So you are saying you prefer T-Mobile coverage to AT&T's or is it just price? Because Verizon wouldn't be any cheaper if they had an iPhone. And of course there would be the simultaneous data & voice issue which may not be that big of a deal. My friend has a G1 on TM and the coverage is pretty poor except when in the city. In rural areas there is no signal apparently.
I'm not saying I prefer it, I'm saying I have it and my favorite company in the whole world (Apple) doesn't. So there you go.
Okay folks - like it or hate it, Google will have Apple getting a bit scared.
Even if you're an Apple Fanboy/Fangirl and won't touch the N1 you won't be put off by what Apple will have to do to remain in the top seat.
At last, here is the credible competition that should mean Apple will have to drive down their prices.
I can't wait to see what Vodafone has to offer in the Spring time as this is when my phone contract is up - Bingo!
By the way - here's one of my predictions - Google will have to bring out some sort of iTunes for the N1 to fully benefit from its multifunction capabilities!
Get in there Google!
Well, with their phone strategy in place, and possible tablets coming from them soon, all they will need is a credible pipeline for delivery of books, magazines, newspapers, audio, podcasts and movies... piece of cake.
I seriously doubt Apple is afraid of Google. If anything Google crapped its pants after hearing the news of Apple buying up that mobile ad network. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple even decides to create a search engine of its own on MobileMe to replace Google. Google is deciding to step into Apple's core business, hardware, Apple will have no choice but to step on Google as well. Google is making a lot of money off of Apple's platforms and we will begin to see a shift to more Apple services, backed by Apple owned ads. Also take into consideration the number of applications downloaded and how many of those are ad-supported. I'm sure there's a lot of potential profit slipping between Apple's fingers and they're dying to take control of that. They could make it dead simple for developers to add advertisements in their apps and then simply collect the money as they're clicked. They already have the payment system set up with developers.
Also, Android isn't a threat to the iPhone, it is threat to Windows Mobile.
However, Apple is now reacting to Google's moves. Not a good place to be. Apple needs to be ahead of the curve, not slowing down so Google can pass them. All of this is happening very quickly now that the 3G and 4G networks are finally coming to fruition.
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
Google officials said they will focus on specific projects with partners, such as the Motorola Droid, to encourage innovation in the marketplace.
So we're going to get a load of crap Android phones in the market place and every now and then we'll get a diamond. This is why Google should go it alone.
..Not until Exchange support gets a LOT better on the Android platform. We're a Microsoft outfit and we've had several of our users ask about the Droid phones, and we keep telling them no, sorry, won't work with our Exchange email. Windows Mobile and iPhone have ActiveSync support. Palm had that poor VersaMail client and we don't want to go through that again with bolt-ons for Android.
google licensed activsync from microsoft just like apple did. it should be in android 2.0 or 2.1.
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
sounds like the same argument made back in the Windows 3.1 days....we saw what direction that went...
Though I don't have an iPhone, but I did have a Samsung Moment (for about 2 weeks) that had Android on it... and the biggest concern was: Is 2.0 coming to the Moment [or the Hero for that matter]. That was before 2.1 was introduced. Both the Moment and the Hero are running 1.5.
So, are all of these new Android phone going to leave the old ones behind? The iPhone OS has always been available for all phones, not just the most recent model.
I have a Pre and I guess we are all hoping that Palm just stays in business and are anticipating their CES presentation to we know the direction Palm is going. Hopefully, up!
Google is making a lot of money off of Apple's platforms and we will begin to see a shift to more Apple services.
Google is making a lot of money off Apple's brand period through it's AdSense/Adwords strategy. In fact add in BMW, Mercedes, Microsoft, Mazda, Hyundai, Kia, Marks & Spencer and every other brand you can think off and you have the Google success story, you get the picture?
Google's strategy into mobile phones is purely to keep its core business (PPC revenue) in business. the $850 million acquisition of AdMob tells you everything you need to know about Google's motivation.
Apple doesn't need to acquire other ad revenue services to kill Google off. Apple, like every other major brand could wipe Google off the face of the earth by simply not supporting its PPC model.
But that's the genius of Google and the big brands can't see it (although i have a sneaky feeling Apple may just have sussed it). Google's Achilles heel is in it's core business. But who's going to be the first to challenge it.
Agreed... The tablet will help them against Amazon & Barnes and Noble (is B&N really a credible threat though?). They will slowly lose ground to web-based apps... Apple is a hardware company, so what do they care, but if customers don't mind a cheap $300 Windows box in order to run web apps then this model is in trouble.
Apple's best bet is to continue to push the envelope in the mobile space with hardware + content (iTunes catalog) + delivery (iTunes, AppStore) and to get iWork ported to be web-based (which they are doing). They will especially need to convert iTunes to be more YouTube-ish, which will open the door for advertising revenues.
Am I the only one (admittedly an Apple fan) who sees that Microsoft has again missed the boat? Apple has a shot at the Great Web Migration that is happening because they have content + distribution (iTunes / App Store), but what does Microsoft have? Search (Bing)? Not really. Content (Zune store)? Nope. No app store that I'm aware of. No proprietary hardware. All in all, I think Google is looking REALLY good and Apple OK for now but they need to open up iPhone to more developers (can't be just Objective-C, and the store can't be so restrictive) and get iTunes content delivered via the web (like YouTube).
Microsoft though? Yikes. Those 2-5 year datacenter and office contracts will expire at some point and then people will have many decisions to make.
And RIMM? Double Yikes. The only assets they have are a large user base (which can be easily migrated) and a closed radio network. No real app lock-in to speak of.
Google is attempting to replicate the old Microsoft model by supplying software to an ecosystem of hardware manufacturers and software ISVs, but how do they actually make money from Android? Not by advertising...
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
I wish someone would create a different category of smart phones. Seems to me that every company has tried to emulate the iPhone to some degree. It's like no one has an original idea. Imagine if Apple had entered the mobile phone space with a Razor clone - how unoriginal would that have been? Instead, Apple created something completely different from the other guys on the block. They were not afraid to be different or to take chances. If Google and others want to differentiate themselves, they are gonna have to display some intellectual prowess. Because as I see it, all these phones are just iPhone wannabes.
Looks really good, and development process is so much simpler for it as well. If I were in the market for a phone now, this would be the only contender really.
I love that I can fire up Eclipse and write apps for it in Java (Java is what I do all day anyway). Really exciting.
If Google and others want to differentiate themselves, they are gonna have to display some intellectual prowess. Because as I see it, all these phones are just iPhone clones..
Like i've already said here Google is not really interested in innovating and outpacing Apple. It's going to have its PPC model splashed on thousands of smartphones in the years to come. That's its motivation. the phones an extension of Gmail etc...
The quote from Google executives about working with a few partners to keep innovation moving forward should tell you all you need to know.
Apple on the other hand has innovation in its DNA. As long as Apple want smartphone supremacy it's theirs for the keeping.
Android OS (from 2.0 or 2.1?) has some sort of a multi-touch API but most smartphone makers do not use it, except for Motorola with its EU version of Droid (i.e. Milestone). Probably due to legal/licensing issues. Or may be it is buggy? Who knows.
Agreed... The tablet will help them against Amazon & Barnes and Noble (is B&N really a credible threat though?). They will slowly lose ground to web-based apps... Apple is a hardware company, so what do they care, but if customers don't mind a cheap $300 Windows box in order to run web apps then this model is in trouble.
Apple is not a "hardware company," not really. They purchase hardware components based on their design specifications and sell them, but the magic is in how it's integrated into software. Ultimately that is what makes them unique in my mind. Cloud-based initiatives such as iTunes Store, App Store, MobileMe and whatever follows them will be equally successful.
For business reasons I may occasionally need to run a Windows VM on my Macbook like most people, but I much prefer to stay in the native OS X side. There is a comparison. I would probably not purchase the same Apple hardware at the same price point if OS X was not part of the picture and came with Windows only. That would not be a "Mac" without the software that makes it one.
Google is making a lot of money off Apple's brand period through it's AdSense/Adwords strategy. In fact add in BMW, Mercedes, Microsoft, Mazda, Hyundai, Kia, Marks & Spencer and every other brand you can think off and you have the Google success story, you get the picture?
Google's strategy into mobile phones is purely to keep its core business (PPC revenue) in business. the $850 million acquisition of AdMob tells you everything you need to know about Google's motivation.
Apple doesn't need to acquire other ad revenue services to kill Google off. Apple, like every other major brand could wipe Google off the face of the earth by simply not supporting its PPC model.
But that's the genius of Google and the big brands can't see it (although i have a sneaky feeling Apple may just have sussed it). Google's Achilles heel is in it's core business. But who's going to be the first to challenge it.
BTW, you attributed a quote to me that mjtomlin made. I didn't write that.
Comments
So you are saying you prefer T-Mobile coverage to AT&T's or is it just price? Because Verizon wouldn't be any cheaper if they had an iPhone. And of course there would be the simultaneous data & voice issue which may not be that big of a deal. My friend has a G1 on TM and the coverage is pretty poor except when in the city. In rural areas there is no signal apparently.
I'm not saying I prefer it, I'm saying I have it and my favorite company in the whole world (Apple) doesn't. So there you go.
That's real chessy to call the Nexus One a "superphone"
The damn device can't even pinch & zoom!
Apple will do a better job this summer, watch!
Okay folks - like it or hate it, Google will have Apple getting a bit scared.
Even if you're an Apple Fanboy/Fangirl and won't touch the N1 you won't be put off by what Apple will have to do to remain in the top seat.
At last, here is the credible competition that should mean Apple will have to drive down their prices.
I can't wait to see what Vodafone has to offer in the Spring time as this is when my phone contract is up - Bingo!
By the way - here's one of my predictions - Google will have to bring out some sort of iTunes for the N1 to fully benefit from its multifunction capabilities!
Get in there Google!
Well, with their phone strategy in place, and possible tablets coming from them soon, all they will need is a credible pipeline for delivery of books, magazines, newspapers, audio, podcasts and movies... piece of cake.
I seriously doubt Apple is afraid of Google. If anything Google crapped its pants after hearing the news of Apple buying up that mobile ad network. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple even decides to create a search engine of its own on MobileMe to replace Google. Google is deciding to step into Apple's core business, hardware, Apple will have no choice but to step on Google as well. Google is making a lot of money off of Apple's platforms and we will begin to see a shift to more Apple services, backed by Apple owned ads. Also take into consideration the number of applications downloaded and how many of those are ad-supported. I'm sure there's a lot of potential profit slipping between Apple's fingers and they're dying to take control of that. They could make it dead simple for developers to add advertisements in their apps and then simply collect the money as they're clicked. They already have the payment system set up with developers.
Also, Android isn't a threat to the iPhone, it is threat to Windows Mobile.
However, Apple is now reacting to Google's moves. Not a good place to be. Apple needs to be ahead of the curve, not slowing down so Google can pass them. All of this is happening very quickly now that the 3G and 4G networks are finally coming to fruition.
Oh well, maybe the next one.
But "Superphone"?
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
Google officials said they will focus on specific projects with partners, such as the Motorola Droid, to encourage innovation in the marketplace.
So we're going to get a load of crap Android phones in the market place and every now and then we'll get a diamond. This is why Google should go it alone.
..Not until Exchange support gets a LOT better on the Android platform. We're a Microsoft outfit and we've had several of our users ask about the Droid phones, and we keep telling them no, sorry, won't work with our Exchange email. Windows Mobile and iPhone have ActiveSync support. Palm had that poor VersaMail client and we don't want to go through that again with bolt-ons for Android.
google licensed activsync from microsoft just like apple did. it should be in android 2.0 or 2.1.
Fugly. Not a bad phone but no "iPhone Killer."
Oh well, maybe the next one.
But "Superphone"?
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
sounds like the same argument made back in the Windows 3.1 days....we saw what direction that went...
sounds like the same argument made back in the Windows 3.1 days....we saw what direction that went...
I have no idea what you mean by this.
So, are all of these new Android phone going to leave the old ones behind? The iPhone OS has always been available for all phones, not just the most recent model.
I have a Pre and I guess we are all hoping that Palm just stays in business and are anticipating their CES presentation to we know the direction Palm is going. Hopefully, up!
Google is making a lot of money off of Apple's platforms and we will begin to see a shift to more Apple services.
Google is making a lot of money off Apple's brand period through it's AdSense/Adwords strategy. In fact add in BMW, Mercedes, Microsoft, Mazda, Hyundai, Kia, Marks & Spencer and every other brand you can think off and you have the Google success story, you get the picture?
Google's strategy into mobile phones is purely to keep its core business (PPC revenue) in business. the $850 million acquisition of AdMob tells you everything you need to know about Google's motivation.
Apple doesn't need to acquire other ad revenue services to kill Google off. Apple, like every other major brand could wipe Google off the face of the earth by simply not supporting its PPC model.
But that's the genius of Google and the big brands can't see it (although i have a sneaky feeling Apple may just have sussed it). Google's Achilles heel is in it's core business. But who's going to be the first to challenge it.
Apple's best bet is to continue to push the envelope in the mobile space with hardware + content (iTunes catalog) + delivery (iTunes, AppStore) and to get iWork ported to be web-based (which they are doing). They will especially need to convert iTunes to be more YouTube-ish, which will open the door for advertising revenues.
Am I the only one (admittedly an Apple fan) who sees that Microsoft has again missed the boat? Apple has a shot at the Great Web Migration that is happening because they have content + distribution (iTunes / App Store), but what does Microsoft have? Search (Bing)? Not really. Content (Zune store)? Nope. No app store that I'm aware of. No proprietary hardware. All in all, I think Google is looking REALLY good and Apple OK for now but they need to open up iPhone to more developers (can't be just Objective-C, and the store can't be so restrictive) and get iTunes content delivered via the web (like YouTube).
Microsoft though? Yikes. Those 2-5 year datacenter and office contracts will expire at some point and then people will have many decisions to make.
And RIMM? Double Yikes. The only assets they have are a large user base (which can be easily migrated) and a closed radio network. No real app lock-in to speak of.
Google is attempting to replicate the old Microsoft model by supplying software to an ecosystem of hardware manufacturers and software ISVs, but how do they actually make money from Android? Not by advertising...
Fugly. Not a bad phone but no "iPhone Killer."
Oh well, maybe the next one.
But "Superphone"?
LOL. It's a smartphone, in the same category as the iPhone. No, Google didn't create a new category, it created an iPhone clone with a fraction of the apps, an ugly UI, and no multitouch.
It's just OK. Not revolutionary. If your product is "just OK" in the same category as Apple's product, then Apple's next product update will consign your product to oblivion, or nearly that.
That's the rule when competing in the same handheld space as Apple.
I wish someone would create a different category of smart phones. Seems to me that every company has tried to emulate the iPhone to some degree. It's like no one has an original idea. Imagine if Apple had entered the mobile phone space with a Razor clone - how unoriginal would that have been? Instead, Apple created something completely different from the other guys on the block. They were not afraid to be different or to take chances. If Google and others want to differentiate themselves, they are gonna have to display some intellectual prowess. Because as I see it, all these phones are just iPhone wannabes.
I love that I can fire up Eclipse and write apps for it in Java (Java is what I do all day anyway). Really exciting.
If Google and others want to differentiate themselves, they are gonna have to display some intellectual prowess. Because as I see it, all these phones are just iPhone clones..
Like i've already said here Google is not really interested in innovating and outpacing Apple. It's going to have its PPC model splashed on thousands of smartphones in the years to come. That's its motivation. the phones an extension of Gmail etc...
The quote from Google executives about working with a few partners to keep innovation moving forward should tell you all you need to know.
Apple on the other hand has innovation in its DNA. As long as Apple want smartphone supremacy it's theirs for the keeping.
... and no multitouch
Android OS (from 2.0 or 2.1?) has some sort of a multi-touch API but most smartphone makers do not use it, except for Motorola with its EU version of Droid (i.e. Milestone). Probably due to legal/licensing issues. Or may be it is buggy? Who knows.
Can you store apps on the SD cards or is it still just the support files? I hope you?re not confusing the 512MB RAM with the 512MB on-board NAND.
The stock OS did not allow for apps on the SD card. But third-party hacks made it possible to store them on the card, and to load them dynamically.
By the time I got my Treo, there was plenty of memory, so no such tricks were necessary.
Agreed... The tablet will help them against Amazon & Barnes and Noble (is B&N really a credible threat though?). They will slowly lose ground to web-based apps... Apple is a hardware company, so what do they care, but if customers don't mind a cheap $300 Windows box in order to run web apps then this model is in trouble.
Apple is not a "hardware company," not really. They purchase hardware components based on their design specifications and sell them, but the magic is in how it's integrated into software. Ultimately that is what makes them unique in my mind. Cloud-based initiatives such as iTunes Store, App Store, MobileMe and whatever follows them will be equally successful.
For business reasons I may occasionally need to run a Windows VM on my Macbook like most people, but I much prefer to stay in the native OS X side. There is a comparison. I would probably not purchase the same Apple hardware at the same price point if OS X was not part of the picture and came with Windows only. That would not be a "Mac" without the software that makes it one.
Google is making a lot of money off Apple's brand period through it's AdSense/Adwords strategy. In fact add in BMW, Mercedes, Microsoft, Mazda, Hyundai, Kia, Marks & Spencer and every other brand you can think off and you have the Google success story, you get the picture?
Google's strategy into mobile phones is purely to keep its core business (PPC revenue) in business. the $850 million acquisition of AdMob tells you everything you need to know about Google's motivation.
Apple doesn't need to acquire other ad revenue services to kill Google off. Apple, like every other major brand could wipe Google off the face of the earth by simply not supporting its PPC model.
But that's the genius of Google and the big brands can't see it (although i have a sneaky feeling Apple may just have sussed it). Google's Achilles heel is in it's core business. But who's going to be the first to challenge it.
BTW, you attributed a quote to me that mjtomlin made. I didn't write that.