I thought Google also announced an easy way to update android which includes even down to graphics drivers, did I dream that?
Let's see if we actually start to see more than a tiny sliver of Android handsets using the current version of Android. It's not enough to propose an alleged way of defragmenting the platform. It has to work in actual practice, otherwise, I'd say you just dreamed it or it was just more vaporware from Google.
Spot on. Let's wait and see before declaring it failed. Or successful.
So far it's working fairly well to break out many of the core features for upgrading thru the Play Store so that users can still get much of the "best new stuff" even if they don't get the very latest OS update. Project Treble is a similar way to address the OS itself.
I thought Google also announced an easy way to update android which includes even down to graphics drivers, did I dream that?
Let's see if we actually start to see more than a tiny sliver of Android handsets using the current version of Android. It's not enough to propose an alleged way of defragmenting the platform. It has to work in actual practice, otherwise, I'd say you just dreamed it or it was just more vaporware from Google.
Vendors and/or Google have been getting better. Version 7.x, which was officially released in late-August 2016, is running on 7.1% of handsets, according to Google.
The big weakness for Apple is AI/ML compared to Google. This is the area that Apple really needs to get a lot more serious and get going. Look at the new Google Photos feature where you take a photo of your kid at bat with a chain link fence between you and your kid and Google just magically removes. It is truly incredible.
The biggest area that Apple will need to figure out is Siri and a smart speaker. Google keeps adding features and now you have the user identified on the fly. So I ask for my music and get my music and if wife asked she gets hers without doing anything special or needing to manually switch accounts.
Is anyone else able to do this besides Google?
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
How about before they spend all the time on new features, they spend 5 minutes removing the 100MB download limit from the Apple App Store. (Apple requires a wifi connection. I have unlimited LTE data.)
I can't tell you how stupid it is to still have this tiny limit... Yes, there is a (every changing) workaround but it's incredibly annoying.
Also, I can't install CRITICAL IOS updates with this limit in place, and there is no workaround. I'm using with Apple (rather than Android) because of the superior security. Apple's pissing that advantage away.
So if I understand this correctly, you are trying to upgrade an operating system … over a mobile phone network.
A phone network that isn't really unlimited because when you exceed your limit (it's in the contract you didn't read) , or during periods of network congestion (when everyone on your network is trying to upgrade their OS at once), the connection will be throttled back. That increase the time to install the update and increases the risk that you will lose the connection while files are downloading.
Oh, come off it. Throttling occurs at around 20GB, and even a slower connection is better than not doing the upgrade at all if he doesn't have access to WiFi. There's no reason this limit couldn't be doubled or tripled. Why must we be such sycophants that we can't tolerate the smallest valid criticism of Apple? This is a phone, not a religion.
Because his threat (to us) of leaving for Android because of it is childish theatre.
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
New gowth is important to wall street. That doesn't make it as important to apple, it's designers, or especially its customers. Delighting the customer and making profit is boss.
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
New gowth is important to wall street. That doesn't make it so important to apple, it's designers, or especially its customers.
Seeing as Tim Cook took the unusual step of doing an exclusive, lengthy interview with both CNBC and Jim Cramer after this most recent quarter I think you may be underestimating the importance of Apple's stock performance to Apple themselves. Surprised you didn't already view Apple's stock by-backs as evidence of that.
EDIT: and for those who assume those buybacks are going into Apple's financial assets they are not. The stock is retired rather that retained as treasury stock, burned in effect with no residual value.
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
New gowth is important to wall street. That doesn't make it so important to apple, it's designers, or especially its customers.
Seeing as Tim Cook took the unusual step of doing an exclusive, lengthy interview with both CNBC and Jim Cramer after this most recent quarter I think you may be underestimating the importance of Apple's stock performance to Apple themselves.
Investors are one of their target audiences, of course they'll craft a message for them. My statement stands -- delighting the customer and earning profit is boss. See The Dumbest Idea In the World:
The idea that if you don't buy a "premium" phone means you've got nothing more than a pocket calculator is ridiculous. The goal of tech companies should be to make technology more accessible to people not less. Smartphone prices should be coming down over time not going up. I know a number of people who own an iPhone SE and it's one of their favorite phones ever. It's not a lesser phone to them because they didn't spend $1000 on it.
"But rather than only launching another AR app or Lens-like service, Apple could be expected to deliver a platform for third party AR apps, in the pattern of its previous efforts to turn Maps, iMessages, Siri, Apple Watch and Apple TV into development platforms, not just products. Apple's most lucrative Services business--the App Store--comes from building a development platform for iOS." --AI Editorial
In best of both worlds, Apple will 1. open up AR as a platform as DED suggests (taking a percentage as outsiders profit from iOS userbase) and 2. find a way to better monetize search and transactions itself, augmenting ApplePay.
Look at it now. Each day AAPL phone or watch is ON many hundreds of millions of well-to-do consumers for 18 hours.
Google, FB, AMZN, zero in on the critical transactional moments (including search, discovery, etc.) of AAPL users. And that’s fine. Hurray for open competition.
I’m just saying AR, in a more versatile Siri, is how Apple gets itself back more deeply into the transactional game, clicks and bricks. Not only good for AAPL profits, but safeguards data, privacy of Apple customers, and will attract more users into the ecosystem.
People today still very naive on privacy. That may start to change in a few years as personal assistants, health sensors, etc. become more prevalent. Machines read all your past transactions, primary posts, messages, emails, and secondary communications (mentioning you but not addressed to you).
Many people will be okay with “intimate,” but not “invasive.” Apple chiefly represents the former, Google/FB the latter.
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
New gowth is important to wall street. That doesn't make it so important to apple, it's designers, or especially its customers.
Seeing as Tim Cook took the unusual step of doing an exclusive, lengthy interview with both CNBC and Jim Cramer after this most recent quarter I think you may be underestimating the importance of Apple's stock performance to Apple themselves.
Investors are one of their target audiences, of course they'll craft a message for them. My statement stands -- delighting the customer and earning profit is boss. See The Dumbest Idea In the World:
there re is no doubt that apple manages to their customer first, not wall street. thus the "Apple NEEDS to...!" proclaimation is silly.
If the "Apple needs to" comments have to do with their stock price alone I'd generally agree with you. In fact "Apple needs to" anything is probably false since they already have enough cash and mindshare to hang around another 30 years.
How about before they spend all the time on new features, they spend 5 minutes removing the 100MB download limit from the Apple App Store. (Apple requires a wifi connection. I have unlimited LTE data.)
I can't tell you how stupid it is to still have this tiny limit... Yes, there is a (every changing) workaround but it's incredibly annoying.
I don't have any real data limit either and I fail to see what's so annoying about it.. If I really can't be bothered to wait until I am back on wifi a couple of hours or days later, I just go to App Store and hit the Update All..
The problem is I no longer use wifi at all. With unlimited data there is no need. The security update I'm referring to is 150MB. And it is obviously not the first time I've run into this arbitrary limit.
I think you'll see more and more people just using the phones and iPads on LTE. Once 5G is available that number will explode.
All Apple has do is warn people that they're downloading a large file, and let them decide if they want to continue.
T-mobile doesn't start prioritizing traffic until about 30GB. I've exceed that amount several times, whatever prioritizing that occurred wasn't noticeable.
Apple is still living in the past with the 100MB limit. There is no logical reason it still exists...
As for "threatening" you... what are you smoking? I'm voicing a common criticism on Apple's Forums. I don't care about "new" features, fixing things that don't work well is time better spent.
If you want to argue against what I've said, give me a good reason for the 100MB limit with no way to bypass it.
How about before they spend all the time on new features, they spend 5 minutes removing the 100MB download limit from the Apple App Store. (Apple requires a wifi connection. I have unlimited LTE data.)
I can't tell you how stupid it is to still have this tiny limit... Yes, there is a (every changing) workaround but it's incredibly annoying.
Also, I can't install CRITICAL IOS updates with this limit in place, and there is no workaround. I'm using with Apple (rather than Android) because of the superior security. Apple's pissing that advantage away.
So if I understand this correctly, you are trying to upgrade an operating system … over a mobile phone network.
A phone network that isn't really unlimited because when you exceed your limit (it's in the contract you didn't read) , or during periods of network congestion (when everyone on your network is trying to upgrade their OS at once), the connection will be throttled back. That increase the time to install the update and increases the risk that you will lose the connection while files are downloading.
Oh, come off it. Throttling occurs at around 20GB, and even a slower connection is better than not doing the upgrade at all if he doesn't have access to WiFi. There's no reason this limit couldn't be doubled or tripled. Why must we be such sycophants that we can't tolerate the smallest valid criticism of Apple? This is a phone, not a religion.
Not being able to download SW updates over LTE can be frustrating, but consider the massive amount of data involved in every user downloading GB of apps nearly every day, and massive surges of very large OS updates that hit for millions of users within the first few days of release.
There are likely discussions with carriers that avoid swamping their networks. Apple's approach seems to be working to limit what needs to be downloaded, in initiatives like last year's App Thinning, but carrier networks are not built out to serve unlimited broadband style service for every subscriber at once.
How about before they spend all the time on new features, they spend 5 minutes removing the 100MB download limit from the Apple App Store. (Apple requires a wifi connection. I have unlimited LTE data.)
I can't tell you how stupid it is to still have this tiny limit... Yes, there is a (every changing) workaround but it's incredibly annoying.
I don't have any real data limit either and I fail to see what's so annoying about it.. If I really can't be bothered to wait until I am back on wifi a couple of hours or days later, I just go to App Store and hit the Update All..
The problem is I no longer use wifi at all. With unlimited data there is no need. The security update I'm referring to is 150MB. And it is obviously not the first time I've run into this arbitrary limit.
I think you'll see more and more people just using the phones and iPads on LTE. Once 5G is available that number will explode.
All Apple has do is warn people that they're downloading a large file, and let them decide if they want to continue.
T-mobile doesn't start prioritizing traffic until about 30GB. I've exceed that amount several times, whatever prioritizing that occurred wasn't noticeable.
Apple is still living in the past with the 100MB limit. There is no logical reason it still exists...
As for "threatening" you... what are you smoking? I'm voicing a common criticism on Apple's Forums. I don't care about "new" features, fixing things that don't work well is time better spent.
If you want to argue against what I've said, give me a good reason for the 100MB limit with no way to bypass it.
Apple has over a billion active iOS devices in play and nearly all users have WiFi. If you think it's about time this limitation should end, then go ahead and submit a request to Apple through the proper channels—posting here does nothing.
The push back you're getting here isn't because you've presented a unique user scenario, it's that you 1) stated that Apple should do something because it would benefit you, and 2) made no statements as to what you currently do for a workaround, at least for iOS 8.
A 3 second search found me one workaround for App Store apps.
I thought Google also announced an easy way to update android which includes even down to graphics drivers, did I dream that?
Let's see if we actually start to see more than a tiny sliver of Android handsets using the current version of Android. It's not enough to propose an alleged way of defragmenting the platform. It has to work in actual practice, otherwise, I'd say you just dreamed it or it was just more vaporware from Google.
Vendors and/or Google have been getting better. Version 7.x, which was officially released in late-August 2016, is running on 7.1% of handsets, according to Google.
Actually it's not getting better. It's getting worse. At the same time last year, Android 6.x had reached a slightly higher 7.5% penetration, and two years ago Android 5.x was well above 9%.
New, commercially relevant Android is effectively going away, sliding into obscurity. To distract, Google is showing off cool apps (Lens, Assistant) that don't even work across more than a tenth of it's installed base.
Thats is why Google is bringing those things to iOS, because Apple's platform is modern, functional, growing and healthy.
The base of "really old Android" is actually growing faster, perhaps in part because some devices don't get upgrades yet stick around, but also because new devices continue to ship in large volumes with very outdated software.
The Android apologists like to focus on flagship new Androids, but those models don't sell in enough quantity to matter. Most Androids are barely functional feature phones aimed at selling for $100.
Low margin exporters don't work to get the most updated software working on their basic hardware for that kind of money. They ship 2-3 year old products, unchanged. That is the majority of Android.
The idea that if you don't buy a "premium" phone means you've got nothing more than a pocket calculator is ridiculous. The goal of tech companies should be to make technology more accessible to people not less. Smartphone prices should be coming down over time not going up. I know a number of people who own an iPhone SE and it's one of their favorite phones ever. It's not a lesser phone to them because they didn't spend $1000 on it.
Not true. "Premium" isn't defined at $1000. For Apple it usually means $600, and in Android land it is around $400.
But it Android is slipping downhill so rapidly that new sub-premium tiers at $300 and $100 are being talked about by market research groups.
The big weakness for Apple is AI/ML compared to Google. This is the area that Apple really needs to get a lot more serious and get going. Look at the new Google Photos feature where you take a photo of your kid at bat with a chain link fence between you and your kid and Google just magically removes. It is truly incredible.
The depiction of a chainlink fence being removed and the missing details extrapolated was indeed "incredible," but it remains a depiction, not reality. Google hasn't shipped that, so it remains to be seen how well it works in practice.
Last fall, Apple showed off Portrait mode, which it then actually shipped in beta and then to users and used the feature to market IPhone 7 Plus--which sold in high volumes.
Google could invent lots of camera/optical ML tricks and it still wouldn't sell any real volume of $600 Pixel phones.
Google didn't invent the Adobe healing brush, it just showed off some unfinished vaporware to its high credulity audience to make itself look innovative.
I thought Google also announced an easy way to update android which includes even down to graphics drivers, did I dream that?
Let's see if we actually start to see more than a tiny sliver of Android handsets using the current version of Android. It's not enough to propose an alleged way of defragmenting the platform. It has to work in actual practice, otherwise, I'd say you just dreamed it or it was just more vaporware from Google.
Vendors and/or Google have been getting better. Version 7.x, which was officially released in late-August 2016, is running on 7.1% of handsets, according to Google.
Actually it's not getting better. It's getting worse. At the same time last year, Android 6.x had reached a slightly higher 7.5% penetration, and two years ago Android 5.x was well above 9%.
New, commercially relevant Android is effectively going away, sliding into obscurity. To distract, Google is showing off cool apps (Lens, Assistant) that don't even work across more than a tenth of it's installed base.
Thats is why Google is bringing those things to iOS, because Apple's platform is modern, functional, growing and healthy.
The base of "really old Android" is actually growing faster, perhaps in part because some devices don't get upgrades yet stick around, but also because new devices continue to ship in large volumes with very outdated software.
The Android apologists like to focus on flagship new Androids, but those models don't sell in enough quantity to matter. Most Androids are barely functional feature phones aimed at selling for $100.
Low margin exporters don't work to get the most updated software working on their basic hardware for that kind of money. They ship 2-3 year old products, unchanged. That is the majority of Android.
Was just going to post this. People should go back and read your other article about Android version share over the years. It really is a gawdawful mess.
A couple weeks ago we find out Samsung sold 55 million Galaxy S7's in a year. During that same time they sold well over 300 million smartphones. So even Samsung (who makes better phones than the countless low-end Android OEMs around the world) still only sells 1 flagship to almost 6 lower end phones. Then we see that iOS users typically spend around 4x (App Store) to 5X (online mobile shopping) or 6X (digital content) when compared to the typical Android user. It's no wonder. I'm sure flagship Android buyers probably spend similar amounts on accessories or Apps as iPhone users. It's just that they are the minority. Metric after metric shows this.
Once again, thanks for the review DED. I do think that Alphabet's new focus on financial results is making them a less interesting and adventurous company.
I thought Google also announced an easy way to update android which includes even down to graphics drivers, did I dream that?
Let's see if we actually start to see more than a tiny sliver of Android handsets using the current version of Android. It's not enough to propose an alleged way of defragmenting the platform. It has to work in actual practice, otherwise, I'd say you just dreamed it or it was just more vaporware from Google.
Vendors and/or Google have been getting better. Version 7.x, which was officially released in late-August 2016, is running on 7.1% of handsets, according to Google.
Actually it's not getting better. It's getting worse. At the same time last year, Android 6.x had reached a slightly higher 7.5% penetration, and two years ago Android 5.x was well above 9%.
New, commercially relevant Android is effectively going away, sliding into obscurity. To distract, Google is showing off cool apps (Lens, Assistant) that don't even work across more than a tenth of it's installed base.
Thats is why Google is bringing those things to iOS, because Apple's platform is modern, functional, growing and healthy.
The base of "really old Android" is actually growing faster, perhaps in part because some devices don't get upgrades yet stick around, but also because new devices continue to ship in large volumes with very outdated software.
The Android apologists like to focus on flagship new Androids, but those models don't sell in enough quantity to matter. Most Androids are barely functional feature phones aimed at selling for $100.
Low margin exporters don't work to get the most updated software working on their basic hardware for that kind of money. They ship 2-3 year old products, unchanged. That is the majority of Android.
That's not what I recall so I looked up the history in Internet Archive. Android 6.0 only had 2.3% on this calendar day in 2016.
However, it was released on 05 October 2015, which is 44 days in the calendar year past 7.0's release on 22 August 2016, so if we move 6.0's compare date up to 05 July to get the same number of days available, we do get Marshmallow with a 10.1%.
Comments
So far it's working fairly well to break out many of the core features for upgrading thru the Play Store so that users can still get much of the "best new stuff" even if they don't get the very latest OS update. Project Treble is a similar way to address the OS itself.
The biggest area that Apple will need to figure out is Siri and a smart speaker. Google keeps adding features and now you have the user identified on the fly. So I ask for my music and get my music and if wife asked she gets hers without doing anything special or needing to manually switch accounts.
Is anyone else able to do this besides Google?
People will continue to buy their iPhones and there is ZERO doubt that is changing any time soon. It is about growing more than anything else. Apple over 2 years ago had $2.33 EPS and just reported $2.10 EPS while Google grew earnings 29%. Apple needs to get into new areas and find some growth and it seems Google are taking some of those opportunities.
EDIT: and for those who assume those buybacks are going into Apple's financial assets they are not. The stock is retired rather that retained as treasury stock, burned in effect with no residual value.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/28/maximizing-shareholder-value-the-dumbest-idea-in-the-world/
there re is no doubt that apple manages to their customer first, not wall street. thus the "Apple NEEDS to...!" proclaimation is silly.
In best of both worlds, Apple will 1. open up AR as a platform as DED suggests (taking a percentage as outsiders profit from iOS userbase) and 2. find a way to better monetize search and transactions itself, augmenting ApplePay.
Look at it now. Each day AAPL phone or watch is ON many hundreds of millions of well-to-do consumers for 18 hours.
Google, FB, AMZN, zero in on the critical transactional moments (including search, discovery, etc.) of AAPL users. And that’s fine. Hurray for open competition.
I’m just saying AR, in a more versatile Siri, is how Apple gets itself back more deeply into the transactional game, clicks and bricks. Not only good for AAPL profits, but safeguards data, privacy of Apple customers, and will attract more users into the ecosystem.
People today still very naive on privacy. That may start to change in a few years as personal assistants, health sensors, etc. become more prevalent. Machines read all your past transactions, primary posts, messages, emails, and secondary communications (mentioning you but not addressed to you).
Many people will be okay with “intimate,” but not “invasive.” Apple chiefly represents the former, Google/FB the latter.
I think you'll see more and more people just using the phones and iPads on LTE. Once 5G is available that number will explode.
All Apple has do is warn people that they're downloading a large file, and let them decide if they want to continue.
T-mobile doesn't start prioritizing traffic until about 30GB. I've exceed that amount several times, whatever prioritizing that occurred wasn't noticeable.
Apple is still living in the past with the 100MB limit. There is no logical reason it still exists...
As for "threatening" you... what are you smoking? I'm voicing a common criticism on Apple's Forums. I don't care about "new" features, fixing things that don't work well is time better spent.
If you want to argue against what I've said, give me a good reason for the 100MB limit with no way to bypass it.
There are likely discussions with carriers that avoid swamping their networks. Apple's approach seems to be working to limit what needs to be downloaded, in initiatives like last year's App Thinning, but carrier networks are not built out to serve unlimited broadband style service for every subscriber at once.
The push back you're getting here isn't because you've presented a unique user scenario, it's that you 1) stated that Apple should do something because it would benefit you, and 2) made no statements as to what you currently do for a workaround, at least for iOS 8.
A 3 second search found me one workaround for App Store apps.
Another option, if you have a Mac or another iDevice, is to tether since that tells the device you're connecting via WiFi.
New, commercially relevant Android is effectively going away, sliding into obscurity. To distract, Google is showing off cool apps (Lens, Assistant) that don't even work across more than a tenth of it's installed base.
Thats is why Google is bringing those things to iOS, because Apple's platform is modern, functional, growing and healthy.
Http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/17/05/17/google-io17-android-deployment-rate-continues-to-slip-backward
The base of "really old Android" is actually growing faster, perhaps in part because some devices don't get upgrades yet stick around, but also because new devices continue to ship in large volumes with very outdated software.
The Android apologists like to focus on flagship new Androids, but those models don't sell in enough quantity to matter. Most Androids are barely functional feature phones aimed at selling for $100.
Low margin exporters don't work to get the most updated software working on their basic hardware for that kind of money. They ship 2-3 year old products, unchanged. That is the majority of Android.
Not true. "Premium" isn't defined at $1000. For Apple it usually means $600, and in Android land it is around $400.
But it Android is slipping downhill so rapidly that new sub-premium tiers at $300 and $100 are being talked about by market research groups.
iPhone SE is "premium" compared to Android.
The depiction of a chainlink fence being removed and the missing details extrapolated was indeed "incredible," but it remains a depiction, not reality. Google hasn't shipped that, so it remains to be seen how well it works in practice.
Last fall, Apple showed off Portrait mode, which it then actually shipped in beta and then to users and used the feature to market IPhone 7 Plus--which sold in high volumes.
Google could invent lots of camera/optical ML tricks and it still wouldn't sell any real volume of $600 Pixel phones.
Google didn't invent the Adobe healing brush, it just showed off some unfinished vaporware to its high credulity audience to make itself look innovative.
Was just going to post this. People should go back and read your other article about Android version share over the years. It really is a gawdawful mess.
A couple weeks ago we find out Samsung sold 55 million Galaxy S7's in a year. During that same time they sold well over 300 million smartphones. So even Samsung (who makes better phones than the countless low-end Android OEMs around the world) still only sells 1 flagship to almost 6 lower end phones. Then we see that iOS users typically spend around 4x (App Store) to 5X (online mobile shopping) or 6X (digital content) when compared to the typical Android user. It's no wonder. I'm sure flagship Android buyers probably spend similar amounts on accessories or Apps as iPhone users. It's just that they are the minority. Metric after metric shows this.
However, it was released on 05 October 2015, which is 44 days in the calendar year past 7.0's release on 22 August 2016, so if we move 6.0's compare date up to 05 July to get the same number of days available, we do get Marshmallow with a 10.1%.