The difference being that Apple gets most of their money straight from consumers rather than corporate entities.
Not that it's really relevant to our conversation, but who would you trust? A company that you paid directly for services provided directly to you or a company that was paid by some corporate entity on behalf of you for God knows what service they are providing that company (i.e. giving out your private information, search habits, etc). Again, not an immediately relevant issue but certainly food for thought.
You are misunderstanding and misconstruing what "open" means.
1. Google has minimum requirements for devices (any device) to access the marketplace. Among them are requirements that the device have a compass/accelerometer/GPS and a few other features. There is NOTHING keeping for these devices from having their own markets (which some companies and providers are doing) and there is NOTHING keeping programmers with apps on the Google Market from also offering the same apps outside of the market. Android lets you side-load applications to your heart's content. Only AT&T has blocked this feature. As an iphone user, you should know all about AT&T restrictions.
2. You can tweak Android almost however you like. Google reserves the right to control how they license their core apps (Gmail, Maps, etc), but the source code for the Android operating system is freely available to anyone who wants to inspect it and tweak it as they see fit.... meaning you can replace the keyboard, launcher, dialer, etc..... This is the definition of open that most people are referring to.
In contrast, Apple has a policy of disallowing any applications that "replicate functionality". iOS source code is not available to anyone but Apple themselves and if you have a problem with how a particular aspect of the software is designed, then you are usually stuck having to use it as Apple intended.
In addition, iOS devices do not have USB ports or flash card readers built in. Anything put onto these devices must be imported through Apple's iTunes software. This is so that Apple can regulate (and get a $ cut of in most cases) any software or media that is put on the device. This way, they can make it easier for iOS users to purchase digital goods from Apple (or companies Apple has agreements with) and erect artificial barriers from obtaining digital goods from non-Apple sources. This is the definition of "closed" that most people use.
I completely agree that iOS is closed in that respect but I prefer it that way. I think the experience is a lot better, the UI is much smoother and responsive (thanks to iOS being run through the iPhone's GPU as opposed to CPU which unfortunately is not possible on any current Android phone) and the keyboard is much more responsive and comfortable to use. I prefer the quality of the apps on iOS due to Apple's standardization of GUI aspects whereas Android apps are all over the place with respect their GUIs. While iTunes is not a perfect app by any means, I prefer having a centralized place where I can manage my phone as opposed to Android where everything is all over the place and there is no way of properly syncing music without some 3rd party software.
Also, I'm a Droid X user because I'm on a family plan with Verizon. I've been using it since the day it came out.
Since google does not make any hardware, they have little control over the policies that carriers and phone manufacturers enforce on their devices. At the end of the day, carriers and service providers will nickel and dime customers as much as they can before they go so far as to hurt sales.
The Nexus One was Google's attempt to give consumers an option and to see whether a truly open and unlocked handset was commercially viable in the mobile phone market. The problem wasn't the phone itself... the problem was distribution. No one could put their hands on one and try it out before buying one at full price. I don't know about you... but spending ~$400 on a phone that I will have to keep with me everyday without being able to test it out first is a big leap of faith.
Is it so surprising that instead, most people opted to spend $200 on subsidized phones they could go down to the store to try out first?
Carriers will continue to nickel and dime customers to no end. But I think what we are forgetting is that there are 3 parties involved here, the carrier, the phone manufacturer, and the end user. The difference between Android phones and the iPhone is that in the case of Android, the phone manufacturer is still very much in the pocket of the carrier while in the case of the iPhone, Apple had their own agenda which was very different from that of the carrier. This provided the end user leverage over the carrier since they were now able to buy apps and music from a source other than the carrier. Android on the other hand provides no leverage over the carrier. The open Android marketplace on Sprint, Tmobile, and Verizon android phones only exist primarily as competition to the App store, not because of the phone manufacturer or carrier. If there was no iPhone, there never would have never been an Android marketplace that was open to Verizon users (or an Android phone period for Verizon users).
Your information is out of date. As of Tuesday the iPhone and Android facebook applications reached parity. Also, regarding the market vs App store... there are a lot more free, quality apps for Android than for iPhone. If you are willing to deal with advertisements then you don't have to spend a dime on most apps at all. Angry Birds is one example of this model.
Funny you mentioned Angry Birds. The only reason it's free on Android is that the developer probably knew they weren't going to make a lot of money trying to sell the thing on the Android marketplace so instead they offered it for free with ads where at least they were guaranteed to make something.
Programmers trying to sell programs will go wherever the users are, period. As for getting programs onto the Market or App Store, then there is no question.... the process is far easier, cheaper, and less of a hassle with Google.... especially since you don' t even have to sell your program on the Google market (you can sell it off of your own website).
$25 is all it costs to become an Android developer. As I recall, Apple charges ~$99, which carries no guarantee that your program will be approved and make it onto the app store.
The process may be "easier" with Android but you are still not considering what makes more money, an Android app or an iOS app? Isn't that important at the end of the day?
That the fact that Apple treats its customers with so much disdain is very surprising for a company that makes most of its money from their direct purchases.
Marketing is Apple's last bastion when it comes to iOS. Looking objectively at function, features, pricing, and availability, there is little reason to go with iOS over Android.
I've never once felt that I was treated with disdain by Apple. I own a Macbook pro and an iPod touch and enjoy using both devices. My experience with my Macbook pro has been immeasurably better than the Dell laptop I used preceding it.
This is why people refer to iPhone enthusiasts as 'fan-boys' so often. They can no longer claim that their phones are the best at anything. Their preference for the iOS platform is rooted in emotional subjectivity. You know this to be true, just read this forum.
There is nothing wrong with that (people have different opinions), but its when they deny that that is the case that arguments start.
Um yes, people will prefer a device that they emotionally enjoy using. There is a lot more to using a device than just a list of specs which unfortunately is something that Android fanboys can't seem to wrap their heads around. Much more important is ease of use, UI, and enjoyability. By your standards, there should be no need for luxury cars or first class seats on airlines because they are not necessarily "better" than their lower priced counterparts.
