I love all these sorry grapes comments about how updates aren't a big deal now that Android has proven yet again to be an incoherent platform. Who cares about adding new features, increasing the performance, or adding considerable life to your device?¡ Which are then followed up with comments about rooting the device and looking for 3rd-party updates are no big deal for the average user. I'm sure if they can't figure it out those users shouldn't own smartphones anyway¡
I wouldn't exactly call them sour grapes comments...
These are two very unique and very different ecosystems. Apple's methods literally cannot work with Android. It's not ONLY a matter of ineptitude (which, again, does exist, and needs to be dealt with) but some devices must be unable to upgrade because the hardware required is weak.
In the future this'll probably be less of an issue as components prices lessen and lower end hardware is much more powerful in comparison.
But yea...Android OEMs need to step their games up...as do the carriers.
Google seems to be aware of the unsustainability of the current mobile device market outside of Apple and is making great strides with Android 4.0 to creating a unified and IMO attractive experience on the software side. But being that they do not control hardware and seemingly are powerless against the carriers to dictate terms it could be a while before we see some positive changes.
Google has the right idea IMO...problem is the idea is incomplete and all the other players are holding on to an old model.
Do you think a $299 bargain bin PC is meant to ever compete against an iMac?
How about a stylish top of the line $1500+ PC?
get it now?
All iPhones are high end phones...period. There is no low end iPhone, just older models.
Android phones are not the same, never were, and probably never will be.
Dude, did you read my comment? You know that, I know that. Anyone who picks up an iPhone or uses a Mac knows all that. Heck, like I said, my two-year old knows that.
The ones who apparently don't know that are just about all the tech journalists, just about all the analysts, survey conductors and stat counters, and the CEOs of Apple competitors who get up and talk trash... and everyone in here and other forums who loves to quote them favorably regarding "Android" (when whatever that actually is isn't up for grabs).
And yet, the iPhone competes rather handily against any single other phone on the planet, doesn't it? Oh, but we can't count like that, because, because they aren't "intended" to compete with the iPhone, and it's just not fair. Presumably, only the expensive ones that actually look and act as much like the iPhone as possible are intended to compete with the iPhone. Oh, the irony (just listen to yourself).
Double. standard. Get it?
And yet, tens of millions of people are spending their money on this one "highend" phone. Surely, there are tens of millions of other people somewhere out in the wide world who would buy some one, any, one other, phone model out there running Android, no matter whom that phone was aimed at? Surely. Surely, this high end, niche phone called the iPhone cannot possibly appeal to so many more normal everyday people across the board than any one other phone in the world?
What, this niche, hi-end phone? Appeals to all kinds of people in all walks of life and all ages? Appeals to tens of millions of people, twenty million more per quarter? Android fan (right here in this thread, too): Oh, that's because Apple makes "one-size-fits-all products!"
Double. Standard. Get it?
But you are talking semantics anyway. Of course the iPhone is the "high end" model, Apple only makes one phone (and rather well and competitively, at that; because other companies struggle to build phones and tablets and computers with comparable materials and quality at comparable prices).
So you can't even say that it's simply a case of "getting what you pay" for anymore; that only rich, snobby, fashion-conscious people buy iPhones. That's patently untrue. Plus, on contract, you can get an iPhone at any price point (BTW whatever iPhone is latest at the time, including the 4 and now 4S, have been available in Europe and elsewhere for 0 up front for years -- it didn't start with the 3G this quarter as it has in USA). In contract monthly fees there are tradeoffs -- probably because carriers know they aren't getting extra revenue from iPhone users in terms of ringtones and SMS, etc.
And yet, companies like Sprint still bet the company on the iPhone, and say how happy there were to do it!
Double. Standard. Get it?
And while a $299 bargain bin PC is not trying to compete with the iMac, Apple is surely competing with them, in its own way (asymmetrically). It's called the iPad, you might have heard of it. Apparently netbook sales are waaaay down.... "but, but that has nothing to do with the iPad, because the iPad isn't a "PC" and, and netbooks are not intended to compete with iPads, and there's no such thing as "post-PC", and the iPad is a media tablet", boo hoo.
"They can do so knowing that it?s been well over 3 years since anyone bought an iPhone that couldn?t run that OS."
Not that I expect developers to support 3+ generations/ years old stuff - but just because the Original iPhone has not been sold as new does not mean there aren't still a lot of them out there being used.
I gave my original iPhone to a niece and then her dad bought her sister an identical model off eBay. They have run across many apps they cannot use since that device is limited to pre 4.x OS versions.
I have always thought that the market share numbers etc do not adequately account for the fact that Apple hardware lasts a looooong time. And how many non-Apple iOS devices are being sold on eBay - broken - in the $100 range.
But what I said was true. And not a single person has yet to prove otherwise.
Here we go for a third time:
-If there's an app that requires 2.3, it's because it requires NFC/FFC
-If the app doesn't use those 2 features, this means that the app could require anything from 1.6-2.2.
-Every phone in the last 2 years has been 2.2, or currently has an option to upgrade to 2.2
-The only fragmentation that I see is with accessories that go with Android phones
I am not posting to "troll". I'm posting because most people seem misinformed about Android and WP7. I currently own every phone except a Blackberry.
Are people that aren't obsessed about Apple trolls? \
Well if I must.
I had a G2 for a long long while. Gingerbread was out for and only available through a third party d/l for months till it was finally released. It was inevitable that apps would crash because the oS was out of date. I had tons of problems, with basic apps, crashing issues and all you have to do is look at the app store and see I am not alone.
The fragmentation, is all over the place. There is not a singe in their market place that does not have compatibility issue with some phone or the other.
It is a real issue for Droid users and one that I hope Google addresses because, I welcome the competition, but you don't stay in the game by ignoring the facts.
In Google's defense these things didn't sell very well. It was reported they sold 135k units in the first 74 days, and then it was discontinued from Google's site about 7 months after it first went on sale. I can't imagine there are many Nexus One users at this point to make the expense of creating an update viable, especially not with Google's business model.
That's not the reason they aren't updating the N1 to ICS. The hardware is just too old. It lacks sufficient internal memory and ICS is probably best meant to run on a dual-core platform. People forget that it's mostly meant as a developer phone. And Google doesn't want Android developers using 2 year old hardware.
In any event, I think there's a long term and short term issue here. In the long term, fragmentation is improving. Google isn't iterating as fast anymore. They are pretty much slowing down to a yearly cycle. The hardware is getting better and more capable of handling software updates for two years. And companies are getting better at passing out updates. Also, with ICS, and future versions of Android, Google is making a lot harder for OEMs to skin the OS and for carriers to insert bloatware (now removable on ICS). With ICS for example, it's hard to imagine what any OEMs can do to change it other than adding a few apps and widgets and maybe some font changes. And as the skins get lighter, the rate of upgrades will actually improve. I expect fragmentation will reduce substantially in 2013 and beyond.
In the short-term though, there's going to be a rough ride. ICS is a huge departure for Android. No more physical buttons. Optimized for high-res screens, multi-cores, NFC. Gotta have a FFC for facial recognition. Etc. I expect that very few phones will get ICS in 2012. And until OEMs figure out how to get at least a bit of differentiation through software, they'll be holding off on putting out ICS phones till the middle of 2012. That means a lot of Gingerbread phones sold till then.
Well, depending on how you define out of date, the IPhone comes out with outdated hardware.
But does it really. Is the hardware 'outdated' or simply not the latest and greatest.
This is a phone we are talking about, for some their only phone. Most consumers are more concerned with having slightly older but hopefully more stable hardware than some new kid on the block that hasn't been tested yet and could leave them stranded somewhere without a working phone.
My point was simply that on Android nowadays 1GB of app storage is fine.
I use 4GB of apps on my iPhone. Biggest 4 apps are NBA Jam (300MB), Katamari, then Numbers and Pages. And this is because a lot of my larger apps for work (Goodreader, 282MB) are used on my iPad now.
Sorry for the tangent. But I think it leads to the point of how the iPhone is utilized for more of its potential, especially in regards to third party apps/developers
Dude, did you read my comment? You know that, I know that. Anyone who picks up an iPhone or uses a Mac knows all that. Heck, like I said, my two-year old knows that.
The ones who apparently don't know that are just about all the tech journalists, just about all the analysts, survey conductors and stat counters, and the CEOs of Apple competitors who get up and talk trash... and everyone in here and other forums who loves to quote them favorably regarding "Android" (when whatever that actually is isn't up for grabs).
And yet, the iPhone competes rather handily against any single other phone on the planet, doesn't it? Oh, but we can't count like that, because, because they aren't "intended" to compete with the iPhone, and it's just not fair. Presumably, only the expensive ones that actually look and act as much like the iPhone as possible are intended to compete with the iPhone. Oh, the irony (just listen to yourself).
Double. standard. Get it?
And yet, tens of millions of people are spending their money on this one "highend" phone. Surely, there are tens of millions of other people somewhere out in the wide world who would buy some one, any, one other, phone model out there running Android, no matter whom that phone was aimed at? Surely. Surely, this high end, niche phone called the iPhone cannot possibly appeal to so many more normal everyday people across the board than any one other phone in the world?
What, this niche, hi-end phone? Appeals to all kinds of people in all walks of life and all ages? Appeals to tens of millions of people, twenty million more per quarter? Android fan (right here in this thread, too): Oh, that's because Apple makes "one-size-fits-all products!"
Double. Standard. Get it?
But you are talking semantics anyway. Of course the iPhone is the "high end" model, Apple only makes one phone (and rather well and competitively, at that; because other companies struggle to build phones and tablets and computers with comparable materials and quality at comparable prices).
So you can't even say that it's simply a case of "getting what you pay" for anymore; that only rich, snobby, fashion-conscious people buy iPhones. That's patently untrue. Plus, on contract, you can get an iPhone at any price point (BTW whatever iPhone is latest at the time, including the 4 and now 4S, have been available in Europe and elsewhere for 0 up front for years -- it didn't start with the 3G this quarter as it has in USA). In contract monthly fees there are tradeoffs -- probably because carriers know they aren't getting extra revenue from iPhone users in terms of ringtones and SMS, etc.
And yet, companies like Sprint still bet the company on the iPhone, and say how happy there were to do it!
Double. Standard. Get it?
And while a $299 bargain bin PC is not trying to compete with the iMac, Apple is surely competing with them, in its own way (asymmetrically). It's called the iPad, you might have heard of it. Apparently netbook sales are waaaay down.... "but, but that has nothing to do with the iPad, because the iPad isn't a "PC" and, and netbooks are not intended to compete with iPads, and there's no such thing as "post-PC", and the iPad is a media tablet", boo hoo.
Double. Standard. Head. in. sand. Get it?
You said more to support my point than yours. Okay let's try this again.
Is a Hyundai Sonata meant to compete with a BMW? Of course not.
Is the Kia Optima, Ford Focus, Chrysler Town & Country, Lexus ES300, Mercedes S600 collectively ever meant to compete with a BMW M5?
Also these companies are less anti Apple than you guys think. Listening to you all I'd think there were a diss a day.
Two different ecosystems having two different sets of rules applying to them is not a double standard.
Also I'm well aware iPhone is the greatest selling phone in recent history (congrats you must've worked so hard on it, glad to see you were successful) That's another part of the further nuanced ecosystems at play.
I remember when phones didn?t even get updated, yes I?m that old!
I think it?s good that there are different phones out there for different people. I was a long time coming back to apple after abandoning them many years ago. I must say that I?m completely at home now and very happy I came back. But for a long time I was used to changing phones on a regular basis from dumb to smart...to smarter. It wasn?t until the iPhone that I got used to updates and new features. Prior to that, if I wanted new features it meant buying a new phone.
I think there will always be a certain percentage of phone users that don?t need, want or even particularly care about ?updates?. They are happy with the existing features and the phone serves their purposes, here?s nothing new to learn. If they are in the mood for change...it?s not just the features, but the look and feel of the phone that adds to that ?new purchase? a ?new adventure?. For those people, it?s probably preferable to upgrade the entire experience to new, rather than ?refresh? the old one.
I love innovation, but I?ve always felt that the best driver for innovation was competition. Why did Apple design and build the iPhone? Well, according to some, it was because some senior Apple people thought their phones were crap. In the same vein, phone companies are always try to out-do their competition by bringing out the ?latest and greatest? with better features than others, they just do it differently.
The fragmentation in Andriod is definitely something that some would consider when deciding to buy a phone, but for many, it?s probably not that important. They are buying the phone as is, they are buying the colour, the look, the feel, and the features at that moment in time. I think very few people buy a phone worry about what it will be able to do in the future.
Does Apple give better support when it comes to upgrading software? Probably yes, as it?s part of their overall strategy (including selling you more ?i? products). Does this mean that Andriod and the phones that it is running on are cheating or treating their customers like idiots? No I don?t think so, because most of them don?t have an iPad/iPod/Mac to sell you, they want you to buy the next phone they bring out.
Thank you for proving my point about the enduring double standards here.
Why is it necessarily the case that when someone who upgrades an Android phone they're "just wasting more money"?
Is it really inconceivable to you that it just might be possible for some people to enjoy their devices even if they're not made by Apple?
I'm talking about people thinking Android will be as polished as iOS and they wander around the manufacturers thinking the next one will be better if they aren't satisfied with their current one. I'm sure there are plenty of android users who love their phone.
I had an android phone (verizon) and i dropped it for a iphone 4S.
Also, i maybe a fanboi but i'm not an iSheep. Why do many fandroids think only iSheep buy iphones?
... Well, in some areas it's still behind Froyo (native turn by turn navigation, ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Yeah people are really demanding that (sarcasm)
Believe it or not (and I'm sure some won't), the built-in navigation is one of the reasons I'm going to upgrade to a new Android phone when my contract expires in six months. I am not overly fond of the OS, and I like iOS better, but I don't want to spend large amounts of money buying third-party GPS software, and then even more to keep the maps up to date. I like having the feature as a free app, pulling map and traffic data from the internet.
Of course, Google makes the Maps app for iOS as well, but that version doesn't have navigation. They reserve that for their Android users, and if (as I assume) this is an important feature that keeps people using Android (as it is for me), that's not likely to change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBRSTREETG
I wish I was joking but my Android crashed so much it just became tiring to use it for anything other than phone calls, email and checking when the next bus or train was coming and that app crashed all the time. The experience was dismal.
I've experienced this as well, but not to the degree you have.
The phone (an original Motorola Droid) worked great when it was new, but over the years, it has gotten less stable. Apps hang more often, the OS sometimes reboots itself for no apparent reason, data connections are slower.
Would this be fixed if Verizon would push out the latest versions of Android to me? I don't know. I'd love to find out.
I suspect that much of the problem is that app developers (including Google) are developing their apps with the assumption that you have a modern phone with a fast (or even dual core) processor, and they don't bother to test them on older/slower phones. So when the apps update (and Google apps often update without notice or warning, and don't give you the ability to refuse) you end up with a slower and less stable device.
The Android Market app is a perfect example. It has been updated three times since I got my phone. Each time, the UI looks nicer, but it runs slower and crashes more. On a more modern phone (a Motorola Atrix, my employer got for me), I don't see as many problems.
Part of me thinks that this is why Apple is so draconian with what they allow in the App Store. By making sure apps don't use anything undocumented or do anything Apple doesn't want, it increases the likelihood that the app won't break when new versions of the OS ships.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen
Arguably, Siri needs the faster processor (but, to be fair, we don't know that for sure yet).
...
NEW Android phones don't always ship with the LATEST Android OS.
Relatively new Android Phones, that are perfectly CAPABLE of using the LATEST OS, or even the last one or two, do not get upgraded because Google, the manufacturer, the carrier, or all three, JUST DON'T CARE.
Regarding Siri, no, we don't know. But I think that's for marketing purposes. It seems to me that Siri works by sending audio to an Apple server, which does all the CPU-intensive processing, sending back the answer(s). They can probably implement that on any iPhone.
WRT Android updates: I think you're absolutely right. Google releases regular updates, but they can't arrive on your handset until the manufacturer and carrier decide to integrate and distribute it. Which they usually don't bother doing.
Some of this is inevitable, since handsets from different manufacturers have different hardware and requires different drivers. So the manufacturer (at least) must get involved. And no carrier is going to push out an update without testing it, because they don't want the customer-service nightmare that would occur if they pushed out a bad update that crashes or bricks the phone.
Some of it could've been avoided if Google was more heavy-handed. Most Android phones have UIs customized by the manufacturer or the carrier. My (Google-branded) Droid has what I assume to be the default/stock UI. My Atrix has Motorola's "MotoBlur" UI. HTC and Samsung have also customized the UI. So when Google ships an updated OS, these manufacturers need to integrate all their UI customizations - they can't just recompile a few device drivers and ship the Google-supplied software.
I suspect that if Google would forbid handset manufacturers from customizing the UI, or require them to use a well-documented "skin" UI for all customizations, it would allow them to port their customizations much more quickly. But the manufacturers would complain about the restriction. And since Android is open source, Google wouldn't be able to enforce the rule anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen
What outdated hardware are you talking about?
I think he's referring to the fact that Apple was late to market with a 3G phone, and has no 4G offering (aside from AT&T's HSPA+, which is really a fast 3G, not actually 4G.) They have no LTE offering (for Verizon and AT&T), and no WiMax offering (for Sprint.)
Now there are perfectly good reasons for this - Apple has stated that they're unhappy with the current generation of LTE chipsets (large, power-hungry, etc.) It's also known that some LTE features (like voice-over-LTE) are not properly supported by the chipsets and carriers. It makes sense (to me, anyway) that Apple is waiting for the tech to mature a bit before deploying it.
But that doesn't change the fact that not everything in the iPhone is on the bleeding edge of new tech, and for some people, that may be important enough to drive a purchasing decision.
I'm talking about people thinking Android will be as polished as iOS and they wander around the manufacturers thinking the next one will be better if they aren't satisfied with their current one. I'm sure there are plenty of android users who love their phone.
I had an android phone (verizon) and i dropped it for a iphone 4S.
Also, i maybe a fanboi but i'm not an iSheep. Why do many fandroids think only iSheep buy iphones?
Believe it or not (and I'm sure some won't), the built-in navigation is one of the reasons I'm going to upgrade to a new Android phone when my contract expires in six months. I am not overly fond of the OS, and I like iOS better, but I don't want to spend large amounts of money buying third-party GPS software, and then even more to keep the maps up to date. I like having the feature as a free app, pulling map and traffic data from the internet.
I have Waze for my iphone 4s.. It's free, it's social (you can add to it where you see cops, traffic, etc.), and it has gps-navigation. It also gives you a few routes to choose from.
And lastly, The Nexus one was a developer phone which received almost zero marketing, sold unlocked and primarily for Tech oriented folks so I HIGHLY doubt that Google not updating the Nexus one will stop them from getting Ice cream Sandwhich.
It was launched just before the iPad in an attempt to jump on the PR bandwagon of "look what we can do", and Google thought that their PR power would get them to the acres of media that Apple get.
It didn't get much press coverage, and simply putting the name "Google" on it, did not bring in the sales.
Google even promoted it as a new way of buying a phone (eg outside the network) when companies around the world have been doing that for over 10 years!
They spun it as a developer/techie phone when their sales were discovered as being less than piss poor.
I have Waze for my iphone 4s.. It's free, it's social (you can add to it where you see cops, traffic, etc.), and it has gps-navigation. It also gives you a few routes to choose from.
Yeah, I think reviewers tend to leave this out. Waze is better than my Vibrant. At least my 4S can tell where I am.....not 5 miles away.
I find that on BOTH my iPhone 4s (one work supplied and one personal) that occasionally some app (or webapp, or website) climbs out of the sandbox (so to speak) and starts running down the battery at an amazing rate. Turning off apps and/or rebooting does the trick.
I don't know why or how it happens, but apparently things do need to be "turned off" at times. Not sure if this occurs on iOS5 as I've only had it for a week.
I recall others on AI reporting this behavior, but it has been a while.
If this is happening to you with some degree of frequency I'd suggest that something else might be happening. You might try resetting things like your network settings, especially if you can't track it to something specific. There have occasionally been quirks and bugs worked in when getting a new phone and restoring from a backup (especially when that backup was from a previous version of iOS). This is especially abnormal if you've somehow traced this to general webpages. Some of what you describe is completely outside the architecture of the OS.
I would imagine that if someone is experiencing a problem like this they'd be able to trace it to a specific app which is actually using an ongoing service.
Comments
I love all these sorry grapes comments about how updates aren't a big deal now that Android has proven yet again to be an incoherent platform. Who cares about adding new features, increasing the performance, or adding considerable life to your device?¡ Which are then followed up with comments about rooting the device and looking for 3rd-party updates are no big deal for the average user. I'm sure if they can't figure it out those users shouldn't own smartphones anyway¡
I wouldn't exactly call them sour grapes comments...
These are two very unique and very different ecosystems. Apple's methods literally cannot work with Android. It's not ONLY a matter of ineptitude (which, again, does exist, and needs to be dealt with) but some devices must be unable to upgrade because the hardware required is weak.
In the future this'll probably be less of an issue as components prices lessen and lower end hardware is much more powerful in comparison.
But yea...Android OEMs need to step their games up...as do the carriers.
Google seems to be aware of the unsustainability of the current mobile device market outside of Apple and is making great strides with Android 4.0 to creating a unified and IMO attractive experience on the software side. But being that they do not control hardware and seemingly are powerless against the carriers to dictate terms it could be a while before we see some positive changes.
Google has the right idea IMO...problem is the idea is incomplete and
Do you think a $299 bargain bin PC is meant to ever compete against an iMac?
How about a stylish top of the line $1500+ PC?
get it now?
All iPhones are high end phones...period. There is no low end iPhone, just older models.
Android phones are not the same, never were, and probably never will be.
Dude, did you read my comment? You know that, I know that. Anyone who picks up an iPhone or uses a Mac knows all that. Heck, like I said, my two-year old knows that.
The ones who apparently don't know that are just about all the tech journalists, just about all the analysts, survey conductors and stat counters, and the CEOs of Apple competitors who get up and talk trash... and everyone in here and other forums who loves to quote them favorably regarding "Android" (when whatever that actually is isn't up for grabs).
And yet, the iPhone competes rather handily against any single other phone on the planet, doesn't it? Oh, but we can't count like that, because, because they aren't "intended" to compete with the iPhone, and it's just not fair. Presumably, only the expensive ones that actually look and act as much like the iPhone as possible are intended to compete with the iPhone. Oh, the irony (just listen to yourself).
Double. standard. Get it?
And yet, tens of millions of people are spending their money on this one "highend" phone. Surely, there are tens of millions of other people somewhere out in the wide world who would buy some one, any, one other, phone model out there running Android, no matter whom that phone was aimed at? Surely. Surely, this high end, niche phone called the iPhone cannot possibly appeal to so many more normal everyday people across the board than any one other phone in the world?
What, this niche, hi-end phone? Appeals to all kinds of people in all walks of life and all ages? Appeals to tens of millions of people, twenty million more per quarter? Android fan (right here in this thread, too): Oh, that's because Apple makes "one-size-fits-all products!"
Double. Standard. Get it?
But you are talking semantics anyway. Of course the iPhone is the "high end" model, Apple only makes one phone (and rather well and competitively, at that; because other companies struggle to build phones and tablets and computers with comparable materials and quality at comparable prices).
So you can't even say that it's simply a case of "getting what you pay" for anymore; that only rich, snobby, fashion-conscious people buy iPhones. That's patently untrue. Plus, on contract, you can get an iPhone at any price point (BTW whatever iPhone is latest at the time, including the 4 and now 4S, have been available in Europe and elsewhere for 0 up front for years -- it didn't start with the 3G this quarter as it has in USA). In contract monthly fees there are tradeoffs -- probably because carriers know they aren't getting extra revenue from iPhone users in terms of ringtones and SMS, etc.
And yet, companies like Sprint still bet the company on the iPhone, and say how happy there were to do it!
Double. Standard. Get it?
And while a $299 bargain bin PC is not trying to compete with the iMac, Apple is surely competing with them, in its own way (asymmetrically). It's called the iPad, you might have heard of it. Apparently netbook sales are waaaay down.... "but, but that has nothing to do with the iPad, because the iPad isn't a "PC" and, and netbooks are not intended to compete with iPads, and there's no such thing as "post-PC", and the iPad is a media tablet", boo hoo.
Double. Standard. Head. in. sand. Get it?
Not that I expect developers to support 3+ generations/ years old stuff - but just because the Original iPhone has not been sold as new does not mean there aren't still a lot of them out there being used.
I gave my original iPhone to a niece and then her dad bought her sister an identical model off eBay. They have run across many apps they cannot use since that device is limited to pre 4.x OS versions.
I have always thought that the market share numbers etc do not adequately account for the fact that Apple hardware lasts a looooong time. And how many non-Apple iOS devices are being sold on eBay - broken - in the $100 range.
But what I said was true. And not a single person has yet to prove otherwise.
Here we go for a third time:
-If there's an app that requires 2.3, it's because it requires NFC/FFC
-If the app doesn't use those 2 features, this means that the app could require anything from 1.6-2.2.
-Every phone in the last 2 years has been 2.2, or currently has an option to upgrade to 2.2
-The only fragmentation that I see is with accessories that go with Android phones
I am not posting to "troll". I'm posting because most people seem misinformed about Android and WP7. I currently own every phone except a Blackberry.
Are people that aren't obsessed about Apple trolls?
Well if I must.
I had a G2 for a long long while. Gingerbread was out for and only available through a third party d/l for months till it was finally released. It was inevitable that apps would crash because the oS was out of date. I had tons of problems, with basic apps, crashing issues and all you have to do is look at the app store and see I am not alone.
The fragmentation, is all over the place. There is not a singe in their market place that does not have compatibility issue with some phone or the other.
It is a real issue for Droid users and one that I hope Google addresses because, I welcome the competition, but you don't stay in the game by ignoring the facts.
In Google's defense these things didn't sell very well. It was reported they sold 135k units in the first 74 days, and then it was discontinued from Google's site about 7 months after it first went on sale. I can't imagine there are many Nexus One users at this point to make the expense of creating an update viable, especially not with Google's business model.
That's not the reason they aren't updating the N1 to ICS. The hardware is just too old. It lacks sufficient internal memory and ICS is probably best meant to run on a dual-core platform. People forget that it's mostly meant as a developer phone. And Google doesn't want Android developers using 2 year old hardware.
In any event, I think there's a long term and short term issue here. In the long term, fragmentation is improving. Google isn't iterating as fast anymore. They are pretty much slowing down to a yearly cycle. The hardware is getting better and more capable of handling software updates for two years. And companies are getting better at passing out updates. Also, with ICS, and future versions of Android, Google is making a lot harder for OEMs to skin the OS and for carriers to insert bloatware (now removable on ICS). With ICS for example, it's hard to imagine what any OEMs can do to change it other than adding a few apps and widgets and maybe some font changes. And as the skins get lighter, the rate of upgrades will actually improve. I expect fragmentation will reduce substantially in 2013 and beyond.
In the short-term though, there's going to be a rough ride. ICS is a huge departure for Android. No more physical buttons. Optimized for high-res screens, multi-cores, NFC. Gotta have a FFC for facial recognition. Etc. I expect that very few phones will get ICS in 2012. And until OEMs figure out how to get at least a bit of differentiation through software, they'll be holding off on putting out ICS phones till the middle of 2012. That means a lot of Gingerbread phones sold till then.
Well, depending on how you define out of date, the IPhone comes out with outdated hardware.
But does it really. Is the hardware 'outdated' or simply not the latest and greatest.
This is a phone we are talking about, for some their only phone. Most consumers are more concerned with having slightly older but hopefully more stable hardware than some new kid on the block that hasn't been tested yet and could leave them stranded somewhere without a working phone.
My point was simply that on Android nowadays 1GB of app storage is fine.
I use 4GB of apps on my iPhone. Biggest 4 apps are NBA Jam (300MB), Katamari, then Numbers and Pages. And this is because a lot of my larger apps for work (Goodreader, 282MB) are used on my iPad now.
Sorry for the tangent. But I think it leads to the point of how the iPhone is utilized for more of its potential, especially in regards to third party apps/developers
[citation required]
The citation is the SOURCE LINK for the article on which this entire thread is based.
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11...ory-of-support
Dude, did you read my comment? You know that, I know that. Anyone who picks up an iPhone or uses a Mac knows all that. Heck, like I said, my two-year old knows that.
The ones who apparently don't know that are just about all the tech journalists, just about all the analysts, survey conductors and stat counters, and the CEOs of Apple competitors who get up and talk trash... and everyone in here and other forums who loves to quote them favorably regarding "Android" (when whatever that actually is isn't up for grabs).
And yet, the iPhone competes rather handily against any single other phone on the planet, doesn't it? Oh, but we can't count like that, because, because they aren't "intended" to compete with the iPhone, and it's just not fair. Presumably, only the expensive ones that actually look and act as much like the iPhone as possible are intended to compete with the iPhone. Oh, the irony (just listen to yourself).
Double. standard. Get it?
And yet, tens of millions of people are spending their money on this one "highend" phone. Surely, there are tens of millions of other people somewhere out in the wide world who would buy some one, any, one other, phone model out there running Android, no matter whom that phone was aimed at? Surely. Surely, this high end, niche phone called the iPhone cannot possibly appeal to so many more normal everyday people across the board than any one other phone in the world?
What, this niche, hi-end phone? Appeals to all kinds of people in all walks of life and all ages? Appeals to tens of millions of people, twenty million more per quarter? Android fan (right here in this thread, too): Oh, that's because Apple makes "one-size-fits-all products!"
Double. Standard. Get it?
But you are talking semantics anyway. Of course the iPhone is the "high end" model, Apple only makes one phone (and rather well and competitively, at that; because other companies struggle to build phones and tablets and computers with comparable materials and quality at comparable prices).
So you can't even say that it's simply a case of "getting what you pay" for anymore; that only rich, snobby, fashion-conscious people buy iPhones. That's patently untrue. Plus, on contract, you can get an iPhone at any price point (BTW whatever iPhone is latest at the time, including the 4 and now 4S, have been available in Europe and elsewhere for 0 up front for years -- it didn't start with the 3G this quarter as it has in USA). In contract monthly fees there are tradeoffs -- probably because carriers know they aren't getting extra revenue from iPhone users in terms of ringtones and SMS, etc.
And yet, companies like Sprint still bet the company on the iPhone, and say how happy there were to do it!
Double. Standard. Get it?
And while a $299 bargain bin PC is not trying to compete with the iMac, Apple is surely competing with them, in its own way (asymmetrically). It's called the iPad, you might have heard of it. Apparently netbook sales are waaaay down.... "but, but that has nothing to do with the iPad, because the iPad isn't a "PC" and, and netbooks are not intended to compete with iPads, and there's no such thing as "post-PC", and the iPad is a media tablet", boo hoo.
Double. Standard. Head. in. sand. Get it?
You said more to support my point than yours. Okay let's try this again.
Is a Hyundai Sonata meant to compete with a BMW? Of course not.
Is the Kia Optima, Ford Focus, Chrysler Town & Country, Lexus ES300, Mercedes S600 collectively ever meant to compete with a BMW M5?
Also these companies are less anti Apple than you guys think. Listening to you all I'd think there were a diss a day.
Two different ecosystems having two different sets of rules applying to them is not a double standard.
Also I'm well aware iPhone is the greatest selling phone in recent history (congrats you must've worked so hard on it, glad to see you were successful) That's another part of the further nuanced ecosystems at play.
Plus the iPhone is an awesome phone.
And the only iOS phone out there.
I think it?s good that there are different phones out there for different people. I was a long time coming back to apple after abandoning them many years ago. I must say that I?m completely at home now and very happy I came back. But for a long time I was used to changing phones on a regular basis from dumb to smart...to smarter. It wasn?t until the iPhone that I got used to updates and new features. Prior to that, if I wanted new features it meant buying a new phone.
I think there will always be a certain percentage of phone users that don?t need, want or even particularly care about ?updates?. They are happy with the existing features and the phone serves their purposes, here?s nothing new to learn. If they are in the mood for change...it?s not just the features, but the look and feel of the phone that adds to that ?new purchase? a ?new adventure?. For those people, it?s probably preferable to upgrade the entire experience to new, rather than ?refresh? the old one.
I love innovation, but I?ve always felt that the best driver for innovation was competition. Why did Apple design and build the iPhone? Well, according to some, it was because some senior Apple people thought their phones were crap. In the same vein, phone companies are always try to out-do their competition by bringing out the ?latest and greatest? with better features than others, they just do it differently.
The fragmentation in Andriod is definitely something that some would consider when deciding to buy a phone, but for many, it?s probably not that important. They are buying the phone as is, they are buying the colour, the look, the feel, and the features at that moment in time. I think very few people buy a phone worry about what it will be able to do in the future.
Does Apple give better support when it comes to upgrading software? Probably yes, as it?s part of their overall strategy (including selling you more ?i? products). Does this mean that Andriod and the phones that it is running on are cheating or treating their customers like idiots? No I don?t think so, because most of them don?t have an iPad/iPod/Mac to sell you, they want you to buy the next phone they bring out.
Thank you for proving my point about the enduring double standards here.
Why is it necessarily the case that when someone who upgrades an Android phone they're "just wasting more money"?
Is it really inconceivable to you that it just might be possible for some people to enjoy their devices even if they're not made by Apple?
I'm talking about people thinking Android will be as polished as iOS and they wander around the manufacturers thinking the next one will be better if they aren't satisfied with their current one. I'm sure there are plenty of android users who love their phone.
I had an android phone (verizon) and i dropped it for a iphone 4S.
Also, i maybe a fanboi but i'm not an iSheep. Why do many fandroids think only iSheep buy iphones?
... Well, in some areas it's still behind Froyo (native turn by turn navigation, ...
Yeah people are really demanding that (sarcasm)
Believe it or not (and I'm sure some won't), the built-in navigation is one of the reasons I'm going to upgrade to a new Android phone when my contract expires in six months. I am not overly fond of the OS, and I like iOS better, but I don't want to spend large amounts of money buying third-party GPS software, and then even more to keep the maps up to date. I like having the feature as a free app, pulling map and traffic data from the internet.
Of course, Google makes the Maps app for iOS as well, but that version doesn't have navigation. They reserve that for their Android users, and if (as I assume) this is an important feature that keeps people using Android (as it is for me), that's not likely to change.
I wish I was joking but my Android crashed so much it just became tiring to use it for anything other than phone calls, email and checking when the next bus or train was coming and that app crashed all the time. The experience was dismal.
I've experienced this as well, but not to the degree you have.
The phone (an original Motorola Droid) worked great when it was new, but over the years, it has gotten less stable. Apps hang more often, the OS sometimes reboots itself for no apparent reason, data connections are slower.
Would this be fixed if Verizon would push out the latest versions of Android to me? I don't know. I'd love to find out.
I suspect that much of the problem is that app developers (including Google) are developing their apps with the assumption that you have a modern phone with a fast (or even dual core) processor, and they don't bother to test them on older/slower phones. So when the apps update (and Google apps often update without notice or warning, and don't give you the ability to refuse) you end up with a slower and less stable device.
The Android Market app is a perfect example. It has been updated three times since I got my phone. Each time, the UI looks nicer, but it runs slower and crashes more. On a more modern phone (a Motorola Atrix, my employer got for me), I don't see as many problems.
Part of me thinks that this is why Apple is so draconian with what they allow in the App Store. By making sure apps don't use anything undocumented or do anything Apple doesn't want, it increases the likelihood that the app won't break when new versions of the OS ships.
Arguably, Siri needs the faster processor (but, to be fair, we don't know that for sure yet).
...
NEW Android phones don't always ship with the LATEST Android OS.
Relatively new Android Phones, that are perfectly CAPABLE of using the LATEST OS, or even the last one or two, do not get upgraded because Google, the manufacturer, the carrier, or all three, JUST DON'T CARE.
Regarding Siri, no, we don't know. But I think that's for marketing purposes. It seems to me that Siri works by sending audio to an Apple server, which does all the CPU-intensive processing, sending back the answer(s). They can probably implement that on any iPhone.
WRT Android updates: I think you're absolutely right. Google releases regular updates, but they can't arrive on your handset until the manufacturer and carrier decide to integrate and distribute it. Which they usually don't bother doing.
Some of this is inevitable, since handsets from different manufacturers have different hardware and requires different drivers. So the manufacturer (at least) must get involved. And no carrier is going to push out an update without testing it, because they don't want the customer-service nightmare that would occur if they pushed out a bad update that crashes or bricks the phone.
Some of it could've been avoided if Google was more heavy-handed. Most Android phones have UIs customized by the manufacturer or the carrier. My (Google-branded) Droid has what I assume to be the default/stock UI. My Atrix has Motorola's "MotoBlur" UI. HTC and Samsung have also customized the UI. So when Google ships an updated OS, these manufacturers need to integrate all their UI customizations - they can't just recompile a few device drivers and ship the Google-supplied software.
I suspect that if Google would forbid handset manufacturers from customizing the UI, or require them to use a well-documented "skin" UI for all customizations, it would allow them to port their customizations much more quickly. But the manufacturers would complain about the restriction. And since Android is open source, Google wouldn't be able to enforce the rule anyway.
What outdated hardware are you talking about?
I think he's referring to the fact that Apple was late to market with a 3G phone, and has no 4G offering (aside from AT&T's HSPA+, which is really a fast 3G, not actually 4G.) They have no LTE offering (for Verizon and AT&T), and no WiMax offering (for Sprint.)
Now there are perfectly good reasons for this - Apple has stated that they're unhappy with the current generation of LTE chipsets (large, power-hungry, etc.) It's also known that some LTE features (like voice-over-LTE) are not properly supported by the chipsets and carriers. It makes sense (to me, anyway) that Apple is waiting for the tech to mature a bit before deploying it.
But that doesn't change the fact that not everything in the iPhone is on the bleeding edge of new tech, and for some people, that may be important enough to drive a purchasing decision.
I'm talking about people thinking Android will be as polished as iOS and they wander around the manufacturers thinking the next one will be better if they aren't satisfied with their current one. I'm sure there are plenty of android users who love their phone.
I had an android phone (verizon) and i dropped it for a iphone 4S.
Also, i maybe a fanboi but i'm not an iSheep. Why do many fandroids think only iSheep buy iphones?
Even Applefan boys think I don't own a 4s...
What Android phone did you have?
i had a htc droid eris. Stuck at 2.1 with only using internal memory for apps.
oh and Angry birds was so choppy on that device. I have an older ipod touch that played angry birds so smoothly.
Believe it or not (and I'm sure some won't), the built-in navigation is one of the reasons I'm going to upgrade to a new Android phone when my contract expires in six months. I am not overly fond of the OS, and I like iOS better, but I don't want to spend large amounts of money buying third-party GPS software, and then even more to keep the maps up to date. I like having the feature as a free app, pulling map and traffic data from the internet.
I have Waze for my iphone 4s.. It's free, it's social (you can add to it where you see cops, traffic, etc.), and it has gps-navigation. It also gives you a few routes to choose from.
And lastly, The Nexus one was a developer phone which received almost zero marketing, sold unlocked and primarily for Tech oriented folks so I HIGHLY doubt that Google not updating the Nexus one will stop them from getting Ice cream Sandwhich.
It was launched just before the iPad in an attempt to jump on the PR bandwagon of "look what we can do", and Google thought that their PR power would get them to the acres of media that Apple get.
It didn't get much press coverage, and simply putting the name "Google" on it, did not bring in the sales.
Google even promoted it as a new way of buying a phone (eg outside the network) when companies around the world have been doing that for over 10 years!
They spun it as a developer/techie phone when their sales were discovered as being less than piss poor.
I have Waze for my iphone 4s.. It's free, it's social (you can add to it where you see cops, traffic, etc.), and it has gps-navigation. It also gives you a few routes to choose from.
Yeah, I think reviewers tend to leave this out. Waze is better than my Vibrant. At least my 4S can tell where I am.....not 5 miles away.
It is a great app, though.
Beg to differ.
I find that on BOTH my iPhone 4s (one work supplied and one personal) that occasionally some app (or webapp, or website) climbs out of the sandbox (so to speak) and starts running down the battery at an amazing rate. Turning off apps and/or rebooting does the trick.
I don't know why or how it happens, but apparently things do need to be "turned off" at times. Not sure if this occurs on iOS5 as I've only had it for a week.
I recall others on AI reporting this behavior, but it has been a while.
If this is happening to you with some degree of frequency I'd suggest that something else might be happening. You might try resetting things like your network settings, especially if you can't track it to something specific. There have occasionally been quirks and bugs worked in when getting a new phone and restoring from a backup (especially when that backup was from a previous version of iOS). This is especially abnormal if you've somehow traced this to general webpages. Some of what you describe is completely outside the architecture of the OS.
I would imagine that if someone is experiencing a problem like this they'd be able to trace it to a specific app which is actually using an ongoing service.