Google 'Nexus One' pictured, rumored coming to T-Mobile - Page 3

Discussion success!

that I am only using the term "fracturing" when developers have en masse talking about the problems of having multiple flavors across multiple hardware configurations...

its the old tired and fustrating "works, but not certified"...which was a nightmare for hardware manufacturers using windows...you can not possible predict which hardware configuration a consumer will use to build their computer, only design an optimum one.

what work you have to do before you before buying a peripheral to make sure it works with your motherboard, your video card, your sound card....etc,.

New rumor brewing that this phone will cost $199 subsidized by Google itself. Interesting move.

As for the computer building, it's as hard as you think it is. I, at first, thought the same way. That there's too much to burn through before finding what works. But it turns out that there are standards (governed by IEEE) for the motherboards that make it really easy to determine what will and will not work. Not to mention that the slots are keyed to only accept a specific connector. And the manufacturers of those items have their drivers at the ready for Windows. Plus, implying that you're building a desktop automatically implies that you have a bit of knowledge into how the pieces work together.

All the mainstream motherboards "evolve", if you will, to a new standard at pretty much the same time. And the hardware follows suit. There are the high-performance boards at the very edge that move on to new standards, but they're more of the exception.

For example, I have a PCI-E based board. I grab any manufacturer's video card that uses the PCI-E standard and swap out. Install drivers. Done. Same goes with sound cards, network adapters, etc.

Even in a fragmented world, there are standards that offer control.

Very succinctly put, especially for those questioning the validity of this article on AI

That is a horrible example which only works with certain HW components, not with varying HW platform types or OS models with different UIs.

Maybe I'm missing the whole point of how desktop building fits in to the discussion?

The way I interperated it was that there are many varying motherboard manufacturers and I can buy a board from any one of them. The same for video cards, sound cards, etc. As long as all of them build to the PCI or PCI-E standard, then I can fit any manufacturer's PCI-E video card into any manufacturer's motherboard's PCI-E slot.

The thing on a motherboard that truly is incompatible is the processor socket than anything else. And even then, all motherboards have a wide range of sockets that it will accept. You buy a board that has Intel on it, you get an Intel processor. Same for AMD. Then you can stick whatever manufacturer's product you want into the corresponding slot. Provided that you match the standard that slot goes with, of course.

I don't understand the fragmentation argument. They all have the same OS.

Are you so blindly in love with Apple that you don't see the point of having more than one hardware choice for a certain OS? People need a choice of hardware features as well as software. Having more Android phones can't hurt Google and can't hurt consumers.

Don't forget that the iPhone has had 3 major versions now. New games and such take advantage of the 3GS and its faster processor and video capability.

It's all targeting our fickle consumers. Google, as does Apple, plans on selling attractive and profitable products made in Asia.

The Google 'nexus' offering may be intended to encourage a more 'open' wireless U.S. rate structure. Maybe even like the rest of the world.

If T-Mobile is the intended 'home' of the device this may be related to TM's new plan and installing of new high-speed services.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. I do have a feeling that carriers will fight hard for the carrier exclusive, subsidized phone model, but with a giant like Google in the mix, you never know what will happen.

At least you can do what you are saying with T-Mobile, but it'd be nice if other carriers gave you a discount for not subsidizing your hardware.

Half the thread explains the fragmentation argument in detail.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...0&postcount=20

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...7&postcount=25

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...3&postcount=30

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...0&postcount=65

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...8&postcount=80

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...4&postcount=16

Actually, yours is a meaningless comment

Fragmentation always refers to whatever the referer means by fragmentation. What you may think is a completely and utterly seperate concept.

Yes. Words only mean what the speaker intends, and what the listener apprehends is unrelated.

Although I don't know why I bother to post this, since it's a crapshoot if anyone will find it intelligible.

How is the iPhone in these various versions fragmented when 1) the OS is the same, and 2) the hardware is substantially the same?

** Best Post I've Read In Months! **

Nice job. Unfortunately, there will still be people who just don't get it. But that's okay, it just proves that there are very different mindsets when it comes to purchasing and using technology.

Interestingly, the above is pretty irrefutable proof that you are FAR from a typical consumer. You're a smart guy, and you "get" technology. But it appears you don't understand consumers (referring to the iPhone/fragmentation conversation). It doesn't matter if stores sold a completely pre-canned kit that contained exact matches for boards, processor, case, etc. 99% of consumers will NEVER purchase something like that. Ever. This is why Linux has such a hard time gaining any market share with consumers, even though it's very successful in the server market. I have a handful of Linux servers myself, and have no problem setting one up, but I have no interest at all in using one for my desktop.

As a developer, I have great interest in Google's handset OS, but as a consumer, I have very little. If over time it proves to be robust, virus-free, spyware-free, app-rich, and doesn't pass personal information (location, app usage, various types of "cookies", etc) back to Google, then I will consider it. But I'm more geeky than the typical consumer as well.


This is really interesting stuff, if it's true. I would love to see anything that pushes the carriers lose their grip on consumers in the cell phone industry.

But personally, I would not use any phone that passed any information to Google (or other companies) that I did not specifically enter or request. The iPhone already does too much of this, and it's fortunate that we can jailbreak the devices and lock them down. I know a lot of people just don't care, but fortunately this conversation is happening more as people become aware of the amount of personal information Google has now.

It will take some time before people wake up and realize how scary this is, but I like the fact that more and more people are bothered by the type, and sheer amount, of personal information that various companies, Google in particular, are in control of now. Our society is like a lobster. Put it in a nice warm pot of water, and slowly turn up the heat until it's boiled for dinner. The lobster doesn't even complain because it happens slowly.

Technically one thing, actually another - how open source is that!

McD

Great post.



Unless they can at least break even with that price then it doesnt seem likely. Since Google already dominates mobile searches across nearly all mobile browsers and Android as a platform there is simply no need to offer a loss leader device that Google has to fork out money to support.

Three of those products are successors and the other is in a different category & did Apple release them in competition to it's licensees products?

But hey, I suppose not all come-backs have to be clever!

McD

i can understand why google does this with their own phone. they are trying to control the features, UI etc, with all these other android phones how does google control the experience like apple does, because now their maybe 20+ "android" experiences and the brand becomes diluted or amorphous.

now google could clearly define the parameters to give a unique UI and experience, but phone manufacturers want some way to differentiate their phones. it also shows that apple did the right thing and the MS model is doomed.

the big question, is going from a moto android, to htc android, to samsung android et al just confuses the consumer--(can apps be transfered) and IT goes nuts.

google needs more than an app store it needs a more tight universe like apple to give a total seemless experience.

nokia, MS, Pre are doomed, there will be room for RIM, since some simply like that physical keyboard.

gee all those that said apple needs a cdma phone, well that's dead. also i applaud google for pushing this to the consumer to release us from the oppressive telecoms, iphone started this now another nail in the coffin is google. this is the way to finally get the monthly costs down and more penetration

I'm more worried as to who will support the phone, because I doubt HTC will if it is Google branded. Not saying that Google sucks in this regard, but they haven't sold any hardware themselves directly yet.

It's sarcasm - like calling your pet Chihuahua 'killer'

McD

So, to summarise, what fragmentation/differentiation really means is roughly 1% market share.

And what's all this about Google providing a tangible product anyway? I thought they just made money by pointing people in a chaotically plausible direction.

McD

Actually it isn't "from" Blade Runner, because nexus is a separate term in itself available to use by anyone, and in terms of cultural history Henry Miller used it before Blade Runner. If they intend it to be "from" Blade Runner that's their business, not mine, my associations are personal.

Well, since Apple doesn't license the iPhone OS it would be impossible to compete with its licensees, so it's kind of a nonsense argument. Also, in most ways the various Android phones are successors to each other. The same as Gen 1 iPhone users can't enjoy 3G, so goes for the equivalent Gen 1 Android users. Or any of the various iterations of the iPod. Such is the nature of technology that it is always advancing.

One very nice feature of the Android platform is I could buy apps with little fear of vendor lock-in. If I buy Verizon's Droid and then another Android phone next year is more to my liking I have a much higher chance of being able to use those apps on the new phone. With the iPhone, I have zero chance of switching to another manufacturers phone; I'll always be stuck buying next year's iPhone to continue to use my apps (and having no choice on shopping around for the best phone feature set).

People aren't looking for 5 year or even 3 year commitments to cell phones. They're practically fashion accessories to be switched out as styles change. Not long ago, the Motorola Razr was the fashionable cell phone to have. Now it's the iPhone. What will the next "must have" cell phone fashion be? I don't know.

And before I get hit the fallback argument, I'm not Android lover. And I'm not an iPhone hater. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. Would an iPhone be fun to have? Sure, but I wasn't willing to leave Verizon to get it.

I've said this before, but I think it's a fundamental error to continue to think of "cell phones" in Razr terms. Phones like the Razr were entirely differentiated by case design. Of course they were disposable and used as fashion accessories.

Modern mobile computing devices have more in common with laptops or netbooks than dumbphones. People don't change out their laptop because they get bored with the looks of the thing-- they change it out when they need more computing power to run the apps they want to run.

The iPod, for instance, wasn't just a fad. Apple made the iPod. Macs + OS X also rule their respective market. Apple makes the iPhone. It was (and is) the single most important mobile device of the last few years and even with competition, is holding its own and projected to increase by leaps and bounds. If you believe the "by 2012" predictions about Android + iPhone sharing top spots, then we're certainly not talking seasonal fashion or fleeting trends. There is nothing preventing the iPhone from not only having the staying power of the iPod, but from enjoying a similar kind of market domination over the course of time.

Apple "fashion" is characteristically long-lived.

Dumb comment. It doesn't matter who "coined" the term first or whatever you are trying to say. The fact is nobody cares who was first. Names are often derived from famous movies and just like Droid is from Starwars, Nexus is certainly influenced from Blade Runner. Somehow you also do not see the relation between the words Droid (similar to replicant) and Nexus.

Google currently has a natural/legal monopoly in the online advertising space. To use this legal monopoly to subsidize / tie users into using another line of business (mobile handsets) in order to grow market share in a secondary market might raise red flags. I realize that the purchase of the Nexus One is entirely optional for the users and product tying in the AntiTrust sense is usually the other way around. But I think MicroSofts lawyers would love to have a crack at Google for AntiTrust violations, and Tying the use of Google Cloud products to a possibly subsidized Nexus One might be their chance.

Excellent point! I can see that being an anti-trust issue.

And once again is pointed out that all iPhone versions have different hardware, so you can either go for (limited) lowest denominator or live in the fragmented world as a developer. The fact all has same OS version is not going to help you there.

On the other hand, while you see several versions of Android at the same time, as it is right now the devices are quite the same, so it is relatively easy to write application that use all the HW features of the device (all have camera, all have GPS, all have Compass, and to some extent have similar video card and processing speed). Unless you writing app that uses latest 2.0 features (such as BT or Wifi peer-to-peer connectivity), your application will run on all Android devices just fine. When you create your 2.0 API based application, all devices (including G1) will run 2.0 so it will be still one single platform.

iPhone doesn't have GPS and Compass, iPhone 3G doesn't have Compass and has substantially different video card to 3GS and iPod Touch don't have Camera (and network access except wifi, but that's understandable) and has different memory model. Quite big fragmentation when you consider they are produced by company with such reputation.

Android, in contrast, while every device has a different fancy home screen is pretty much the same from the developer point of view, and multiple versions of the OS is not that big concern as you might read in various FUD posts on this site.

People buy Android phone and get the same experience..it works out of the box and does what they expect it to do. Just strange sort of "tech-sexuals" like you, who needs to know your device runs the latest version of the system the second day it is announced to stay happy, cares if Android devices have 1.6 or 2.0. Average user doesn't know and he'll happy upgrade once the upgrade for his device is ready. It is much more likely G1 will be upgraded to 2.0 early next year as it won't.

But there is another important point : on iPhone, it is quite essential for you to have the latest version of the OS, otherwise you'd feel somewhat retarded as really important features (copy and paste, system search) won't be there. Android has the important features from the beginning.
What is the major feature of 2.0 ? It is CDMA-compliant (transparent to developer). It is not important at all to you as GSM phone owner. But it will help get Android market share that iPhone probably never get.

Well a point can be dumb in as much as you don't get it, which you obviously don't. Nexus is a term that is very widely used, and wasn't "coined" so to speak by anyone. The fact that you associate it with Blade Runner doesn't mean it's "from" Blade Runner, or that anyone else will associate it with it. For instance I who have somehow missed Blade Runner (which I d actually love to watch asap for that matter) and it seems I am more literate, I associate it with Henry Miller's book.

In any case I think it's pompous and megalomaniac as per my original post. Great for a product that will fail to attract the imagination of the consumer public and that will fall short of expectations.

Logic stood on its head...

Somehow various OS versions with different interfaces on different hardware is deemed better than the natural progression of the iphone in terms of hardware. How it fragments the market that previous models have less features is beyond anyone...

I think there is a fear that Apple will screw up again like they did with Microsoft and the good times will fade away. Google will control everything.

Yeah, Android is open source, so you can spin-off a completely non-compatible version and still call it Android Phone. But to get the Android Market and all the Google Applications on it, it needs to conform to pretty tight standards. Google is aware of the risk of fragmentation and IMO is doing pretty decent work there.


Don't agree. I am the Android developer (so I qualify for your "any developer" option) and I have no problems supporting my application on different models and screen sizes. Maybe it has something to do with the multiple years of experience with J2ME which was indeed fragmented.
It is probably possible to write application that will have problems, but if you are reasonably careful you won't run into any major problems. Such problems are with iPhone as well as there are multiple versions of it.

But you brought an interesting point about the screen size : yes Android has officially different screen sizes, and since 1.6 version of OS, there is published way how to deal with multiple resolutions, which is quite elegant, almost automatic.

With all those rumors about iPhone Tablet and iPhone Nano, it is quite inevitable that iPhone will get different display resolutions soon. What information is available to iPhone developer how to prepare for multiple resolutions ? ZERO. There will be many applications among those 100,000 in the AppStore that use hard coded screen sizes and will run into major problems except some Apple "stroke of genius". This is not too comfortable position to be with for iPhone developer...being an open platform with predictable development is quite important.

Ok, try that slowly for you again. We talked about fragmentation from the developer point of view. Although the interface (mostly of the home screen) might be different between different Android models, the API is pretty much stable through different versions. They are adding new features, similar to your "natural progression of the iPhone", but at the same time, more and more devices gets the OS update, so before developer is done with application that uses new 2.0 features (API), the use base will probably have it. On the other hand, most of Android devices are pretty much the same from the hardware point of view, there are no devices left in the cold without GPS, Camera, Compass, so you can count on devices to have them. So you can create applications using those features that will address entire platform, while on iPhone you are out of such luck. Some of the features are optional on Android, so perhaps we'll see one day a device, that ships without GPS, so the platform gets more fragmented so it will be on par with iPhone, but right now it is simply less fragmented. I know the truth hurts, especially if you still repeat your mantra "OS and HW is from the same manufacturer so it gotta be better" but in fact it is not.

iPhone is still very powerful and nice device, but I wouldn't play that "fragmentation" card against Android, because if you look at the facts, it sounds silly.

Apple "stroke of genius" - Nice to see you are willing to note that it will happen:, this is Apple after-all

Does anyone else see 2010 as a VERY important year for Apple? They have opened the door to some exciting times, and now they ether stay ahead or fall behind. The competition is coming on strong, and Apple CAN NOT sit back and take a "Wait & see" attitude. At least not if they want to stay ahead of this race.

We all have to realize, there will come a day, when someone else will come up with something mind blowing, it will be a sad day in the Life & Times of Apple, but it will happen. Until then, here's looking forward to a very interesting 2010 for Apple and all of us Apple freaks.

Skip

I disagree.

Instead, the whole point of the iPhone was to make smartphone functionality readily usable by the stupidest among us. That is why, for example, there is only one hardware button on the front. That is why multi-taking is available only for a select subset of apps. That is why software additions are available only from one source.

The iPhone could be MUCH better if it were made for people of average intelligence, and without deferring to dolts who weren't able to stop their VCR from flashing"12:00" for 5 years straight. While not all iPhone users are stupid, all the stupid folks who want a smartphone have only one choice.

I'm hoping Android will be for the rest of us.

nexus |ˈneksəs|
noun ( pl. same or -uses )
a connection or series of connections linking two or more things : the nexus between industry and political power.
a connected group or series : a nexus of ideas.
the central and most important point or place : the nexus of all this activity was the disco.
ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from Latin, a binding together, from nex- bound, from the verb nectere.


*