Not really related to this discussion, but the New York Times is reporting a rumor that Nokia plans to abandon Symbian and adopt Windows Phone 7 for its smartphones: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/te...y/04nokia.html
However biased it will be, I look forward to AI's take on this.
I am currently using a Samsung Focus with WP7 in place of my Ip4. The UI is amazingly fluid, intuitive, attractive and MODERN. It will be huge for the platform if this alliance becomes a reality.
from the presentation, whatever DED says, it is clear Honeycomb certainly offers more complexity/possibilities to users than the iPod.
Apple has mastered simplification. calling iPad an app warehouse is stupid trash talk. instead, iOS gets out of the way and allows apps to take you wherever you want to go.
whereas Google does not want to get out of the way. Google wants to be THE way you go, via the web, to capture your eyeballs for ads. Android fans are in constant denial about this manipulation - they've drunk the Google-Aide. it's Open!
for the minority of the market - 25%? - that prefers complexity/many possibilities, that's great. for the majority - 75%? - that prefer simplicity/just need limited things, it's not. so over the next few years i expect iPad will hold about 70% of the tablet market, just like the iPod does in its PMP market.
one thing iOS should take from Android is widgets, because, done right, they can greatly simplify your life - which is what iPad is all about. maybe only just a few Apple built-in widgets so the power drain is done right. almost everyone would like a totally unified inbox widget for all messages, texts, tweets, (skype) voice mails, friends posts, and whatever else that was always up to date on your home screen (Windows Phone 7 does this). many, like me, would love a single real time map widget with traffic, radar, and any locational alerts in my vicinity from other apps. perhaps one or two other widgets ... oh yeah, a connections widget with 3G data, wifi choices, bluetooth and other such settings all displayed together at once.
another thing iOS should take from Android to make it simpler is ending the mandatory iTunes setup/sync with a computer. that does stop un-technical people - the elderly in particular - from having an iPad (they can have the phone company set up their wifi/modem). sync IS good with its backup and many other tools, but ought to be optional (and wireless).
Google wants to be THE way you go, via the web, to capture your eyeballs for ads. Android fans are in constant denial about this manipulation - they've drunk the Google-Aide
I could understand this about an iPod Touch or iPad, but exactly who goes anywhere without their phone, which in this case is the iPhone? If I was at a friend's house, browsing on their computer, my phone would be accessible because it would be in my pocket.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
I could understand this about an iPod Touch or iPad, but exactly who goes anywhere without their phone, which in this case is the iPhone? If I was at a friend's house, browsing on their computer, my phone would be accessible because it would be in my pocket.
To each his own, in the end I suppose. I understand your view and like you, my phone isn't out of hand's reach most of the time. I just like having the option of being able to do everything from the computer in front of me if possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBillyGoatGruff
I'm not trying to be a smartass, but is this a security concern? Suppose a hacker figures out your login and password. Would he be able to download malware to your phone or tablet remotely?
You actually raise an interesting point.
I would suppose at the very least the app will have to be from the Market, not pushed in from anywhere. Yes, yes, I know of the reports of malware apps in the Market. Second, I might be wrong, but I don't think on Android, any app can just automatically run and start doing things on your phone unless you run it first. And third, any new apps downloaded will show up in the notification bar so if you know you didn't download it, you'd know to delete it right away.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
Been there... done that with this person... he/she can only say one thing... Tapas is Android... even after saying basically that I'd have to be a geek to get Android os to run on a Tapas phone.
... and we're the ones that don't want to understand?!
Remember Wintel, try assessing the situation here when a single software manufacturer & multiple users of that software. Eventually that will make the PC market where there is only Intel & Windows. It doesn't work for the long term. Product manufacturers should do there own inventions thats the only way market can grow forward and consumers will reward their inventions. If, a company constantly sits with a thin margin of profit then you can think that there will least investment in R&D and more on packing together things based on cost. So, that someday they will hit profitability enough that can be added to the R&D budget.
If, andriod fails to generate a significant amount of revenue for Google, it will loose interest in the charity work and cut team sizes working on them.
Of course it works long term. Microsoft continues to rake in large amounts of cash. Last I checked windows based computers still outsell Macs. Many of these companies can't afford a wait and see approach. Motorola was thisclose to stop making mobile phones. Now they've turned the ship around and the mobile division is its own entity. Their revival might be short lived but looking at their upcoming offerings I think they'll do just fine.
Having extra abilities is not always a bad thing. Remember, the ability to push apps is only one part of the cloud sync ability.
Another I've talked about is the ability to push Google Maps directions directly to your Android device and have it automatically start up Nav and start routing you. Same with webpages if you want to resume reading from one device to another.
Though I always wonder. If Apple came out with this ability, would everyone so quickly dismiss it? Or would it become part of the "magic" of Apple?
Been there... done that with this person... he/she can only say one thing... Tapas is Android... even after saying basically that I'd have to be a geek to get Android os to run on a Tapas phone.
... and we're the ones that don't want to understand?!
Well, the point I was making, and which I don't think we'll get him to admit, is that to call a phone an "Android" phone, Google has to approve it as "Android compatible", otherwise, you aren't allowed to use the name "Android". ("Android compatibility" approval is a somewhat mysterious process that Google doesn't like to talk much about. But, for anyone who thinks that the only proprietary Google technology in "Android" is a couple of apps, this is, for example, what the Skyhook lawsuit is all about: Google's demand that "Android compatible" devices must use Google's location services.)
Tapas and OMS phones are not "Android compatible", are not allowed to use the "Android" name, and are not "Android" phones. And they shouldn't be included in Google's (or Google*'s, what is this, Major League Baseball?) smartphone OS marketshare.
If, andriod fails to generate a significant amount of revenue for Google, it will loose interest in the charity work and cut team sizes working on them.
Wrong. Google generates a HUGE amount of revenue. What it wants is your information...your habits, to which it sells. Every app they develop gives them more and more information about what you do, in which gets sold. It's where you go, who you email to, keywords within, etc. etc. etc. Google is Big Brother.
Though I always wonder. If Apple came out with this ability, would everyone so quickly dismiss it? Or would it become part of the "magic" of Apple?
Just as Google came out with a relative copy of iOS and the whole Android phone market began, but fanboys of the platform denounce everything Apple? Who's worse? Android owes everything to Apple. The entire metaphor of the touch screen smartphone is entirely the work of Apple. They made it work and sold it to the public. Android is sought out as an alternative.
Well, the point I was making, and which I don't think we'll get him to admit, is that to call a phone an "Android" phone, Google has to approve it as "Android compatible", otherwise, you aren't allowed to use the name "Android". ("Android compatibility" approval is a somewhat mysterious process that Google doesn't like to talk much about. But, for anyone who thinks that the only proprietary Google technology in "Android" is a couple of apps, this is, for example, what the Skyhook lawsuit is all about: Google's demand that "Android compatible" devices must use Google's location services.)
Tapas and OMS phones are not "Android compatible", are not allowed to use the "Android" name, and are not "Android" phones. And they shouldn't be included in Google's (or Google*'s, what is this, Major League Baseball?) smartphone OS marketshare.
Hey... I'm with you on this 100%.
This person is backed into a corner and now all they can say is "Tapas is Android"... which, by inference would mean that Android is Tapas... I'd love to see this whole scenario run by a few customers at the local Best Buy.
We covered that... we're talking about the most up to date phones and OS versions.
Can someone other than a geek load Android 2.2 on a Tapas phone without any problems?
Answer this question fairly and maybe I'll take you more seriously... otherwise you are just a trolling fool.
Well, the important question is, say Motorola loads Tapas or OMS on to Droid hardware. Are they allowed to sell the resulting product as an "Android" phone. The answer is, no, they won't be allowed.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
No, they are not. They are completely different applications platforms.
Anyone can download, modify and create their own OS from the Android code base. However, to call that modified OS, "Android," it has to meet guidelines outlined by the Open Handset Alliance.
One of the biggest rules in those guidelines, is that the OS must support Android's application framework and the Dalvik VM. After all, if your OS can't run Android apps, then why call it Android, except for marketing purposes?
Neither OMS or Tapas OS support Android's application framework, they have created their own platform for applications, which makes their apps incompatible with Android and vise-versa.
OMS is actually a proprietary OS owned and controlled by ChinaMobile for use on their OPhone line of devices. This is analogous to Apple's OS X, which is proprietary, but based off open source code. They're considered proprietary, because along with the open source code, there's a lot "home grown" code as well.
... Anyone can download, modify and create their own OS from the Android code base. However, to call that modified OS, "Android," it has to meet guidelines outlined by the Open Handset Alliance. ...
Actually, it has to pass Google's "Android compatibility" review to be called Android.
The rest of your points I believe are correct, though.
Comments
The Fragmentation and App piracy will push devs away from Android. For a dev, IOS offers protection from both. So being segregated isn't all that bad.
Some devs are better than none.
Not really related to this discussion, but the New York Times is reporting a rumor that Nokia plans to abandon Symbian and adopt Windows Phone 7 for its smartphones: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/te...y/04nokia.html
However biased it will be, I look forward to AI's take on this.
I am currently using a Samsung Focus with WP7 in place of my Ip4. The UI is amazingly fluid, intuitive, attractive and MODERN. It will be huge for the platform if this alliance becomes a reality.
Apple has mastered simplification. calling iPad an app warehouse is stupid trash talk. instead, iOS gets out of the way and allows apps to take you wherever you want to go.
whereas Google does not want to get out of the way. Google wants to be THE way you go, via the web, to capture your eyeballs for ads. Android fans are in constant denial about this manipulation - they've drunk the Google-Aide. it's Open!
for the minority of the market - 25%? - that prefers complexity/many possibilities, that's great. for the majority - 75%? - that prefer simplicity/just need limited things, it's not. so over the next few years i expect iPad will hold about 70% of the tablet market, just like the iPod does in its PMP market.
one thing iOS should take from Android is widgets, because, done right, they can greatly simplify your life - which is what iPad is all about. maybe only just a few Apple built-in widgets so the power drain is done right. almost everyone would like a totally unified inbox widget for all messages, texts, tweets, (skype) voice mails, friends posts, and whatever else that was always up to date on your home screen (Windows Phone 7 does this). many, like me, would love a single real time map widget with traffic, radar, and any locational alerts in my vicinity from other apps. perhaps one or two other widgets ... oh yeah, a connections widget with 3G data, wifi choices, bluetooth and other such settings all displayed together at once.
another thing iOS should take from Android to make it simpler is ending the mandatory iTunes setup/sync with a computer. that does stop un-technical people - the elderly in particular - from having an iPad (they can have the phone company set up their wifi/modem). sync IS good with its backup and many other tools, but ought to be optional (and wireless).
Google wants to be THE way you go, via the web, to capture your eyeballs for ads. Android fans are in constant denial about this manipulation - they've drunk the Google-Aide
Which ads have Android?
I could understand this about an iPod Touch or iPad, but exactly who goes anywhere without their phone, which in this case is the iPhone? If I was at a friend's house, browsing on their computer, my phone would be accessible because it would be in my pocket.
That's it! Cool feature, but practically useless.
I have said, but you don't want to understand.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
I could understand this about an iPod Touch or iPad, but exactly who goes anywhere without their phone, which in this case is the iPhone? If I was at a friend's house, browsing on their computer, my phone would be accessible because it would be in my pocket.
To each his own, in the end I suppose. I understand your view and like you, my phone isn't out of hand's reach most of the time. I just like having the option of being able to do everything from the computer in front of me if possible.
I'm not trying to be a smartass, but is this a security concern? Suppose a hacker figures out your login and password. Would he be able to download malware to your phone or tablet remotely?
You actually raise an interesting point.
I would suppose at the very least the app will have to be from the Market, not pushed in from anywhere. Yes, yes, I know of the reports of malware apps in the Market. Second, I might be wrong, but I don't think on Android, any app can just automatically run and start doing things on your phone unless you run it first. And third, any new apps downloaded will show up in the notification bar so if you know you didn't download it, you'd know to delete it right away.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
Been there... done that with this person... he/she can only say one thing... Tapas is Android... even after saying basically that I'd have to be a geek to get Android os to run on a Tapas phone.
... and we're the ones that don't want to understand?!
Remember Wintel, try assessing the situation here when a single software manufacturer & multiple users of that software. Eventually that will make the PC market where there is only Intel & Windows. It doesn't work for the long term. Product manufacturers should do there own inventions thats the only way market can grow forward and consumers will reward their inventions. If, a company constantly sits with a thin margin of profit then you can think that there will least investment in R&D and more on packing together things based on cost. So, that someday they will hit profitability enough that can be added to the R&D budget.
If, andriod fails to generate a significant amount of revenue for Google, it will loose interest in the charity work and cut team sizes working on them.
Of course it works long term. Microsoft continues to rake in large amounts of cash. Last I checked windows based computers still outsell Macs. Many of these companies can't afford a wait and see approach. Motorola was thisclose to stop making mobile phones. Now they've turned the ship around and the mobile division is its own entity. Their revival might be short lived but looking at their upcoming offerings I think they'll do just fine.
even after saying basically that I'd have to be a geek to get Android os to run on a Tapas phone.
1. Tapas IS Android
2. Youy are talking about ANOTHER version of the os. Can you install iOS 2.0 on iPhone 4?
Yes you're the ones who doesn't can or want to understand.
That's it! Cool feature, but practically useless.
Having extra abilities is not always a bad thing. Remember, the ability to push apps is only one part of the cloud sync ability.
Another I've talked about is the ability to push Google Maps directions directly to your Android device and have it automatically start up Nav and start routing you. Same with webpages if you want to resume reading from one device to another.
Though I always wonder. If Apple came out with this ability, would everyone so quickly dismiss it? Or would it become part of the "magic" of Apple?
Been there... done that with this person... he/she can only say one thing... Tapas is Android... even after saying basically that I'd have to be a geek to get Android os to run on a Tapas phone.
... and we're the ones that don't want to understand?!
Well, the point I was making, and which I don't think we'll get him to admit, is that to call a phone an "Android" phone, Google has to approve it as "Android compatible", otherwise, you aren't allowed to use the name "Android". ("Android compatibility" approval is a somewhat mysterious process that Google doesn't like to talk much about. But, for anyone who thinks that the only proprietary Google technology in "Android" is a couple of apps, this is, for example, what the Skyhook lawsuit is all about: Google's demand that "Android compatible" devices must use Google's location services.)
Tapas and OMS phones are not "Android compatible", are not allowed to use the "Android" name, and are not "Android" phones. And they shouldn't be included in Google's (or Google*'s, what is this, Major League Baseball?) smartphone OS marketshare.
But when you click on your friend's computer iPhone iTunes doesn't open. This is the difference
Wow... You're really splitting hairs there. Is pulling the phone out of your pocket that inconvenient?
If, andriod fails to generate a significant amount of revenue for Google, it will loose interest in the charity work and cut team sizes working on them.
Wrong. Google generates a HUGE amount of revenue. What it wants is your information...your habits, to which it sells. Every app they develop gives them more and more information about what you do, in which gets sold. It's where you go, who you email to, keywords within, etc. etc. etc. Google is Big Brother.
Though I always wonder. If Apple came out with this ability, would everyone so quickly dismiss it? Or would it become part of the "magic" of Apple?
Just as Google came out with a relative copy of iOS and the whole Android phone market began, but fanboys of the platform denounce everything Apple? Who's worse? Android owes everything to Apple. The entire metaphor of the touch screen smartphone is entirely the work of Apple. They made it work and sold it to the public. Android is sought out as an alternative.
1. Tapas IS Android
2. Youy are talking about ANOTHER version of the os. Can you install iOS 2.0 on iPhone 4?
Yes you're the ones who doesn't can or want to understand.
We covered that... we're talking about the most up to date phones and OS versions.
Can someone other than a geek load Android 2.2 on a Tapas phone without any problems?
Answer this question fairly and maybe I'll take you more seriously... otherwise you are just a trolling fool.
Well, the point I was making, and which I don't think we'll get him to admit, is that to call a phone an "Android" phone, Google has to approve it as "Android compatible", otherwise, you aren't allowed to use the name "Android". ("Android compatibility" approval is a somewhat mysterious process that Google doesn't like to talk much about. But, for anyone who thinks that the only proprietary Google technology in "Android" is a couple of apps, this is, for example, what the Skyhook lawsuit is all about: Google's demand that "Android compatible" devices must use Google's location services.)
Tapas and OMS phones are not "Android compatible", are not allowed to use the "Android" name, and are not "Android" phones. And they shouldn't be included in Google's (or Google*'s, what is this, Major League Baseball?) smartphone OS marketshare.
Hey... I'm with you on this 100%.
This person is backed into a corner and now all they can say is "Tapas is Android"... which, by inference would mean that Android is Tapas... I'd love to see this whole scenario run by a few customers at the local Best Buy.
We covered that... we're talking about the most up to date phones and OS versions.
Can someone other than a geek load Android 2.2 on a Tapas phone without any problems?
Answer this question fairly and maybe I'll take you more seriously... otherwise you are just a trolling fool.
Well, the important question is, say Motorola loads Tapas or OMS on to Droid hardware. Are they allowed to sell the resulting product as an "Android" phone. The answer is, no, they won't be allowed.
Well, I was hoping you could help me to understand, and that we could then go on to discuss "Compatibility". BTW, are those OMS and Tapas phones "Android compatible"?
No, they are not. They are completely different applications platforms.
Anyone can download, modify and create their own OS from the Android code base. However, to call that modified OS, "Android," it has to meet guidelines outlined by the Open Handset Alliance.
One of the biggest rules in those guidelines, is that the OS must support Android's application framework and the Dalvik VM. After all, if your OS can't run Android apps, then why call it Android, except for marketing purposes?
Neither OMS or Tapas OS support Android's application framework, they have created their own platform for applications, which makes their apps incompatible with Android and vise-versa.
OMS is actually a proprietary OS owned and controlled by ChinaMobile for use on their OPhone line of devices. This is analogous to Apple's OS X, which is proprietary, but based off open source code. They're considered proprietary, because along with the open source code, there's a lot "home grown" code as well.
... Anyone can download, modify and create their own OS from the Android code base. However, to call that modified OS, "Android," it has to meet guidelines outlined by the Open Handset Alliance. ...
Actually, it has to pass Google's "Android compatibility" review to be called Android.
The rest of your points I believe are correct, though.