T-Mobile To Offer Android-Based Phone By Christmas

[macsmurf]

I realize, but I also don't accept that open source is automatically more secure than proprietary code. This threadlet got started when someone suggested that the Android OS was going to be good because it's "open." My question is "why?" I don't think I've seen an answer but I believe the question has been beaten to death anyway.

Well, I think it has already been answered, but i'll summarize. There are essentially three perspectives here; a manufacturer, a developer, and a consumer perspective.

For the manufaturer, Android is first of all a benefit because the are allowed to use it (for free). They don't have to reinvent the wheel by implementing the network stack themselves etc. A lot of companies use a Linux kernel in their embedded systems for precisely that reason. Even Apple used large amounts of code from BSD when they created OS X. In addition, if Android is widely adopted, companies have the option of cooperating on software that are not cost effective for them to develop themselves. The companies will compete on hardware, as they always have, and on whatever proprietary changes to the OS they choose to make.

For the deveploper, this means that an application probably will be easier to port from one company's phone to another. This means that developing apps to the phone will become more economically attractive than it would be to make an app for a specific phone. Also, developers are free to discuss issues with each other and have the option of drilling down into the OS (and supply patches to Google) when they experience unexpected behaviour. In addition, developers of third-party apps will be able to write in new functionality and get it adopted into the main OS. This will hopefully, in time, lead to a more stable and feature-rich OS base.

For the consumer, this will hopefully lead to a better, less bugridden experience. The consumer will have a wider choice of hardware and apps and will be locked in to a lesser degree when contemplating a switch to another phone.

Of course, these benefits rely on wide adoption and aren't available just because the OS is open. Rather, the openness of the OS facilitates this. This isn't a new concept. It has been proven to work, not only when it comes to embedded systems and OS in general, but also in programming environments such as java (the most widely used programming language today). When a java developer makes an application today, chances are that he will be using several open source components in his final product.

 

[FleurDuMal]

Anyone who wanted an advanced touch screen phone has bought one by now.

No they haven't

 

[Wolfpup]

Worthless. Can't think of any other way to describe it.

The Android phone has no potential whatsoever. The iPhone has already killed it and will only continue to blow it away.

How has the iPhone killed it? Unless the hardware and software just don't come together, Android has huge potential. Seems like it's striking just about at the perfect time too. No one's done what Android's trying to do very well yet.

No they haven't

Nooo kidding

 

[Macinposh]

Seriously though, this is a poor video of an early prototype. Don't write Android off just because of a few odd things.


If Android is 90% as good (meaning the user experience) as the Iphone, Apple will have to go back to being an MP3 music player company. The "closed" Iphone development/appstore model will die.

I would say :"Nah.."


Apple...sorry... iPhone will prosper in the future just fine. It has and will make it´s clientee : pre teens,tech-heads and in the future tech-allergics and in general people who need multimedia capable phones but are not willing to tinker.

Android will deliver it´s biggest blows against symbian and especially Windows mobile devices,in wich manufacturers are allready pissed of because of the lisencing fees.
The tinkerers (wich will be intrested in the relatively open developement) will be the forefront in creating content quickly. I think android will be the Linux-On-Stereoids of mobile world.

Hopefully at least.. It would push the other telephone/os developers to do better stuff.

My 0.23 dollars.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Well, I think it has already been answered, but i'll summarize. There are essentially three perspectives here; a manufacturer, a developer, and a consumer perspective.

That's a whole lot of "hopefullys." I think this comes down to the previously debated end-to-end vs. component model question. Apple has pursued the former with substantial success, in terms of creating "whole widgets" that produce a satisfying user experience. Microsoft has spent their corporate lifetime doing the latter, but as we discussed at great length in another thread recently, they're now trying to figure out how to duplicate the end-to-end user experience with the component model. Some (myself in particular) questioned their ability to make that happen with no control over the hardware side of the equation. I also pointed out in that thread that you could count the number of big successes with the component model on one finger, and that one was essentially a freak of nature.

So now Google is trying the component model, and some think it's got a good chance of succeeding. I don't see much reason to expect it, beyond the fact that it's got the Google brand name associated with it -- but then again, only with the OS, and not the finished product that consumers will hold in their hands. That's created by somebody else. Big problem, if the hope is to compete with Apple's model of complete control over the finished product.

I also have to point out that Google has absolutely no experience with operating systems or consumer products. And as I said before, they seem to lack the corporate attention span to create a spit-and-polished final product, which I think is necessary to grab and hold consumer's attention.

My conclusion is that the odds are way against them making a big splash in this market, and that these adverse odds are not substantially mitigated just because the OS is "open."

 

[Lynxpro]

Google leaves their wares in beta so they can point and say its still beta when something goes wrong. Take for instance G-mail's outtage last week. I think the practice is crap. But there are many things about big G that are crap. I still am scratching my head on the fact that Google Groups doesn't have a calender system in place

Uhm, out of fairness, didn't .Me/.Mac also suffer an outtage at the same time as Gmail? Is MobileMe listed as in Beta? Seriously, if you are going to throw stones at Google, then you also need to throw them back at Apple. Gmail is free, after all. The last time I checked, MobileMe is subscription based.

Can we all stop arguing about Android? Let's choose to view the platform as a positive because at the very least, it might ensure that Microsoft is kicked out of the mobile phone industry once and for all. And anything that hurts Microsoft is good not only for Apple, but Google, Sony, and plenty of others.

 

[macsmurf]

That's a whole lot of "hopefullys."

Yes. Unfortunately, I'm unable to see into the future. My apologies

I think this comes down to the previously debated end-to-end vs. component model question. Apple has pursued the former with substantial success, in terms of creating "whole widgets" that produce a satisfying user experience. Microsoft has spent their corporate lifetime doing the latter, but as we discussed at great length in another thread recently, they're now trying to figure out how to duplicate the end-to-end user experience with the component model. Some (myself in particular) questioned their ability to make that happen with no control over the hardware side of the equation. I also pointed out in that thread that you could count the number of big successes with the component model on one finger, and that one was essentially a freak of nature.

I disagree completely. Android isn't meant for end users but for phone manufacturers as a basis for their final phone OS. Nobody will have to hunt for drivers because a phone does not have user replacable parts.

When it comes to software, Apple has never been end-to-end. They have alway cooperated with software manufacturers and the App Store is only the most recent example.

As I've mentioned ad nauseum, OS X is built on BSD and Next components so the end-to-end only refers to the way Apple interacts with the end user.

So now Google is trying the component model, and some think it's got a good chance of succeeding. I don't see much reason to expect it, beyond the fact that it's got the Google brand name associated with it -- but then again, only with the OS, and not the finished product that consumers will hold in their hands. That's created by somebody else. Big problem, if the hope is to compete with Apple's model of complete control over the finished product.

The phone manufacturers will have complete control over the code base. They won't be able to dictate how other companies should behave, but they can take their code and run, and create something entirely different if they want.

I also have to point out that Google has absolutely no experience with operating systems or consumer products. And as I said before, they seem to lack the corporate attention span to create a spit-and-polished final product, which I think is necessary to grab and hold consumer's attention.

Android is not a consumer product but a template from which you can create a consumer product. Also, Google has very special needs when it comes to data handling, so Google has been working with OS components for years. At Google's level a lot of things need to be tweaked such as the file system.

My conclusion is that the odds are way against them making a big splash in this market, and that these adverse odds are not substantially mitigated just because the OS is "open."

OK. I've think my point has been made clear so let's leave it at that.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Yes. Unfortunately, I'm unable to see into the future. My apologies

No? I find my perfect future vision to be such a great convenience.

The distinction between the end-to-end and component models is being missed. Short of recreating a lengthy discussion in another thread, I will summarize the models with the examples of the Windows/PC vs. Mac, and Symbian vs. iPhone. I think you can see the distinction being made here and it has nothing to do with software development or drivers or or the source of the code inside. It has to do with the user experience with the final product. Any manufacturer with control over only half of that experience is going to be at a substantial disadvantage I believe. Suffice to say the iPhone hasn't been a huge hit for nothing. The very fact that as you say "Android isn't for end users" illustrates my point. If each Android-based phone will be different, then how will Android build an identity in the minds of consumers? I believe Google would have been better off designing their own, complete "Google Phone" -- this consumers would have understood, and it would have the benefit of the huge Google brand identification. That product probably would have succeeded if it was any good whatsoever.

Anyway, we've paid our money and placed our bets.

 

[macsmurf]

The distinction between the end-to-end and component models is being missed. Short of recreating a lengthy discussion in another thread, I will summarize the models with the examples of the Windows/PC vs. Mac, and Symbian vs. iPhone. I think you can see the distinction being made here and it has nothing to do with software development or drivers or or the source of the code inside. It has to do with the user experience with the final product.

I agree with the last sentence, but drivers have to do with the user experience. Hunting for them is, at least, part of my user experience with Windows.

Any manufacturer with control over only half of that experience is going to be at a substantial disadvantage I believe.

Well, as I've been trying to tell you the manufacturer has control over the entire experience. Just as Apple has control over it, although they built OS X on Next and BSD software. Where is the difference?

Suffice to say the iPhone hasn't been a huge hit for nothing. The very fact that as you say "Android isn't for end users" illustrates my point. If each Android-based phone will be different, then how will Android build an identity in the minds of consumers?

It really shouldn't. Users should care about the phone in it's entirety, not the stuff the software is build on. How many of Apple users care (or even know) about the BSD and Next stuff in OS X? How many users know (or even care) that their GPS device or router is running Linux? How many, for that matter, knows that the iPhone is running on an OS X kernel?

Developers and manufacturers should care about Android, not the end user. It's not about the OS for the user. Never has been.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Well, as I've been trying to tell you the manufacturer has control over the entire experience. Just as Apple has control over it, although they built OS X on Next and BSD software. Where is the difference?

So it becomes another Symbian? What's the point? Possibly I'm missing something here but I'm still trying to understand why Google creating yet another OS for mobile phones is an important event, and not in spite of, but because the consumer products will have no brand identification with Google. I keep hearing how it's going to be an "iPhone killer," for no reason that I can see other than Google is behind it.

 

[michelepri]

let it be a free platform and Iphones will have to adapt. It was about time this new platform came out. Apple IPhone's selling model is disgusting and I hope it will die out soon. Bz the way, if you are in Germany and think you can't end your contract with the T-Mobile state monopoly, you can stop paying bills for 3 months. After that T-Mobile will end the contract for you. Once the contract is ended you should pay your bills so you will stay bill free and have no more obligation to Apple/Telecom/German Government.

 

[Nicolecat]

Judging from the first poor quality video on youtube...and what seems like press release videos (with poor sound and echo).

I feel like it will definitely be a trail to explore for those that aren't apple followers.

Personally, having a Qwerty keyboard is just another movable appendage to easily break.

 

[macsmurf]

So it becomes another Symbian? What's the point?

Does the manufacturer have full control with Symbian? Is it free? That's the point.

 

[Nicolecat]

I don't know if anyone has linked to this yet...just skimmed the rest of the posts
...but tmonews.com has some more info up. www.tmonews.com

Not sure as to the source behind it...but after reading some of the posts below the article, someone said they would be offering this (most likely the HTC Dream) to t-mobile customers that have been with t-mobile for 2 years (which sounds like a bogus high number) for $99...with presales starting September 17th.

Others are saying the price will fall more in the $150-$399 ranges.

Thoughts?

 

[maokh]

hahahahahah. Android is open source?! Yeah right. come on guys .. Android is not open source. Its just as open source as symbian was in 1997. Just because symbian is open now doesnt make it retroactively open sourced for developers in 1997. Google is no different than Apple in my opinion.

And for those who disagree with me, please provide the url of the source code. I would love to see it.

The code you write for Android is in java ... but with its own custom set of API's. No native apps. Oh sure, more google promises that maybe someday they might, but dont count on it. And also, dont count on carriers accepting your native code even if an SDK was released.

There are also lots of little surprises that will make topics like gmail privacy a complete yawn.

The biggest challenge with Android is the user experience. It has a lot of potential for a great user experience. its snappy and pretty, but it still has a long way to go. You could probably thank the TI OMAP platform for this really...its running on good hardware. You can have the best engine under the hood, but if the user experience sucks, its all over after the first handset.

Who is going to build that UI? I hope google doesn't. The current UI is very piss poor, like the rest of their products, and I do not really like the path they are taking. So who does that leave? tmobile? there's another bad idea. Im a bit confused.

The only thing good google has going for themselves is the potential, mere potential, of running on a wide variety of handsets and becoming a real mobile platform. But they have a lot of competition in that industry.

"christmas season" is way too soon for any of this coming together well.

Wish them the best of luck.

heh.

 

[tmiw]

The code you write for Android is in java ... but with its own custom set of API's. No native apps.

At least you can run apps on the phone itself in the first release. iPhone restricted you to Web based apps only, unless you wanted to jailbreak. Also, Java's pretty much near native speeds now, anyway, so being able to write your Android app in C probably won't make much of a difference in speed, anyway--and will make it much harder to have applications that work on all Android devices.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Does the manufacturer have full control with Symbian? Is it free? That's the point.

Maybe, but it's a doubtful virtue. That's my point.

 

[macsmurf]

hahahahahah. Android is open source?! Yeah right. come on guys .. Android is not open source. Its just as open source as symbian was in 1997. Just because symbian is open now doesnt make it retroactively open sourced for developers in 1997. Google is no different than Apple in my opinion.

And for those who disagree with me, please provide the url of the source code. I would love to see it.

Here is the stuff available now: http://code.google.com/android/kb/licensingandoss.html

By the way, is Symbian open?

The code you write for Android is in java ... but with its own custom set of API's. No native apps. Oh sure, more google promises that maybe someday they might, but dont count on it. And also, dont count on carriers accepting your native code even if an SDK was released.

They not only say they will, they name the license. If they don't release the source code, I for one will be flappergasted.

 

[czarthp]

I am looking forward to it. I wanted an IPhone but 3g and gps was not enough for me to break my contract. plus I get 1500 mins for $50 with t-mobile. with an Iphone $50 will get me 450 mins. add unlimited text and data and I will be paying 10-15 dollars more than what I pay now. bottom line its not worth it to switch to me, so I got a 16gb Ipod touch now, I will be getting the andriod phone so I will have thebest of both worlds.

 

[furrina]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella
People are so concerned about "But Google hasn't put any safe guards into Android to prevent rouge applications".

One advantage of the glossy glass screen -- it doubles as a mirror to help with the application of rouge, lipstick, eye shadow and other makeup.

f*cking awesome

 

[impact_blue]

I love all the comments about how it's gonna fail. On this particular phone it might, but this isn't OSX where it's only based on the iphone. Android will come up in better more advanced phones as well.


I love my iphone, but im sure Google/some mobile phone company will come up with something that will eventually give the iphone a run for it's money. The fanboys just can't stand competitors.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I love all the comments about how it's gonna fail. On this particular phone it might, but this isn't OSX where it's only based on the iphone. Android will come up in better more advanced phones as well.

Yup, if you keep shooting in the dark, eventually you will hit something.

 

[JAYGEE]

I'm sure Android will do fine

 

[Millah]

I think Android will destroy all of the other iClones out there trying to compete with Apple, but I still think Apple will remain dominant over Android. While Android is definitely nice, it still is just trying to play catch-up with the iPhone and doesn't really revolutionize anything it just is more of an alternative to iPhone. iPhone will always continue to sell well because of the name and the fact that they were the first of its kind, Apple laid down the blueprint for this new generation of mobile devices and these competitors are just following behind Apple.

Also nobody has even come close to matching the user experience on the iPhone. iPhone really still stands out compared to Android because Android still feels like a spiced up mobile interface while iPhones OS is unlike any other mobile phone and the interface still feels one of a kind. If iPhone had never come out, then Android would have been a breakthrough, but since the iPhone was such a revolution and is still years ahead of anything out there, Android doesn't have that same effect anymore. Plus the iPhone is just now starting to become mass market friendly with the price drop, so with more and more people getting one its going to be hard to convince the mass-market NOT to get an iPhone. The enthusiasts and the hardcore might be easier to convince if they give more technical features and stuff, but the mass market is going to want an iPhone because of the great user experience and interface.

Its nice to have some real competition for Apple, we all know Apple works best when they have to compete

 

[realhunter36]

T-mobile has great minute plans but very week signals.
3G Iphone is the trend yo~