Google and Samsung escalate hostilities over watches, Tizen and Android's openness

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 141
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by larry9 View Post

    Does anybody seriously think Apple needs to build its own hardware to sell IOS?

     

    Yes. Period. Do you honestly want to use the garbage from anyone else? They’re all too lazy to put actual work in to making devices worth owning. Never mind that Apple has the best performance on the market because they know exactly what hardware is being used. Read about fragmentation, beyond that.

     

    They would be even more successful if they licensed it and let others sell iphone clones with a variety of features, form factors, and prices. It is the sameness of product choices that is keeping Apple from owning the market. Their own manufacturing arm is denying Apple a complete takeover of the smartphone market. 


     

    You’ll notice that Apple is the only company in any industry in which it is in that is making money. You’ll notice that Apple makes both hardware and software. Either you’re speaking from a standpoint of ignorance or really, REALLY stupid concern trolling. You’re wrong either way.

  • Reply 102 of 141
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    LOL. You are absolutely one of the wittiest posters here., and can be one of the most enjoyable. :D

    I'm glad you're impressed. I'm actually you from the future who's come back in time to warn you: stop wasting time singing the praises of Google and regularly attempting to depict Apple negatively in an Apple-related forum. Not only was it counter productive but it created a subconscious connection between Google and irritating, pointless behaviour and was not the impression I was hoping to make.

    Oh, and since I'm back here, can you do me a favour?

    Get all our money out of Google stock.

    Things aren't so rosy for them where I come from...
  • Reply 103 of 141
    What a shame. Google and Samsung have fallen out. Oh dear! If only there was an innovative Obvious Simple alternative. Hmmm lete think I'm Obiously Skipping something. Hmm something's ring a bell here I O S. Ah iOS! No reliance on Google or Samsung. Let google and Samsung fight it out neither are innocent.
  • Reply 104 of 141
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    For a wearable it might be a better fit than Android. The iPod Nano with a touchscreen still doesn't use iOS so I even wonder if Apple would use iOS in the rumoured iWatch.

    I feel an echo in here, because I'm pretty sure half the stuff mentioned in the article was stuff I mentioned a week ago, then again, there are plenty of people who could see the same thing.

    First, Tizen, this is a DOA (Dead on Arrival) product, and Android will be circling the toilet if it actually makes any significant inroads. However Samsung is notoriously awful at producing hardware, let alone software, and puts out a lot of half baked things that don't work to specification. Two examples straight from this article, the first models of the tablet and smartwatch. However I feel the entire "smartwatch" is a dead platform if it doesn't get like a week of battery life at the minimum. I can also think of Samsung devices from a decade ago that had high failure rates, and if we look outside the phone/tablet's... oh just google it. Microwaves, TV's, you name it, someone's complained about it.


    The iPod Nano uses an OS called Pixo, which at some point was owned by Sun, but now Apple has it. The point of this OS is that the iPod Nano doesn't run installable software. It has like 64MB of ram, earlier models might have even less. Because it uses so little power, it lasts quite a while. The OS is skinned to look like iOS.
  • Reply 105 of 141
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,387member
    Ironic how fandroids used to claim how "customization" was a reason they wanted to use Android (and some kind of advantage), yet increasingly, Google doesn't want the ironically named Open Handset Alliance members to do that with Android. Keep Android pure, fall in line, do not challenge Google because Google doesn't need competition.

    A few of the licensees are arriving at the conclusion that leaving Android relatively unaltered is the way to go, among them Sony, Motorola, and now ZTE. It looks like the trend is back to more a stock Android look. After going to extremes to look like something other than Android I guess gravitating to a more comfortable and logical middle-ground shouldn't be a surprise.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/zte-announces-google-now-launcher-offering-improved-user-experience-and-better-value-2014-07-17
  • Reply 106 of 141
    damn_its_hotdamn_its_hot Posts: 1,210member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by leesmith View Post



    Samsung is the one being the bully. Samsung is attempting to use it's leverage as the dominant Android device manufacturer to do whatever it wants.

     

    More like a sumo bout ...

     

  • Reply 107 of 141
    damn_its_hotdamn_its_hot Posts: 1,210member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post



    If Samsung thinks they have some street 'cred' on their own without Android they will be surprised to learn that people who buy Galaxy are primarily Android fans not Samsung fans.




    I used to believe this but not anymore. Samsung has plenty of street cred. If they can keep Tizen functioning somewhat like Android then many people won't ever know the difference.

     

    Really big if!

     

    Hell Google can't keep Android "...functioning somewhat like Android...". Lotsa Luck!

  • Reply 108 of 141
    rivertriprivertrip Posts: 143member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

     

     

    Both companies are scumbags, and each deserves to fail based on their individual shortcomings... But in this particular case, why is it wrong for Samsung to want to differentiate its products by leveraging the much vaunted "openness" of Google's Android OS? Wasn't that google's battle cry against Apple's "closed" ecosystem?


    That was the "battle cry." It also was a lie.

  • Reply 109 of 141
    damn_its_hotdamn_its_hot Posts: 1,210member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by larry9 View Post



    Does anybody seriously think Apple needs to build its own hardware to sell IOS? They would be even more successful if they licensed it and let others sell iphone clones with a variety of features, form factors, and prices. It is the sameness of product choices that is keeping Apple from owning the market.

     

    1. YES. Hardware IS Apples game - it is why they are so profitable.

     

    2. Maybe you were not around for the clone debacle http://www.macworld.com/article/1133598/macclones.html Steve fixed that when he came back.

     

    3. Steve also fixed that when he came back. He killed all the superfluous hobbies, clones, the Performa (over 30 models of these in 5 yrs), and got back to a core of 4 products*. 

     

    Those who do not study history are doomed to relive it. (In case you forgot Apple was on a slippery slope to a dark pit in 1997 - it was also a great time to buy AAPL at less than $18 a share before the split BTW).

     

    *He even dropped Newton as a project (but not forever - only till we can do it right) which upset a lot of folx. The Newton was a prototype IMHO for the iPad that then led to the iPhone (after Motorola's disastrous flip phone with music "partnership" which limited you to 100 songs).

     

    ............................................................................

     

    I am biased as I am long on AAPL; also read history ;-)

  • Reply 110 of 141
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,229member
    larry9 wrote: »
    Does anybody seriously think Apple needs to build its own hardware to sell IOS? They would be even more successful if they licensed it and let others sell iphone clones with a variety of features, form factors, and prices. It is the sameness of product choices that is keeping Apple from owning the market. Their own manufacturing arm is denying Apple a complete takeover of the smartphone market.

    I think people that have more than 1/3 of their brain functioning understand that Apple REQUIRES its hardware as a critical part of its business. The HARDWARE has allowed Apple to dominate the handset business pulling in 60-80% profit share world wide.
  • Reply 111 of 141
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,437member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    A few of the licensees are arriving at the conclusion that leaving Android relatively unaltered is the way to go, among them Sony, Motorola, and now ZTE. It looks like the trend is back to more a stock Android look. After going to extremes to look like something other than Android I guess gravitating to a more comfortable and logical middle-ground shouldn't be a surprise.



    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/zte-announces-google-now-launcher-offering-improved-user-experience-and-better-value-2014-07-17

    No profits anyway, might as well let Google do all the lifting, and no, as a matter of fact, feature variations aren't going to make much difference to the buyers in a mature Android market. It's going to be price and marketing driven. 

  • Reply 112 of 141
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,784member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    A few of the licensees are arriving at the conclusion that leaving Android relatively unaltered is the way to go, among them Sony, Motorola, and now ZTE. It looks like the trend is back to more a stock Android look. After going to extremes to look like something other than Android I guess gravitating to a more comfortable and logical middle-ground shouldn't be a surprise.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/zte-announces-google-now-launcher-offering-improved-user-experience-and-better-value-2014-07-17

    Maybe if Scamsung does a good job on their own mobile OS the companies you mention will have a better alternative or at least 'an' alternative. I hope, should it come into being, that all the makers of the fragmented junk out there flocks to it. I think this would be excellent news for Apple. If it does happen, Google would be just schmidt out of luck i guess.
  • Reply 113 of 141
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,784member
    1. YES. Hardware IS Apples game - it is why they are so profitable.

    2. Maybe you were not around for the clone debacle http://www.macworld.com/article/1133598/macclones.html Steve fixed that when he came back.

    3. Steve also fixed that when he came back. He killed all the superfluous hobbies, clones, the Performa (over 30 models of these in 5 yrs), and got back to a core of 4 products*. 

    Those who do not study history are doomed to relive it. (In case you forgot Apple was on a slippery slope to a dark pit in 1997 - it was also a great time to buy AAPL at less than $18 a share before the split BTW).

    *He even dropped Newton as a project (but not forever - only till we can do it right) which upset a lot of folx. The Newton was a prototype IMHO for the iPad that then led to the iPhone (after Motorola's disastrous flip phone with music "partnership" which limited you to 100 songs).

    ............................................................................

    I am biased as I am long on AAPL; also read history ;-)

    I couldn't agree more with your reply to that inane suggestion.
  • Reply 114 of 141
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,784member
    Really big if!

    Hell Google can't keep Android "...functioning somewhat like Android...". Lotsa Luck!

    Don't rock their confidence ... I want Sammy to do this. :)
  • Reply 115 of 141
    spanading wrote: »
    What a shame. Google and Samsung have fallen out. Oh dear! If only there was an innovative Obvious Simple alternative. Hmmm lete think I'm Obiously Skipping something. Hmm something's ring a bell here I O S. Ah iOS! No reliance on Google or Samsung. Let google and Samsung fight it out neither are innocent.

    In the case of Google and Samsung (vs. Apple), it's a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my frienemy."

    That's what I like about the new Apple-IBM partnership to sell and service iOS devices in the workplace. Each partner knows what they bring to the table. And neither is trying to eat each other's lunch. Or get kicked off the other's board of directors. IBM makes a much saner iOS partner than either Google or Samsung.
  • Reply 116 of 141
    darklite wrote: »
    There's a Grand Canyon of difference between sort of the customization users want, and the sort the manufacturers want.

    Users: setting a home screen wallpaper, organizing apps into folders or other preferred layouts, choosing default applications, installing any application they want, having the ability to replace things like the app launcher or the lock screen, etc.

    Manufacturers and carriers: sideloading own-brand copies of all default apps, self-made UIs (invariably with horrible performance and memory usage), and in Samsung's case the ability to put an iOS skin on top of everything. 

    Google's push to exert more control over the OS doesn't seem to be going in a direction that will harm users. The people writing garbage like TouchWiz, on the other hand...

    The principle of "openness," and the spirit of "competition", both of which Fandroids hold dear and as arguments against Apple don't suddenly take a back seat to "single party control," consistent UX, and "user safety" which Apple fans have long held as advantages of iOS. Be consistent in the forum wars. Don't suddenly decide to value the things Apple fans value while holding those same traits in contempt against iOS.
  • Reply 117 of 141
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    Really big if!

    Hell Google can't keep Android "...functioning somewhat like Android...". Lotsa Luck!

    What I meant was a drastic change to the UI. Samsung tweaks the UI so that it's somewhat different from vanilla Android.
  • Reply 118 of 141
    bocboc Posts: 72member
    Interesting that Samsung & Google appear to be fighting the battle for the low cost devices.

    Tizen is Samsung's attempt to differentiate. Google's attempt is even tighter contract limitations.

    Sounds like Samsung has realized you can't deal with Google and must strike out on their own to become vertically integrated like Apple.
  • Reply 119 of 141
    waybacmacwaybacmac Posts: 309member

    Gee, wouldn't this be a great opportunity for a real smart company, with a well-functioning alternate smart phone OS but small market share, to offer manufacturers such an OS at a very much reduced cost? But where would one find such a company?

     

    Hint: not in Washington state. ;)

  • Reply 120 of 141
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    2) I bought a Hyundai. So far a good deal for the money.

    I bought a Hyundai for my daughter. Superb value for money.

Sign In or Register to comment.