why every android device is unique
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I've always been a PC guy and have used Macs in the past. I'm just used to Windows as opposed to an iOS. The fact that Android is open sourced, it allows for any user to customize it however they want.
I own an EVO 3D, and own an iPod Touch. There's endless possibilities on what I can do on the 3D versus what I can do on the iPod. I also know that the iPod can be jailbroken as well.
I do understand your argument as there are many different phones that come out each week/month. It gets overwhelming as to which device is better and what not, but it all comes down to what the end user wants for a device that fits their needs. A typical user just wants to be able to call, text, and get online. These typical users would like to see different styles, colors, sizes that fit their lifestyle.
Apple has a standardized iPhone/iPod and it receives an update once in a while. Granted, you can pick out a cover for it in different colors and styles, but it has the same UI look.
But I, on the other hand, like to tinker and like to customize the device of my choice.
Based on the fact that we're all members here on this forum by choice and are happily reading and writing...I'd say that there's no such thing as too much.
Although I'll be honest, I was dying to just say about this much "...................." (there I said it)
i agree that android is all over the place with late updates ect however i love the fact that its available in all flavors not just one flavor like you know who.
Android is just the hip thing. It's quickly becoming to mobile-devices what MS-DOS/Windows was to home computers. Only, the licensing is different
That doesn't mean there's too much of it though. Android is still linux at its core, and part of that is putting up with the disorganized community development.
Related
Maybe I posted this in the wrong section,so sorry,asking to Zecanilis . Do anyone have an iPhone here? If so,anyone can tell why Android/iOS is better? I don't wanna know it,wanna know your opinions only
So,I prefer Android because it's opensource p) and because it's more "customizable" ha
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA Premium App
Wow, why do we need a topic like this ? Sorry, but if you write this on Google you can find thousands of them. This will only end with flames and fights. Nothing useful.
badeaioan said:
Wow, why do we need a topic like this ? Sorry, but if you write this on Google you can find thousands of them. This will only end with flames and fights. Nothing useful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah,infact I firstly posted and already-existing thread and I had to change thread theme. I apologize for this but what could I do?
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA Premium App
Actually, I like such threads, because they remind macfa...uh....macfans D) to keep quiet when it comes to comparisons to Android. Android is superior from almost any point of view.
metalboy94 said:
Actually, I like such threads, because they remind macfa...uh....macfans D) to keep quiet when it comes to comparisons to Android. Android is superior from almost any point of view.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. But... I have to admit,for me AppStore games are better
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA Premium App
adobe ceo has said that apple can only dream of flash coming to ios because they are simply not going to make adobe flash of ios...
this is BIG + for android...
ciaox said:
Yeah. But... I have to admit,for me AppStore games are better
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Care to explain why? 'Cause both AppStore and Android Market contain their fair share of crap.
@ccdreadcc: True, although with the advent of HTML5 I'm not sure how long Flash support will continue to be an advantage of Android...
Android wins do to notifications the apps not games there more intgrated with the os an its changeable u can change everything an make ur phone look diffrent an i enjoy that no 2 phones look the same an iphone there identical but they do have better games an browser is better with pinching an zooming but my sgs is a little faster with apps closed but with stuff runing its laggy an ios is mostly smooth all the time but they dont have real multi tasking
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
this old comic tells everything LINK
soberspine said:
this old comic tells everything LINK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exacly its ur phone u can do wat u plz tphone(therephone) 4 its not yours but u payed 1million 4 it
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
You honestly can't go wrong with either and really depends on what you like. Honestly, I think why iPhone sales are so high is because people are misinformed about the product. Everyone gets it because they have been told to or think its cool since everyone has one, but at the end of the day both operating systems can do the same or maybe better(android).
I'd say both have their plus points. I've got my O1, which is my first android device. I love the ability to customise each and every part of it. We are all fans of this OS, we already know how great it is
But what I don't like about android, is the lack of quality content on the market, specially for low end devices like ours. I've got an iPhone 3GS too, and when you access the appstore on it, there's lots of great stuff out there.
Another downside is the lack of software optimisation. We got great hardware, with ****ty software: not a great combination. For e.g. my old iPod Touch 2nd gen still runs every damn single game I put on it without a drop of lagging, whereas we all know what happens on our O1. If we did not have such great developers here, we wouldn't be enjoying our O1 that much. :/
And before someone says something like, "you got a weak device, you should buy a SGS2 or whatever to feel the true power of android," I got one thing to say: each and every one of apple's products are optimised directly from manufacturers, their users dont need to depend on external developers. We can't say that much about our devices though.
Well my experience with iOS comes from an iPod Touch 3rd Gen that I've owned for 1.5 years, and my experience with Android comes from my O1 that I've owned for 2 weeks.
As others have mentioned I love my O1 and I think that Android as an "OS" it's definitely great, and I believe that if we were to compare iOS Vs. ANDROID only at the "OS" level, the Android OS it's superior essentially because it's a powerful, open source OS that allows you to go under the hood and tweak it or improve it, whereas with iOS is just a black box that you access only through APIs published by the manufacturer.
The thing is that comparing OS to OS does not makes much sense to the end user since what's more important is comparing "The Experience" of owning and using a phone with iOS Vs a phone with ANDROID, and at that level I think that iOS/iPhone definitely provides a much solid, cohesive and overall better experience to the end user (at least from my point of view):
1-) On iOS the OS and the Hardware are "One", since we have one company that manufactures the hardware and builds and optimize the OS to run only on that hardware, providing a longer life cycle for your product since the strategy of the manufacturer (Apple) is not focused on launching a new model every 3-4 months (as it is with Android phone manufacturers). Apple's focus is actually selling as much of the same model as they can over a period of at least one year.
2-) The Appstore even though is much more restrictive (than the Market) provides a much more controlled and predictable experience for App Developers, because they only have to worry about complying with the guidelines established by their development platform, and not with developing an App that will have to run as good as possible on hardware created by 8 or 10 different manufactures who have 100+ different phone models. Volume becomes an issue and so far developers have more success selling a 99 cents app on the Appstore than selling a $5 app on the Market. Take a look at this post from a renowned Game Developer talking about his experience about porting a hit game on the Appstore to the Android Market
Bottom line is that it all comes down to the Apps more than the hardware itself (we know that phones like the Samsung Galaxy S2 beats the crap out of an iPhone 4 and basically anything else), but all that powerful hardware, dual core processors and beefy GPUs can't do much if quality Apps are not there to take advantage of it, and so far Apple has done a better job in creating a suitable environment for developers at all levels: Programming, Marketing, Billing and Post-Sales Support.
When it comes to consumers (us) I definetely prefer the android cause i'm not willing to pay a sh1tload of money to buy a marketing bloat product which targets to rip off the ignorant gudget fashion victums. I want to be able to have a smartphone for 200 euros and to be able to customize it and use it the way I want and not the way they want.
And I don't want to hear a thing about better games etc etc cause if I want games i'll go and buy a psp and the total amount of money for low/mid-end android + psp will still be conciderably lower than an apple icrap
I will write my opinion, but everybody has an unique opinion so it may not matter.
As stated above, iOs and the hardware of the iPhone are one, they are designed and built as an entity. The result is the most powerful phone. Apart from the antenna problem the iphone had, the phone is perfect. And it will still be. The single-core iPhone 4 runs as smooth as dual-core android phones. Because android phones took everything that was good in linux, but also what is bad.
Android is for the guys that like customization, playing with their devices. You will never have to jailbreak an iPhone, as it's os is godlike anyway. The nasty part is that most of appstore games cost $ and some people may not be so willing to pay for every app they have.
Apart from the price, ioS is better than android, and i consider that anyone who disagrees is just sad he can't afford an iphone.That doesn't mean android is not good, because it is excellent, but still not quite at the apple's product level. Peace
Well I have also tried iOS, I own an iPod Touch 2G (MC, so it's the newer iteration). Sure, there are quality games by Gameloft & co. on the AppStore which also run alright on the iPod, but on 4.2 it gets really slow if you have any other tweaks on it, or if you activated multitasking and wallpapers.
What would definitely improve the Android experience is Gameloft getting their head out of their @ss and port their great games to lower-end devices as well. I really can't see what's the problem with minimum requirements for CPU and RAM if they really think 320x480 games would confuse customers, due to it being the most popular Android low-end resolution.
Other than that, Android is better than iOS simply because it allows you to do more stuff without hacks. First and foremost, the ability to use the phone as a mass storage device (Google should allow mass storage without additional drivers, it would be useful in certain situations, such as at school, where computers are usually blocked from installing drivers ).
@vador9: Sorry mate, but you're just as much of a d*ck as the other Apple fans. I can afford an iPhone, but that doesn't mean I WANT to spend that much money. Partly because the only reason for that price is the glass in it.
metalboy94 said:
Well I have also tried iOS, I own an iPod Touch 2G (MC, so it's the newer iteration). Sure, there are quality games by Gameloft & co. on the AppStore which also run alright on the iPod, but on 4.2 it gets really slow if you have any other tweaks on it, or if you activated multitasking and wallpapers.
What would definitely improve the Android experience is Gameloft getting their head out of their @ss and port their great games to lower-end devices as well. I really can't see what's the problem with minimum requirements for CPU and RAM if they really think 320x480 games would confuse customers, due to it being the most popular Android low-end resolution.
Other than that, Android is better than iOS simply because it allows you to do more stuff without hacks. First and foremost, the ability to use the phone as a mass storage device (Google should allow mass storage without additional drivers, it would be useful in certain situations, such as at school, where computers are usually blocked from installing drivers ).
@vador9: Sorry mate, but you're just as much of a d*ck as the other Apple fans. I can afford an iPhone, but that doesn't mean I WANT to spend that much money. Partly because the only reason for that price is the glass in it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can actually do Mass Storage without the drivers.
And please, do not insult any other forum members. Whatever his opinion may be, its his, it should be respected. Its only a sharing of opinion, not a war.
Android has a great user interface, its highly customisable, it offers whatever someone may want. It's just that rare are the devices which really makes android look so good.
To explain this, I'll take the example of our fabulous O1. Forget about the pricing, let's just analyse the phone in itself: a nice phone, with great features, and a wonderful OS. The OS can do pretty much everything. Now where is the problem? LG, LG is the problem. I agree we paid for a low end phone, but that doesnt mean it should contain ****ty bugs, like the screen lag for example. Even with gingerbread out, it still has not been solved.
Its often the device which holds many a problems, not the OS. This is where iOS has an advantage, it's been used only on a couple of devices, and both the devices and the OS are manufactured by the same company. This causes a great optimisation. For example again, on any iOS device you may not be able to send a file via bluetooth properly (limited by the OS), but you have a smooth touchscreen with no lag at all and you almost never have an error popping up now and then (from the manufacturer).
Moreover, when we say "Appstore offers a larger range of quality apps than that of Android Market", its not just about games. Often basic apps are of much lower quality on the Market, e.g. compare the Facebook app on both platform, and you'll see that the Android version is weak.
Overall:
Android wins when it comes to customisation and performance (provided you have a good device), and iOS has an upper hand when it comes to best user experience and high quality apps
( ) iPhone
( ) iPad
( ) iPad 2
( ) iPod Touch
(✔) iDon't have money
(Certainly not for overpriced hype from a vendor whose customer attitude is way worse than Microsoft's )
Vip_blast said:
You can actually do Mass Storage without the drivers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can? Please enlighten me, I thought it really needed the LG Android drivers for that.
Also, he insulted us first, by implying we all are too poor to get iPhones and that's why we're jealous and say iOS is worse.
I'm sure this is being discussed somewhere on this massive forum, but didn't see it in here, so here it is. This is honestly one of the biggest draw backs in my opinion to buying an Android phone. For instance, my mom bought the Samsung Charge which is still on Froyo. There appears to be no plans to take it up to Gingerbread or ICS. That's just sad. The phone is new and she'll be two OS's behind. I have a feeling we'll not see ICS unless we crack it ourselves.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
stalked_r/t said:
I'm sure this is being discussed somewhere on this massive forum, but didn't see it in here, so here it is. This is honestly one of the biggest draw backs in my opinion to buying an Android phone. For instance, my mom bought the Samsung Charge which is still on Froyo. There appears to be no plans to take it up to Gingerbread or ICS. That's just sad. The phone is new and she'll be two OS's behind. I have a feeling we'll not see ICS unless we crack it ourselves.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what the result of having (or at least attempting to have any open platform). There are so many players with so much freedom that fragmentation is unavoidable. This is nothing new to the LINUX community.
Just look at every time Linus Torvalds and his successors release a new LINUX kernel, it can be any where from days to years before it gets implemented depending on what distro you are running.
This disadvantage is easily over come by the advantages that come from an open platform.
A closed echo system has its advantages as well, but given the opportunity apple would be more than happy to control everything you do with your phone. Flash is a prime example, if apple could they would keep you from using flash ever again, not because that is what is best for you, its because it is one way apple can control you and make more money at your expense.
I believe flash is one more reason apple hates Android so much, because Steve Jobs in a maniacally ego driven rant declared flash dead. Now thanks to Android by next year there will be more fully flash capable phones than not, and eventually apple will have to cave.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
What a crock. IOS updates have been laggy failures on old hardware. Siri is not available on old hardware, and other features of IOS have not been made available to older hardware.
Saying it's bad because new versions of android can't run on older hardware is bull****, but trying to say it's not true for IOS is bigger bull****.
And funny, the guy seems to have cherry-picked some of the worst possible Android device examples.
Admittedly, he limits it to US carriers, and - well, they are the worst since they insist on customized devices that often don't get updates their international brethren receive.
Look at the I9000 and I9100 - both are almost identical to the Captivate and I777 respectively, but they get FAR more frequent updates. #*#[email protected])*#[email protected])#[email protected] AT&T.
The only real advantage for Apple is that they can and will tell a carrier that wants to exert control over the handset to go **** themselves. As others have pointed out, in many cases, iOS has serious issues with backwards compatibility - upgrading a non-S iPhone 3G to iOS 4 would cause it to be a laggy piece of ****.
Whereas Android 2.3 was on many devices a performance and battery management improvement, and if it wasn't - unlike iOS nothing prevents you from flashing back.
I could care less about iOS. Granted the article was definitely a hack job at Android from a Apple Fanboi. No matter that though, there is definitely truth to the article as well as setiment stated here that American carriers are asswipes when it comes to updates.
I have an AT&T family plan, with my SGS2 and three Iphone 4s. I wouldn't give up my Android if Steve came back from the grave and begged, but I wouldn't ask my less than tech savvy wife, daughter, or lazy son to give up their Apple. Both have a place, and we each have a preference. I had an original Captivate, which was, for me, absolutely awesome. It wasn't because AT&T made it so, it was because I took the time and effort to learn about Android, and used the tools available to keep up to date with the OS. I sold my Cappy when I got the SGS2, and sold it for more than I paid for it. To me, the fact that the carriers don't keep the OS up to date is just a minor inconvenience. I have the skills, and with Android, the ability, to utilize whatever hardware I happen to own to its maximum capability. Try that with an Iphone. Not gonna happen.
The original article is full of facts, but doesn't really contribute to the truth. Android is only as good as the hardware you run it on. Same with iOS. If you choose not to purchase bleeding edge hardware, you cannot expect the OS to run well. Try running Windoze 7 on a 486 box made for XP...
Before we start this discussion, i'd just like to say that the devs are doing a brilliant job of bringing android flavours to the Touchpad and this discussion should in no way be a deterrent to them doing their work.
Is it just me or is the touchpad a neglected device in terms of development compared to other tablets? i.e. asus, samsung, htc.
There are a huge number of devs and a wide variety of custom ROMS, themed ROMS, ported ROMS, Mods the list goes on and on.
As far as I'm aware of the problems (feel free to correct me) the source for half the hardware hasn't been released (such as the webcam) etc etc. so it kind of makes it very very difficult if not impossible to experiment with different ROMS.
Yes some out there can say to me "buy a tablet that was meant to run android next time" fair enough. But is it alot to expect the same level of development as usual android tablets?
webOS is very lovely but it doesn't cut it for me in terms of customisation (even with some of the childish looking themes on preware). CM9 has its issues still with regards to not everything working yet, but even when it's complete i still miss simple conveniences like VPN and connect WiFi using WPS automatically to name a few.
So can we expect that kind of development? or is it too much to ask.
I doubt we'll have Samsung level development, but that's true of any non-Samsung device. Have no idea why they're so popular, but usually the size of their dev communities put others to shame.
As you've pointed out, we don't have all our hardware working right now. Between that and the fact that CM9 itself (as a whole, not just the TP Version) is incomplete, its no wonder there's only two or three roms. Many people make their roms using another as a base, be it a stock firmware (of which the TP obviously does not have) or CM. Since CM9 is in a constant state of flux, there's no solid base for the TP yet.
As it is, we have the CM9 alpha, CM9 weeklies, AOPK, Unofficial Cornerstone kangs, MIUI, Classicnerd, Cherrykang... and that's just ICS based stuff. Add in Gingerbread roms and non-Android OSs like Ubuntu and you'll find we have a quite a good selection already.
my gripe with gingerbread ROMS is not as some people say "phone rom on a tablet" its just the fact that the apps recognize it as a phone and ruins the whole thing.
apart from MIUI, alot of the other ROMS look and feel pretty similar to me and there isn't much that sets them apart. granted cm9 is in its infancy (EVERYWHERE including my evo 3D, google definitely not redeeming itself over this update fiasco). I haven't really sampled Ubuntu to make a judgement on it.
I suppose if one was to put together something original a) it would be so hard people wouldn't bother attempting it cuz it's just too time consuming b) it'd be like making a lovely dish from leftovers....kernel's modified and compiled from things like htc jetstream (and rumor has it the GS2 on AT&T), ROMS put together from 7" android tablets most of which have the same resolution as the touchpad so it'll make life easier with respect to resizing.... again too much effort and time consuming to be worthwhile
I feel the TouchPad has great development. Especially when you consider a vast majority of the devices were sold before android was put on the device. When the fire sales happened the people that bought them didn't know android was going to be put on it. So anyone that wanted to play with android or build ROMs probably got an android tablet.
There will never be a full stock optimized android build. With the Samsung devices they have a solid start point, and a manufacturer that is devoted to the success of the device. HP has washed its hands of the TouchPad more or less. Everything done to get android on the TouchPad had been done by volunteers, without the resources really needed.
Samsung just generally makes things easiest for people to hack it. HTC and Asus ship their devices with locked bootloaders. Samsung doesn't, so they have one less hurdle right from the get go. The other side of that is Samsung makes great hardware, and decent software. This is easier to show in the phones. HTC makes good phones, but there is two or three extra hurdles that don't exist on Samsung phones. LG phones also don't have those hurdles, but their hardware isn't as good, and they are notoriously bad at getting android updates out.
Another thing to consider is the quality of android overall on a tablet. There is minimal tablet apps, and little motivation. Apple bet their company on the success of the iPad, Microsoft is doing the same with Windows 8. If either of them fail at their tablet product their entire company is in jeopardy. But Google wouldn't notice if android tablets fail, and flop. The entire thing to them is like a hobby. I think if android tablets were more popular in general we would see a lot more going on here. The fact that the TouchPad has sold more units than any other android tablet (combined I think) is really sad. Android just isn't taking hold in the tablet market, and won't without a lot of work by Google. But, what's their incentive? 98% of their revenue is from advertising. They still make money when an iPad pulls up an ad served by Google. They don't really have a lot of skin in the game, and it shows. I think the only reason Samsung, HTC, Motorola etc sell android tablets at all is because they don't really have a choice. They can't sell iOS tablets. The real test will be Windows 8 on ARM. If these companies can license W8 from Microsoft, its familiar to them. Its like building a Laptop or Ultrabook, they rely on Microsoft's ability to make compelling software, and enterprise friendly systems. That's really what HP was trying to do with the TouchPad. HP said the TouchPad wasn't their last tablet, but I would bet their next one runs W8. I think the tablet race us destined to be a two pony race, and that android isn't going to be the second pony much longer at the rate things are going. </rant>
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
ace9988 said:
Before we start this discussion, i'd just like to say that the devs are doing a brilliant job of bringing android flavours to the Touchpad and this discussion should in no way be a deterrent to them doing their work.
Is it just me or is the touchpad a neglected device in terms of development compared to other tablets? i.e. asus, samsung, htc. niggles (or problems; you decide) with cm9 has started to
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get so tired of people complaining they don't get the same things from a $200 device as others get from their $600 ones. The reason the TPs are selling at the price they are is that the manufacturer stopped development. But, IMNSHO, the TP users are actually benefiting from that. If HP were still in charge, the TP would not have ICS, Ubuntu or Arch running.
this is my first tablet after all.....and when we're used to the development we see on our (assumed) android phones you can't help but compare, but like i said its only a discussion. and whats Arch?
Doesn't the fact that HP released the android kernel help development? How much does it help
Hey Guys, just came across this article and thought it was a good read. Do you think Android will partner with Asus to make their own brand of tablets...will it be better for us as Android buyers in the future if Android had more control by being the hardware as well as software maker. or do you feel like this is turning them into Apple-lite
http://www.androidauthority.com/will-google-abandon-android-71483/
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
detta123 said:
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah basically..lol.
they taking the whole Asus Manufacturing Google Nexus tablet and spinning it into some crazy apocalyptic Android dying story. Android will be fine. Android growth has really actually just begun. we haven't seen nothing yet. Google needs a nexus tablet to instill confidence and optimism in Androids future. It can almost be guareenteed to attract more developers to android ecosystem. If android was dying, I'd seriously doubt they'd be making a tablet with Asus, restructured Google Play Store, and Making Google store purchases possible to be made online by anyone. All these recent moves Google has made is pointing to something big coming up.
Android for LIFE!
All of my current and future devices will continue to be android.
It is just way too much fun, IOS sucks.
If android goes away, I will go back to laptops.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
I dont even want to read that article Android brings profit and is a huge thing worldwide. Why would you abandon something like this? Of course its not Google's biggest income generator but it has so much potential and it serves as competition to Apple.
Google deciding to do some hardware manufacturing? I really like that. They probably learn from it and be able to improve the software/hardware.
There is one thing though they could do to android imho. I like some of the 3rd party GUI's that come with android devices. For example HTC Sense. They add alot of nice widgets and great looking uniform base apps.
BUT. At the price of getting important updates like ICS half a year later? No... No.
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
clouds5 said:
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Yeah i've read about that too. i dont think custom UIs need to go away. Sometimes they're great. And with tegra3 phones coming out i guess the performance wont be such an issue anymore.
But i'd love to see some change in that situation. I think updates shouldnt be delayed more than 1 month. Not like half a year.
The article is the usual blog filler; title is admittedly clickbait. Then again, most news & blog sites have SEO'ed titles to varying degree. Yellow journalism used to be on the fringe. Now, it's the way to get clicks. That's the cost of "free" content.
Idle gossip aside, Google's strategy for tablet adoption has not worked. It will need to do something, and soon. We should know by Google I/O in June, if not earlier.
IMO, the rumors presently circulating--direct-sale of cheapo tablet & online store--aren't enough. The problems are more fundamental, and are myriad. To me, what's discouraging aren't the obstacles, but that I haven't seen any signal from Google leadership that they recognize the scope of the obstacles.
At any rate, Android won't suffer the fate of WebOS. It's entrenched on phones, and its open-source distribution will allow it to live on as a "hobbyist" OS, if nothing else.
Things move pretty fast in this mobile market, so we won't have long to wait, one way or the other.
Trolling done wrong.
A terrible excuse for either op-ed or journalism. sigh.
Seems this kid who wrote the article didn't get the point of android....
It amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products... it generates Google accounts which can be used for the almost infinite range of Google products. It helps to spread G+ and not to mention Google ad-words..
There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand... When you use it the normal way you pretty soon notice that Android is a Google product... you are asked to create a Google account, you have a ton of Google services pre-installed etc. .
Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort. Just because it spreads Google stuff. The power you have when 50% of the smart-phones world wide run with your is is enormous... Google does not have to worry too much about branding as long as the providers don't remove the Google-Products from it...
I see it like a commenter in the article, Google Tablet to fight the Kindle Fire... because it breaks the Google-branding... not so funny for Google...
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
e.mote said:
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, the Motorola Xoom, great as it was(I owned one), was simply overpriced.
I do believe that in order to be widely accepted as being better than Apple, Google needs to seriously focus on getting better developer support. You can release the best tablet in the world, but if you do not have developer support, people will continue to flock to IOS. Lower the price of tablets while maintaining good quality standards, and gain developer support=win for Android
e.mote said:
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You make some interesting points, but I disagree that iOS is anywhere near being accepted as a PC replacement. In many important ways, Android is much farther along in this respect--access to the file system alone is one area. And, I think the idea that tablets will replace PCs is way overblown--having tried to use mine (even with the keyboard dock) as a replacement for my Windows notebook, I can testify that although some things are more convenient with tablets (like ebook reading, casual surfing, etc.), NOTHING is as efficient as with a "real" PC.
I could never do my job on any existing tablet, whether it's iOS or Android. I work with complex documents, use Photoshop for more than changing color tones, do some light video editing, etc. None of those are efficient (or even possible) on a tablet. Even the simple things like browsing, Twitter, etc., etc., are more efficient on a notebook or desktop. Again, a tablet is convenient--lightweight, long battery life, etc.--so it has its place alongside a real PC. But thinking it can replace a PC for most people is, I think, entirely unrealistic at this point.
Maybe that'll change in a few years, although I doubt even that. Seriously, who can imagine working EXCLUSIVELY on a 10" screen? And if a tablet becomes something that you plug into external monitors and keyboards and such, well then, ASUS is already mostly there with the Transformer series. And at that point what we'll have is just a more portable PC with external accessories. Once a tablet becomes complex enough in terms of network support, printing, peripheral devices like scanners, etc., then is it really a "tablet" any longer?
..........
demandarin said:
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
sparkym3 said:
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was what it was involving. thanks for pointing out those details.
Link doesn't work anymore!
I know that we all probably figured as much and understand that in the future, Mobile phones and tablets will defeat PCs and Laptops completely (now that we are getting devices that can double or even triple as phone, tablet and potentially PC/laptop), still it is an interesting read and article. So, have a look at this. Specifically click on the "Future of Mobile>" link at the bottom of the article to see a powerpoint presentation!
Interesting indeed. I've wondered about this before, specifically Microsoft's future and the 'Andriod vs. iOS' war.
When it comes to Microsoft, I'm just not sure anymore. Sure, they have their hands gripped tightly around the desktop and laptop markets, but seeing this only reaffirms my opinion that Microsoft doesn't have much left going for them. With smartphones and tablets often going for more than an entire desktop computer, and now that phones and tablets truly are grossing more sales than desktops and laptops, Microsoft isn't the giant corporation it used to be. At least, not in comparison to the competition. If they don't get their act together soon, they may start to see profits dwindle. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't tried stronger marketing campaigns for their Windows phones and tablets; I know they exist, but I've never seen one in person and I've never seen an ad for them.
When it comes to Apple vs. Google/Motorola/Samsung/HTC/Nokia/Rim (essentially all mobile phone manufacturers), I've often wondered who will pull out ahead when smartphones continue to rise in sales and popularity. On one hand there is Android, along with it's very large user-base and realistically small developer-base, and on the other is iOS and its even larger user-base, extremely strong fanboy mentality, and its incredibly large developer-base. I used to think Android had it in the bag as I started seeing them all the time at school and work.. but I just don't know anymore. I would like to see Android win, because it's my personal preference, but I don't see it happening. Honestly, I think Apple's got this one in the bag. When it comes to apps and the user interface, they've already won.
theredvendetta said:
Interesting indeed. I've wondered about this before, specifically Microsoft's future and the 'Andriod vs. iOS' war.
When it comes to Microsoft, I'm just not sure anymore. Sure, they have their hands gripped tightly around the desktop and laptop markets, but seeing this only reaffirms my opinion that Microsoft doesn't have much left going for them. With smartphones and tablets often going for more than an entire desktop computer, and now that phones and tablets truly are grossing more sales than desktops and laptops, Microsoft isn't the giant corporation it used to be. At least, not in comparison to the competition. If they don't get their act together soon, they may start to see profits dwindle. Frankly I'm surprised they haven't tried stronger marketing campaigns for their Windows phones and tablets; I know they exist, but I've never seen one in person and I've never seen an ad for them.
When it comes to Apple vs. Google/Motorola/Samsung/HTC/Nokia/Rim (essentially all mobile phone manufacturers), I've often wondered who will pull out ahead when smartphones continue to rise in sales and popularity. On one hand there is Android, along with it's very large user-base and realistically small developer-base, and on the other is iOS and its even larger user-base, extremely strong fanboy mentality, and its incredibly large developer-base. I used to think Android had it in the bag as I started seeing them all the time at school and work.. but I just don't know anymore. I would like to see Android win, because it's my personal preference, but I don't see it happening. Honestly, I think Apple's got this one in the bag. When it comes to apps and the user interface, they've already won.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as I have an Android tablet and Android phone in my hand I will not agree that iPhone is winning. As of now Android has one thing going for it and that is its humongous user base. Yet it is baffling that it has at best a moderate developer base. I would guess that more devs would dev for this platform. Also, I learned that deving for android is easier as well. Oh well...
The ONLY way Android can win is if Google grows a pair of balls and tells all the manufacturers firmly that there is no way in hell you are allowed to make customizations. All you are doing is ruining the experience without significantly improving user experience and causing additional delays and fragmentation with deploying updates. From now on all of you release AOSP and update the week Google releases source code. Android's Achilles heel is fragmentation. That is why despite the fact that there are more androids than iPhones developers don't prefer it OR get much revenue from it.
So, Google, Grow. Some. Balls!!!
Moreover, I have always had a soft spot for Microsoft. I dunno but it being the underdog I always wanted MS to come sweeping to victory with their Windows phone 7. Frankly it is a very good OS. Many of my friends state that it has one of the smoothest UI. And it is so good that it can run amazingly on a single core device. All WP7 devices are single core but you'll never notice it. It is that good. In fact, I believe it was this CES or may be the last, when MS was cocky and started boasting that if you show us a device that can run smoother and faster than their Nokia Lumia 900 device, they will give you $100 (or may be the phone, I dunno). It was a bet.
Also MS did one more thing right. It had the balls, unlike Google to tell manufacturers that they can't customize WP7 other than the color scheme and some innocent apps/links on the home screen. No theming or skinning. And all WP7 devices get updates promptly, at worst within a month!!! Google, you can learn a thing or two from MS! Unfortunately MS is not really advertizing WP7 as much as they should. They can easily get more market share by appropriately marketing it and boasting its plus points!
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA Premium HD app
The reason why Android has so few Devs compared to apple is because apple is one phone with a large portion of the market. If you're a company producing apps, you look at this and think: well, we could code for Apple and get this much market share, our we could code for Android, and then we would have to make sure it's compatible with all 200 different types, screen rezs, screen sizes, etc, to get a slightly larger market share.
In fact, up until about last summer, Google's dev page said to program the code for iPhone first, and then port it to Android, if you were going to do both.
So yeah. Unfortunate, but a fact of life.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda premium
Very thorough presentation there.