Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

rmwebs

macrumors 68040
Apr 6, 2007
3,140
0
Zero benefit? Eliminating dependence on Google for bug-fixes, tactical updates, strategic platform direction and replacing all that with an OS that Samsung owns and controls is a huge benefit.

It's Android. It's open source. If Samsung or whoever were to find a bug in the UI layer, they can fix it themselves and put it back into the Android repo. There is no relying on Google for any part of the OS. Google are the biggest contributors to Android, but ultimately the path that the OS takes comes down to the Android developers. As with all open source projects, anyone can join in and develop on it.

Based on that, you have the option of using Android and it's UI, an OS that is stable, has a massive number of contributors, etc, or starting again, going it alone, and relying on your own (much smaller) team of developers to do everything. The cost alone makes it not worthwhile, let alone the face that you'd kill your market in a second due to not having an ecosystem of developers and applications.

And ditching Google's profit layer will be essential in the future.

Could you elaborate on that? Google dont make any money from ANDROID the operating system. They make money from licensing the 'GAPPS' package (which consists of Play Store, Play Music, Play Video, Gmail, Chrome, Maps (and its license), etc).

Hardware profits will decline over time, as retail prices drop. It's inevitable for Samsung, Apple, and everyone else. The ecosystem is where profits will come from in 20 years.

I do agree here. However I dont see hardware profits vanishing completely. Samsung and Apple still sell their devices at premium prices, and people pay it. Google sell the nexus range at or below cost, as they know they will make their money back from app sales and other ecosystem usage from the user. This really is a better model, as it allows them to focus on making sure you use their hardware, and their ecosystem. In comparison, Samsung just has to release a phone every year and pay for marketing.

They would be way better off doing what Amazon have done, ans forking Android. They end up with a ready to go, stable OS, and a fleet of app developers who only need to submit their apps to one more appstore. No recoding or anything needed. I guess thats essentially what they are trying to pull off with Tizen, but with a bit more control over the OS. I suspect they will be moving to an x86 architecture for the devices as well, given that Intel is the other big backer.

This is assuming Android apps wont need recompiling or tweaking for Tizen as a majority of devs simply wont bother, this ultimately destroys the ecosystem. If you had a choice between buying an Android handset, with 700,000 apps at your disposal, or a Samsung one, running Tizen with their own private appstore with 1000 apps available, you'd go with the Android.

Customize the existing UI? Why do you think Samsung did that? Because their engineers were bored? Nope. They did it to differentiate themselves from the generic wannabes who don't have the engineering resources to do that. To cover up the bare Android UI with their own UI, which allows them to erase the word Android from their marketing literature.

Any (sane) company would change the UI from 'stock'. OEM's such as HP and Toshiba do it all the time with Windows based desktops and laptops, it's a way of getting your own unique look that nobody else offers. It's widely known that the s3 was so popular due to the unique features it offered on top of Android. TouchWiz provided some pretty unique features.

The Galaxy S4 launch avoided all mention of Google and included the word "Android" only once or twice, as Samsung explained how they'd improved security beyond what Google's generic release can provide.

Obviously. Why exactly would you want to name your competitor at a launch? They only mention Android because people want to know they can get at the apps, and to satisfy any possible licensing terms they may have.

The Galaxy brand is more important to Samsung than the Google or Android brands.

Again, obviously. That's like saying "The Pavilion brand is more important to HP than the Windows or Microsoft brands". Your own company ALWAYS comes first.

Important enough that they are hedging their bets with Tizen. A Tizen Android phone is on track for release this year.

And I'm sure it'll do well in some markets, just like Bada did. Despite how unknown it was to the wider world, it still managed to sell 15.8 million bada powered devices in 2012 worldwide. Clearly they arent confident enough to commit to using it on the Galaxy range though.

And guess what. Tizen can run Android apps.

Yup it can (was playing around with it myself on the sdk a couple of days ago). I do hope that they go down the line of doing this in a way, however as a programmer, logically there are two possible outcomes I can think of. Either Tizen uses a custom android loader and UI layer that essentially 'translates' Android app's to work on it (which is a terrible thing in the long run), or it uses a direct code port from the android core, which essentially runs as though the app launching part of the OS was android. This would be better, but still not perfect when it comes to apps needing to interact with core OS components.


Even if we put this to the side and say Sumsung will move to Tizen for the galaxy range (which for what its worth, I do think they will eventually do, just not for a long time), you still have the ecosystem issue, just to a slightly lesser extent.

They first need to get developers to submit apps to their own store (there's no way Google Play would be on Tizen), and this is assuming devs wont have to change code to make it work correctly.

Then you've got the rest of the ecosystem such as syncing, communicating between devices, etc that both iOS and Android have.

Then you have assistant apps such as maps (license fees!), mail, etc

Finally the last part of the ecosystem, media. They need a tv/movie service and a music service. An easy option would be to strike deals with the likes of Netflix and Spotify. Alternatively they open their own store and get licenses from all the media companies/groups. However we all know how long this kind of stuff takes.


So, you don't see Samsung moving away from Android any time soon?

It depends on your definition of soon, but no. I dont. It's all well and good saying 'Tizen supports Android apps - GO' but there's so much more before they have an ecosystem in place that people will want to use. This is all that matters. If you have an appstore with 500k+ apps, a music store, a videos store, native support for things like youtube, facebook, twitter, etc you're sorted. But the fact is, even with Android app support, Samsung arent even close to having that ecosystem.

Do I think they will eventually move completely? Probably. But not until they have a solid foundation in place to keep people on their devices, something they dont have right now. They are a hardware company, always have been. Moving into software is not a simple thing.

Well if Samsung is in it for the long run (and it appears that they will be the only Android hardware partner with any significant market share going forward) then Samsung will take a careful strategic approach. They can't blow it like Nokia, RIM, Microsoft, Palm, LG, HTC, Dell, Lenovo, et al.

I agree, I think we'll see them start building their ecosystem by releasing a few low-cost smartphones on Tizen late 2013 or early 2014. This gives them the chance to essentially 'test the waters'. A slow roll out is the only chance they have of making this work.

Samsung will use Android only because they have to. Develop Tizen because they want to. Develop their Samsung Hub ecosystem (you may have heard of this during the Galaxy S4 launch) because they absolutely need to.

Yup, spot on. The launch did seem to focus heavily on the ecosystem, so they know that it's all about that (seriously, most people couldn't give a damn about the hardware specs). They have the potential to actually blow both Apple and Google out of the water. Get the TV's, Mobiles, Stereos, Cameras, Printers heck even Fridges on the same 'system' so you can communicate between all your devices. How cool would that be? They are the only ones in the position to pull it off right now, and I do honestly hope they can pull it off, we need something like this to really shake things up for Apple and Google. I just dont hold my breath, they havent had the best track record when it comes to software related stuff.

And when Tizen and Samsung Hub are ready, buh bye Google.
Good luck with that whole Motoroogle mess.

I dont think Google will be that affected. They seem to be turning themselves into a dual-business. One side web/advertising, the other side hardware and Android. It'll be telling what happens with the next Nexus update. They have essentially bought themselves a Samsung - a hardware company. By bringing that in house they can afford to release devices at cost, and do what Amazon are succeeding at. Sure, they will loose a bit of cash in licensing from 'GAPPS' to Samsung, but the chances are they will make most of it back just by licensing Google Maps for Tizen. Even if they dont, realistically they wont really be loosing anything other than a few Android developers employed by Samsung.


I have an open mind about the whole thing, I love working with iOS and Android and hopefully Tizen in the not too distant future. I sense they may be having a few early problems though given that the first handset was due out in the 2nd half of 2012, then it was pushed back to Q1 2013, and now we're being told "later in 2013". I know they need to bring people over from Bada, but even still, that's a pretty hefty delay.
 

GermanyChris

macrumors 601
Jul 3, 2011
4,185
5
Here
There are some folks here that need to read The Cathedral and the Bazaar. It a bit old now but should clear up a rather lot of confusion.
 

imudius

macrumors newbie
Feb 4, 2013
2
0
Stop kidding yourself

Is for me.

Different strokes for different folk and all.

Apple people don't think like that... Ya'll don't know what you like or what's good... Which is evident by you being an android user and defending the fb phone at you kidding... This phone is a peace of trash the gs3 is trash and the note 2 is the worst phake tablet with stupid oversized phone apps that aren't as good as iPhone apps android is a sorry sorry joke you guys need stop trolling Mac sites and stop kidding yourselves
 

turtlez

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2012
977
0
I'm not here to teach business 101. If you can't figure out what Zuckerberg had to gain by his sales pitch, then perhaps you should read up more.

alright i'll tell you how I see it. Some guy saying that experience on phone B is better than experience on phone A. He is trying to get Apple to open up. Will Apple do this? Of course not, they have been bashed to open up for years but that is Apple's way. So he tried to get something impossible but ended up insulting the iPhone in the process.

PS, if you can't simply tell me then it sounds like you don't know either. Go ahead tell me and prove me wrong for the good of us both.

----------

All he cares about is money.. not the user.I`ve never used Facebook and never will.

I'd love to be able to say the same thing but I gotta use it for CG industry networking, my gym info. Always aiming for a FBless life though :p
 

Ryan John

macrumors regular
Jan 31, 2011
129
0
He says something like "android is great because you can put Facebook in your main screen, and it has a way better user experience, but I use an iPhone"...

I somehow think Mr Zuckerburg will own more than one phone with his wealth.
 

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
Quite ironic from the guy who has tried to re-AOL the Internet so everyone just uses Facebook for everything then using the much more capable and open Internet.

Facebook's co opting the Internet is the worst thing that has happened to the Internet since it first started getting public usage in 93-94.

Imagine the problems if facebooks user access database got compromised. The whole point of the Internet was the sum of the parts are greater than just a single entity and it has worked well.

I realize he has to push his Facebook phone but come on. Facebook has pushed the online experience back twenty years by becoming the one stop shop for so many people.

----------

How many times has their privacy settings been messed up so that photos, IMs, even those of Zuckerburg himself were made public? More than a few times.

I don't want the privacy of every text message, e-mail, phone conversation, etc. going through Facebook.

No thanks.

This is what bothers me with so many third party websites are pushing Facebook authentication. I think this is a massive disaster waiting to happen.

I thought Facebook died like MySpace. Everyone I know uses Tumblr and Twitter now for everything.

Twitter is a good comparison. It was a revolutionary web product with a singular focus. Facebook once was the same. Then they decided they had to do everything themselves. Twitter has stayed focused on their primary purpose and I think it will serve them well.

I suspect if Apple told Zuckerberg, "We will work with you to create Facebook home for iOS and have it work exactly as you want. Just one condition we want exclusivity." He would jump o. That deal in a second and tell android to pound sand. He is clearly frustrated when dealing with Apple because they do not serve his every whim like everyone else does but Apple's approval and convergence is what he desires most.

His comments almost sound like a tenth grader trying to use reverse psychology to get the attention of the one he yearns for the most.

Maybe Apple's "Openness" to developers will allow for the next big social media worlds to emerge. Instagram started as an iOS application. An application Zuckerberg then paid an Austin powers ridiculous one billion dollars.

The ironic thing is if apple had Facebook Home on iOS for the part several years Instagram may have never had the ability to take off.

So when we talk about openness lets just not talk about allowing any dumb developer do anything they want developing an app. Let us look at the openness that fostered and allowed Instagram happen. I am not aware of any billion dollar social media companies that literally went from nothing to a massive player in the android ecosystem.

So when we talk about openness let us be a little results oriented as well
One thing android has over on apple by a huge margin is they have managed to create a thriving malware and virus protection in the mobile space. Something apple could never do. So I guessv android has that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
Exactly what Android phanboiz have been saying all along.
"Just wait until next year, or the year after, or whenever."

[crickets...]

We're still waiting.

Android is the worst dessert spot in the world.

"I would like an ice cream sandwich please?"

Waiter: oh sorry. You got here at 8:45. Icream sandwiches are only for people who came after 9:00. However if you wait until 11:30 there is a chance we can get you an ice cream sandwich. In the meantime enjoy your gingerbread man.

Thanks to all this stupid media attention from facebook i decided to finally just drop it.

It was a little jarring to see how tied into facebook i was. Deleted passwords from chrome, deleted apps from iphone, delete account from iPhone, gotta go delete the apps from my Nexus 7 when i get home.

its a good feeling though.


Out of curiosity did you use any third party sites that you used your Facebook login to connect? If so what is the process of disconnecting these accounts when you delete your Facebook account?

----------

You completely missed the point. He isn't saying it "is" he is saying that it's openness allows that it could be. I mean when you essentially have the keys to the shop the possibilities are endless compared to when you are only given access to one room

Yet if we compare the creation of blockbuster apps born in one environment vs the other, the closed environment wins by a mile.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

marksman

macrumors 603
Jun 4, 2007
5,764
5
I think that's why Google decided to start its own line. The Nexus line use 'stock' android and are very decent devices. I've been using a Nexus 7 for the last few days and the OS is way cleaner and nicer than that of the 3rd party Android handsets and tablets I've used in the past.

The end game is that Android will still be OpenSource, but Google/Motorola devices will probably be the only ones with 'Real Android'. Others will use custom launchers and tweaks, but keep app compatibility. Jelly Bean is a completely different beast to old android versions, and the fragmentation now really only affects the UI for the most part.

I think it will be more abrupt than that. Googlerolla will expand their own devices with a unique os. Be it brand new, a version of chrome or a fork of android. Ultimately they will pull their resources out of android.

Google gave it a good try but I suspect they are not happy with the monetary returns they have seen with the android model. Given the share of the market android has, I suspect the revenue numbers are significantly less than they hoped.

So I think they will pick up the pace of their device development under some soft of new/revised OS and then leave if to the oems if they want to keep working on it.

I suspect even though google has a bigger market share , google makes more money from iPhones than android phones. They clearly want to get into the cradle to grave market with smart phones because it is magnitudes more popular then releasing a free mobile os and just counting on search revenue.

This is one reason why facebooks approach here is weird. He has to know android driven by google is not long for this world. I also have to assume this is what they settled in and not the rumored Facebook phone.

Heck google saw amazon fork android and capture the entire user experience. Some of the android handset makers are going to be screwed unless they can make a living with windows.

The most interesting thing is what will Samsung do. With google clearly looking to ramp up their combined hardware and software line up, it is worth stopping any contributing to android just to hamper Samsung. Samsung has the most market share. What better way to kick off a new series of products other than really hurting the ability of the number one player to compete.

I am really curious to see how google plays its hand but I have been saying for a while that google was going to abandon android. It is more clear now more than ever.
 

raw8725

macrumors regular
Feb 7, 2013
114
0
Absolutely agree, Android 4.2.2. is light years ahead of my iPhone's 6.1.3 which is still looks and feels as if its stuck in 2007. I'm glad I snagged this brand new for cheapy on eBay I don't think its worth the UK RRP. Previous to this I was using the Nexus 4 which costs less than half the price of this and is a much much better experience.
 

turtlez

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2012
977
0
Absolutely agree, Android 4.2.2. is light years ahead of my iPhone's 6.1.3 which is still looks and feels as if its stuck in 2007. I'm glad I snagged this brand new for cheapy on eBay I don't think its worth the UK RRP. Previous to this I was using the Nexus 4 which costs less than half the price of this and is a much much better experience.

i love it how people weigh up the price of phones. Did you know the iPhone has a design in the works for 1 year? Did you know the iPhone uses aluminium instead of plastic? Did you know Apple make their own OS for it as well? Did you know android isn't actually free, it is gaining profits for google? Weigh all this up and call it half price.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

alexN350z

macrumors member
Sep 20, 2011
76
4
The context Zuckerberg got to this conclusion is limited to Facebook desktop they built, he didn't say Android is way better than iPhone. There is no point to magnify the problem, we all know Android is a open system you can do more things with it.
 

X Cruz 187

macrumors member
Mar 12, 2011
86
5
Texas
Facebook not for everyone!

Maybe now Apple will remove the mandatory Facebook app. & replace it with YouTube. Not everyone uses facebook.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,779
41,982
USA
i love it how people weigh up the price of phones. Did you know the iPhone has a design in the works for 1 year? Did you know the iPhone uses aluminium instead of plastic? Did you know Apple make their own OS for it as well? Did you know android isn't actually free, it is gaining profits for google? Weigh all this up and call it half price.

Further proving you need to take a business class.

The iPhone has a design in the works for one year? No. Roadmaps are across several years and iterations. They are design, often, concurrently - and can take more than a year. Did you know that not all iPhone were made of aluminum? And "plastic" was never an issue until Apple changed. Then all of the sudden people thought plastic was crappy. Both are great and viable materials. They both have pros and cons?

Did you know that Android itself IS free. Google Apps are what cost money and are a profit center for Google.

----------


I'm surprised you are able to use an iPhone if that's the case. Really.

Both my wife and my mother are not at all tech savvy. AT ALL. My wife had an iPhone for 2 years and just switched to Android. She's had no problem whatsoever and has actually asked me for less help for how to do things. My mom never had a smart phone and was up and running on her android phone in a day or two and can now call, text, use whatsapp, take pictures, email and check facebook. All the things she needs to do.

Granted - only two "cases" there. But let's be honest - you had to be replying with snark anyway if you really believe Android is SOOOOO much harder to use than iOS.
 

wovel

macrumors 68000
Mar 15, 2010
1,839
161
America(s)!
because this whole scenario was just made up. if you answer your phone and put it to your ear, where does the flashlight shine? you run sideways like a crab?

otherwise, you would have to constantly hold it in front of you in your hand during running to light the way? pretty tiresome

basically it has to be attached to the forehead for being useful as a flashlight for running, but this would be the most idotic thing i have ever seen...

this is not a real world scenario

I am picturing this with the Note II and can't seem to stop laughing.

----------

I think it will be more abrupt than that. Googlerolla will expand their own devices with a unique os. Be it brand new, a version of chrome or a fork of android. Ultimately they will pull their resources out of android.

I think pulling Rubin is the first sign of this. Google is not making anything off of Android. Their bottom line would have been better over the past 4 years if they stayed out of the phone business and just provided apps for Apple and MS. They can't keep pouring money down that hole to enhance Samsung products forever.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.