Just calm down a little bit and relax or you're going to haemorrhage. I think you're getting a little bit too worked up!
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.
Google Press Conference Today: Mobile "Android" Platform
- Thread starter edesignuk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just calm down a little bit and relax or you're going to haemorrhage. I think you're getting a little bit too worked up!
I think this comment by winterspan is pertinent. The real advantage of this system is that it is a functional operating system, Linux, that will be used by all the parties listed, and there are a lot of big players here, and a single flavor of Linux at that. Currently no operating system is used by a large enough group to standardize either the user interface or 3rd party applications. Go look at Roughlydrafted for excellent summaries on the various cell phone operating systems.
Symbian may be the most robust of the operating systems that is widely available, but in fact there are several incompatible versions, so that programs that run on one version can't run on the others. This limits its usefulness. I understand also that it is an aging system, not really up to the requirements of modern internet and multitasking use.
Mobile Windows or whatever it's called these days is still a minor player. The operating system does not seem to me to be robust, with frequent crashing, and the UI is really inferior. Look at the difference between the Treo with mobile windows and the Treo with Garnet/Palm. the windows version requires a lower resolution screen, requires many more taps or choices to accomplish the same action, etc. And it has sold only a few million sets, not really that much more than Apple has in only a few months.
Palm operating system as described by many here is an ancient system, it works pretty well, although it crashes on me at least once a week. Many 3rd party programs. but can't do multitasking. Palm realizes this and supposedly is working on its own version of Linux, but when push comes to shove, has anybody seen it?
Linux is the other very common phone operating system, but mainly on cheap phones in asia, and again, like Symbian, exists in multiple incompatible versions so that programs that run on one can't run on the others.
So a single version of Linux, with single set of SDK, means it will be really useful both for developers and for users. Everyone is focusing on the ability to mod this system, but I think it is the stability of Linux and the reliably common (hopefully) user interface that will be the real selling points. I can't hand my Treo to my wife to make a phone call, that is how confusing the interface is. I can't pick up her Blackberry to answer it if she's out of the room because I can't figure out which button to push. A consistent user interface, even if a little confusing, would mean lots of people would be used to it, so could pick up any of the phones with Android and use it fairly easily.
Of course, Apple insists on being the jewel in the crown of usability (or is it, usability is the jewel in the crown of Apple), so that almost anyone intuitively understands how to use it. But at least a common user interface in Android would be better than nothing.
This is very cool, who cares what the platform its self is like but it will put pressure on apple to be ever more innovative.
I wouldn't be so sure.
If anything, this may force Apple's hand a bit quicker than we had all imagined - which is good for customers.
Yeah, but the press loves Google and will surely position them as the freedom fighters in this, especially with the whole "open initiative" thing...
I agree. However, I will continue to use it until I find a word more suitable for someone that lashes out and puts down another company and/or their products solely because they are competing with Apple.
I don't think I ever said anything about "tens of millions" of Android based phones selling in two years.. but I may be wrong?
I also believe there is strong pressure already from the iPhone on the average price point for a phone. In the future, I can easily see huge growth in the smartphone sector as their prices decline and people become more willing to pay additional money for a better phone. Until now, it just hasn't been worth it for the average consumer to put money into a nice phone (other than people buying RAZR type "Im cool" phones).
The other thing you have to remember is that this platform WILL NOT be changing the mobile sales model of subsidizing phones on contracts. Although it's not like Europe here in the US, the carriers will still take $150-$250 off of retail for a new phone, so a mid-high end HTC will still be in many people's price ranges, especially after they start to see intuitive, responsive, devices that can do much more than what they have now. (as seen with the Iphone)
I agree, taste and style do not have an age. And where did I say I was one of these younger types? I only said that you weren't seeing my point because you were probably older than the ~14-20 type that do use facebook, myspace, xbox, verizon chocolate phones, etc.
I'm 24 and an application developer, web designer, and retail business owner. I do none of those things described above, and I agree that myspace is one of the worst expressions of adolescence I have seen in years.
I was not trying to offend you with the age comment, I was only putting that forward to remind you who makes up a large part of these companies markets, and their preferred type of 'customization' (however loud and gaudy).
I'm seen about ten iPhones/Ipod Touches around here and eight of them were in the hands of minors.
I don't really understand your comment, but what I was trying to get across is that the Android platform is NOT just a core linux stack, it DOES indeed have a fully featured, consistent user interface. May carriers/hardware manufacturers change this? possibly.. But I would posit they won't be doing the same types of major UI "overhauls" (aka destruction of usability) that they have been doing with Windows mobile. If the 'default' Android interface is going to be as good as some have reported, I doubt they will do much to screw it up. (except Verizon.. which thankfully is not even in the group...)
New Ad RingTone
Can't wait for Google to give us the new Ad Ring Tone. If you opt for a free phone, you have to sit through a 10 second commercial, before you pick up.
And if you call someone with a free Google Phone, you'll have to sit through a commercial too!
It will be very interesting to see what comes of this, but the more players involved the greater the chance it will never see the light of day.
I'll keep my iPhone, Thank you.
Can't wait for Google to give us the new Ad Ring Tone. If you opt for a free phone, you have to sit through a 10 second commercial, before you pick up.
And if you call someone with a free Google Phone, you'll have to sit through a commercial too!
It will be very interesting to see what comes of this, but the more players involved the greater the chance it will never see the light of day.
I'll keep my iPhone, Thank you.
I learned how to multi-quote!
yea... thats what the funny men in white coats always say...
Excellent post. A much better job at describing this point than I have.
This is precisely what will make this so unique. Many people on these forums ask "how is this different than symbian/WinMobile/Garnet ?" .
The open nature of this platform is for the extensibility required by carriers and hardware manufacturers to get this OS on as many devices as possible.
The real advantage to Android will be the sheer universality of the platform and how many companies will be using it.
Based on the reports so far, and just inferring from what Google has said, It seems that they actually do "get it" in the since they understand how deficient current phone platforms and interfaces are compared to the iPhone.
If they weren't developing a new intuitive interface, it wouldn't matter how many phones they have on any platform.. It would be too difficult for the average person to be able to use any software/services that Google would create. Case in point... Google maps for mobile is already great, but how many users do they have, and how many of those are smartphone geek types?
I don't think they would invest all of the time and effort into Android without actually putting something together that takes a big leap forward. They want every cell phone on the market to be as intuitive and useful as the iPhone, while allowing all means of 3rd party applications.
That environment is the 'fertile ground' that will allow Google to innovate new mobile applications and location-based services and vastly increase the volume of devices that will potentially be users of their products. I'm assuming that their theory is that they will be able to make top-notch software and 'cloud' services and that they only need to make it available for people to adopt it. And I would definitely agree with that.
yea... thats what the funny men in white coats always say...
Excellent post. A much better job at describing this point than I have.
This is precisely what will make this so unique. Many people on these forums ask "how is this different than symbian/WinMobile/Garnet ?" .
The open nature of this platform is for the extensibility required by carriers and hardware manufacturers to get this OS on as many devices as possible.
The real advantage to Android will be the sheer universality of the platform and how many companies will be using it.
Based on the reports so far, and just inferring from what Google has said, It seems that they actually do "get it" in the since they understand how deficient current phone platforms and interfaces are compared to the iPhone.
If they weren't developing a new intuitive interface, it wouldn't matter how many phones they have on any platform.. It would be too difficult for the average person to be able to use any software/services that Google would create. Case in point... Google maps for mobile is already great, but how many users do they have, and how many of those are smartphone geek types?
I don't think they would invest all of the time and effort into Android without actually putting something together that takes a big leap forward. They want every cell phone on the market to be as intuitive and useful as the iPhone, while allowing all means of 3rd party applications.
That environment is the 'fertile ground' that will allow Google to innovate new mobile applications and location-based services and vastly increase the volume of devices that will potentially be users of their products. I'm assuming that their theory is that they will be able to make top-notch software and 'cloud' services and that they only need to make it available for people to adopt it. And I would definitely agree with that.
I'm not assuming they're idiots. However, their own description of the implementation suggests that 3rd party apps are going to be given a whole lot more power than is customary (they will be "equal" to the base apps). The reason for giving third party apps lower priority (on a traditional system) is that it helps prevent applications and users from fouling things up on a basic level. Imagine if every app in *nix were run with administrator privileges, for instance. Makes a trojan horse awfully easy to implement. We'll see.
AFAIK, the java programs on regular phones aren't given the same priority/access as what google is talking about. Of course, it's just a general description. And I'm all for the open source development. It's the "equal" footing for 3rd party apps that has me concerned. Perhaps I have a different interpretation than what they actually mean by that statement. We shall see.
Dave
The lack of multi-tasking, at least initially, was on purpose. In my opinion, it's why the basic palm devices worked so well. I was around for the advent of multi-tasking on MacOS. Really, that was when computers started to bog down. It's fun to pull out my old SE/30 and see just how fast the apps are, on a processor that is thousands of times slower than today's machines. Once you introduce multi-tasking, now you have different applications talking to the processor, memory, and each other. Your productivity goes up - you can have tasks running in the background - but speed takes a huge hit. The original idea with PalmOS was to simplify things greatly, to not try to be everything a PC is. These were the best little machines. I still use a Sony Clie all day long at my work. You can see the same thing happening with phones now. The more it tries to be a computer, the less easy it is to use as a phone. Of course, I have an internet phone, but I realize I'm sacrificing functionality for convenience. The best phone experience is often offered by the cheapie giveaways.
Dave
I don't think I'd complain too much. As long as they don't try to charge me extra for the data that'll need to be constantly flowing in the background to refresh those ads...
Will do on Friday when the iPhone arrives.
Blimey I didn't realise they didn't have multi-tasking licked yet. I've used PalmOS for years (still do on my really old Sony pda) but tbh it's just a glorified diary for me. I thought the newer devices must be more capable.
There's hacked per-process multitasking - with the right software you can play MP3s in the background while you run any other app.
The kernel around which Palm OS is organized is capable of multitasking. But the license under which Palm purchased it prohibited them from exposing that capability to user level applications.
PalmOS Cobalt was supposed to be a ground-up rewrite which could have finally overcome that limitation. But it never amounted to anything more than a proof-of-concept design.
With that non-starter, a Linux-based Palm OS has been planned. But Plam has been making a lot of mistakes lately, so I'm not holding my breath for any announcements of hardware releases.