It's really embarrassing listening to someone resort to petty name calling to make him/herself feel intellectually superior.
To call someone a "fanboi" would suggest you do not have the ability to take part in reasoned discussion, resorting to petty and childish name calling instead.
You also seem to be suffering from what phychologists call 'Freudian Projection' by projecting your own "grade school" behavior on to others.
I find the frequency of the deliberately belittling term "fanboi" on this site mildly annoying, last I knew this was a mac forum, not a playground. And to replace the 'y' with an 'i', how old are you boy?
You must not be familiar with the dismal appreciation of Appleinsider's community from the outside mac community or the greater computing community. It's viewed as a group of hyperirrational and shrill mac fanbois who believe in the most insane apple rumors without any solid grounding in facts. It's actually quite comical to hear others' opinions of the AI site.
Why do I say this? So that AI can look at itself and realize the mess that it has become. Nobody respects the National Inquirer... do you want AI to get any respect as a news publication? Read over the initial posts in this topic with this in mind, and hopefully you'll see how ridiculous those posts are.
"The accelerometer that largely governs just screen rotation in the iPhone can now be used in a new Street View mode that rotates the point of view simply by changing direction in the real world."
Having a hard time visualizing this? Someone care to take stab at explaining this? Sound like the technology that?s already in a GPS unit? too me anyway.
Thanks
Well, for one you could watch the video. But for a simple explanation, if you know what street view is in Google Maps, its like looking at a photo of a street. However, on Android, as you move the iPhone, the street view rotates as well. If your Android phone is pointing north, your street view will be pointing north. If your Android phone is pointing south, your street view will point south. Pretty cool.
How about we stop fighting and get back on topic???
The iPhone is not just a phone and a PDA, but a very well organised media player/iPod. The integration of everything into one is the key selling point as it does everything well, and it comes out looking good to boot.
Do you think that google can fight that element?
I don't think Google cares about iPod integration. Google is doing what they think is best for the next era of computing. We already saw what happened in the last era. Lock-in. Apple started it but clearly lost out to an open platform. But then Microsoft hijacked it. Google wants to make sure this doesn't happen again. That is why Android exists. It would not be good for the market if the iPhone dominated. Steve Jobs has shown over and over that he wants complete control over his products even when people insist on more openness. He only opens things up when doesn't control a market.
Personally, I like having a separate iPod. I just hope the iPhone will finally work like a modem. Then I might be persuaded to get one. Otherwise I'll stick with my crappy Palm Centro until the Android phones show up before making a decision on which direction to go.
I don't think Google cares about iPod integration. Google is doing what they think is best for the next era of computing. We already saw what happened in the last era. Lock-in. Apple started it but clearly lost out to an open platform. But then Microsoft hijacked it. Google wants to make sure this doesn't happen again. That is why Android exists. It would not be good for the market if the iPhone dominated. Steve Jobs has shown over and over that he wants complete control over his products even when people insist on more openness. He only opens things up when doesn't control a market.
Personally, I like having a separate iPod. I just hope the iPhone will finally work like a modem. Then I might be persuaded to get one. Otherwise I'll stick with my crappy Palm Centro until the Android phones show up before making a decision on which direction to go.
Steve Job's first market dominating product, the Apple ][, was very open - it even came with schematics and ROM listings.
Macintosh never dominated the market and Steve Jobs wasn't still at Apple when it's chance to was blundered by people with no vision. Macintosh wasn't even outselling Apple ][ when steve was there.
iPod dominates the marked and I see no signs at all of that slowing down innovation with the iPod. Quite the contrary, Apple has been very aggressive in improving the iPod from generation to generation.
iPhone has also been pretty aggressive in it's advances. It's taking longer to get a world class API ready than it took to get the product on the market in the first place, but what other existing cell phone has anything near as powerful as Cocoa on MacOS X for programmers to develop apps? And I suspect those APIs are better off by Apple waiting until version 2.0 to make them public. That gave them a chance to tweak things that weren't quite right before developers started using them.
At this point Android is no different than the previous generation Windows approach, promised future features being hyped to stop people from adopting a competing system that is currently better and already on the market. And like windows before it, Android is being developed by a company who was one of the initial companies Apple contacted to develop apps for their OS.
There are two types of mobile phone development. The hardware sort that Nokia does - by repeatedly soldering ever more components into a phone. And the software sort that Apple is doing. Competing in the first arena is pretty easy. Hire engineers, buy off-the-shelf parts, go solder.
Competing in the second arena is where it gets interesting. The current software platforms used by Nokia, Palm, and Windows Mobile puts them in a very bad place for catching up. Palm has being trying to update its platform for years, with only glacial progress.
The only vaguely credible competition for the iPhone OS is Android. Both the iPhone and Android have Unix in the basement. Both run apps.
But currently, the two are not evenly matched. What goes between the OS and the Application is where the big difference lies.
On the iPhone, Cocoa allows incredibly rapid development of finished robust software. And because that software relies on Cocoa to perform the UI tasks, your application will behave consistently with all other Cocoa apps. When you compile, the resulting application runs in native code. Which means faster, and more battery efficient.
Android relies upon interpreted Java code to do the same job, and lacks the equivalent of Cocoa to drive the user-interface layer. Resulting applications will be interpreted byte code which is a poor solution for slow processors.
It's true that more programmers are familiar with Java. But in a race, the Cocoa team will have code running sooner and running faster than the Java team. Chances are the app will look prettier too.
Competition is good for the market, so I hope Android succeeds. It is *already* a better solution than Symbian and Windows and Palm.
Manufacturers already have to write drivers for the firmware they use. If Android becomes popular then drivers for the same chips can be used with no alteration and there will be a very large developer community available to write these drivers at a much lower cost because of the widespread use of the platform and significant competition among coders in a open SDK.
I guess my concerns are at a higher level than drivers. More for Android application developers.
For example, will the DrawTextWithFontAtPoint() function render that text exactly the same on all Android platforms? And with the correct font? This has been the classic case where the JVM has failed in the past.
Or, will there be 10 different handwriting recognition modules for all of the different Android platforms, each with a different programming interface? Or some other new technology which has been patented and will only be implemented for the Android platform(s) on which the company that patented it cares about.
You see where I'm going with this... once people/companies who want to patent their new ideas for the Android platform get into the mix (or who control 3rd party technology which needs to be integrated into Android), I can see it becoming the write once, debug everywhere situation that Java was and still is for a lot of things.
If you need a real-life example of what I'm talking about, try embedding a Flash application into a Java app (not running in a web browser, but a full fledged Java application). Is it going to be the same for interacting with Flash apps on Android?
All of you dismissing Android because of icon aesthetics and missing feature should realize that Android could be the next Windows 95 that wipes Apple out of the mobile business.
Windows 95 was "good enough" to most people. Android could be "good enough" to most people also. And if people can get cheap phones with Android on them, Apple could be in trouble.
Mind you, there seems to be a huge reversal recently. People are buying Apple products in droves with little regard for price. Seems like people have finally awoken and seen the light (thanks to iPods and word of mouth).
There's nothing about the iPod that couldn't have been said about the Mac 10-15 years ago. Macs were clearly a superior product...but nobody knew that. A series of events allowed the iPod to break this curse and make people more aware of Apple products (including the Mac).
Still...Apple has to be careful and not let Android become "good enough". I think Apple's doing a good thing patenting many iPhone innovations. Anything to stop people from directly copying the iPhone look and feel is a good for Apple.
The reason 95 was good enough to so many was the simple fact there was little to choose from. Come on did you forget that quickly?
The reason 95 was good enough to so many was the simple fact there was little to choose from. Come on did you forget that quickly?
Well, really it was because Microsoft had DOS+Win3.1 and Office dominance (pretty much a monopoly). All those Win32/Win16 apps ran on the vast majority of PCs in use. Win95 was simply an easy decision: cheap upgrade and all existing manufacturers shipped it. What really killed Apple at the time was the Pentium Pro more than living up to its billing, PPC not living up to its billing, and Mac System 7 crashing under its own weight while Win95 became more than acceptable.
What's Android got? Google's brand name. It's got nothing else: no existing base to sell into, no dominant (Nokia, Samsung) manufacturer using it for its cell phones, no side-monopoly to use as a lever, no 3rd party killer app depending on it (nevermind 3rd party app market and cell phone market is a tenuous meeting at best). Win 95 basically had all of these advantages, actually every advantage, really.
Overall the conversation of AndroidOS versus iPhone OS X is kind of funny. It lacks perspective as we are talking about systems that currently have 0% and <1% of the market. Call me crazy, but they've got a long way to go before catching up before the real dent in the market is made. iPhone OS X at least is looking like it's denting the high end consumer market.
Comments
It's really embarrassing listening to someone resort to petty name calling to make him/herself feel intellectually superior.
To call someone a "fanboi" would suggest you do not have the ability to take part in reasoned discussion, resorting to petty and childish name calling instead.
You also seem to be suffering from what phychologists call 'Freudian Projection' by projecting your own "grade school" behavior on to others.
I find the frequency of the deliberately belittling term "fanboi" on this site mildly annoying, last I knew this was a mac forum, not a playground. And to replace the 'y' with an 'i', how old are you boy?
You must not be familiar with the dismal appreciation of Appleinsider's community from the outside mac community or the greater computing community. It's viewed as a group of hyperirrational and shrill mac fanbois who believe in the most insane apple rumors without any solid grounding in facts. It's actually quite comical to hear others' opinions of the AI site.
Why do I say this? So that AI can look at itself and realize the mess that it has become. Nobody respects the National Inquirer... do you want AI to get any respect as a news publication? Read over the initial posts in this topic with this in mind, and hopefully you'll see how ridiculous those posts are.
"The accelerometer that largely governs just screen rotation in the iPhone can now be used in a new Street View mode that rotates the point of view simply by changing direction in the real world."
Having a hard time visualizing this? Someone care to take stab at explaining this? Sound like the technology that?s already in a GPS unit? too me anyway.
Thanks
Well, for one you could watch the video. But for a simple explanation, if you know what street view is in Google Maps, its like looking at a photo of a street. However, on Android, as you move the iPhone, the street view rotates as well. If your Android phone is pointing north, your street view will be pointing north. If your Android phone is pointing south, your street view will point south. Pretty cool.
How about we stop fighting and get back on topic???
The iPhone is not just a phone and a PDA, but a very well organised media player/iPod. The integration of everything into one is the key selling point as it does everything well, and it comes out looking good to boot.
Do you think that google can fight that element?
I don't think Google cares about iPod integration. Google is doing what they think is best for the next era of computing. We already saw what happened in the last era. Lock-in. Apple started it but clearly lost out to an open platform. But then Microsoft hijacked it. Google wants to make sure this doesn't happen again. That is why Android exists. It would not be good for the market if the iPhone dominated. Steve Jobs has shown over and over that he wants complete control over his products even when people insist on more openness. He only opens things up when doesn't control a market.
Personally, I like having a separate iPod. I just hope the iPhone will finally work like a modem. Then I might be persuaded to get one. Otherwise I'll stick with my crappy Palm Centro until the Android phones show up before making a decision on which direction to go.
I don't think Google cares about iPod integration. Google is doing what they think is best for the next era of computing. We already saw what happened in the last era. Lock-in. Apple started it but clearly lost out to an open platform. But then Microsoft hijacked it. Google wants to make sure this doesn't happen again. That is why Android exists. It would not be good for the market if the iPhone dominated. Steve Jobs has shown over and over that he wants complete control over his products even when people insist on more openness. He only opens things up when doesn't control a market.
Personally, I like having a separate iPod. I just hope the iPhone will finally work like a modem. Then I might be persuaded to get one. Otherwise I'll stick with my crappy Palm Centro until the Android phones show up before making a decision on which direction to go.
Steve Job's first market dominating product, the Apple ][, was very open - it even came with schematics and ROM listings.
Macintosh never dominated the market and Steve Jobs wasn't still at Apple when it's chance to was blundered by people with no vision. Macintosh wasn't even outselling Apple ][ when steve was there.
iPod dominates the marked and I see no signs at all of that slowing down innovation with the iPod. Quite the contrary, Apple has been very aggressive in improving the iPod from generation to generation.
iPhone has also been pretty aggressive in it's advances. It's taking longer to get a world class API ready than it took to get the product on the market in the first place, but what other existing cell phone has anything near as powerful as Cocoa on MacOS X for programmers to develop apps? And I suspect those APIs are better off by Apple waiting until version 2.0 to make them public. That gave them a chance to tweak things that weren't quite right before developers started using them.
At this point Android is no different than the previous generation Windows approach, promised future features being hyped to stop people from adopting a competing system that is currently better and already on the market. And like windows before it, Android is being developed by a company who was one of the initial companies Apple contacted to develop apps for their OS.
Competing in the second arena is where it gets interesting. The current software platforms used by Nokia, Palm, and Windows Mobile puts them in a very bad place for catching up. Palm has being trying to update its platform for years, with only glacial progress.
The only vaguely credible competition for the iPhone OS is Android. Both the iPhone and Android have Unix in the basement. Both run apps.
But currently, the two are not evenly matched. What goes between the OS and the Application is where the big difference lies.
On the iPhone, Cocoa allows incredibly rapid development of finished robust software. And because that software relies on Cocoa to perform the UI tasks, your application will behave consistently with all other Cocoa apps. When you compile, the resulting application runs in native code. Which means faster, and more battery efficient.
Android relies upon interpreted Java code to do the same job, and lacks the equivalent of Cocoa to drive the user-interface layer. Resulting applications will be interpreted byte code which is a poor solution for slow processors.
It's true that more programmers are familiar with Java. But in a race, the Cocoa team will have code running sooner and running faster than the Java team. Chances are the app will look prettier too.
Competition is good for the market, so I hope Android succeeds. It is *already* a better solution than Symbian and Windows and Palm.
C.
Manufacturers already have to write drivers for the firmware they use. If Android becomes popular then drivers for the same chips can be used with no alteration and there will be a very large developer community available to write these drivers at a much lower cost because of the widespread use of the platform and significant competition among coders in a open SDK.
I guess my concerns are at a higher level than drivers. More for Android application developers.
For example, will the DrawTextWithFontAtPoint() function render that text exactly the same on all Android platforms? And with the correct font? This has been the classic case where the JVM has failed in the past.
Or, will there be 10 different handwriting recognition modules for all of the different Android platforms, each with a different programming interface? Or some other new technology which has been patented and will only be implemented for the Android platform(s) on which the company that patented it cares about.
You see where I'm going with this... once people/companies who want to patent their new ideas for the Android platform get into the mix (or who control 3rd party technology which needs to be integrated into Android), I can see it becoming the write once, debug everywhere situation that Java was and still is for a lot of things.
If you need a real-life example of what I'm talking about, try embedding a Flash application into a Java app (not running in a web browser, but a full fledged Java application). Is it going to be the same for interacting with Flash apps on Android?
All of you dismissing Android because of icon aesthetics and missing feature should realize that Android could be the next Windows 95 that wipes Apple out of the mobile business.
Windows 95 was "good enough" to most people. Android could be "good enough" to most people also. And if people can get cheap phones with Android on them, Apple could be in trouble.
Mind you, there seems to be a huge reversal recently. People are buying Apple products in droves with little regard for price. Seems like people have finally awoken and seen the light (thanks to iPods and word of mouth).
There's nothing about the iPod that couldn't have been said about the Mac 10-15 years ago. Macs were clearly a superior product...but nobody knew that. A series of events allowed the iPod to break this curse and make people more aware of Apple products (including the Mac).
Still...Apple has to be careful and not let Android become "good enough". I think Apple's doing a good thing patenting many iPhone innovations. Anything to stop people from directly copying the iPhone look and feel is a good for Apple.
The reason 95 was good enough to so many was the simple fact there was little to choose from. Come on did you forget that quickly?
The reason 95 was good enough to so many was the simple fact there was little to choose from. Come on did you forget that quickly?
It sounds like you are forgetting OS/2 and Mac OS.
The reason 95 was good enough to so many was the simple fact there was little to choose from. Come on did you forget that quickly?
Well, really it was because Microsoft had DOS+Win3.1 and Office dominance (pretty much a monopoly). All those Win32/Win16 apps ran on the vast majority of PCs in use. Win95 was simply an easy decision: cheap upgrade and all existing manufacturers shipped it. What really killed Apple at the time was the Pentium Pro more than living up to its billing, PPC not living up to its billing, and Mac System 7 crashing under its own weight while Win95 became more than acceptable.
What's Android got? Google's brand name. It's got nothing else: no existing base to sell into, no dominant (Nokia, Samsung) manufacturer using it for its cell phones, no side-monopoly to use as a lever, no 3rd party killer app depending on it (nevermind 3rd party app market and cell phone market is a tenuous meeting at best). Win 95 basically had all of these advantages, actually every advantage, really.
Overall the conversation of AndroidOS versus iPhone OS X is kind of funny. It lacks perspective as we are talking about systems that currently have 0% and <1% of the market. Call me crazy, but they've got a long way to go before catching up before the real dent in the market is made. iPhone OS X at least is looking like it's denting the high end consumer market.
Regards
Android