First of all, I agree with most comments that the article is not able to prove that Android, and specifically G1, is not a competitor to iPhone. For god's sake, how can differences in hardware like G1 not having an headphone jack be one of the reason why they are aimed at different markets.
Why not? iPhone is part music player, one of the fundamental features of the product. Plug in a headphone and go. It's the simplest and most common audio accessory with the most basic and most common audio connector, and you don't see a problem with having to buy an adapter? Or at least you don't seem to. As such, I don't see it as necessarily the same market if it's not really trying hard enough to make itself very useful to people that want to listen to audio.
If Apple did the same thing, I don't think we'd hear the end of the complaining for quite a while.
"Android is aiming to target the cheaper non-multitouch touch screen market" - wow, now there is now a market division based on multi-touch! Also, engadget says, with some conviction, that this is more due to intellectual property problems than anything else.
Or one could look at what Google itself says. "When asked about Android multi-touch, Andy Rubin says software doesn?t really need to do much to support it ? developers just need to write the right drivers to make it happen (Android demonstration during keynote was single-touch)."
So Engadget was speculating. Apple has patented some UI elements, but Apple clearly does not have a patent on multitouch. If you bothered to look around at Google's actual comments, you'd see there is nothing controversial about the idea that the Android API left out multitouch support because it was targeting cheaper devices.
Quote:
He concludes "but the real motivator in a Capitalist society is revenue, something that Google hasn't lined up yet in its store", in effect assuming that paid apps wont exist, atleast for a long time, which is obviously not true.
Motivating profits are not going to start tumbling in on day one if there is zero installed base, and the G1's customers are all freetards looking for a hobbyist platform as opposed to the 5 -10 million iPhone users ready to throw money at iTunes for anything that moves.
Quote:
The way he clearly assumes that AppStore is better is also not obvious - http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/e...g-developer-s/ - clearly shows there are problems on the other side as well. Plus, apple problems have been proven, and Android problems are just possibilities at the moment. Completely open models can survive, wikipedia and sourceforge are great examples.
Having people whine about the App Store is pretty immaterial when its bringing in 40-50 million per month. Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
480*320 3.2" screen... "ppi unspecified"? I think someone failed maths.
Perhaps you are too quick to assume that 3.2" is a precise measurement of the screen and that the reported resolution is in fact the raw resolution rather than the usable resolution. Rather than jumping to conclusions based on "third grade math," we presented that a rated ppi was not specified.
Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
With all do respect DED, its not what you say as much as how you say it. Often you articles are laced with hyperbolic fanboism. Most of the time its not necessary. Example: " By then, the iPhone market will have grown by additional leaps and bounds. ". Couldn't that have been just as effectively said "By then, the iPhone market will likely have grown" ?
With all do respect DED, its not what you say as much as how you say it. Often you articles are laced with hyperbolic fanboism. Most of the time its not necessary. Example: " By then, the iPhone market will have grown by additional leaps and bounds. ". Couldn't that have been just as effectively said "By then, the iPhone market will likely have grown" ?
My comment was addressing complaints about facts stated in the article, contrasted with populist opinion pieces. You can additionally complain about how every fact is presented, but do you really want to read botoxed prose that bends over backward to be inoffensive and in so doing reads like cardboard?
Also, take note that the comments on articles are themselves "laced with hyperbolic fanboism," particularly those that reference hyperbolic fanboism using hyperbolic fanboism.
Or one could look at what Google itself says. "When asked about Android multi-touch, Andy Rubin says software doesn’t really need to do much to support it — developers just need to write the right drivers to make it happen (Android demonstration during keynote was single-touch)."
So Engadget was speculating. Apple has patented some UI elements, but Apple clearly does not have a patent on multitouch. If you bothered to look around at Google's actual comments, you'd see there is nothing controversial about the idea that the Android API left out multitouch support because it was targeting cheaper devices.
Motivating profits are not going to start tumbling in on day one if there is zero installed base, and the G1's customers are all freetards looking for a hobbyist platform as opposed to the 5 -10 million iPhone users ready to throw money at iTunes for anything that moves.
Having people whine about the App Store is pretty immaterial when its bringing in 40-50 million per month. Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
Rubin passed the buck. Google has the resources to write the multi-touch driver, but then again they'd have to do much more than just a driver. The X11 mouse driver is being completely overhauled for Xorg 7.5 or 7.6 and that's at least 12 months out.
I agree that Android has gotten off to a slow and not exactly overwhelming start. But this is such a scalding, one-sided article that it really does nothing but inform the reader of the author's bias.
I agree that Android has gotten off to a slow and not exactly overwhelming start. But this is such a scalding, one-sided article that it really does nothing but inform the reader of the author's bias.
Who said Android was getting off to a slow start, (besides DED and he's to be taken with grain of salt)?
Ars is reporting brisk pre-sales of the G1 phone here.
I think its a good thing. A little competition would be good for Apple.
Who said Android was getting off to a slow start, (besides DED and he's to be taken with grain of salt)?
Ars is reporting brisk pre-sales of the G1 phone here.
I think its a good thing. A little competition would be good for Apple.
So recognizing that Android sales are starting from zero and proceeding forward with a critically panned model is "biased," but uncritically reporting that T-Mobile PR is talking about "brisk" sales without defining what that even means, and publishing the story as "a bright future" for Android is a significant journalistic accomplishment?
Your decision to "believe" pandering PR over hard numbers indicates the bias problem isn't in AI reports, but within your own judgement.
So recognizing that Android sales are starting from zero and proceeding forward with a critically panned model is "biased," but uncritically reporting that T-Mobile PR is talking about "brisk" sales without defining what that even means, and publishing the story as "a bright future" for Android is a significant journalistic accomplishment?
Your decision to "believe" pandering PR over hard numbers indicates the bias problem isn't in AI reports, but within your own judgement.
In find the Ars article NO MORE and opinion piece than your own.
Time will tell.
Edit for prediction.
I think at the end of next year that the iPhone will be the #1 selling smartphone and Android smartphone(s) will be #2. RIM will fall to #3.
In find the Ars article NO MORE and opinion piece than your own.
Time will tell.
Edit for prediction.
I think at the end of next year that the iPhone will be the #1 selling smartphone and Android smartphone(s) will be #2. RIM will fall to #3.
What do you think?
Except that this article isn't a sales prediction, it's a comparison of the G1 and the iPhone and where both are in terms of product and platform viability today. The piece you referenced says the G1 is selling well based on PR, not numbers. That's the same BS that others reported about the Kindle. You are choosing to side with what you have an emotional attachment for. The AI article is not stating any emotional attachment for one side, but rather pointing out facts that underline that the G1 and the iPhone are not targeting the same market. There's not even a controversy outside of the one in your mind, based on your willingly PR-manipulated feelings. I'm not even sure why you are on the attack.
You are choosing to side with what you have an emotional attachment for.
Not true. I happily own a 3g iPhone. Not that doesn't mean that I don't appreciate what Google are attempting to do with Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince
The AI article is not stating any emotional attachment for one side, but rather pointing out facts that underline that the G1 and the iPhone are not targeting the same market.
I disagree. Just because the iPhone and Android don't match up perfectly feature for feature doesn't mean they don't go after the same customer. The smartphone market is big enough for both but iPhone and Android are competitors. I don't think there is market segmentation within the smartphone market like you seem to imply.
Comments
First of all, I agree with most comments that the article is not able to prove that Android, and specifically G1, is not a competitor to iPhone. For god's sake, how can differences in hardware like G1 not having an headphone jack be one of the reason why they are aimed at different markets.
Why not? iPhone is part music player, one of the fundamental features of the product. Plug in a headphone and go. It's the simplest and most common audio accessory with the most basic and most common audio connector, and you don't see a problem with having to buy an adapter? Or at least you don't seem to. As such, I don't see it as necessarily the same market if it's not really trying hard enough to make itself very useful to people that want to listen to audio.
If Apple did the same thing, I don't think we'd hear the end of the complaining for quite a while.
"Android is aiming to target the cheaper non-multitouch touch screen market" - wow, now there is now a market division based on multi-touch! Also, engadget says, with some conviction, that this is more due to intellectual property problems than anything else.
Or one could look at what Google itself says. "When asked about Android multi-touch, Andy Rubin says software doesn?t really need to do much to support it ? developers just need to write the right drivers to make it happen (Android demonstration during keynote was single-touch)."
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/05/28...rom-google-io/
So Engadget was speculating. Apple has patented some UI elements, but Apple clearly does not have a patent on multitouch. If you bothered to look around at Google's actual comments, you'd see there is nothing controversial about the idea that the Android API left out multitouch support because it was targeting cheaper devices.
He concludes "but the real motivator in a Capitalist society is revenue, something that Google hasn't lined up yet in its store", in effect assuming that paid apps wont exist, atleast for a long time, which is obviously not true.
Motivating profits are not going to start tumbling in on day one if there is zero installed base, and the G1's customers are all freetards looking for a hobbyist platform as opposed to the 5 -10 million iPhone users ready to throw money at iTunes for anything that moves.
The way he clearly assumes that AppStore is better is also not obvious - http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/e...g-developer-s/ - clearly shows there are problems on the other side as well. Plus, apple problems have been proven, and Android problems are just possibilities at the moment. Completely open models can survive, wikipedia and sourceforge are great examples.
Having people whine about the App Store is pretty immaterial when its bringing in 40-50 million per month. Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
480*320 3.2" screen... "ppi unspecified"? I think someone failed maths.
Perhaps you are too quick to assume that 3.2" is a precise measurement of the screen and that the reported resolution is in fact the raw resolution rather than the usable resolution. Rather than jumping to conclusions based on "third grade math," we presented that a rated ppi was not specified.
Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
With all do respect DED, its not what you say as much as how you say it. Often you articles are laced with hyperbolic fanboism. Most of the time its not necessary. Example: " By then, the iPhone market will have grown by additional leaps and bounds. ". Couldn't that have been just as effectively said "By then, the iPhone market will likely have grown" ?
With all do respect DED, its not what you say as much as how you say it. Often you articles are laced with hyperbolic fanboism. Most of the time its not necessary. Example: " By then, the iPhone market will have grown by additional leaps and bounds. ". Couldn't that have been just as effectively said "By then, the iPhone market will likely have grown" ?
My comment was addressing complaints about facts stated in the article, contrasted with populist opinion pieces. You can additionally complain about how every fact is presented, but do you really want to read botoxed prose that bends over backward to be inoffensive and in so doing reads like cardboard?
Also, take note that the comments on articles are themselves "laced with hyperbolic fanboism," particularly those that reference hyperbolic fanboism using hyperbolic fanboism.
Also, take note that the comments on articles are themselves "laced with hyperbolic fanboism," ......
Sure but don't you want you articles to be more thoughtful than the comments?
Or one could look at what Google itself says. "When asked about Android multi-touch, Andy Rubin says software doesn’t really need to do much to support it — developers just need to write the right drivers to make it happen (Android demonstration during keynote was single-touch)."
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/05/28...rom-google-io/
So Engadget was speculating. Apple has patented some UI elements, but Apple clearly does not have a patent on multitouch. If you bothered to look around at Google's actual comments, you'd see there is nothing controversial about the idea that the Android API left out multitouch support because it was targeting cheaper devices.
Motivating profits are not going to start tumbling in on day one if there is zero installed base, and the G1's customers are all freetards looking for a hobbyist platform as opposed to the 5 -10 million iPhone users ready to throw money at iTunes for anything that moves.
Having people whine about the App Store is pretty immaterial when its bringing in 40-50 million per month. Don't judge a blog by its cower. If you really want to compare facts with bs, you might compare my track record at getting things right with the sources you want to believe, and how often they get things right in the hindsight of six months later.
Rubin passed the buck. Google has the resources to write the multi-touch driver, but then again they'd have to do much more than just a driver. The X11 mouse driver is being completely overhauled for Xorg 7.5 or 7.6 and that's at least 12 months out.
I agree that Android has gotten off to a slow and not exactly overwhelming start. But this is such a scalding, one-sided article that it really does nothing but inform the reader of the author's bias.
Who said Android was getting off to a slow start, (besides DED and he's to be taken with grain of salt
Ars is reporting brisk pre-sales of the G1 phone here.
I think its a good thing. A little competition would be good for Apple.
Who said Android was getting off to a slow start, (besides DED and he's to be taken with grain of salt
Ars is reporting brisk pre-sales of the G1 phone here.
I think its a good thing. A little competition would be good for Apple.
So recognizing that Android sales are starting from zero and proceeding forward with a critically panned model is "biased," but uncritically reporting that T-Mobile PR is talking about "brisk" sales without defining what that even means, and publishing the story as "a bright future" for Android is a significant journalistic accomplishment?
Your decision to "believe" pandering PR over hard numbers indicates the bias problem isn't in AI reports, but within your own judgement.
So recognizing that Android sales are starting from zero and proceeding forward with a critically panned model is "biased," but uncritically reporting that T-Mobile PR is talking about "brisk" sales without defining what that even means, and publishing the story as "a bright future" for Android is a significant journalistic accomplishment?
Your decision to "believe" pandering PR over hard numbers indicates the bias problem isn't in AI reports, but within your own judgement.
In find the Ars article NO MORE and opinion piece than your own.
Time will tell.
Edit for prediction.
I think at the end of next year that the iPhone will be the #1 selling smartphone and Android smartphone(s) will be #2. RIM will fall to #3.
What do you think?
In find the Ars article NO MORE and opinion piece than your own.
Time will tell.
Edit for prediction.
I think at the end of next year that the iPhone will be the #1 selling smartphone and Android smartphone(s) will be #2. RIM will fall to #3.
What do you think?
Except that this article isn't a sales prediction, it's a comparison of the G1 and the iPhone and where both are in terms of product and platform viability today. The piece you referenced says the G1 is selling well based on PR, not numbers. That's the same BS that others reported about the Kindle. You are choosing to side with what you have an emotional attachment for. The AI article is not stating any emotional attachment for one side, but rather pointing out facts that underline that the G1 and the iPhone are not targeting the same market. There's not even a controversy outside of the one in your mind, based on your willingly PR-manipulated feelings. I'm not even sure why you are on the attack.
You are choosing to side with what you have an emotional attachment for.
Not true. I happily own a 3g iPhone. Not that doesn't mean that I don't appreciate what Google are attempting to do with Android.
The AI article is not stating any emotional attachment for one side, but rather pointing out facts that underline that the G1 and the iPhone are not targeting the same market.
I disagree. Just because the iPhone and Android don't match up perfectly feature for feature doesn't mean they don't go after the same customer. The smartphone market is big enough for both but iPhone and Android are competitors. I don't think there is market segmentation within the smartphone market like you seem to imply.