or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as core platforms
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as core platforms

post #1 of 128
Thread Starter 
A new batch of smartphones based upon Google's Android platform have started to arrive, finally fleshing out what users can really expect of the platform. This article is the first in a series examining how Android stacks up in comparison to the iPhone as a smartphone software platform.

Articles in this series:
Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as core platforms
Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as business models
Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as advancing technology
Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as software markets

Android doesn't really compete against the iPhone directly; Android is a flexible platform that can be put to use with a lot of implementation leeway by any company, not a specific product tightly managed by a single company in the way the iPhone is.

However, with the wholesale collapse of nearly every other viable smartphone platform --including the old PalmOS, Linux distros like OpenMoko and GreenPhone, Windows Mobile, and even the leading Symbian -- Android has assumed the position as the lead candidate for producing a potential rival to the iPhone, and lots of hardware vendors are hoping to use Android to do just that. New Android phones from HTC, Motorola, and Sony Ericsson are clearly taking aim at the iPhone, each in unique ways.

Comparing specific implementations of Android phones against the iPhone is problematic because Android is only one component of the package. Individual Android-based phones may be exclusively tied to a specific mobile network with different price plans, service coverage, carrier restrictions, or technology limitations that have nothing to do with Android itself. Similarly, different phone manufacturers may have their own design or quality issues, support problems, features or pricing that contribute to or distract from the overall ownership experience but which also don't involve Android itself.

For these reasons, this series will focus exclusively on Android's strengths and weaknesses in comparison to Apple's iPhone as a software platform, rather than being limited to any specific phone model. The issues presented here will broadly apply to all Android phones on the market, as well as those still in production. In addition to the factors presented here, there are lots of issues external to the software platform that users will want to consider when actually choosing a phone.

However, because the core phone platform so deeply impacts usability, expansion options, third party software capacity and feature support, examining the differences will provide a lot of illumination on what kind of experience Android users will have over their phone's lifetime compared to the iPhone. This comparison is analogous to comparing Windows to Mac OS X, rather than the features of a specific Windows PC against a specific Mac model.

Android vs. iPhone: under the surface

The Android or iPhone software platform is more than just a core operating system. And really, the differences in their core operating systems are one of the least important factors to users. Both use a Unix-derived kernel and operating system environment that few users will ever even see. Android phones happen to use a Linux kernel while the iPhone uses the same Mach/BSD Unix kernel as Apple's desktop Macs.

In the big picture, this doesn't really matter much because neither smartphone platform provides any real access to this layer (either to users or developers), and neither phone platform is designed to run desktop software developed for Linux PCs or Macs. Both systems are examples of well regarded technology that is fully capable of supporting the needs of the smartphone environment above the core OS.

The actual platform environment that matters to users on Android and the iPhone exists well above the core operating system kernel. This is where applications run, where security is enforced, and where the business model behind the smartphone impacts what users can and can't do.

Platform environment: Android

Rather than running desktop Linux PC software (which is built using the X11 "X Window System" paired with a window manager like KDE or GNOME) like Nokia's N900 running Maemo Linux, Android supplies a modified Java Virtual Machine similar in many respects to the BlackBerry OS and Symbian phones designed to run Java ME apps. Google has modified Android's Java bytecode interpreter (which it calls Dalvik) to avoid having to pay Sun licensing fees for the official JVM in Android. This enables Google to offer Android for free, and without any interference from Sun. It also effectively makes Android a Java platform, not a Linux platform.

Existing Java ME software is easy to port to Android, which is an advantage both because it makes delivering new third party Android apps easier for developers familiar with mobile Java programming, and because it forces developers to do some minimal porting rather than just make their old Java ME apps available as is. The majority of existing Java ME apps are simple and low quality and can't actually run across the wide range of phones that are supposed to run them. Java ME competes against Adobe's Flash Lite, which is also broadly licensed to phone makers but which, like Java ME, hasn't done much to result in broad availability of quality mobile software.

Sun's mobile Java platform is purported to be a "write once, run everywhere" platform, but in reality it only serves as a lowest common denominator for very minimal functionality. BlackBerry and Symbian users want to obtain software custom designed for their phone OS and model, not a basic generic applet that can potentially run on any phone but which does not take advantage of any special features on any model.

The "run everywhere" premise of Java ME is also complicated by the fact that different phones (even from the same vendor) implement the Java virtual machine differently. This results in user confusion as each app has to be tested and optimized for each new phone model, something that simply hasn't happened. That's why Sun's Java ME platform, despite being touted as "the most ubiquitous application platform for mobile devices across the globe," hasn't resulted in a popular, successful market for smartphone software.

Google has purposely broken compatibility with Java ME to introduce Android's Dalvik alternative as a new development platform that leverages all the developer experience and familiarity of Java, without allowing or intending Android software to run on BlackBerry or Symbian phones. The hope is that Android's single, standardized implementation of Java technology will do what Sun's broadly licensed Java ME failed to do: deliver a viable mobile software market across hardware vendors' offerings.


This all happened before

Android's goal is somewhat similar to the world of desktop computers in the late 70s, where various vendors adopted CP/M as a common way to write software that could work on more than just one computer model. Microsoft introduced its own modified copy of CP/M under the name MS-DOS, partnered with IBM to widely deploy it, and then became very successful in selling a standardized, proprietary version of what had been a loosely open standard (open in the sense of being widely used by multiple companies, not in the sense of open source or an open specification).

When other software vendors began copying MS-DOS, the new market for DOS PCs enabled hardware makers to bundle any DOS with their hardware, and customers could subsequently run any DOS software on their PCs. However, Microsoft subsequently worked to suppress and eventually killed off all MS-DOS software clone competitors with the introduction of Windows 95 in order to maintain monopolized control over the software platform sold on every PC globally.

In contrast, Google says it intends to allow manufacturers to use Android any way they like. Phone makers and even mobile operators can introduce their own modified versions of Android that all use the same Dalvik bytecode interpreter. This will result in the Android software market being much more like DOS PC world of the late 80s than the Windows world of the past fifteen years.

This is an important distinction because Google's Android is being frequently compared to Microsoft Windows by pundits, despite the fact that Google has little in common with Microsoft in terms of how it runs its new platform and how it plans to make money from it.

Platform environment: iPhone

Apple has taken an entirely different approach to delivering its mobile software platform. Rather than building a bytecode interpreter based upon a specific, customized implementation of Java ME, Apple introduced the iPhone running a scaled down version of its desktop Mac OS X Cocoa development environment. This leverages the installed brain trust of the company's Mac developers rather than the installed base of Java ME coders in the existing smartphone market.

It's still possible to port Java code to the iPhone, but it requires more translation work as Apple only supports Objective-C/C as an iPhone development language in its own tools. Rather than allowing iPhone developers to easily port over desktop Mac apps to the iPhone, the great overlap between iPhone and Mac development tools appears to have been more of strategy to draw developer attention to the Mac. Apple already sells about twice as many iPhones as it does Macs, and the iPhone certainly casts a larger mindshare net than the Mac platform does itself.

The differences between developing for Android and for the iPhone are not a clear win for either camp. Both offer somewhat similar tools in terms of capability, with Google's being more familiar to open source or Java developers and Apple's being nearly identical to its desktop Mac platform tools. Apple has a minor lead in having deployed its platform about a year and a half before Android reached the market, and because it has been actively working on its Mac OS X platform for over a decade; Google is new to the platform development business.

However, the team Google acquired to put Android together has been working within the company for about as long as Apple's own efforts on the iPhone; both got started on their current strategies around 2005. Outside of Google, the original Android project dates back to 2003, and was largely built upon on operating system technology that started at Danger in 2000, around the same time as Mac OS X's modern development. So in many respects, Android and iPhone are contemporary platforms, as opposed to Symbian, BlackBerry OS, and Windows Mobile which had their core foundations designed in the mid 90s to serve very different purposes as simple PDA or pager operating systems.

Android vs. iPhone: the business model

In addition to their internal technical differences, Android and the iPhone platform also differ in many other more significant respects that will more directly impact users. It's possible to use inferior technology to create a good product, and to use excellent technology to deliver a terrible product. More than technical specifics, users will be most impacted by platform factors such as:

User restrictions and/or freedoms accorded by the platform's business model.
The potential for rapid advancement of new features, increased sophistication and greater performance delivered in software updates.
The usability of core bundled applications and the availability and affordability of useful and desirable third party software.

Upcoming segments will look at how Android and the iPhone compare in these respects.
post #2 of 128
Wow, a relatively fair and balanced article from Prince. I'm in total shock
post #3 of 128
Didn't Android go beyond the original so called Java stuff and went full blown, or is this another myth?
post #4 of 128
Hi, Android developer here. Just a few points...

Quote:
Android doesn't really compete against the iPhone directly; Android is a flexible platform that can be put to use with a lot of implementation leeway by any company, not a specific product tightly managed by a single company in the way the iPhone is.

Google controls the platform and writes the vast majority of new code. They also have the concept of "with Google" phones, i.e. those phones running a Google-approved, vanilla version of Android. The Motorola Droid and HTC Magic are examples of Google phones. That's as close the iPhone model as you're going to get.

Quote:
New Android phones from HTC, Motorola, and Sony Ericsson are clearly taking aim at the iPhone, each in unique ways.

Don't forget Samsung and LG. Android has got all of the traditional "big five" manufacturers on-board with the exception of Nokia.

Quote:
In the big picture, this doesn't really matter much because neither smartphone platform provides any real access to this layer (either to users or developers)

Android apps are capable of calling native code using a System.loadLibrary call.

Quote:
Adobe plans to bring Flash support to Android and Blackberry

...and Symbian and Windows Mobile.
post #5 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Didn't Android go beyond the original so called Java stuff and went full blown, or is this another myth?

What exactly is your idea of "full blown"?

Android is a modified Java platform. How does it achieve full blowness?
post #6 of 128
The phone business and "the computer" business are not the same thing, but it's tempting to think it's the same thing again. It's slightly different. And that sight difference end up being very different.

Phones are different because there are more personal, and Apple is gambling on the fact that they're product is better, quite simply. They proved choice wasn't necessarily what people wanted when it came to their music players, and they're trying to prove it again.

Take consoles: People know of three. MP3 players, people know of even less probably. Phones might end up being a similar scenario. Probably not only 3 players, but not 'many' more. They want to be one of the big players, and they are.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #7 of 128
Good article, but I wouldn't say Linux was "Unix-derived."

It's a clean room "Unix-like" copy isn't it?
(as opposed to being a variant or derivative implementation)
post #8 of 128
What does Windows Mobile use as far as a kernel goes and what runs (or crashes) as far as a platform?

Will Apple rewrite mobileme since alot of it is written in AJAX and appears to be catering more toward iPhone users than Macintosh users?

What is the big deal with flash? Most website developers are pretty much burning out on using it and it's been crashing web browsers on both platforms for years now. Sometime after Adobe bought it.

Can you develop flash applications without paying Adobe? How much of a hit does the OS and battery take by using Flash as opposed to just using the native platform?

Thanks.
post #9 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Similarly, different phone manufacturers may have their own design or quality issues, support problems, features or pricing that contribute to or distract from the overall ownership experience but which also don't involve Android itself.

I don't agree. This seems to provide the Android market with a built-in excuse. "The PLATFORM is fine. It's all of those crappy phones that are the problem."

But I doubt the market will see it that way. If too many companies tout their latest Android hardware as the greatest thing since sliced bread and then fail to deliver, plenty of that mud is going to stick to Android. "Android phones suck."

The flipside, of course, is that they could in fact make great phones. Unfortunately, quite of few of the current models have received lackluster reviews at best, with only one (Droid) being touted as a worthwhile competitor to the iPhone.

And even then Verizon may still screw the deal, as, for example, the feedback to their $30 additional tethering plan is meeting stiff resistance.

Again, a carrier issue, but a phone depends on that synthesis to work.

Secondarily, the very freedom Google is giving the carriers to modify Android as they wish could be another major issue. Anyone remember how Verizon just loves to gut phone features and interfaces?
post #10 of 128
If this is like the PC days instead of having vendors innovating ways to bring you more and better HW specs, we’ll see the innovating new ways to save money from the top to the bottom to offer a device that that is cheaper than their competitor. \
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #11 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

...and Symbian and Windows Mobile.

i can't wait
post #12 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerofTruth View Post

What does Windows Mobile use as far as a kernel goes and what runs (or crashes) as far as a platform?

Windows CE as its kernel.
Quote:

Will Apple rewrite mobileme since alot of it is written in AJAX and appears to be catering more toward iPhone users than Macintosh users?

MobileMe is not AJAX. The MobileMe website is AJAX, but that's just one of its interfaces. MobileMe itself is a server tech with a private API.
post #13 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akac View Post

Windows CE as its kernel.

MobileMe is not AJAX. The MobileMe website is AJAX, but that's just one of its interfaces. MobileMe itself is a server tech with a private API.

Using WindowsNT 4.0 Servers with Itanium I processors, connected by ISDN lines. Not really, but it would explain why it’s so slow to use iDisk.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #14 of 128
I agree that at the end there will be three types of phones: iPhone, Android Phone, and WinMo Phone. WinMo's latest phones are actually looking good enough to compete with Android, so I don't think it will die off, but I predict it to be a third place out of three, with maybe 20% market share, the other 80% split about evenly between iphone and android, sorry Symbian.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #15 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Didn't Android go beyond the original so called Java stuff and went full blown, or is this another myth?

No myth. I assume by "full blown," you meant that Android has native development kit in good old C-based languages (well, a "compiled" language as opposed to an interpreted one). They released an NDK a few months back to support "performance" sensitive applications.

My bet is that the NDK will be the app environment of choice in Android within a year or two. It's not like every single piece of code running on a computer (not just a mobile, a laptop or a computer) isn't performance sensitive. The only place Java is really taken on life is server side. Basically everything short of that, where UI matters, it isn't very good.
post #16 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

No myth. I assume by "full blown," you meant that Android has native development kit in good old C-based languages (well, a "compiled" language as opposed to an interpreted one). They released an NDK a few months back to support "performance" sensitive applications.

My bet is that the NDK will be the app environment of choice in Android within a year or two. It's not like every single piece of code running on a computer (not just a mobile, a laptop or a computer) isn't performance sensitive. The only place Java is really taken on life is server side. Basically everything short of that, where UI matters, it isn't very good.

Yep, that's what I thought. The only big reason for wanting this is due to the core pocket media player needs more access than Java would provide it.
post #17 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

The phone business and "the computer" business are not the same thing, but it's tempting to think it's the same thing again. It's slightly different. And that sight difference end up being very different.

Phones are different because there are more personal, and Apple is gambling on the fact that they're product is better, quite simply.

I think the (smart) phone business is becoming more and more like the computer business, and the iPhone is a big part of the reason. But, success is really about mindshare and, to some extent, network effects (in case anyone thought I meant AT&T vs. Verizon). Right now Apple has mindshare and the network effect of iTunes, the App Store and iPod, and Android will have to be something pretty special to take that away from them. (The other major player with mindshare is RIM, although, I think theirs is more fragile right now, and on the decline: no one is reviewing new phones as Blackberry killers.)

The reason that the IBM PC became the dominant computer platform wasn't because it was the best, and it wasn't even because of the clones, it was because IBM was synonymous with computers and their PC immediately grabbed all the mindshare. (And the clones and Microsoft were successful because of this.)

Apple essentially stole the mindshare when they released the iPhone. Maintaining it is a combination of marketing and innovation, something I think they are well aware of, and very good at. But, it's likely that Android will grow at the expense of other platforms with less mindshare, rather than at the expense of Apple, for the foreseeable future. This is, however, a case were controlling the whole package gives them a leg up on the competition, since too much diversity (in form factors, quality, features, etc.) tends to dilute mindshare by creating confusion about just what the product is.
post #18 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

I agree that at the end there will be three types of phones: iPhone, Android Phone, and WinMo Phone. WinMo's latest phones are actually looking good enough to compete with Android, so I don't think it will die off, but I predict it to be a third place out of three, with maybe 20% market share, the other 80% split about evenly between iphone and android, sorry Symbian.

There may end up being three types of phones, but Windows Mobile won't be one of them. Windows mobile is near death, and Android is the final nail in the coffin. All that's left is for SB to take it out behind the Microsoft campus and put a bullet in its head so it isn't buried alive.
post #19 of 128
I think you have to say Android is competing with Apple iPhone directly. They are in fact in the same market competing for the same users. Moreover, as soon as Apple unveiled the iPhone, Google started to make Android more and more iPhone OS like.

If Apple didn't release the iPhone, I bet Android would look a lot like evolved Blackberries, Treos, and WM phones. This is one of the early Android prototypes:



A year later, everything Android was touchscreen. That's a basically a declaration of war to me. The HTC Magic/Hero/myTouch/DROID Eris du jour are basically iPhone clones. Pure finger-based touchscreen devices.

If I were Apple, I would do everything I can to undermine Google, including using alternative search engines, map engines, video sharing, etc. All these 3rd party hardware and software companies should know that they are at the mercy of Google's business strategy (monopolize search, use search business to kill all other potential companies taking a potential revenue source). It's a hard to beat business strategy. The GPS companies are basically dead now.

It'll be interesting to see if some hardware company totally subterfuges Android. Take every thing Android, but don't use Google services. Say email, maps, video, search, etc., all are served by MS. Wonder what Google would do?

Admittedly, with Google's position, any such action (undermining, subterfuge) has to be played very very carefully.
post #20 of 128
The room seems a little quiet and I seem to read fear of the future for Apple.

I think Fortune was saying good bye to the past and thanks for everything with the award.

The Future does seem to all about 100's of phones on all carriers and application developers climbing over each other to get on the Google Wave.

Good Bye Steve...

It was nice knowing you. The 90's all over again and still a closed system. You'd think Steve Jobs would be smarter 20 years later.

But he's a billionaire now he doesn't really need the money anymore.
post #21 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

The room seems a little quiet and I seem to read fear of the future for Apple.

I think Fortune was saying good bye to the past and thanks for everything with the award.

The Future does seem to all about 100's of phones on all carriers and application developers climbing over each other to get on the Google Wave.

Good Bye Steve...

It was nice knowing you. The 90's all over again and still a closed system. You'd think Steve Jobs would be smarter 20 years later.

But he's a billionaire now he doesn't really need the money anymore.

Don't bet on it.
post #22 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Don't bet on it.

I already have by going long on Google.
post #23 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

I agree that at the end there will be three types of phones: iPhone, Android Phone, and WinMo Phone.

I have to agree with Anonymouse, WinMo is falling too quickly to be a contender again without some serious reworking and lot of time.. I dont see MS dropping it, theyll get someone build a phone around their mobile OS or just drop everyone like they did PlayForSure and make their own Zune phone, which is what I hope they will do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

My bet is that the NDK will be the app environment of choice in Android within a year or two.

I think that sounds about right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

This is one of the early Android prototypes:

image: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rly_device.jpg

A year later, everything Android was touchscreen. That's a basically a declaration of war to me.

Wow! I cant ever imagine using a phone like that again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Don't bet on it.

I wasnt sure it that was a real post of just trolling.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #24 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I have to agree with Anonymouse, WinMo is falling too quickly to be a contender again without some serious reworking and lot of time.. I don’t see MS dropping it, they’ll get someone build a phone around their mobile OS or just drop everyone like they did PlayForSure and make their own Zune phone, which is what I hope they will do.



I think that sounds about right.


Wow! I can’t ever imagine using a phone like that again.



I wasn’t sure it that was a real post of just trolling.

The subject Title is comparing the iPhone to Android. It can't be called trolling if you're giving your opinion.

Steve made a ton of money for people paying way too much for being elite and letting Steve Jobs tell them what they want.

Google is making a ton of money by just giving the consumers what they have asked for.

The Future.
post #25 of 128
Java and Flash can just disappear as far as I am concerned -- keep them off the iPhone and keep more native speeds, thank you.
post #26 of 128
So HOW did this article omit Web OS and Windows Mobile?
post #27 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Java and Flash can just disappear as far as I am concerned -- keep them off the iPhone and keep more native speeds, thank you.

.

That is the exact thinking that will keep Apple from advancing anymore.

HTML5 is years away from being common regardless of what Steve Jobs tells everyone.

Adobe made it simple for all to see that on the iPhone Apple is blocking it. Thank You Adobe for letting the world know that it's Apple that is holding back technology that Adobe has made available. If Apple wants it to work better on their products then Apple needs to work with a partner to give optimal performance. Steve doesn't want Flash.

That is the final nail in the coffin. Every other mobile phone will have Flash but the iPhone.

Apple is trying to hold all of the cards and it's deck is getting smaller with each move they make. Steve doesn't like partners. He wants it all, vendors and consumers are tired of it.

RFID Chip the iPhone and loose more customers.

This has been in the work for years and Google has continued to build partners in every sector. Apple burns bridges with vendors.

If you are going short in the Market. Apple is a great play. If you are going long then Google is for your 401k.

Steve dies and Apple stock sinks. What average consumer even knows who the CEO of Google is.

Google is on a company buying frenzy. Apple is on a Patent a day frenzy.
Apple is trying to patent air. Steve will give it to you if you buy it from iTunes.

Who's the evil one in the market these days?...
post #28 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

It can't be called trolling if you're giving your opinion.

Sure it can. Trolling is simply a matter of intent.
post #29 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

The subject Title is comparing the iPhone to Android. It can't be called trolling if you're giving your opinion.

Steve made a ton of money for people paying way too much for being elite and letting Steve Jobs tell them what they want.

Google is making a ton of money by just giving the consumers what they have asked for.

The Future.

A future where different versions on different phones with different features completely confuses the common consumer? Which versions of which Android implementation is a particular App written for? Some phones use one UI, some another, some a bland vanilla version of Android.. One bad implementation of Android combined with a draconian cancellation fee could sour an entire group to Android. You might expect a consumer to not cast such general aspersions on an entire platform, but if the pain was significant enough, most will just associate 'Android' with 'bad experience'.

The network problems associated with the iPhone and AT&T are not the same. Most people aren't as quick to associate dropped calls and bad signal to the hardware itself.
post #30 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Sure it can. Trolling is simply a matter of intent.

So is blind devotion AnyMouse. It hurts the room for the same reason.

As does your average posting.
post #31 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

.


RFID Chip the iPhone and loose more customers.

That's for sure. RFIDs in the iPhone will be just another reason for those "government's tracking me" nuts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nondual View Post

A future where different versions on different phones with different features completely confuses the common consumer? Which versions of which Android implementation is a particular App written for? Some phones use one UI, some another, some a bland vanilla version of Android.. One bad implementation of Android combined with a draconian cancellation fee could sour an entire group to Android. You might expect a consumer to not cast such general aspersions on an entire platform, but if the pain was significant enough, most will just associate 'Android' with 'bad experience'.

The network problems associated with the iPhone and AT&T are not the same. Most people aren't as quick to associate dropped calls and bad signal to the hardware itself.

I'm kind of confused about how the GUI would affect if an app would work or not. The custom GUI only changes how the user gets to the app, not the app itself. Additionally, with the Eclair SDK, it's been shown that you can write an app and it'll function as intended, regardless of the resolution, screen size, or GUI for that matter. Shown at the 1:25 mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opZ69P-0Jbc
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #32 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by nondual View Post

A future where different versions on different phones with different features completely confuses the common consumer? Which versions of which Android implementation is a particular App written for? Some phones use one UI, some another, some a bland vanilla version of Android.. One bad implementation of Android combined with a draconian cancellation fee could sour an entire group to Android. You might expect a consumer to not cast such general aspersions on an entire platform, but if the pain was significant enough, most will just associate 'Android' with 'bad experience'.

The network problems associated with the iPhone and AT&T are not the same. Most people aren't as quick to associate dropped calls and bad signal to the hardware itself.

If you really think that then you know nothing of Google's partnerships with their vendors.

You may say the same thing for the early Window's users but Google has covered it's basis by clearly defining what each phone based on specs can use what features of Androids features.

Google is Microsoft of the new centurey but they have a much broader partnership a (strangle hold some might say) on how the market develops.

It's not just phones. It's OS's, PMP, TV boxes, TV's, Tablets, EBook developers.

While Steve was sitting on his pile of cash Google was very busy coverying all basis of every sector of your life.
post #33 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

That is the final nail in the coffin. Every other mobile phone will have Flash but the iPhone.

Yes, Flash is so essential to the mobile phone experience.

Quote:
Who's the evil one in the market these days?...

Google? You? Kim Jong Il? Oh, I'm all confused now.
post #34 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

The room seems a little quiet and I seem to read fear of the future for Apple.

I think Fortune was saying good bye to the past and thanks for everything with the award.

The Future does seem to all about 100's of phones on all carriers and application developers climbing over each other to get on the Google Wave.

Good Bye Steve...

It was nice knowing you. The 90's all over again and still a closed system. You'd think Steve Jobs would be smarter 20 years later.

But he's a billionaire now he doesn't really need the money anymore.


Underestimate Apple at your own peril.

Ballmer did. Balsilie did. Kallasvuo did. Colligan did.

Schmidt's next.

It's been two years and the iPhone is only gaining in popularity. Apple is about to overtake RIM, unless Balsilie can pull a rabbit out of his button-festooned clickety-click-click hat. Nokia is in a downward slide. Windows Mobile went from goliath to garden gnome almost overnight. Palm is in ruins.

All because of the iPhone. One device. Not hundreds of devices running different versions of a knockoff mobile OS, but ONE device, running a single, dedicated operating system.

Motorola had better offer something revolutionary right out of the gate. And I don't mean a free GPS app, better camera, and a browser that doesn't do multitouch. It needs to redefine the game or no one outside tech forums and Android's developers will care.
post #35 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

That's for sure. RFIDs in the iPhone will be just another reason for those "government's tracking me" nuts.



Actually, with the Eclair SDK, it's been shown that you can write an app and it'll function as intended, regardless of the resolution, screen size, or GUI for that matter. Shown at the 1:25 mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opZ69P-0Jbc

The OS is not resolution dependent nor screen size dependent. It's not even dependent on GSM or CDMA or LTE. It can currently handle all of them with Eclair.

What does the next pastry have in store for us? Google has already spelled it out so everyone can benefit from it.

Apple continues to hide its secrets. Hell, You don't even really know if there is a tablet out there and if so what Apple has intended for it.

Single solution for a single product VS sharing future SDK's and features so the next gen of chips and phones, computers, netbooks, eReaders, etc. can use the features.

Open VS Closed. Open wins and that is why I've moved a large portion of my portfolio to Google. I'm young enough to wait for the return.
post #36 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

The room seems a little quiet and I seem to read fear of the future for Apple.

I think Fortune was saying good bye to the past and thanks for everything with the award.

The Future does seem to all about 100's of phones on all carriers and application developers climbing over each other to get on the Google Wave.

Good Bye Steve...

It was nice knowing you. The 90's all over again and still a closed system. You'd think Steve Jobs would be smarter 20 years later.

But he's a billionaire now he doesn't really need the money anymore.

Sure,

I'ts just like Palm killing off Windows Mobile. That went well didn't it.

It's not the 90's. Check the numbers. In the 90's, NOBODY was buying Macs anymore.
The Centris, Performa and Quadra were underpowered and bloated and looked like crap.
Software support was nill, and Apple was out of ideas due to their NIH mentality. Projects that were to be cancelled were still being worked on due to stubborn engineers. CEO's had the "Ballmer" syndrome and thought the public will buy anything they cram down their throats.

Today we have a different scenario. Microsoft is actually scared of Apple, even though they have 95% of the market and in the 90's they could have cared less about Apple and only helped them out due to several lawsuits against them and the threat of the DOJ coming after them due to killing Netscape.
Now we have a situation where Apple has to keep innovating to keep their lead. This is a good thing. Without Google to give them a little competition, they can backslide and turn into MS. The Appstore is a decent way for talented programmers to make some money pretty easily. Right now, Google is just a software company, So, like Microsoft, they are dependent on the handset manufacturers to get it right. Verizon had to visit Motorola several times to get the Droid the way they wanted it. Ironcially, a lot of the early reviews claim that the phone part of the Droid is terrible.

It's going to take another generation of Android handsets and software upgrades before it could give Apple some grief. Although, thats only if Apple rests on their laurels with the 3GS, which you know they won't. It's hard to hit a moving target.
post #37 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Underestimate Apple at your own peril.

Ballmer did. Balsilie did. Kallasvuo did. Colligan did.

Schmidt's next.

It's been two years and the iPhone is only gaining in popularity. Apple is about to overtake RIM, unless Balsilie can pull a rabbit out of his button-festooned clickety-click-click hat. Nokia is in a downward slide. Windows Mobile went from goliath to garden gnome almost overnight. Palm is in ruins.

All because of the iPhone. One device. Not hundreds of devices running different versions of a knockoff mobile OS, but ONE device, running a single, dedicated operating system.

Motorola had better offer something revolutionary right out of the gate. And I don't mean a free GPS app, better camera, and a browser that doesn't do multitouch. It needs to redefine the game or no one outside tech forums and Android's developers will care.

Now CloudedFuture would never agree with that!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #38 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerofTruth View Post

Sure,

I'ts just like Palm killing off Windows Mobile. That went well didn't it.

It's not the 90's. Check the numbers. In the 90's, NOBODY was buying Macs anymore.
The Centris, Performa and Quadra were underpowered and bloated and looked like crap.
Software support was nill, and Apple was out of ideas due to their NIH mentality. Projects that were to be cancelled were still being worked on due to stubborn engineers. CEO's had the "Ballmer" syndrome and thought the public will buy anything they cram down their throats.

Today we have a different scenario. Microsoft is actually scared of Apple, even though they have 95% of the market and in the 90's they could have cared less about Apple and only helped them out due to several lawsuits against them and the threat of the DOJ coming after them due to killing Netscape.
Now we have a situation where Apple has to keep innovating to keep their lead. This is a good thing. Without Google to give them a little competition, they can backslide and turn into MS. The Appstore is a decent way for talented programmers to make some money pretty easily. Right now, Google is just a software company, So, like Microsoft, they are dependent on the handset manufacturers to get it right. Verizon had to visit Motorola several times to get the Droid the way they wanted it. Ironcially, a lot of the early reviews claim that the phone part of the Droid is terrible.

It's going to take another generation of Android handsets and software upgrades before it could give Apple some grief. Although, thats only if Apple rests on their laurels with the 3GS, which you know they won't. It's hard to hit a moving target.

It's not the 90's anymore and Apple is still operating under the same tactics.

Google could care less about Microsoft, Apple or Palm for that matter.

All closed OS's that are the past. Give developers 100's of devices to develop for and the future is written all over again.

Edit.

Quote:
So, like Microsoft, they are dependent on the handset manufacturers to get it right

It worked great for MS on the desktop. Google, unlike MS has been planning this for years & has every platform covered. Where is the future?

It's in your toaster, phone, TV, name it and Google has planned for all of them.
Developing for 1 platfrom or every platform. As a devoper what would you program for?
post #39 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Underestimate Apple at your own peril.

Ballmer did. Balsilie did. Kallasvuo did. Colligan did.

Schmidt's next.

It's been two years and the iPhone is only gaining in popularity. Apple is about to overtake RIM, unless Balsilie can pull a rabbit out of his button-festooned clickety-click-click hat. Nokia is in a downward slide. Windows Mobile went from goliath to garden gnome almost overnight. Palm is in ruins.

All because of the iPhone. One device. Not hundreds of devices running different versions of a knockoff mobile OS, but ONE device, running a single, dedicated operating system.

Motorola had better offer something revolutionary right out of the gate. And I don't mean a free GPS app, better camera, and a browser that doesn't do multitouch. It needs to redefine the game or no one outside tech forums and Android's developers will care.

Neither side should underestimate the other. Google has a lot of untapped potential and is actively creeping into segments of the market other than smartphones. To ignore this puts you in the same boat as the people who ignored the iPhone when it was first displayed to the world. The fact that the iPhone is successful because of certain Google products speaks for itself. The way Android allows the manufacturer of a product to shape the GUI however they like makes it even harder to know that it's an Android-powered device.

How's about the whole integrated search thing? The thing that Google is known best for (hell, internet searching is by default called "Googling" now). You don't need to know a specific address or even the known location of an event anymore. The searching via the Google cloud of information to pull a specific piece of information from a very broad search input is pretty game changing in my mind. And to use it to navigate even more so. So far, from all the reviews I've read, the search has worked almost perfectly (and voice recognition just as well).
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #40 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudFuture View Post

The room seems a little quiet and I seem to read fear of the future for Apple.

I think Fortune was saying good bye to the past and thanks for everything with the award.

The Future does seem to all about 100's of phones on all carriers and application developers climbing over each other to get on the Google Wave.

Good Bye Steve...

It was nice knowing you. The 90's all over again and still a closed system. You'd think Steve Jobs would be smarter 20 years later.

But he's a billionaire now he doesn't really need the money anymore.

You're reading too much into it. Jobs is fine with low market share. He understands the game. You honestly think he doesn't?

As long as Apple achieves most of the profits, they really don't care what their market share is. This is perfectly achievable with the current market dynamics. If they achieve say 7-10 percent of the total phone market but 50+ percent of the so-called smartphone market, they will have 50+ of the profits in the mobile industry. If this happens, their stock will double again.

Dan makes an interesting point about how mobile vendors are rallying around Android as Symbian, WM and various incarnations of Linux are cratering under the inertia of the iPhone and Blackberry. That's a big plus for Android. But you have to remember that his point is that Android isn't like MS Windows and Google isn't like MS. What Google wants is ad revenue through their multitude of services. So Google's number 1 goal is to get as many eyeballs on Google services as they can. They are perfectly happy with WebOS, AndroidOS, iPhone OS X, WM, Symbian, Maemo, LiMo, whatever dominating the market as long as they use Google services.

Since hardware vendors will try to create their own brands when using Android (Google, Moto, HTC, Samsung, SE, LG will all have they own UI layer and branding) with their own versions of hardware and Android software. This will create fiefdoms, not unification.

In this type of environment, Apple can win the majority of customers and profits. The fact that Google will allow such customization will fracture the app development market. The specs on the Moto DROID are cool and all, but many if not a large majority of apps will look like crap on the DROID's 16:9 854x480 screen when all Android apps are currently designed for 3:2 480x320 screens. It will only get worse as more and more vendors use different spec hardware.

This will also create an environment where abandoning Android will be very easy. There isn't anything driving vendor lock-in in the mobile market. Not any that I can see. There isn't a killer app that has lock-in data and data formats. There isn't a killer market that locks in a consumer.

Apple and Google definitely are dancing about this. Their business models don't directly compete (Google sells advertising, Apple sells hardware), but there is a bit overlap and they'll be doing the frenemy dance for awhile.

I am interested in seeing if the likes of Nokia, MS, Yahoo, Amazon, GPS vendors, and others respond to Google. Are they going to band together and oppose Google's core business by providing an advertising business themselves? Nokia and MS are getting closer together. Nokia using MS services would be amazing competition for Google, assuming Nokia abandons their own services ambitions. Nokia and MS collaborate at that level, it will be much easier for Samsung, SE, and LG to be folded in.

Apple will always beat to their own drum.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as core platforms