Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.

I neither agree or disagree with this statement, I'm just very curious as to whether or not it is true. Anyone have an data that can prove/disprove this?
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

So stop whoring out your lame beta OS, Google, and finally have some respect for your product.

Steve Jobs was right all along. All this open baloney falls apart pretty quick when you spread your crap around to anyone and everyone who can slam together a box.

Next on the list: tighter Android Marketplace controls and a fresh round of app rejections.

Then we'll here everyone say "of course, it had to happen, no big deal." Yeah, we ****ing told you like two years ago when it was announced Android would be licensed out to everyone. But for some reason the perennially clueless thought that it would work forever.

In the post-PC era, User Experience reigns supreme. But Apple already taught us that years ago.
 
Think ...

As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.

Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.

When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.

Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.

BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
 
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

So stop whoring out your lame beta OS, Google, and finally have some respect for your product.

Steve Jobs was right all along. All this open baloney falls apart pretty quick when you spread your crap around to anyone and everyone who can slam together a box.

Next on the list: tighter Android Marketplace controls and a fresh round of app rejections.

Then we'll here everyone say "of course, it had to happen, no big deal." Yeah, we ****ing told you like two years ago when it was announced Android would be licensed out to everyone. But for some reason the perennially clueless thought that it would work forever.

In the post-PC era, User Experience reigns supreme. But Apple already taught us that years ago.

You're an angry little boy. Why all the anger over a Fu***** computer?
 
Polished like the pure Google, "optimized from the ground up for tablets" Honeycomb running on the XOOM right now?

Yikes.

No...polished like Android 2.2 vs. 1.0. I think my Droid had 2.0 when I got it, and just going from 2.0 to 2.1 to 2.2 they made huge strides. Google will get it right, and this is just another step towards that. Has iOS always had the polish that it has currently? (Asking honestly, I'm new to iPhone).
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

So stop whoring out your lame beta OS, Google, and finally have some respect for your product.

Steve Jobs was right all along. All this open baloney falls apart pretty quick when you spread your crap around to anyone and everyone who can slam together a box.

Next on the list: tighter Android Marketplace controls and a fresh round of app rejections.

Then we'll here everyone say "of course, it had to happen, no big deal." Yeah, we ****ing told you like two years ago when it was announced Android would be licensed out to everyone. But for some reason the perennially clueless thought that it would work forever.

In the post-PC era, User Experience reigns supreme. But Apple already taught us that years ago.

Well said.

I'm wondering what exactly will be "open" about Android now that Andy Rubin has to approve everything.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.

You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)

Finally Google admits Jobs was right about fragmentation and recognises that to fight Apple it must become Apple. But it won't admit it. Prepare for lots of "closed is open and open is closed" stuff. Plus: the state of emergency justifying this closure is temporary: sort of like in Syria 50 years ago.

You know, I am truly sorry for the idealists in the open source community. They deserve better.

Were you attempting to make a point here?
 
Google wants to do with android, what apple has been doing for the past 4 years with ios. Actually make money!

The only reason google made android open source was to get a lot of money invested in the ecosystem (HTC is basically dependent on android now). I see google charging handset manufacturers like HTC for it's OS in the near future.

Because when all is said and done, Google is a company and like any other company, it's goal is profit.
 
Has LTD ever posted anything not pro-Apple?

I'll give it to you dude, you're very articulate and you have a way of spinning things to sound like you're right, but you are blatantly against anything that encourages competition or threatens Apple in any way.
 
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.

The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.

The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.

The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.

Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
 
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.

-LanPhantom

but you can by a older iphone for 99 dollars
 
I think one thing Google may require--possibly starting right now--is that all cellphone and tablet manufacturers that use Android MUST include an option for what amounts to a "pure" Android interface "experience," which means the ability to disable Motorola's Motoblur and HTC's HTC Sense interface changes in favor of the true Android interface.

Perhaps the biggest advantage of the iPhone is the fact because you only have ONE interface type, it becomes very easy to do minor version updates to the cellphone OS to add features and/or fix bugs. Google reining in Android will mean that future Android cellphones and tablet computers will also gain the ability to do minor version updates easily.
 
I like everyone bashing on the Apple "fanboys." It's comical. Somehow telling it like it is hangs a sign around your neck saying "i'm a fanboy, flame me."

People defending Google here by saying Google is still open are simply delusional. Now, if you defend Google by saying, "hey, Google was wrong these past few years, they're going in the right direction now," I'll give you credit.

But, somehow, Google changing its policies that were clearly not in the best interest of consumers gives people a reason to bash Apple customers.

Google is practically admitting what Apple "fanboys" have been saying all along.

"You can't handle the truth!"


SactoGuy18: Good idea. I've been wondering why Google never did this originally.
 
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.

The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.

The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.

The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.

Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.

Yeah! That's what'll happen!

Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.

To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.

To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.

And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.

Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
 
Last edited:
John Gruber's take:
So here’s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was “open” only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.

Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.
Can't say I disagree.

I completely disagree.

Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.

This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.

I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
 
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.

Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.

When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.

Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.

BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.


I disagree because Smartphones have become essentially computers for people, and people much more than ever want to maintain their existence when they upgrade or move on. With the iPhone this is simply easy to just get a new model of iphone and continue on. Crossing from one manufacturer of android to another with a new OS and everything else, I can't believe it is anywhere near as seamless or effortless.

I think mostly what we are seeing in the marketplace now is the android is for people who can't afford an iPhone. Other people mentioned the two for one deals and other things. It is just a marketplace where android based phones are more affordable and accessible to people who don't have as much to spend on a smartphone.

The whole android handset is crazy. Manufacturers make up new models every 3 weeks, Google renames each version of the Android operating system with some silly name... There is no cohesion or continuity in that at all. I think consumers look more for that than ever.

Android has barely been out long enough for most of the normal consumers to be on an upgrade path already and to have to cycle into a new device. Time will tell.

I think people will see a new android handset (although aqain it is confusing with 25 different makers), and expect to be able to just take it home and upgrade it.. But is that how it happens? Because it is like 2 clicks for an iPhone.
 
Yeah! That's what'll happen!

Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.

To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.

To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.

And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.

Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.

The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.

I stand by my three groups: 1—indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2—people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3—the true believers in the open-source religion.

Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!

And no, I see no "bias" in the article—I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
 
I neither agree or disagree with this statement, I'm just very curious as to whether or not it is true. Anyone have an data that can prove/disprove this?

I have just tried to find some information on this, and the only information I can find are two seperate quarters where a blackberry phone was number 1 for that particular quarter. The 3G was second in that quarter. In another instance, Blackberry was #1 for a quarter, and the 3GS was #2 and the 3G was #4.

There is a lack of data actually listing the top selling individual smartphones out there.

The interesting thing is I suspect the other top selling phones are all Blackberry devices. Maybe the Droid would be in there, but I suspect if you did a top 10 only one android device would be there.
 
I hope this silences all the Android trolls that claimed there was no fragmentation.
 
Android is the worst

I am so happy my android phone is open source and can be tweaked at any time by the various phone manufactures. Where else could I end up with a phone that thinks I am so Eastern European country in he morning, and some South Pacific island in the afternoon, while I really have never left the North West of the U.S. Lets here it for android and open source. This problem has be going on for about 1.5 years I have been told it is not a problem and I need to learn to live with it.

I would take Apples approach any day. If only the I phone was available on my preferred carrier. Not a fan of ATT and my wife dislikes Verizon. Bummer for me.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.