This is only vapourware at this point, but the UI is pretty slick. I don’t think they could make it that smooth with so many UI elements, but maybe Android has grown in ways that I am not yet aware. So far the iPhone is the smoothest device I’ve tested.
I personally don't think it's vaporware. In the strictest, technical sense of the term, yes. But there's way too much showcasing of the actual program for me to think that Google will just drop it. Guess we'll know for sure on the 6th.
As for the smoothness, the newest version of Google Maps with all the layers runs damn smooth on my Storm. I've can activate all the layers and not have much of a slow-down. With the Droid's increased hardware and improvements in Android 2.0, I'm pretty sure there'll be no problem rendering smoothly. Again, we'll have to wait until the 6th to see.
That video of the media GUI for SE's Xperia Rachael is damned slick. The hardware on that device is awesome too. Sucks that it's going to be a GSM only device, as AT&T and T-Mobile in my area isn't all that great.
Quote:
Here is a decent comparison of Moto Droid v iPhone 3GS. The reviewer champions the Droid as the ultimate winner, but his comparison is fair. We can’t all have the same personal choice. The browser tests had interesting results considering both devices are essentially the same HW and use essentially the same browser engine.
Thanks for the MobileCrunch comparison article! I have to say that one thing about the browser test. It looks like from the pictures that the Droid is loading up snapshots of the Flash items on the screen because its browser has a plug-in ready for when Flash 10 comes to mobile devices. That would explain the speed difference, as the Droid's loading extra content while the iPhone is bypassing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Except that Google has said they're bringing this app to the iPhone. Why wouldn't they? They're not device manufacturers, they only wrote Android to make sure Google services get as big a piece of the mobile pie as possible. If Google services do well on the iPhone, it's still a win for Google.
It is, in fact, pretty melodramatic to imagine that because Apple gets the Google apps a little while after Android gets them that they're on the fast track to irrelevance. The smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux; vertical integration actually makes a lot more sense for handsets, where tight hardware/software integration can have a huge impact on the user experience.
Plus, the original Mac had nothing like the iTunes ecosystem, it never had the huge app advantage that the iPhone enjoys, and Google isn't MS. They're big, and they're ambitious, but there's just too many differences between the cusp of the personal computer revolution and now to make easy analogies.
I have to disagree with the "smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux" comment. Android is the "Windows" of the smartphone world. Google's trying to have a single OS spread across many hardware manufacturers and providers. Just like how Windows is spread across many PC manufacturers and resellers. And the iPhone OS is like the Apple OS in that it's only available on things that Apple makes and controls.
You can't discount Google's horizontal integration either. Android is starting to show up on electronics other than smartphone now. It's not a stretch of the imagination to envision a lot of the leading electronics manufacturers to use Android. There are tons of devices already on the market or coming to the market with digital screens to display information (touchscreen or not) for all kinds of uses around the house. With Google's latest SDK that allows any program to display correctly, regardless of the screen size of the device, it'll open a whole new level for developers.
Lets say Android ends up on Logitech's latest universal remote with WiFi. Developers can write an app that links to TV Guide and alerts you when a favorite show is about to come on and ask if you want to switch to that channel. No more need to have to figure out the clumsy software that comes with the cable/satellite provider's box.
I have to disagree with the "smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux" comment. Android is the "Windows" of the smartphone world. Google's trying to have a single OS spread across many hardware manufacturers and providers. Just like how Windows is spread across many PC manufacturers and resellers. And the iPhone OS is like the Apple OS in that it's only available on things that Apple makes and controls.
And here I thought Windows Mobile was the Windows of the smartphone world. Single OS spread across many manufacturers and providers. Hasn't worked out very well for MS.
And that still doesn't account for the iTunes ecosystem, which is so massively different from the early days of PC adoption as to render any comparisons meaningless. Or the fact that the iPhone and Touch cost about the same or less than the competition. Or the fact that MS's entrenchment in the PC market was incumbent on partnering with IBM for business cred. Or pretty much any other aspect of then vs. now besides "one software many devices."
The history of the PC was the particular history of a particular technology at a particular time. There's no reason to forever assume that the best and most successful model of all subsequent tech is to make software for as many equipment manufacturers as possible. The game console makers don't do that, they seem to do alright. And Android has yet to confront what handset design fragmentation is going to do to developer enthusiasm.
Quote:
You can't discount Google's horizontal integration either. Android is starting to show up on electronics other than smartphone now. It's not a stretch of the imagination to envision a lot of the leading electronics manufacturers to use Android. There are tons of devices already on the market or coming to the market with digital screens to display information (touchscreen or not) for all kinds of uses around the house. With Google's latest SDK that allows any program to display correctly, regardless of the screen size of the device, it'll open a whole new level for developers.
Again, Windows CE got used as the embedded OS in a lot of devices. Doesn't seem to have had much impact on the fortunes of the Windows phone OS. Ditto Linux.
Quote:
Lets say Android ends up on Logitech's latest universal remote with WiFi. Developers can write an app that links to TV Guide and alerts you when a favorite show is about to come on and ask if you want to switch to that channel. No more need to have to figure out the clumsy software that comes with the cable/satellite provider's box.
That would be fine, but how does that make Android more of a competitor to the iPhone? Is it some kind of win for the consumer to have the same underlying OS on their Logitech remote as they do on their phone?
Android has shown up on a few internet tablet style devices. It remains to be seen if it will be widely adopted as the front end to a bunch of stuff, but even if it is those iterations would be of necessity highly customized, highly limited subsets of the phone OS. After all, it's just a Linux kernel running Java code with a handset optimized UI. Once you start writing specialized versions for things like cable boxes, why not just use Linux?
More interesting would be the dockable or wireless solutions that let you use your handset as a controller. Here, the iPhone/Touch are making inroads, with devices taking advantage of the recently exposed dock connector hardware access. And if I were a device manufacturer, I'd be far more interested in developing hardware that could work with the iPhone/Touch, given the installed user base and ongoing sales.
Here are some Droid v. 3GS side by side photo comparisons. Note that the Droid has a 5mpx camera and the 3GS is a 3Mpx camera. The results may surprise you…
Quote:
The Droid takes 5 megapixel images and it has a flash, true. But the software behind the iPhone's camera is better. In shot after shot, it seemed as though the Droid was more likely to be "tricked" by tough lighting, or to play it safe and sacrifice some image quality.
Overall, I think the Droid's problem is that it undersaturates the colors and screws up the levels. It looks like a film of gray has been silkscreened over many of these images. It's not bad, mind you. And the camera's intentions are good. But I was generally happier with the iPhone photos. The iPhone isn't afraid of recording shadows. The Droid wants to tease out detail from every nook and cranny.
Seen, but not used? Android 2.0's first venture into the wild is on the Droid. Sure there's some videos out there that show bits and pieces of it, but you can't really base it all on that can you? Just one more week until user reviews start rolling in! But I do understand the appeal for the iPhone, since you're a Mac user (easier integration). I'm a 7 user, so I don't have the same issues as you.
The problem right now is that Verizon and AT&T are both switching to a new standard, LTE. No one really know how long the testing phase will take. It's not like they can flip a switch and LTE works nation-wide. That's the real reason I think why there's no firm dates being announced. Add to that savings from not having to create a CDMA version, just to switch out for another standard. I'm thinking more like 2012 for the iPhone to get over to Verizon.
There have been reviews on several sites although not as complete as I'd like to see.
Neither AT&T or Verizon will have LTE everywhere by 2012 so any phones coming out have to be dual protocol. The iPhone for Verizon will have to understand both CDMA and LTE but there will be chipsets that will take care of that.
I still think there is a good chance that Verizon will get the iPhone next June or July.
Comments
This is only vapourware at this point, but the UI is pretty slick. I don’t think they could make it that smooth with so many UI elements, but maybe Android has grown in ways that I am not yet aware. So far the iPhone is the smoothest device I’ve tested.
I personally don't think it's vaporware. In the strictest, technical sense of the term, yes. But there's way too much showcasing of the actual program for me to think that Google will just drop it. Guess we'll know for sure on the 6th.
As for the smoothness, the newest version of Google Maps with all the layers runs damn smooth on my Storm. I've can activate all the layers and not have much of a slow-down. With the Droid's increased hardware and improvements in Android 2.0, I'm pretty sure there'll be no problem rendering smoothly. Again, we'll have to wait until the 6th to see.
That video of the media GUI for SE's Xperia Rachael is damned slick. The hardware on that device is awesome too. Sucks that it's going to be a GSM only device, as AT&T and T-Mobile in my area isn't all that great.
Here is a decent comparison of Moto Droid v iPhone 3GS. The reviewer champions the Droid as the ultimate winner, but his comparison is fair. We can’t all have the same personal choice. The browser tests had interesting results considering both devices are essentially the same HW and use essentially the same browser engine.
Thanks for the MobileCrunch comparison article! I have to say that one thing about the browser test. It looks like from the pictures that the Droid is loading up snapshots of the Flash items on the screen because its browser has a plug-in ready for when Flash 10 comes to mobile devices. That would explain the speed difference, as the Droid's loading extra content while the iPhone is bypassing it.
Except that Google has said they're bringing this app to the iPhone. Why wouldn't they? They're not device manufacturers, they only wrote Android to make sure Google services get as big a piece of the mobile pie as possible. If Google services do well on the iPhone, it's still a win for Google.
It is, in fact, pretty melodramatic to imagine that because Apple gets the Google apps a little while after Android gets them that they're on the fast track to irrelevance. The smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux; vertical integration actually makes a lot more sense for handsets, where tight hardware/software integration can have a huge impact on the user experience.
Plus, the original Mac had nothing like the iTunes ecosystem, it never had the huge app advantage that the iPhone enjoys, and Google isn't MS. They're big, and they're ambitious, but there's just too many differences between the cusp of the personal computer revolution and now to make easy analogies.
I have to disagree with the "smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux" comment. Android is the "Windows" of the smartphone world. Google's trying to have a single OS spread across many hardware manufacturers and providers. Just like how Windows is spread across many PC manufacturers and resellers. And the iPhone OS is like the Apple OS in that it's only available on things that Apple makes and controls.
You can't discount Google's horizontal integration either. Android is starting to show up on electronics other than smartphone now. It's not a stretch of the imagination to envision a lot of the leading electronics manufacturers to use Android. There are tons of devices already on the market or coming to the market with digital screens to display information (touchscreen or not) for all kinds of uses around the house. With Google's latest SDK that allows any program to display correctly, regardless of the screen size of the device, it'll open a whole new level for developers.
Lets say Android ends up on Logitech's latest universal remote with WiFi. Developers can write an app that links to TV Guide and alerts you when a favorite show is about to come on and ask if you want to switch to that channel. No more need to have to figure out the clumsy software that comes with the cable/satellite provider's box.
I have to disagree with the "smartphone market isn't the PC wars redux" comment. Android is the "Windows" of the smartphone world. Google's trying to have a single OS spread across many hardware manufacturers and providers. Just like how Windows is spread across many PC manufacturers and resellers. And the iPhone OS is like the Apple OS in that it's only available on things that Apple makes and controls.
And here I thought Windows Mobile was the Windows of the smartphone world. Single OS spread across many manufacturers and providers. Hasn't worked out very well for MS.
And that still doesn't account for the iTunes ecosystem, which is so massively different from the early days of PC adoption as to render any comparisons meaningless. Or the fact that the iPhone and Touch cost about the same or less than the competition. Or the fact that MS's entrenchment in the PC market was incumbent on partnering with IBM for business cred. Or pretty much any other aspect of then vs. now besides "one software many devices."
The history of the PC was the particular history of a particular technology at a particular time. There's no reason to forever assume that the best and most successful model of all subsequent tech is to make software for as many equipment manufacturers as possible. The game console makers don't do that, they seem to do alright. And Android has yet to confront what handset design fragmentation is going to do to developer enthusiasm.
You can't discount Google's horizontal integration either. Android is starting to show up on electronics other than smartphone now. It's not a stretch of the imagination to envision a lot of the leading electronics manufacturers to use Android. There are tons of devices already on the market or coming to the market with digital screens to display information (touchscreen or not) for all kinds of uses around the house. With Google's latest SDK that allows any program to display correctly, regardless of the screen size of the device, it'll open a whole new level for developers.
Again, Windows CE got used as the embedded OS in a lot of devices. Doesn't seem to have had much impact on the fortunes of the Windows phone OS. Ditto Linux.
Lets say Android ends up on Logitech's latest universal remote with WiFi. Developers can write an app that links to TV Guide and alerts you when a favorite show is about to come on and ask if you want to switch to that channel. No more need to have to figure out the clumsy software that comes with the cable/satellite provider's box.
That would be fine, but how does that make Android more of a competitor to the iPhone? Is it some kind of win for the consumer to have the same underlying OS on their Logitech remote as they do on their phone?
Android has shown up on a few internet tablet style devices. It remains to be seen if it will be widely adopted as the front end to a bunch of stuff, but even if it is those iterations would be of necessity highly customized, highly limited subsets of the phone OS. After all, it's just a Linux kernel running Java code with a handset optimized UI. Once you start writing specialized versions for things like cable boxes, why not just use Linux?
More interesting would be the dockable or wireless solutions that let you use your handset as a controller. Here, the iPhone/Touch are making inroads, with devices taking advantage of the recently exposed dock connector hardware access. And if I were a device manufacturer, I'd be far more interested in developing hardware that could work with the iPhone/Touch, given the installed user base and ongoing sales.
And all the BS, that you've repeated after some desperately dumb bloggers... Ummm... We used to retort that as "mauvaise pioche!"
The Droid takes 5 megapixel images and it has a flash, true. But the software behind the iPhone's camera is better. In shot after shot, it seemed as though the Droid was more likely to be "tricked" by tough lighting, or to play it safe and sacrifice some image quality.
Overall, I think the Droid's problem is that it undersaturates the colors and screws up the levels. It looks like a film of gray has been silkscreened over many of these images. It's not bad, mind you. And the camera's intentions are good. But I was generally happier with the iPhone photos. The iPhone isn't afraid of recording shadows. The Droid wants to tease out detail from every nook and cranny.
Seen, but not used? Android 2.0's first venture into the wild is on the Droid. Sure there's some videos out there that show bits and pieces of it, but you can't really base it all on that can you? Just one more week until user reviews start rolling in! But I do understand the appeal for the iPhone, since you're a Mac user (easier integration). I'm a 7 user, so I don't have the same issues as you.
The problem right now is that Verizon and AT&T are both switching to a new standard, LTE. No one really know how long the testing phase will take. It's not like they can flip a switch and LTE works nation-wide. That's the real reason I think why there's no firm dates being announced. Add to that savings from not having to create a CDMA version, just to switch out for another standard. I'm thinking more like 2012 for the iPhone to get over to Verizon.
There have been reviews on several sites although not as complete as I'd like to see.
Neither AT&T or Verizon will have LTE everywhere by 2012 so any phones coming out have to be dual protocol. The iPhone for Verizon will have to understand both CDMA and LTE but there will be chipsets that will take care of that.
I still think there is a good chance that Verizon will get the iPhone next June or July.
This looks like the most balanced review yet.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/te...ogue&st=Search