Inside Google's Android and Apple's iPhone OS as core platforms - Page 3

I would have to pretty much agree with this, except for perhaps the size of the margin between Objective-C and the "best language on the planet"; I don't think it's that large. But, yes, an experienced Java programmer could learn Objective-C in a day. (Java is derived from Objective-C, after all.) And, as with learning to program on any platform, the language itself is pretty simple, the frameworks take 99% of the learning time.

I remember when Apple announced "Rhapsody", Mac programmers were freaking out about having to learn Objective-C. All those funny square brackets all over the place! How could they ever program like this! There were proposals to change Objective-C to use a C++ style dot notation (which, unfortunately, was added to Obj-C 2.0; amazing how many grown men couldn't deal with square brackets), proposals to make Java the programming language for Rhapsody, and so on. (They did move WebObjects to Java, which certainly didn't help there.) Fortunately, after a while, most everyone calmed down and realized that Objective-C wasn't really a big deal.

So, am I the only one that picked up on the fact that cloudfuture == teckstud. He gives himself away too easily.

... and that phone would suck.

There's a reason people use Google products and it's not because it comes preinstalled on 15% of browsers.

So how does Steve convince people to "pay way too much"? Does he have special psychic mind control powers?

I think you have it backwards - Steve is very good about giving people exactly what they want, which is a smooth and functional user experience to the exception of all else. This includes ignoring the techno-weenie checklist nazi's which is why "true geeks" often deride Apple - Apple refuses to add features just for the sake of adding features. I don't have a problem with that. If I want devices and software that I can pick apart and totally geek out on, they exist. When I'm done with that and I want stuff that just works in a consistent and reliable way, I have Apple to turn to. Both models have their place. Ultimately since there are more non-geeks then geeks, I think Apple will continue to leave their competitors in the dust.


Google is making a ton of money by luring consumers with "free" services of which they suck up all kinds of information to deliver.... ADVERTISING! Google makes money by selling Ads, and they do whatever they can to give them an edge in advertising to continue doing so. The only thing the consumer is good for to them is profiling them to try to lure more advertisers to spend more money to target said consumers.

No thank you. I would rather pay for my services and be ad-free then turn all my information over to Google (or FaceBook - that's the real up and coming competitor to Google - will be fun to watch).

What Google is doing with Turn by Turn navigation is exactly what got Microsoft in trouble with the Government - using Search revenue to give away turn by turn technology, freezing everyone else out. It will be interesting to see if the DOJ probes Google the same as they did to Microsoft in the 90's.

Google is a one trick poney. Cut their search advertising revenue, they are sunk. Microsoft is basically a one trick pony - Windows/Office is their major revenue generator. Apple on the other hand has the Mac/iPod/iPhone as well as iTunes. Hardware, software and retail - they are well diversified and are continuing to do so. For the person who went long on Google - your basically betting on a one trick pony vs. a well diversified and executing machine (Apple). It's your money but it's not a bet I would make. I've long felt most of Google's market success was and is hype - and I still think so. For all their "technology", they still haven't identified a way to get a significant revenue streams from something other then advertising.

It actually sounds more like NonVendorFan.

So is Android open and freely modifiable or not?

And thus the confusion for techies and pundits. Average users don't care about the Android "advantage" of being open unless it delivers significant functionality.

Excellent point and you hit the nail squarely on the head.

No, no. GOOG are very humble in advertising, too. Their pages are clean.
They seem to be given the bunch of money by content providers for right indexing, for making links appear on top pages of their search results.

Robins. Goodfellows.

Obviously they are doing something different since they are worth far more now then they were in the 90's


Really? You are plugged into Google's management and know their strategic plan? Wow...

Somehow I doubt that, and I guarantee you Google is watching Microsoft, Apple, Palm and many others as well.


Yes, because above all else regular users value the concept of "open" above all else

Get real! Most people don't want to hack or modify anything. They want to buy it and have it work. Technology is a tool, not something to be played with.

Most people are not techies!

Unless Google offers functionality that is unique and compelling, they aren't going to attract the majority of people. Right now the only compelling "feature" of Android is carrier choice. Apple can always change that if they feel compelled enough to. Somehow I don't think they are going to have to - AT&T is still adding more subscribers, and despite Verizon's propping up of their userbase count by acquisitions they are slowing. If the next rev of the iPhone not only continues but accelerates iPhone adoption, it's going to be at the expense of the remaining carriers.

And AT&T is pushing billions into network expansion. Infrastructure does not come easily, and they have a huge momentum in expanded capacity that will be coming on line in the next six months. Users are already reporting improvements in San Francisco. If they can catch up and fix the really bad areas, switch to their lower frequencies that have better distance and penetration for most people it will be more then good enough. Take that iPhone momentum and revenue and continue plowing it into the network - it's going to be a double whammy to Verizon.

Yes, that's quite a few what-if's, but if I were Verizon I would be very concerned right now - and I think they are based on their extremely targeted advertising right now. They know their window of criticism is closing. Apple and AT&T both are refining their respective areas and pretty soon many of the "issues" they are advertising around are going to disappear. Verizon desperately needs more then "the network" to be a compelling argument and it will be interesting to see if the Droid is good enough. This could be a "bet the company" moment...


Indeed - where is the future? Google is two years behind Apple. Android is fragmented out the gate, and if the inevitable confusion over hardware and software support emerges, Android will be known as an inconstant and unreliable user experience (fair or not). Perception matters, and Google by positioning Android as a free-for-all has little control over perception of their platform.

If they were really smart, the "Android" brand would have been tightly controlled with a few trusted vendors with a consistent base of features to match the Zune, iPod and iPhone model. They should have developed a separate brand that is the free-for-all open do-whatever-you-want. That way the techie geeks with a zillion incompatible variations (like the Linux desktop) wont' bleed over into the perception of the platform where the rest of humanity resides. Androids diversity will be an albatross on the user experience for "normal" people and that blowback is going to hurt them. Manufacturers just can't help themselves - they can't say no to the techie's to just throw in features to "distinguish" themselves. End users couldn't care less - they just want a device that works and this is why Apple continues to be successful.



Really? Google has a plan for 1 platform? Then what is the Chrome OS? That sounds like a different platform then Android.

Unlike you I don't see Google as all knowing and all seeing (nor do I view Apple as all knowing or all seeing either, BTW). I see them as flailing around looking for other revenue streams while rapidly exhausting ways of driving new eyeballs to their sites in order to drive advertising. I think they get a pass by techie's and the tech media because they are the darling of "web 2.0"

I guess we will see, won't we?

The iPhone is successful because of the sum of it's parts - and the Google Apps are certainly part of that experience, but they are most definitely not the sole experience. Nor are they a significant part of my experience any more - I hardly use the Google Maps app any more (Wayz and MapQuest are my apps of choice now). Apple could drop Google Maps, replace it with something else (Bing? Now that would be interesting) and I doubt most people would care.

In fact, when I want to look at maps with photos I go to Bing instead of google. I find their imagery is more up to date, and they offer more views then Google.

Google is certainly not infallible. They are still solely dependent on advertising revenue and have yet to create a significant secondary stream of revenue.

It's never wise to invest in only one skill set - no matter the industry or technology.

Good luck with your strategy....

But how many are being used as smartphones? Evidently not that many when you look at web statistics.

The old Shipping vs. Used debate. MS has been claiming market dominance for Exchange for years based on Outlook "Sales". Nevermind that Outlook is bundled in with Office. They count it as a "seat" even if it never gets launched

Bingo. Success DOES NOT equal dominant market share.

Sheesh....

Possibly, although, I don't recall that he has a habit of addressing me by some variation on "anonymouse", which is very TS-like, but it seems NVF has been banned.

Symbian is responsible for 34% of mobile web usage (including non-smartphones) according to the latest AdMob web statistics. Look how far ahead Symbian is compared to everything else but the iPhone - RIM on 8% and Windows Mobile on 4%. Not bad for a platform where unlimited data isn't a mandatory plan of the user's plan.

And how does one define "smartphone use"?

I get that, and in the past 15 years in my career I have changed programming languages/technologies a few times according to demands in the industry. Do I foresee that demand for Java developers will drop to a point any time soon within the next few years that it will be hard to find employment? No. I couldn't say the same if I was an Objective-C developer.

You wish, huh? Everything goes in cycles, and Steve's got more than a few more cycles left up his sleeve for us. "Smart" means nothing. "Genius" is the word for Steve. Only a fool measures success in terms of money.

Touché - I had my stats reversed.


To me I define smartphone use as anything that exceeds what a basic feature phone can do.

Example: For a year and a half I had a Palm Treo with Windows mobile. It was so painful to use I rarely did more with it then use it as a phone and occasionally read email. I didn't need a smartphone to do that. If the iPhone hadn't arrived, when my contract expired I probably would have dropped the Treo and just went back to a basic phone with no data - and I doubt I'm alone in this. There are lots of "smartphones" that are used as glorified phones and email terminals. That's why I find devices like the iPhone much more compelling - the rich variety of applications combined with a useful environment that makes the applications useable and practical is very exciting. I no longer travel with a laptop on personal travel. I can do everything I need to (and more) on my iPhone - that's a paradigm shift.

Ah, you're talking hardware differences.

Well, if you buy an $18,000 Ford Focus, would you expect it to have the same luxury features as a $50,000 BMW/Mercedes/[insert luxury brand here]. No.
Would you expect it to have the same performance as a Ferrari? No.
If you develop an app for the 3GS that takes advantage of the digital compass, would you expect it to work the same on the 3G? No.
What about on the 3G if you take advantage of the GPS functionality? Will it work on the previous generation iPhone? No.

So if the handset manufacturers do start to produce Android phones that vary in hardware features, like the example you gave where one handset might have an accelerometer but another one doesn't, and I write an app to take advantage of that hardware feature - would I expect it to run on the device that does not and have the same behavior? No, of course not.

The writing it too coherent to be Teckstud and the writing isnt nearly angry enough to be NonVendorFan. I think this is a new person.



I know I am. That is my point. You stated that you an write one app and have it work for any and all phones that Android users. I questioned that concept at its foundation.

The differences with iPhone HW versions are very slight, yet you correctly point out that not all apps developed for the iPhone work across all models. The difference is that with 3 models all using the same size display, all with a touch interface and all coming from the same vendor with petty much 1 year difference in release dates the customer will not have much of a problem with knowing which apps work for them and developers will not have much of a problem with testing.

-is there spell check, proper word use in the future? You really destroy your credibility when you can not use the basic english language.

Additionally, everyone talks about monopolizing aspects of technology, and you tout that Google is covering all bases of every sector of your life which has yet to be seen other than email and fine search algorithm...Its also seems that you don't realize that Apple has Apple TVs, several OSs, a rumored tablet that will would be a tablet/eBook reader, PMPs...and again you tout as if having a stranglehold on the how the market develops is a good thing, I swear one day someone argues for competition, and then next day argue gobbling up/control competitors is even better. Well a "partnership" between a vendor and a producer is always LAZY. What apple is doing is creating devices and software that represents true synergy.

And you are right google is the flash in the pan that Microsoft was the last couple of decades. And like M$ previous stock prices, Google will mirror with that because they have not learned from M$ errors. Lack of control of how their OS performs on company B's hardware that looks great on paper but performs poorly because of lack of optimization between the two.

Well, that's exactly one of the more serious problems that Windows Mobile had. The more devices with different hardware, the more difficult it becomes to code around and support all the variations. Consumers are confused about which apps will do what where. The greater the variation, the bigger the problem.

Actually, I believe the location services were available on the original iPhone, just not via GPS. However, yes, there are some differences between different versions of iPhone hardware, but, since there is only one vendor, the differences are few, and the APIs are designed with these differences in mind, it's easy to keep track of those differences and handle them. This wasn't true of Windows Mobile and I doubt that it's going to be true of Android.

Something of note, Nokia owns Qt, which KDE is based off of. I'm sure they're pursuing their own corse, as KDE has recently announced the upcoming KDE Netbook Plasma interface. I'm sure they're working on making something similar for iPhone-like smartphones. If you haven't seen KDE Netbook Plasma UI, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iULB1zE7EJE

'Course, now you're just one of many, many Java programmers, whereas good Objective-C developers are in high demand.

And PHP, Ruby, Python, and other languages have displaced much of the work Java was expected to dominate, has it not? Just read about one site that took three years to rebuild their site, all because someone convinced them that they needed to chose Java.

So, you have made your fortune is the market and are sure that Apple is dead??? LOL,,, ROFLOL.

--gathers self --- takes breath --- sorry but you sound like you are technically inclined... which is good.... and take yourself too seriously.... which is bad.

Look at mp3 players, cell phones... etc. while some features are required, being the head techno geek these days does nothing for actual sales to teens, and 20-35 ers. Its about cool and ease of use. APPLE all the way.

So, I hope you have other stock holdings,,, like Microsoft or Motorola to support your retirement.

Just a thought.
en

That mindset could be the most damaging thing to the other mobile developers.

the reality is that they wouldn't even know it's an android phone. google is selling it's os to manufacturers not consumers.

And lack of consistency is a big problem.

The Droid has multi-touch support in the OS, but doesn’t use it in the UI. The cheaper HTC Eris runs an older version of Android OS and offers multi-touch, but only in HTC’s own custom apps.

WinMo all over again.

Speaking of which, that very topic is addressed here.

Consumers might not care particularly if their phone is running "Android", or what flavor thereof, but they do care about ease of use and ecosystem. iPhone users have confidence that the next iteration of their handset will much like the one they have now, but better. And that it will work with the apps they have now, and the accessories they have now. iPhone developers have the same confidence.

A lot of the posts are right when we all stop being geeks and actually say, "hmm... i wonder what the majority of users/consumers want?". Apple does it well, MS used to do it well because they copied the right things and pushed their monopoly. Google does it OK but they just don't have the polish in anything they do except search and mail like intelligent spam filtering, size of mailbox, free IMAP, search mail (but to be honest i prefer OSX Mail overall to Gmail).

From a phone sector Symbian blows as far as user experience in most of the mutations I have seen and used. Also, BB is pretty ugly and very much feels like a glorified pager as far as form and function.

Most consumers don't care about jailbreaking or modifying every aspect of their phone. they want the phone to be
1. stable
2. easy to use and intuitive
3. provide the most popular features in an easy to access manner
4. be controlled naturally
5. be a good experience

Can an integrated closed loop configuration like Apple iPhone, Nokia and Blackberry do this better than an open one like Google and WInmo. Yes it can and has.

I find that the iPhone does it best because it does the above 5 points best to its target audience. I think that is why Blackberry was able to be so successful as well for Business. Nokia on the other hand did both open and closed and got away with it but couldn't keep the brand as clean and reliable as the other two.

When you lose control you have more potential to lose quality. To be honest it would be interesting to see if businesses drop blackberry for iphone. Google is not in the game.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-10392456-266.html

Short or no lines greet Motorola Droid as Verizon spokesman claims lines are unwanted and ‘flashy’

"The new Motorola Droid got a sleepy reception on Friday morning when it officially went on sale across the country in Verizon Wireless stores starting at 7 a.m. in some places," Marguerite Reardon reports for CNET. "From New York to San Francisco, most stores around the country had few if any lines when doors opened Friday morning."

"Verizon spokesman David Samberg said that a lack of a long line or shortage of devices is actually a good thing," Reardon reports. "'Long lines forming outside are flashy,' he said. 'But it's not really the goal. What we really want to see is this: a steady stream of people coming today and for the next few weeks buying new phones.'"

Reardon reports, "The lines, or lack of lines as the case may be, are far less dramatic than the hoopla surrounding an Apple iPhone launch."

------------------------

DéjÃ* vu: "Palm and Sprint: Don’t expect a iPhone-like camping out and lines for Pre; we don’t want them" - June 04, 2009.

The iPhone certainly is gaining popularity in the business sector. No need for BES HW, no need for yearly fee per user for BES, a UI that is more universal which helps IT, and the ability to make a quality corporate app easily and cheaply. There are some key things the BB wins over the iPhone but they have been dropping significantly every year.

I think you are dead on about Android having trouble breaking into corporate. There is already a class action against an iPhone app developer that wrote games to snag your contacts though a vulnerability. With Android, this could be a lot worse.

For a good (bad?) example of button-overkill that actually made it to market in a high-dollar product, check out:

http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCa...es/VR/360.html

Seriously, how many buttons, dials, and screens does it take to operate something?! This is a tractor, not an airliner...

You have to tunnel a little, but at http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCa...8r_series.html Deere shows an iPod touch plugged into one of the machine's power outlets. You'd think Deere might notice and learn from Apple's design.

Except they do if they plan to use apps sold in the Android market. But which apps work on their particular phone (which may or may not have a manufacturer GUI laid over the top), which version of Android do they have (which as you said they might not even know), etc.

Confusion will abound unless someone steps in soon...

Yeah, everyone is wondering how 3rd party applications will fare if there is a lot of differing hardware on Android "smartphones."

I think it is more insidious than Windows Mobile. People talk about how one phone has this feature or not, but I'm imagining screen size and resolutions will be particularly fractious with touchscreen phones.

A 3" touchscreen is different from a 3.5" touchscreen phone. Fingers need about a square cm or more of screen area to have a good tap. This means applications, especially bitmap centric ones, won't scale that well when going from a small touchscreen to a big touchscreen and all significant applications will need to be redesigned.

I'm still wondering what Palm is doing with the Pixi. Only the simple applications will scale. The UI for anything complex will have to be done if Palm wants the user experience to be any good at all, never mind that a touchscreen for a <3" display wont be much fun.

Also, I'm curious what Apple is going to do for prospective iPhone "nano" and "pro/max/HD." Those thousands of applications won't scale if the screen size and resolutions are different. My only solution for a "Pro" like iPhone would be to use 960x640 screen rez at 3.7-4" diag. Old applications can simply be pixel-quadrupled for the best transition experience. For a smaller screen, Apple probably can't go much more than 480x320 at 3.2" diag before the controls and buttons become too small to tap well.

Because in the 90s Apple had an iTunes store with a plurality of all music sold worldwide, a retail chain, dominant position in portable digital player market, a large share of the profits in the mobile handset industry, and over 90% of the over 1000 dollar computer retail market.

...oh.. wait..


Because of course Google is quite happy to stick to making all it's money off search advertising and email services. Forever.

The future of course is more ways to make money from advertising. Clearly.



Of course there's no difference between programming a toaster or a TV or a pair of sneakers, or a cell phone.

In fact, I really want one of those programmable toasters. No really.

Hey, where's my flying skateboard? I feel cheated.


Cloud, you could be a very entertaining troll, and you're almost there, but you need to up your game a little bit. Focus on your points a bit more, don't wander all over the map, and try to say things that at least make some sense.

Good article, but I wouldn't say Linux was "Unix-derived."

It's a clean room "Unix-like" copy isn't it?

It may change in the future, but it is interesting to see that right now Android is more homogenous target for its developers than iPhone. As you said there is original iPhone, lacking GPS and iPhone 3GS that have extra compass sensor. On the Android side, so far all Google branded phones are pretty much the same. Google learned their lesson from JavaME/WinMobile and is very conservative on this front.

The different screen formats may make this more difficult, but at least you know what is the strategy there (started in Android 1.6) Apple will release different screen format eventually, too, but it is very difficult to future-proof your iPhone application now as you have no details about possible next generation device, you even don't know if/when iPhoneTablet or or iPhoneNano will emerge.

So far this "single vendor" point is not really that strong advantage to Apple as it might look.

It's already solved. If you don't have device, that matches the API-level, the application won't be visible in the Market for your device. So far, all devices are upgradeable to the latest API level and it is as simple process as upgrading OS in iPhone, so it is pretty much the same on both platforms.