Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
G1 Cheaper to build than iPhone 3G
- Thread starter Luke1robb
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Considering they don't put any flash in the device and didn't spend any time making it look nice, not a shock. But compare an 8GB iPhone to a G1 with an 8GB card and it's probably a lot closer.
Let's think about this logically. There's little flash in the G1, the majority of the casing is made from a cheap plastic (no shiny metals), there's a smaller screen and a lot of the device is open source.
Of course it's not going to cost as much. Does that make it inferior? No. Is it inferior to the iPhone? Most would say so. It has awful battery life, it has a clunky keyboard and like the sidekicks the screen is prone to stop working on account of the swivel. Does that mean Android is better than OS X iPhone? No way. Android is going to take off.
Of course it's not going to cost as much. Does that make it inferior? No. Is it inferior to the iPhone? Most would say so. It has awful battery life, it has a clunky keyboard and like the sidekicks the screen is prone to stop working on account of the swivel. Does that mean Android is better than OS X iPhone? No way. Android is going to take off.
Android is an out of control horse running free
I feel like Android has yet to and might never gain its feet as a real OS, in the sense that its kind of all over the place.
I feel like Android has yet to and might never gain its feet as a real OS, in the sense that its kind of all over the place.
I still haven't heard much of a benefit about it aside from it's an open-source OS (how's that working for Linux's popularity?) and it's backed by Google.
So basically, I want someone to scream into my ear what's so darn good about Android. Google makes a lot of good things, but they also just make a lot of things. Even Apple makes duds, so I'm not exactly dancing in my pants over the concept of Android. If Google wasn't behind it, it would be in page 18 of the Tech section (most Tech sections don't have a page 18).
unlike the iPhone OS it's customizable. You can change default apps, map hotkeys, even replace major system parts. This might sound unstable, but it's done in a pretty neat and safe way.
That sounds all neat if you're a really devoted techie (I lost my faith), but I think the vast majority of phone users just want a phone that works. I'm not a fan of some of the limitations on the iPhone, but it's still vastly superior to the two Motorola phones I used before (Razr, v550). It's also superior to the Sony Ericsson phone I bought my dad recently when he lost his phone.
Classifying Android as open source is misleading. Sure you can develop whatever you feel like, but the store can refuse it.
And if it were truly open like some say, why did they release a patch to stop jailbreakers? Why are there jailbreakers in the first place.
And if it were truly open like some say, why did they release a patch to stop jailbreakers? Why are there jailbreakers in the first place.
The store may refuse it, but you don't have to get apps just from Google's app store. You can get them from anywhere, by any means. If you hate all the Android apps on the web, heck, you can write them yourself and load them onto your phone. That is the beauty of Android. You don't have to wait to be spoonfed small amounts of food from one source.
The only major downside i see to android is on the developers side for phone makers. The os is so minimalistic that they have to provide just about everything on their end and make sure it works on their countless configurations of phones. Its alot of work, but hey, at least ppl will be employed, which is deffinatly a good thing.
That's true for the iPhone as well, if you either pay the $99 developer fee, or do a jailbreak.
.