Depends on your definition of "most advanced smart phones" actually means. In my opinion, Apple has a superior total package compared to an Android phone. Apple puts in a huge amount of effort to provide the best possible hardware/software/integration experience around. This robotic test is just one piece of it.
I tend to agree iPhone OS is still a bit smother experience than Android - from what I have heard, as I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far... but this new HTP, with snappier hardware, 800*xyz screen, removable storage, 2 cameras, fully functional GPS (I think so, at least), some more goodies... is more advanced device than current iPhone. More polished OS gives some leverage to iPhone (to some people at least) but with choice of hardware and quicker development cycle for Android platform, it shouldn't be underestimated. To me, Android looks like most serious candidate to become Windows of the smartphone world.
Robotic test is just a test. I haven't noticed people complaining about current Android phones touch sensitivity in real world... and then, it is not like iPhone is that perfect. If, for example, Androids turn out to have better radio than iPhone - which, from my experience with iPhone isn't much of a challenge - I for sure would be the one to sacrifice some screen sensitivity for a better signal reception.
Quote:
Android fanboys seem to think that what matters is highest resolution, brightest display, opensource, < insert more wannabe items here >. Who cares if it's all a chaotic free-for-all, where multiple manufacturers make their own Android flavors and there is no consistency.
Guess what? I am iPhone 3Gs 32GB user, and reasonably happy one (short of poor radio and iTunes-only integration). When I purchased my iPhone, for the money I could have some of the latest Androids at the time, as I paid full price, contract free phone... however Android offer at the time wasn't even remotely good as current models. At the time HTC Hero and Magic, much as I remember, were available with Android 1.6 or something. Simply put, I found iPhone superior at the first glance... but I am not (any) brand loyalist, I analyse new phones with my logic and not my heart, and I don't see iPhone superior any more.
Quote:
I still use my original iPhone 2g. It's "dated" by your standards. But I have a current OS, everything still works great, and I know that Apple will continue making it the best product the can and continue improving the functionality of my 2-year-old piece of hardware.
No it is not dated, or, it is just a bit more dated than 3Gs. Apple has tendency of giving good product and then keeps improving it with small evolutionary steps, some of which could of - should of - be present from the beginning. That aspect of Apple's philosophy is the major reason why I fear next iPhone - or even next few iPhones - will not better 3Gs enough to give me reason for upgrade. Android phones seem to evolve significantly faster.
Quote:
Do they think they'll be able to say the same thing two years from now with their current Android phone? Do they really think their phone maker will waste the time and effort to port the new Android OS to their 2-year-old phone? Think about it. That's a subject none of them are really bringing up. There's no incentive for Motorola (for example) to port Android 3.x to the current phone after six months has gone by.
First of all, we do not know that HTC, Motorola... will not offer major OS upgrades, though I agree it is less likely than iPhone OS upgrades. But if phone is launched with all the features I want, I'm personally not finding that so important. What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured (though you would miss that nice feeling of Apple looking after you).
If you think progress is purely about pumping specs, sure. And "gadget lovers" are likely to agree.
But here's the thing: "gadget lovers" are a tiny pool of potential customers compared to "people." Apple is selling to people. Android is selling to gadget lovers. Math.
You are not completely fair, though you do have some good arguments there.
First of all, iPhone is - or was - ultimate gadget, and was addressing gadget lovers as well. Compass, accelerometer, orientation sensor... are, at the end of the day, gadgets. Still, people were buying them, not only gadget lovers.
Second... I am a bit in photography and it is simple fact that number of pixels sell. I personally don't agree with that, but most people I know will ask first for number of pixels when considering camera. Don't underestimate average consumer and his/her approach that more is always better... and new Androids are offering more pixels. More processing speed. More camera resolution (and more cameras for some). More storage (via replaceable flash cards).
It's pretty clear who the market leader is when the 4th carrier in a country that has had the iPhone for 3 years(?) with the current model halfway through its update cycle completely trounces a new "open" phone that is so super-duper better on a spec sheet that the crappy 3GS. Oh yeah, it's also much cheaper, as pointed out to me yesterday.
Excluding the strikes against the handset for 3 other carriers selling the 3GS since June 2009 and deficient technology (laff) in the 3GS, the Nexus One was still released to a country 5x larger population than the UK and still had had poor sales.
Vodafone, the fourth carrier in the UK to get the iPhone, had an impressive first day of sales, unloading more than 50,000 iPhones on Thursday alone, according to The Independent. To put that in perspective, Vodafone sold 30,000 more iPhones in a single day than Google sold Nexus Ones in a full week.
In fact, the only an Android-based handset can even look decent against against the iPhone is to use the impressive numbers from the original iPhone with an odd 74 day measure. Yet, as the graph shows, it's impossible to make the Nexus One's sales look decent.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
Ah yes, the old "today's smartphone market is exactly the same as the global PC market of 20 years ago when nearly everyone ended up standardising on one operating system...... (breath!)..... and history is bound to repeat itself." chestnut.
Why do you guys keep coming up with this stuff!
Great. I knew there must be a good reason.
Is that the same "gut feeling" that gave us year after year of iPod killers? Or is it the one that gave us the standardised "plays for sure" platform? Perhaps it's the "gut feeling" that told us that Vista would put a stop to Mac market share gains... or no phone could be successful without a real keyboard.
For nearly a decade I have been reading the words of forum geeks, tech bloggers, journos and pundits.... all telling me... "What's going to happen next." I think you're right Nikon. "Gut feeling" is so much better than objective reasoning or real market knowledge or .... you know.... facts.
So, with respect, I call it BS. Gut feeling is the refuge of those who are just (ever so patiently ) waiting for Apple to fail.
Hey, I trust my guts especially when feeling is formed after looking at the market during the last year or so.
Think of where Android phones were in 2007 and where they are now, and think of where iPhone was in 2007 and where it is now
OK, Apple single handedly invented the current smart phone market...
Quote:
Android went from non-existence to some of most advanced smart phones on the market
... and despite coming in AFTER Apple, Android still can't touch the iPhone in overall functionality. Sure, it has a few features here and there that exceed the iPhone, but the overall fit, finish and experience is still a distant second.
Quote:
Here's hope that iPhone 4 will be significantly improved, but somehow I doubt that.
Improve in what way? Except for playing pandora in the background (which they could do if they would stream like other radio apps) there isn't much more I require from the iPhone other than more battery life and more capacity for storage. Simply gloming on more features willy-nilly isn't "improvement".
If Android continues to improve at current rate - and they seem to have momentum - I don't think anyone will be able to follow them, not Apple, not Microsoft, not RIM. With so many good phone hardware manufacturers having knowledge, experience and technology to create great devices, all that was required was good enough software platform, and it is just possible Google has provided exactly that.
Quote:
I don't have doubts that RIM will keep nice share of business users
I do. The biggest changes I see in iPhone OS 4 are wireless setup and deployment of phones and apps. Once that happens RIM is toast. Esp. with the iPad looming - we have so many internal developers simply FROTHING at developing custom internal applications it's not funny.
It's all about ecosystem. Apple has it, everyone else is still thinking about it.
Quote:
but if I'd have to bet on single platform to dominate in the next 5 years, I'd say Android has the best chances.
fine - we'll come back in 5 years. But I don't think it's me who's going to be disappointed.
What is so special about Android other than being open source and a techie dream boat?
It's desktop Linux all over again - but on a phone
The marginalization of Android is so obvious it's almost pathetic watching techie's gush over it. Android will be dead when Verizon finally deploys 4G and gets whatever iDevice Apple is selling at the time. No one is buying Android on Verizon right now because they want it, they are buying it because they don't want AT&T. It's funny listening to tech podcasts and people gush about Andrew, and then later in the conversation start to admit that they miss certain things about it vs. the iPhone. Freaking pathetic anti-fanboys...
More polished OS gives some leverage to iPhone (to some people at least) but with choice of hardware and quicker development cycle for Android platform, it shouldn't be underestimated.
What evidence is there that Android (I assume, you mean the OS and not the hardware) has a quicker development cycle?
Quote:
Robotic test is just a test. I haven't noticed people complaining about current Android phones touch sensitivity in real world... and then, it is not like iPhone is that perfect. If, for example, Androids turn out to have better radio than iPhone - which, from my experience with iPhone isn't much of a challenge - I for sure would be the one to sacrifice some screen sensitivity for a better signal reception.
Touch sensitivity and responsiveness (and hang-ups or errors in that process) are a very real complaint about Android phones. Just read the reviews by Pogue, Mossberg, Baig, etc.
Quote:
No it is not dated, or, it is just a bit more dated than 3Gs. Apple has tendency of giving good product and then keeps improving it with small evolutionary steps, some of which could of - should of - be present from the beginning. That aspect of Apple's philosophy is the major reason why I fear next iPhone - or even next few iPhones - will not better 3Gs enough to give me reason for upgrade. Android phones seem to evolve significantly faster.
And exactly what has been revolutionary about Android? Whether in 1.0 or 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, or 2.1?
And what has been revolutionary about Android phones? A larger screen? OLED? More pixels? More megapixels in camera? Cut and paste? Faster processor? Autocomplete virtual keyboard? Multi-touch?
Quote:
What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured (though you would miss that nice feeling of Apple looking after you).
What have people received with Android updates? Shouldn't all of those features been in its first release, especially since Android came after the iPhone, though Android development supposedly started back as early as 2004 (around the same time as iPhone)? I'm having trouble with your logic.
Just to be clear, Google has some innovations but I wouldn't say it's in the Android OS.
Google apps such as Google Voice and Google Maps/Navigation/Latitude have added things that others haven't had. But Google has been willing to put those apps on any mobile OS (though Apple has rejected some of them.)
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
So let's talk platform.
From Oct 08 to Dec 09 (15 months, 2 Christmas quarters), Canalys estimates that 8.5m Android-based phones have shipped. That includes Droid (including 2-for-1 deals with Droid Eris), but not Nexus One. During that period, 207m smartphones were shipped (Canalys figures). That's 4.1%.
From Jul 07 to Oct 08 (15 months, 1 Christmas quarter), Apple shipped 13m iPhones. That includes the unsubsidized iPhone 2G and $199 iPhone 3G. During that period, 180m smartphones were shipped (IDC numbers, as I don't have Canalys smartphone numbers for 2007). That's 7.2%. (And in 4 out of the next 5 quarters matching the Android period above, iPhone at least doubled its shipments compared to the year before.)
Conclusion: Even though smartphones were more popular, Android sold less than iPhone over a comparable period in their life-cycle. And even if Android doubles its sales for 2010 (over 2009), it's still trailing the iPhone.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
As Mark2005 compendiously points out the Android looks even work when comparing OS platforms, and that is comparing all Android-based handhelds to just the iPhone, excluding the Touch, which I think should be included in we are going to use platform comparisons.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so. Perhaps you've been reading the same reports I've been reading about the big problems Android is having with the various companies going their own way with the devices? Even new phones are coming out with ver 1.5 and ver 1.6. Most of those new phones using it, as well as most of the old ones, can't be upgraded to the new OS's. Even new 2.0 phones are having problems being upgraded to 2.1 Some will never be. And what happens with ver 2.2, 2.5, 3.0 and newer? How many current phones will be upgradable? Likely few. Then newer phones again coming out with obsolete versions of the OS will continue to arrive.
This is in addition to the GUI's being put on many of these phones both from the manufacturers and the carriers, are rendering the phones as separate fiefs. Programs are not able to run across these many boundaries.
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other even if the OS version is the same, and with the many OS versions coming out at the same time, all with varying capabilities, even phones from the same manufacturer will not be able to run the same software.
This is where Apple's long term vision is so important. Google is maintaining little control over any of this which will be, and is already becoming, a major problem. If they don't wake up soon, and understand that allowing anyone to do whatever they want is a danger to the platform, Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
Hey, I trust my guts especially when feeling is formed after looking at the market during the last year or so.
Of course, I might be completely wrong.
It's likely that you will be at least partly wrong. Without acknowledging Android's problems as well as its benefits, you can't make a useful analysis of its future.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
And Android still appears to be lagging the iPhone's current rate of acceleration. Unless you have numbers that show different...so how many total Android handsets have sold to date? Can you provide a chart?
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other even if the OS version is the same, and with the many OS versions coming out at the same time, all with varying capabilities, even phones from the same manufacturer will not be able to run the same software.
This is where Apple's long term vision is so important. Google is maintaining little control over any of this which will be, and is already becoming, a major problem. If they don't wake up soon, and understand that allowing anyone to do whatever they want is a danger to the platform, Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
This is unlikely. While fragmentation is an issue the common Android core is the same. Plus the rate of change will slow. For the majority of apps it will be an annoyance for the devs, not a complete fragmentation. Only those apps tightly coupled with unique handset capabilities will be limited to a smaller subset of phones. It wont be any worse than targetting Java ME as a platform and it should be better overall.
Likewise, Android won't be categorized as "other" any more than WinMo in its various incarnations was sub-divided. Or Symbian with it's variants. Or even Linux which is essentially dead now given Android.
And Android still appears to be lagging the iPhone's current rate of acceleration. Unless you have numbers that show different...so how many total Android handsets have sold to date? Can you provide a chart?
This is unlikely. While fragmentation is an issue the common Android core is the same. Plus the rate of change will slow. For the majority of apps it will be an annoyance for the devs, not a complete fragmentation. Only those apps tightly coupled with unique handset capabilities will be limited to a smaller subset of phones. It wont be any worse than targetting Java ME as a platform and it should be better overall.
Likewise, Android won't be categorized as "other" any more than WinMo in its various incarnations was sub-divided. Or Symbian with it's variants. Or even Linux which is essentially dead now given Android.
I can't agree with that. Problems are already occurring, and it seems to be a big worry.
Now, if there was just an article or two that mentioned minor problems with this, then I wouldn't even bring it up. But from the very beginning I've been talking about this problem. With so many different sources mentioning this (and I just bookmarked a few of the more interesting), and even Google finding it necessary to release a document months ago about developers dealing with fragmentation, this is seen as a very serious problem. A problem that is just getting worse. Considering how bad it is already, in another year, it will be a major problem, and in two years, who knows how bad it will be? What's clear however, is that if Google doesn't take a stronger stance, then it's going to be a great mess.
I understand that with such a system Google has in place, they can't control development of new phones and GUIs by different companies who are all in competition with each other, and who are using Android to avoid paying MS's tax, as well as having the ability to use an OS that they can mod to their continuing delight. They are doing that to differentiate their Android products from others Android products. You may not see it, but that is leading to incompatible systems. It seems as though many in the industry do see that, so I'm not alone.
One problem is that Google is having a senseless update policy. This makes it very difficult for manufacturers to come up with a new phone that has the latest OS. It takes months to develop a phone with an OS. With phone development all over the map as far as dates of introduction go, it's not possible to have the latest OS when it comes out shortly before the new phone does. So we're getting new phones with OS versions from 1.5 on up. Many phones don't seem to be OS upgradeable, so that is another source of confusion.
You minimize the problem, but it's really very serious.
I can't agree with that. Problems are already occurring, and it seems to be a big worry.
...
Now, if there was just an article or two that mentioned minor problems with this, then I wouldn't even bring it up. But from the very beginning I've been talking about this problem. With so many different sources mentioning this (and I just bookmarked a few of the more interesting), and even Google finding it necessary to release a document months ago about developers dealing with fragmentation, this is seen as a very serious problem. A problem that is just getting worse. Considering how bad it is already, in another year, it will be a major problem, and in two years, who knows how bad it will be? What's clear however, is that if Google doesn't take a stronger stance, then it's going to be a great mess.
I dunno, it reminds me of all the negativity about the iPhone not having a real SDK...then boom...real SDK.
The thing to remember is that while Android is open source and carriers and hardware makers can fork, Google still controls the project and the Android Market itself. The advantages of staying compatible with the Android Market is sufficient in my opinion to keep fragmentation from getting out of hand.
Quote:
I understand that with such a system Google has in place, they can't control development of new phones and GUIs by different companies who are all in competition with each other, and who are using Android to avoid paying MS's tax, as well as having the ability to use an OS that they can mod to their continuing delight. They are doing that to differentiate their Android products from others Android products. You may not see it, but that is leading to incompatible systems. It seems as though many in the industry do see that, so I'm not alone.
Will there be incompatible phones? Yes. Will they be the majority? Not likely.
Some companies will fork and maintain their own fork but it's expensive and you continually need to backport all the new features that folks that haven't forked are getting for "free" from Google. Plus, there are all of Google's own apps that will require compatibility like Google Maps, Google Voice, etc.
Quote:
One problem is that Google is having a senseless update policy. This makes it very difficult for manufacturers to come up with a new phone that has the latest OS. It takes months to develop a phone with an OS. With phone development all over the map as far as dates of introduction go, it's not possible to have the latest OS when it comes out shortly before the new phone does. So we're getting new phones with OS versions from 1.5 on up. Many phones don't seem to be OS upgradeable, so that is another source of confusion.
You minimize the problem, but it's really very serious.
If phone makers build incompatible phones then it will be a self-inflicted wound for themselves if they lose access to the majority of Android Market apps. Android buyers will avoid those phones (and carriers) because they lose access to the apps they have already bought. Reviews of these phones will say "Nice phone but doesn't play well with the Android Market...we would rather by this other phone just as good but with far better compatibility".
Developers will target the largest userbase among the pool of Andriod handsets. You're assuming that Google will do nothing to help herd the cats too.
While Google's update policy looks senseless to you at the moment, what they're trying to do is mature the product quickly and without too much worrying about legacy handsets at this time. As I said, this rate of significant SDK changes will likely slack off.
I dunno, it reminds me of all the negativity about the iPhone not having a real SDK...then boom...real SDK.
The thing to remember is that while Android is open source and carriers and hardware makers can fork, Google still controls the project and the Android Market itself. The advantages of staying compatible with the Android Market is sufficient in my opinion to keep fragmentation from getting out of hand.
Will there be incompatible phones? Yes. Will they be the majority? Not likely.
Some companies will fork and maintain their own fork but it's expensive and you continually need to backport all the new features that folks that haven't forked are getting for "free" from Google. Plus, there are all of Google's own apps that will require compatibility like Google Maps, Google Voice, etc.
If phone makers build incompatible phones then it will be a self-inflicted wound for themselves if they lose access to the majority of Android Market apps. Android buyers will avoid those phones (and carriers) because they lose access to the apps they have already bought. Reviews of these phones will say "Nice phone but doesn't play well with the Android Market...we would rather by this other phone just as good but with far better compatibility".
Developers will target the largest userbase among the pool of Andriod handsets. You're assuming that Google will do nothing to help herd the cats too.
While Google's update policy looks senseless to you at the moment, what they're trying to do is mature the product quickly and without too much worrying about legacy handsets at this time. As I said, this rate of significant SDK changes will likely slack off.
Well, again, the opinion in the industry goes against what you're saying, as you would have seen had you read the links.
Sometimes companies don't understand what's best for them. How has Motorola done the past few years? Or Sony-Ericsson? Or Palm? Or Microsoft? Or Nokia?
Not so good. You're making too many assumptions about the competence of the leaders of many companies.
Well, again, the opinion in the industry goes against what you're saying, as you would have seen had you read the links.
Sometimes companies don't understand what's best for them. How has Motorola done the past few years? Or Sony-Ericsson? Or Palm? Or Microsoft? Or Nokia?
Not so good. You're making too many assumptions about the competence of the leaders of many companies.
Sensationalist copy sells.
Google Android's self-destruction derby begins
mkay.
Funny that we ignore this article:
All U.S. Android phones to receive Android 2.1, but some will require a wipe
"After talking with several inside sources familiar with the matter, I would like to report that every Android phone currently released in the United States will be receiving an upgrade to Android 2.1.
Some phones could be missing features of Android 2.1 (live wallpapers), but they will all have an Android 2.1 firmware."
Eh...it's a rumor but it doesn't seem impossible that Google and manufacturers thought a LITTLE ahead about upgrading the OS in their phones. Especially given that Apple has done so already.
Then everyone is on 2.1. Perhaps that's why some manufacturers don't mind releasing 1.5 or 1.6 as 2.1 becomes stable.
He already made note of his error for all to see. Which is why he's having fillet of . . . sole.
OFFICIAL MODERATION NOTICE:
This user has been warned for their extreme awesomeness through the use of a Horatio Kane-zinger. Please note: future zingers may only be posted when sunglasses are put on during the delivery.
All U.S. Android phones to receive Android 2.1, but some will require a wipe
"After talking with several inside sources familiar with the matter, I would like to report that every Android phone currently released in the United States will be receiving an upgrade to Android 2.1.
Some phones could be missing features of Android 2.1 (live wallpapers), but they will all have an Android 2.1 firmware."
Eh...it's a rumor but it doesn't seem impossible that Google and manufacturers thought a LITTLE ahead about upgrading the OS in their phones. Especially given that Apple has done so already.
Then everyone is on 2.1. Perhaps that's why some manufacturers don't mind releasing 1.5 or 1.6 as 2.1 becomes stable.
Well. It's been months already, and most have still not been upgraded. Sprint seems to show little interest, and Verizon is dragging its feet. We'll see how it works.
Comments
Depends on your definition of "most advanced smart phones" actually means. In my opinion, Apple has a superior total package compared to an Android phone. Apple puts in a huge amount of effort to provide the best possible hardware/software/integration experience around. This robotic test is just one piece of it.
I tend to agree iPhone OS is still a bit smother experience than Android - from what I have heard, as I haven't had a chance to play with any Android phone so far... but this new HTP, with snappier hardware, 800*xyz screen, removable storage, 2 cameras, fully functional GPS (I think so, at least), some more goodies... is more advanced device than current iPhone. More polished OS gives some leverage to iPhone (to some people at least) but with choice of hardware and quicker development cycle for Android platform, it shouldn't be underestimated. To me, Android looks like most serious candidate to become Windows of the smartphone world.
Robotic test is just a test. I haven't noticed people complaining about current Android phones touch sensitivity in real world... and then, it is not like iPhone is that perfect. If, for example, Androids turn out to have better radio than iPhone - which, from my experience with iPhone isn't much of a challenge - I for sure would be the one to sacrifice some screen sensitivity for a better signal reception.
Android fanboys seem to think that what matters is highest resolution, brightest display, opensource, < insert more wannabe items here >. Who cares if it's all a chaotic free-for-all, where multiple manufacturers make their own Android flavors and there is no consistency.
Guess what? I am iPhone 3Gs 32GB user, and reasonably happy one (short of poor radio and iTunes-only integration). When I purchased my iPhone, for the money I could have some of the latest Androids at the time, as I paid full price, contract free phone... however Android offer at the time wasn't even remotely good as current models. At the time HTC Hero and Magic, much as I remember, were available with Android 1.6 or something. Simply put, I found iPhone superior at the first glance... but I am not (any) brand loyalist, I analyse new phones with my logic and not my heart, and I don't see iPhone superior any more.
I still use my original iPhone 2g. It's "dated" by your standards. But I have a current OS, everything still works great, and I know that Apple will continue making it the best product the can and continue improving the functionality of my 2-year-old piece of hardware.
No it is not dated, or, it is just a bit more dated than 3Gs. Apple has tendency of giving good product and then keeps improving it with small evolutionary steps, some of which could of - should of - be present from the beginning. That aspect of Apple's philosophy is the major reason why I fear next iPhone - or even next few iPhones - will not better 3Gs enough to give me reason for upgrade. Android phones seem to evolve significantly faster.
Do they think they'll be able to say the same thing two years from now with their current Android phone? Do they really think their phone maker will waste the time and effort to port the new Android OS to their 2-year-old phone? Think about it. That's a subject none of them are really bringing up. There's no incentive for Motorola (for example) to port Android 3.x to the current phone after six months has gone by.
First of all, we do not know that HTC, Motorola... will not offer major OS upgrades, though I agree it is less likely than iPhone OS upgrades. But if phone is launched with all the features I want, I'm personally not finding that so important. What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured (though you would miss that nice feeling of Apple looking after you).
If you think progress is purely about pumping specs, sure. And "gadget lovers" are likely to agree.
But here's the thing: "gadget lovers" are a tiny pool of potential customers compared to "people." Apple is selling to people. Android is selling to gadget lovers. Math.
You are not completely fair, though you do have some good arguments there.
First of all, iPhone is - or was - ultimate gadget, and was addressing gadget lovers as well. Compass, accelerometer, orientation sensor... are, at the end of the day, gadgets. Still, people were buying them, not only gadget lovers.
Second... I am a bit in photography and it is simple fact that number of pixels sell. I personally don't agree with that, but most people I know will ask first for number of pixels when considering camera. Don't underestimate average consumer and his/her approach that more is always better... and new Androids are offering more pixels. More processing speed. More camera resolution (and more cameras for some). More storage (via replaceable flash cards).
People will go for that. Not only gadget lovers.
It's pretty clear who the market leader is when the 4th carrier in a country that has had the iPhone for 3 years(?) with the current model halfway through its update cycle completely trounces a new "open" phone that is so super-duper better on a spec sheet that the crappy 3GS. Oh yeah, it's also much cheaper, as pointed out to me yesterday.
Excluding the strikes against the handset for 3 other carriers selling the 3GS since June 2009 and deficient technology (laff) in the 3GS, the Nexus One was still released to a country 5x larger population than the UK and still had had poor sales. In fact, the only an Android-based handset can even look decent against against the iPhone is to use the impressive numbers from the original iPhone with an odd 74 day measure. Yet, as the graph shows, it's impossible to make the Nexus One's sales look decent.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
Ah yes, the old "today's smartphone market is exactly the same as the global PC market of 20 years ago when nearly everyone ended up standardising on one operating system...... (breath!)..... and history is bound to repeat itself." chestnut.
Why do you guys keep coming up with this stuff!
Great. I knew there must be a good reason.
Is that the same "gut feeling" that gave us year after year of iPod killers? Or is it the one that gave us the standardised "plays for sure" platform? Perhaps it's the "gut feeling" that told us that Vista would put a stop to Mac market share gains... or no phone could be successful without a real keyboard.
For nearly a decade I have been reading the words of forum geeks, tech bloggers, journos and pundits.... all telling me... "What's going to happen next." I think you're right Nikon. "Gut feeling" is so much better than objective reasoning or real market knowledge or .... you know.... facts.
So, with respect, I call it BS. Gut feeling is the refuge of those who are just (ever so patiently
Hey, I trust my guts
Of course, I might be completely wrong.
Think of where Android phones were in 2007 and where they are now, and think of where iPhone was in 2007 and where it is now
OK, Apple single handedly invented the current smart phone market...
Android went from non-existence to some of most advanced smart phones on the market
... and despite coming in AFTER Apple, Android still can't touch the iPhone in overall functionality. Sure, it has a few features here and there that exceed the iPhone, but the overall fit, finish and experience is still a distant second.
Here's hope that iPhone 4 will be significantly improved, but somehow I doubt that.
Improve in what way? Except for playing pandora in the background (which they could do if they would stream like other radio apps) there isn't much more I require from the iPhone other than more battery life and more capacity for storage. Simply gloming on more features willy-nilly isn't "improvement".
If Android continues to improve at current rate - and they seem to have momentum - I don't think anyone will be able to follow them, not Apple, not Microsoft, not RIM. With so many good phone hardware manufacturers having knowledge, experience and technology to create great devices, all that was required was good enough software platform, and it is just possible Google has provided exactly that.
I don't have doubts that RIM will keep nice share of business users
I do. The biggest changes I see in iPhone OS 4 are wireless setup and deployment of phones and apps. Once that happens RIM is toast. Esp. with the iPad looming - we have so many internal developers simply FROTHING at developing custom internal applications it's not funny.
It's all about ecosystem. Apple has it, everyone else is still thinking about it.
but if I'd have to bet on single platform to dominate in the next 5 years, I'd say Android has the best chances.
fine - we'll come back in 5 years. But I don't think it's me who's going to be disappointed.
What is so special about Android other than being open source and a techie dream boat?
It's desktop Linux all over again - but on a phone
The marginalization of Android is so obvious it's almost pathetic watching techie's gush over it. Android will be dead when Verizon finally deploys 4G and gets whatever iDevice Apple is selling at the time. No one is buying Android on Verizon right now because they want it, they are buying it because they don't want AT&T. It's funny listening to tech podcasts and people gush about Andrew, and then later in the conversation start to admit that they miss certain things about it vs. the iPhone. Freaking pathetic anti-fanboys...
More polished OS gives some leverage to iPhone (to some people at least) but with choice of hardware and quicker development cycle for Android platform, it shouldn't be underestimated.
What evidence is there that Android (I assume, you mean the OS and not the hardware) has a quicker development cycle?
Robotic test is just a test. I haven't noticed people complaining about current Android phones touch sensitivity in real world... and then, it is not like iPhone is that perfect. If, for example, Androids turn out to have better radio than iPhone - which, from my experience with iPhone isn't much of a challenge - I for sure would be the one to sacrifice some screen sensitivity for a better signal reception.
Touch sensitivity and responsiveness (and hang-ups or errors in that process) are a very real complaint about Android phones. Just read the reviews by Pogue, Mossberg, Baig, etc.
No it is not dated, or, it is just a bit more dated than 3Gs. Apple has tendency of giving good product and then keeps improving it with small evolutionary steps, some of which could of - should of - be present from the beginning. That aspect of Apple's philosophy is the major reason why I fear next iPhone - or even next few iPhones - will not better 3Gs enough to give me reason for upgrade. Android phones seem to evolve significantly faster.
And exactly what has been revolutionary about Android? Whether in 1.0 or 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, or 2.1?
And what has been revolutionary about Android phones? A larger screen? OLED? More pixels? More megapixels in camera? Cut and paste? Faster processor? Autocomplete virtual keyboard? Multi-touch?
What did you actually receive with iPhone OS updates? Copy&Paste, multimedia messages, video recording..? All of them should have been included in first release - from my point of view - and you would not need updates if your software was more featured (though you would miss that nice feeling of Apple looking after you).
What have people received with Android updates? Shouldn't all of those features been in its first release, especially since Android came after the iPhone, though Android development supposedly started back as early as 2004 (around the same time as iPhone)? I'm having trouble with your logic.
Google apps such as Google Voice and Google Maps/Navigation/Latitude have added things that others haven't had. But Google has been willing to put those apps on any mobile OS (though Apple has rejected some of them.)
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
So let's talk platform.
From Oct 08 to Dec 09 (15 months, 2 Christmas quarters), Canalys estimates that 8.5m Android-based phones have shipped. That includes Droid (including 2-for-1 deals with Droid Eris), but not Nexus One. During that period, 207m smartphones were shipped (Canalys figures). That's 4.1%.
From Jul 07 to Oct 08 (15 months, 1 Christmas quarter), Apple shipped 13m iPhones. That includes the unsubsidized iPhone 2G and $199 iPhone 3G. During that period, 180m smartphones were shipped (IDC numbers, as I don't have Canalys smartphone numbers for 2007). That's 7.2%. (And in 4 out of the next 5 quarters matching the Android period above, iPhone at least doubled its shipments compared to the year before.)
Conclusion: Even though smartphones were more popular, Android sold less than iPhone over a comparable period in their life-cycle. And even if Android doubles its sales for 2010 (over 2009), it's still trailing the iPhone.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
As Mark2005 compendiously points out the Android looks even work when comparing OS platforms, and that is comparing all Android-based handhelds to just the iPhone, excluding the Touch, which I think should be included in we are going to use platform comparisons.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
We won't be talking about Android phones vs iPhones after a year or so. Perhaps you've been reading the same reports I've been reading about the big problems Android is having with the various companies going their own way with the devices? Even new phones are coming out with ver 1.5 and ver 1.6. Most of those new phones using it, as well as most of the old ones, can't be upgraded to the new OS's. Even new 2.0 phones are having problems being upgraded to 2.1 Some will never be. And what happens with ver 2.2, 2.5, 3.0 and newer? How many current phones will be upgradable? Likely few. Then newer phones again coming out with obsolete versions of the OS will continue to arrive.
This is in addition to the GUI's being put on many of these phones both from the manufacturers and the carriers, are rendering the phones as separate fiefs. Programs are not able to run across these many boundaries.
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other even if the OS version is the same, and with the many OS versions coming out at the same time, all with varying capabilities, even phones from the same manufacturer will not be able to run the same software.
This is where Apple's long term vision is so important. Google is maintaining little control over any of this which will be, and is already becoming, a major problem. If they don't wake up soon, and understand that allowing anyone to do whatever they want is a danger to the platform, Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
Hey, I trust my guts
Of course, I might be completely wrong.
It's likely that you will be at least partly wrong. Without acknowledging Android's problems as well as its benefits, you can't make a useful analysis of its future.
Yes, but Nexus is just one part of the platform (and apparently small part). We are talking about Android vs iPhone, not Nexus One vs. 3Gs 32Gb.
And Android still appears to be lagging the iPhone's current rate of acceleration. Unless you have numbers that show different...so how many total Android handsets have sold to date? Can you provide a chart?
In a couple of years, Android will not be one united OS. There will be several versions that are mostly incompatible with each other even if the OS version is the same, and with the many OS versions coming out at the same time, all with varying capabilities, even phones from the same manufacturer will not be able to run the same software.
This is where Apple's long term vision is so important. Google is maintaining little control over any of this which will be, and is already becoming, a major problem. If they don't wake up soon, and understand that allowing anyone to do whatever they want is a danger to the platform, Android may cease to be significant in the future, even if a lot of phones use it. Eventually, most Android phones will be listed on the charts as "other".
This is unlikely. While fragmentation is an issue the common Android core is the same. Plus the rate of change will slow. For the majority of apps it will be an annoyance for the devs, not a complete fragmentation. Only those apps tightly coupled with unique handset capabilities will be limited to a smaller subset of phones. It wont be any worse than targetting Java ME as a platform and it should be better overall.
Likewise, Android won't be categorized as "other" any more than WinMo in its various incarnations was sub-divided. Or Symbian with it's variants. Or even Linux which is essentially dead now given Android.
And Android still appears to be lagging the iPhone's current rate of acceleration. Unless you have numbers that show different...so how many total Android handsets have sold to date? Can you provide a chart?
This is the best information I can find easily:
http://www.numberof.net/number-of-android-phones-sold/
This is unlikely. While fragmentation is an issue the common Android core is the same. Plus the rate of change will slow. For the majority of apps it will be an annoyance for the devs, not a complete fragmentation. Only those apps tightly coupled with unique handset capabilities will be limited to a smaller subset of phones. It wont be any worse than targetting Java ME as a platform and it should be better overall.
Likewise, Android won't be categorized as "other" any more than WinMo in its various incarnations was sub-divided. Or Symbian with it's variants. Or even Linux which is essentially dead now given Android.
I can't agree with that. Problems are already occurring, and it seems to be a big worry.
http://www.businessinsider.com/googl...fusing-2009-11
http://counternotions.com/2009/12/15/nexus/
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/22/ins...partner=alerts
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...nexus_one.html
http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/goog...rby-begins-863
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/e...-the-platform/
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/...:+wired/index+
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361350,00.asp
Now, if there was just an article or two that mentioned minor problems with this, then I wouldn't even bring it up. But from the very beginning I've been talking about this problem. With so many different sources mentioning this (and I just bookmarked a few of the more interesting), and even Google finding it necessary to release a document months ago about developers dealing with fragmentation, this is seen as a very serious problem. A problem that is just getting worse. Considering how bad it is already, in another year, it will be a major problem, and in two years, who knows how bad it will be? What's clear however, is that if Google doesn't take a stronger stance, then it's going to be a great mess.
I understand that with such a system Google has in place, they can't control development of new phones and GUIs by different companies who are all in competition with each other, and who are using Android to avoid paying MS's tax, as well as having the ability to use an OS that they can mod to their continuing delight. They are doing that to differentiate their Android products from others Android products. You may not see it, but that is leading to incompatible systems. It seems as though many in the industry do see that, so I'm not alone.
One problem is that Google is having a senseless update policy. This makes it very difficult for manufacturers to come up with a new phone that has the latest OS. It takes months to develop a phone with an OS. With phone development all over the map as far as dates of introduction go, it's not possible to have the latest OS when it comes out shortly before the new phone does. So we're getting new phones with OS versions from 1.5 on up. Many phones don't seem to be OS upgradeable, so that is another source of confusion.
You minimize the problem, but it's really very serious.
I can't agree with that. Problems are already occurring, and it seems to be a big worry.
...
Now, if there was just an article or two that mentioned minor problems with this, then I wouldn't even bring it up. But from the very beginning I've been talking about this problem. With so many different sources mentioning this (and I just bookmarked a few of the more interesting), and even Google finding it necessary to release a document months ago about developers dealing with fragmentation, this is seen as a very serious problem. A problem that is just getting worse. Considering how bad it is already, in another year, it will be a major problem, and in two years, who knows how bad it will be? What's clear however, is that if Google doesn't take a stronger stance, then it's going to be a great mess.
I dunno, it reminds me of all the negativity about the iPhone not having a real SDK...then boom...real SDK.
The thing to remember is that while Android is open source and carriers and hardware makers can fork, Google still controls the project and the Android Market itself. The advantages of staying compatible with the Android Market is sufficient in my opinion to keep fragmentation from getting out of hand.
I understand that with such a system Google has in place, they can't control development of new phones and GUIs by different companies who are all in competition with each other, and who are using Android to avoid paying MS's tax, as well as having the ability to use an OS that they can mod to their continuing delight. They are doing that to differentiate their Android products from others Android products. You may not see it, but that is leading to incompatible systems. It seems as though many in the industry do see that, so I'm not alone.
Will there be incompatible phones? Yes. Will they be the majority? Not likely.
Some companies will fork and maintain their own fork but it's expensive and you continually need to backport all the new features that folks that haven't forked are getting for "free" from Google. Plus, there are all of Google's own apps that will require compatibility like Google Maps, Google Voice, etc.
One problem is that Google is having a senseless update policy. This makes it very difficult for manufacturers to come up with a new phone that has the latest OS. It takes months to develop a phone with an OS. With phone development all over the map as far as dates of introduction go, it's not possible to have the latest OS when it comes out shortly before the new phone does. So we're getting new phones with OS versions from 1.5 on up. Many phones don't seem to be OS upgradeable, so that is another source of confusion.
You minimize the problem, but it's really very serious.
If phone makers build incompatible phones then it will be a self-inflicted wound for themselves if they lose access to the majority of Android Market apps. Android buyers will avoid those phones (and carriers) because they lose access to the apps they have already bought. Reviews of these phones will say "Nice phone but doesn't play well with the Android Market...we would rather by this other phone just as good but with far better compatibility".
Developers will target the largest userbase among the pool of Andriod handsets. You're assuming that Google will do nothing to help herd the cats too.
While Google's update policy looks senseless to you at the moment, what they're trying to do is mature the product quickly and without too much worrying about legacy handsets at this time. As I said, this rate of significant SDK changes will likely slack off.
I dunno, it reminds me of all the negativity about the iPhone not having a real SDK...then boom...real SDK.
The thing to remember is that while Android is open source and carriers and hardware makers can fork, Google still controls the project and the Android Market itself. The advantages of staying compatible with the Android Market is sufficient in my opinion to keep fragmentation from getting out of hand.
Will there be incompatible phones? Yes. Will they be the majority? Not likely.
Some companies will fork and maintain their own fork but it's expensive and you continually need to backport all the new features that folks that haven't forked are getting for "free" from Google. Plus, there are all of Google's own apps that will require compatibility like Google Maps, Google Voice, etc.
If phone makers build incompatible phones then it will be a self-inflicted wound for themselves if they lose access to the majority of Android Market apps. Android buyers will avoid those phones (and carriers) because they lose access to the apps they have already bought. Reviews of these phones will say "Nice phone but doesn't play well with the Android Market...we would rather by this other phone just as good but with far better compatibility".
Developers will target the largest userbase among the pool of Andriod handsets. You're assuming that Google will do nothing to help herd the cats too.
While Google's update policy looks senseless to you at the moment, what they're trying to do is mature the product quickly and without too much worrying about legacy handsets at this time. As I said, this rate of significant SDK changes will likely slack off.
Well, again, the opinion in the industry goes against what you're saying, as you would have seen had you read the links.
Sometimes companies don't understand what's best for them. How has Motorola done the past few years? Or Sony-Ericsson? Or Palm? Or Microsoft? Or Nokia?
Not so good. You're making too many assumptions about the competence of the leaders of many companies.
Well, again, the opinion in the industry goes against what you're saying, as you would have seen had you read the links.
Sometimes companies don't understand what's best for them. How has Motorola done the past few years? Or Sony-Ericsson? Or Palm? Or Microsoft? Or Nokia?
Not so good. You're making too many assumptions about the competence of the leaders of many companies.
Sensationalist copy sells.
Google Android's self-destruction derby begins
mkay.
Funny that we ignore this article:
All U.S. Android phones to receive Android 2.1, but some will require a wipe
"After talking with several inside sources familiar with the matter, I would like to report that every Android phone currently released in the United States will be receiving an upgrade to Android 2.1.
Some phones could be missing features of Android 2.1 (live wallpapers), but they will all have an Android 2.1 firmware."
Eh...it's a rumor but it doesn't seem impossible that Google and manufacturers thought a LITTLE ahead about upgrading the OS in their phones. Especially given that Apple has done so already.
Then everyone is on 2.1. Perhaps that's why some manufacturers don't mind releasing 1.5 or 1.6 as 2.1 becomes stable.
He already made note of his error for all to see. Which is why he's having fillet of . . . sole.
OFFICIAL MODERATION NOTICE:
This user has been warned for their extreme awesomeness through the use of a Horatio Kane-zinger. Please note: future zingers may only be posted when sunglasses are put on during the delivery.
YEEEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHH!
Sensationalist copy sells.
Google Android's self-destruction derby begins
mkay.
Funny that we ignore this article:
All U.S. Android phones to receive Android 2.1, but some will require a wipe
"After talking with several inside sources familiar with the matter, I would like to report that every Android phone currently released in the United States will be receiving an upgrade to Android 2.1.
Some phones could be missing features of Android 2.1 (live wallpapers), but they will all have an Android 2.1 firmware."
Eh...it's a rumor but it doesn't seem impossible that Google and manufacturers thought a LITTLE ahead about upgrading the OS in their phones. Especially given that Apple has done so already.
Then everyone is on 2.1. Perhaps that's why some manufacturers don't mind releasing 1.5 or 1.6 as 2.1 becomes stable.
Well. It's been months already, and most have still not been upgraded. Sprint seems to show little interest, and Verizon is dragging its feet. We'll see how it works.
But many older phones won't be upgraded.