Related
i have read some post from Nvidia.. im just kinda confuse..
http://www.androidcentral.com/nvidia-stop-supporting-harmony-platform-past-froyo
do they really trashing our tablet ? no more drivers for future updates?
that's an old article and speculation has been around since it's original release. From updated stories, Nvidea claims that it WILL provide support IF the manufacturers request it. It's confusing becuase Nvidea says it wants Honeycomb from Google, Viewsonic wants drivers from Nvidea. Google won't approve use of their market or code for Viewsonic, and of course, WE want it all.
So, as it stands right now:
Google will only release Honeycomb to their approved vendors
Nvidea wants Honeycomb, and will support Harmony boards IF manufactureres request it
Viewsonic will update what they currently have, but can't advance their Harmony based products without Nvidea's cooperation.
WE are sitting with Froyo systems with no hardware acceleration becuase either Nvidea isn't providing it, or Viewsonic is not requesting it (or it cant be done) and getting Honeycomb is a pipe dream, since that all depends on Google.
I think I summed it up nicely, but there are a plethora of posts dealing with this exact topic.
That's why my next device is gonna be an apple ipad. They support their devices after more than 3 years. I will never buy anything with the damn android logo or OS on it. Screw you Google, screw you all android companies, you deserve it. I can't believe that I bought 2 new gtablets to become obsolete and without future in the moment I opened the box. If that's the "experience" that google want from android users, so well I got the "experience", now you can make a roll with android and stuck where you know, Google and Android
By the way I know this is old news, but each company is throwing the ball to others and I see they don't give a damn about users.
It's not Google's fault.
It is Google fault for not given permission to companies for using the sources needed, and the companies for no giving support to android. It is Google fault for the mess a Google Market, being not accessible to a most devices, and for the mess with all android versions.
So go and kiss Google if you a fan of them, but don't take out the blame from them because they are guilty as the companies. For me is the end of all Google related products , I'm sick of them. They become the Microsoft of the 2000's.
Bye bye Google and Android.
kekinash said:
It is Google fault for not given permission to companies for using the sources needed, and the companies for no giving support to android. It is Google fault for the mess a Google Market, being not accessible to a most devices, and for the mess with all android versions.
So go and kiss Google if you a fan of them, but don't take out the blame from them because they are guilty as the companies. For me is the end of all Google related products , I'm sick of them. They become the Microsoft of the 2000's.
Bye bye Google and Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, only "Google experience" devices get full Market access... anyone can build an Android device... anyone can use Android... but they have to partner with Google to get Market access and early access to Android... Viewsonic does not have this partnership... (No, I'm not a die hard fan of Google, but I do love Android).
It's basically up to the manufactures to ask for Google support (and pay for it)...
kekinash said:
It is Google fault for not given permission to companies for using the sources needed, and the companies for no giving support to android. It is Google fault for the mess a Google Market, being not accessible to a most devices, and for the mess with all android versions.
So go and kiss Google if you a fan of them, but don't take out the blame from them because they are guilty as the companies. For me is the end of all Google related products , I'm sick of them. They become the Microsoft of the 2000's.
Bye bye Google and Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really.
Google sets certain standards that have to be met (primarily hardware features) on a device for that device to have "google support" which it basically Market, Gmail, Gtalk, etc....all the Google provided apps.
As mentioned....anyone can build a device and run Android on it.....download the source code from AOSP and go to town. However...AOSP doesn't have or support the Google proprietary apps (Market, Gmail, etc..).
So, it's not Google's fault, it's the device manufacturers fault for being cheap and not adding the required hardware components to the devices to gain Google support.
This is also another reason why Honeycomb (OS 3.0) hasn't been released to open source yet.....hardware requirements are changing (3G not required, etc...) but they are still wanting a cohesive tablet design.
All these cheap android tablets are built to be cheap....because most people only want to pay xx amount. This gets you a "non supported" device....but if you are on this board.....you know that going in on the purchase. It's the community of developers that increase the overall function and use of these cheap "non supported" tablets.
If you wanted a "Google supported" device, buy one. Xoom, Acer Iconia, ASUS Transformer, etc.... Not a Viewsonic Gtabet, 10s, Nook Color, Coby whatever, Folio 100, etc...etc...etc...
Apple makes the iPad and the iOS running on it.....of course they support it.
Viewsonic makes neither the device or the OS.
thank you tcrews. well said
with all of this being said, I bought a G-tab knowing that it wouldn't be an exceptional piece of hardware out of the box. I knew that it took tweeking. I love my Vegan 5.1.1 system, and enjoy using it every day for games, surfing, news, adding sheet music to it, downloading PDFs for upcoming meetings. It's much more convenient than taking a binder full of music, or a stack of papers into a meeting. My son can watch movies on it, or play games, and the battery lasts longer than my Acer netbook.
Is it the best thing on the market, HELL no...but it's also not the most expensive, either.
AAs far as Google partnerships, I suspect that it's their pressure that intimidates companies. After all, as was mentioned, if you want full Google support, you need to buy a partnered piece of hardware. They typically cost more, simply due to the partnership. SO, in the case of viewsonic specifically, the great devs here have devised a way to bypass the partnership (limited bypass, but still a bypass) So, what's Viewsonic's motivation to acquiring said partnership? If Nvidea is trying to get one, perhaps it was Google that stipulated that Honeycomb will not be available on their Harmony platform.
We all know that if the devs here have hardware drivers for Harmony, and eventually code for Honeycomb, EVERY g-tab owner will have both, without requiring Viewsonic to get a partnership with Google.
So, fault lies in a few places (although definitely not warrented or deserved)
1st, to viewsonic for making such a hackable device. We ALL love the fact that we can put on it, basically, whatever we want. this thing is easier to "jailbreak" than an iPod touch.
2nd, to the devs on this site. They have done WONDERFUL work, for FREE to make our experience what it should be. Indirectly, though, the fact that they've made it "look" so easy, would certainly lead to companies doing whatever it takes to protect their assets.
Think of it this way...Since Google makes profit on the sales of their "approved" devices, why on Earth would they want to give the devs here a chance to make the G-Tablet be able to keep up with the devices that are yet to come? It would be Google that would need to explain to Asus, Motorola, HTC, etc. why people aren't buying their golden tablets, over the discount priced G-tab.
My only complaint in all of this is that Gingerbread is a potential reality on the G-tab. The Harmony board will obviously support it and run it. I would be happy if Nvidea would continue development to make a "STOCK" G-tab perform the way that it's hardware was designed to perform. After that, the devs here could tweak it to make it perform better than anticipated. Once Nvidea updates their drivers to utilize all of the hardware acceleration that the Harmony board is capable of, then I would be fine if their abandoned it.
Hell, in all of this discussion, I find that of the 3 computers I own, 2 are running XP, one is running Vista. I'm obviously not a person that is into the "MUST HAVE THE NEWEST" mentality. I'm sure my Acer would nearly explode if I tried running Windows 7 on it, but I'm not upset...XP works fantastically on it. Same with the G-tab. Honeycomb may run, it may be glitchy, it may have bugs, it may make my G-tab explode...regardless, I'm happy with what I have, but would like the hardware acceleration that I know it can handle.
Todd
Thanks tcrews for the explanation, but I think that companies must put somewhere that the device they sell you doesn't have the blessing of google, or they can't access the market and that you will end with an unsupported and obsolete device after you bough it. for a mere 150 dollars more I can have a device that I know for sure is gonna be supported for more than a year. The same happened with my 2 android phones. I bought them and didn't see any update or fix for all the mess with the Android OS, and the same happens with a lot of devices or phones. The companies just put them on the market knowing that they will not be supported in the future. When it was a cheap phone, that was OK for me, but for a phone you pay more that 400 bucks it's an insult.
Simply put Android right now is a big mess, and will stay in the future far from it, until they fix the mess and companies start giving support to what they sell.
I share your view kekinash.
I don't care who's fault it is, the point is Android is a mess unless you want to get into development, hacking, etc. (All of which I can do to an extent).
I have an android phone made by Samsung, I've got the G-tablet, and I used to have a Motorola android phone. Each device has had a number of unexplained issues, of which no one tends to take responsibility for or any level of accountability. The fingerpointing I observed with my current Samsung phone is nothing short of comical. It's AT&T's issue, oh no, it's Samsung that does the software, oh no, you have to call Google "Android support". Nonsense.
My wife has had to iphones, and as much as I despise Apple, any issues (and they were minimal) were resolved quickly. And, you don't have the issue of the same app not working on the same version of the OS. Yes, Apple will discontinue support for older devices just like anyone else, but I've never fought with the iphone as much as I have to do circus acts with these Android-based devices.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I respect everyone's opinion. I love the Android "concept", but the execution, for me, is far from worth my time.
That's why, whether good or bad, an ipad costs what it does.
kekinash said:
That's why my next device is gonna be an apple ipad. They support their devices after more than 3 years. I will never buy anything with the damn android logo or OS on it. Screw you Google, screw you all android companies, you deserve it. I can't believe that I bought 2 new gtablets to become obsolete and without future in the moment I opened the box. If that's the "experience" that google want from android users, so well I got the "experience", now you can make a roll with android and stuck where you know, Google and Android
By the way I know this is old news, but each company is throwing the ball to others and I see they don't give a damn about users.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why must we be bothered with cr-apple plugs on a Android forum? Just go over to cr-apple you don't have to announce it. These type of posts leads us to believe you are just a fanboy trolling.
Yeah, typical answer from a fanboy. I not married to either company, I just pointing the differences between both OS, on one (IOs) you get support, on the other (Android) you're at your own.
It's my right to criticize the things I see wrong, you may like it or not, agree or not, but you can't take this right from me, at least here at the States. And saying what another company is doing right is not to be a fanboy.
And by the way, if the developers here and in another places weren't doing a great job with Android, the OS will be a Sh*t, specially with the g tablet, so a big thanks goes to them. I using a non stock rom and this is the only thing that avoided to send back the 2 tables I have.
This thread is not being productive at all. Closed.
So I am sure many know by now that wireless tethering is being blocked from The Market which opposes Google's statement of Android being "open". Now I am reading that Google is using the issue of "compatibility" to put the kibosh on third party apps that might take away business from Google apps (i.e. Skyhook).
I am tired of these companies saying one thing and doing another but what can we do?
Wireless tethering being blocked is down to the carriers, not Google. As for the rest, Android is Googles baby so i'm not suprised that they want the end user to have the best possible experience. That's how people stay in business. Look what happens when companies forget about their customer base. (Sony).
I only wish that Google would be more restrictive so that manufacturers were stopped from polluting Android with their Bloat.
But Dirk, on one hand it appears that you're fine with carriers driving Android but not manufacturers. maldelovio makes the point that Google touts Android as "open" yet Google ends up being the carriers' "female dog."
I agree with him. Google needs to pull their finger out and start driving the direction of Android. If carriers don't like it, they don't have to allow it, and customers will go elsewhere. I left AT&T after 12 years to go to T-Mobile because AT&T was in love with The Evil One of Cupertino and ignored Android. I'd do the same with any carrier.
Exactly Guilden_NL...what carrier in their right mind would drop Android devices just because Google would not remove wireless tethering from their market??!! Now Google is using the veil of "compatibility" to remove competition. Monopolistic???
DirkGently1 said:
Wireless tethering being blocked is down to the carriers, not Google. As for the rest, Android is Googles baby so i'm not suprised that they want the end user to have the best possible experience. That's how people stay in business. Look what happens when companies forget about their customer base. (Sony).
I only wish that Google would be more restrictive so that manufacturers were stopped from polluting Android with their Bloat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I guess you'll be happy to hear Google just did that.
maldelovio said:
Exactly Guilden_NL...what carrier in their right mind would drop Android devices just because Google would not remove wireless tethering from their market??!! Now Google is using the veil of "compatibility" to remove competition. Monopolistic???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
American wireless carriers take bandwidth seriously. Either they're not very good at managing it, or they have a hard time covering so much area. Either way, a tethering app can be devastating to their wireless experience. As if customers don't hate them enough.
Its easier to piss off carriers than OEMs - I can imagine a very uncomfortable situation for Google if AT&T or Verizon or even T-Mo would press the breaks or ease on the gas for Android.
I only wish they'd put out some freakin honeycomb source 3.0/3.1 I don't care too much. Before they put any effort into improving honeycomb with the 3.1 version they should have taken care of their compatibility excuse for not releasing source. I understand their reasoning but I think now that they have a time frame out there for manufacturers to count on ice cream sandwich they should just release the source of honeycomb for us. Even those crazy Chinese kirf manufacturers wouldn't put honeycomb on a phone with ice cream sandwich coming out in a few months. They need to make good on their open source promises before usb host functionality and widget resizing for a certain Motorola tablet...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-5...s-study/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
to summarize, the article claims that the iOS app store generates more revenue for developers because people are more likely to buy there.
problem is, this article, and others like it, ignore the glaring flaw in their reasoning: revenue from sales is not the only source of revenue for an app developer. ad based revenue models area ctually very lucrative, proof of this can be easily seen from Google's success, and Facebook's success: their entire business model is nothing but ad based revenue!
in fact, ad based revenue is more lucrative in the long term than sales are, because with app sales, the dev gets revenue once, the first time a person buys the app, and then nothing from that customer ever again. but with ad based models, the dev gets money every time a person uses the app, as they get they revenue from a pair of eyes watching the screen.
so then, why does the app store have lots of sales, when the Market has only few sales? what's the difference? the reason is, iOS is not always connected tot he internet, and therefore cannot always receive ads to display, or transmit back user data. true, the iPhone is always on, and the iPad is almost always used at home on a wifi connection, probably 80% of the time at least.
the problem here, is the iPod touch. it's a highly mobile device (thinner than even the iPhone) and has access to all the same apps. it's also very popular. so, any iOS app developer choosing between releasing a free app that's ad based, and a premium app, will have to consider all the millions of iPod users without an internet connection with which to transmit ads over. the dev would be unable to make any money from them, and even if ads were preloaded, there's no guarantee that the user would turn on the app when their wifi is on later to be able to send user data back, confirming the ads were actually seen (especially since it's an on the go device, so people aren't using it at home that much). so that would be millions of downloads the dev would never see money for, unless that person eventually gets an iPhone or iPad, and its a gamble whether they actually would, or when.
Android, however, doesn't really have that problem. there never really was an iTouch style Android device except for the Galaxy Player, which wasn't even available in America (the largest market) until about a month ago. on top of that, until Honeycomb debuted, Google restricted official installation of the Market app itself to only cellular equipped devices, so even if you buy one of those cheap craptablets from CVS pharmacy or Borders running Android 2.1, you can't download Market apps, and therefore aren't relevant to the dev's business model.
it's also worth pointing out here, that the ad based model is better for consumers, too. not only do they get the products for free, they also are more liekly to receive updates in the future. after all, the dev with an ad based model makes money when people continue to use the app. so if the dev updates his app regularly with new features and levels, the user is more likely to continue using/playing or start again after a lull. which means the deve gets more money all the time, and the user gets new entertainment or utility all the time, for no more cost or very little. No more buying sequel after sequel.
For example, look at Angry Birds. it was one game, and was successful as a premium app on iOS. 2 sequels were planned and released; around this time, it came to Android. and Rovio did something different: they released it for free, as an ad based app. and wouldn't you know it, after that happened, there were no more sequels. yet the levels keep getting added and added and added to each game. compared to the original levels in the first game, there are now probably enough levels to fill 10 or 15 games, yet they keep adding them to the same games. they do this every time people tend to finish the last level pack and stop playing, then they add another and it starts up again.
all very interesting info quoted from Cnet
but what is the point you are trying to get at by opening this topic?
One other reason sales are higher on the App Store: people who buy into the Apple system accept the high premium that comes along with it and generally don't take issue with spending for apps. Part of the mindset coming in with Android is the idea of open, free development and therefore a lot of people sit back and wait for a free version of paid apps to come out. Just part of the different perspectives generally seen in the two markets. Developers who understand this have ad-based apps and still get their revenue, especially the ones who make it quite easy to accidentally click ads =P
There's also the fact that some developers allow you to donate as you like and don't require you to do so directly through the market, so there's more revenue that isn't directly seen as a "paid app" sale.
I dont think Android being open source may much of a difference, if you look at the world as a whole 99.9% of people looking at phones/tablets have no clue what open source even means.
That little 'ITunes' card makes the world of difference. I had an IPAd for 1 year, I spent maybe 20 bucks on apps, I have spent maybe 5 bucks on android apps in a few months. Now if I were to get an Android 50.00 gift card, I bet I would spend that within a month!
These gift cards are HUGE for the younger market where they dont have cell phones and they all have ipods, and starting to get Ipads/Iphones.
Interesting
Sent from my LG-P925 using XDA App
This make sense
I don't know, man. I'm pretty sure that Apple's philosophy is not conditioned by a single, specific device.
With the second part I do agree. Apple users are generally people who are able to pay for more expenses. Especially those who have a few Apple products. If you're willing and able to pay over 1k$ for a laptop, then a couple of bucks for an app is nothing.
There's a third reason why Apple has more app sales: it forces you to link your account to a credit card, so you're automatically set to pay for apps. In the Android market, you have to "detour" to link your credit card to your account.
Sent from my LT15i using XDA App
For the Android developer point of vue it is most valuable to use the freemium approach instead of the classic app purchase. It seems that the player prefer to play for free and buy something here and there to improve the game experience. A lot of games are doing that out there.
Most Android phones sold are of the buy 1 get 1(sometimes 2) free variety, and virtually all Android users that I know either don't download apps, have no clue that their phone runs Android or pirate apps by side loading. Personally I only bought 1 app in 2yrs of using various Android phones because most of them were far inferior to iOS versions usually sporting awful UI(due to the fact that Android SDK is a joke compared to Xcode).
Phrenks said:
I don't know, man. I'm pretty sure that Apple's philosophy is not conditioned by a single, specific device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not talking about Apple's philosophy, I'm talking about the revenue potential for developers for iOS devices. What I'm saying is, the iPod has created iOS's own form of fragmentation. a Large portion of iOS users have an iPod touch that's only occasionally able to receive ads (connected) and even then, it's probably not connected when using most apps, especially games.
I had an iPod touch for 2 years back before I got an Android phone, and I only ever turned on the wifi to use the browser, a few news reader apps while killing downtime at work, and the app store/iTunes. that last one I did only very rarely, and I always turned the wifi off immediately after those uses, with the battery being so weak. I NEVER turned it on during games; in fact, If I was playing a game, I always made sure wifi was off, because so many games drained the battery very quickly, so I had to be especially power conscious.
So, if a dev wants to make apps for iOS, they have to consider that if they go ad based, a large portion of people will not give them any revenue at all due to being not connected to receive ads. that's why developers often charge for iOS apps, yet often make the same apps free or cheaper on Android.
Don't make the mistake of assuming Apple has a smarter philosophy than that; remember, the iPhone and iPod touch were never originally designed to have a downloadable app store to begin with. in fact, Steve Jobs openly admitted that he was opposed to it when his subordinates tried to convince him to allow it. It wasn't until the first iOS devices were jailbroken and hackers created Cydia (well before the official app store) that Apple saw the potential and caved. at that point, they had already released the iPod touch anyway, so they were stuck. Add to that the fact that they didn't really have a division designed to sell and distribute ads for other businesses at the time, and you can see how they weren't really prepared to see what the best long term system would be.
alex2792 said:
Most Android phones sold are of the buy 1 get 1(sometimes 2) free variety, and virtually all Android users that I know either don't download apps, have no clue that their phone runs Android or pirate apps by side loading. Personally I only bought 1 app in 2yrs of using various Android phones because most of them were far inferior to iOS versions usually sporting awful UI(due to the fact that Android SDK is a joke compared to Xcode).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? I wish I knew where I could get two for one as never seen any uk retailer offer a deal like that and would love two for one
Out of curiosity though what is it about android sdk you think is a joke? Its not the sdks fault if an apps ui is bad yet anothers is good or all should be bad.
But back on topic most android users I know prefer free apps with ads so it could be true android users aren't so keen to buy apps whereas iphone is more a lifestyle choice and when you buy into a lifestyle your more likely to be willing to spend money investing in it.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
http://www.androidauthority.com/google-issues-statement-regarding-support-for-cdma-devices-50545/
I'm done. More fragmentation.
Sent from my GT-P7310 using Tapatalk
qhinton said:
http://www.androidauthority.com/google-issues-statement-regarding-support-for-cdma-devices-50545/
I'm done. More fragmentation.
Sent from my GT-P7310 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blame your carrier for using bs CDMA...
lowandbehold is right here. Google didn't create the cdma vs. gsm thing you guys have going on there in the US.
.
Thread moved. Would advise you to read forum rules and post in correct section.
Failure to comply with forum rules will result in an infraction and/or ban depending on severity of rule break.
its not our fault that cdma carriers are so much better than GSM ones here in the US. google shouldn't be doing this to its users, it's not like they're any less good as developers just because they choose the superior network (in some areas.)
Sent from my ICS SCH-i500
sageDieu said:
google shouldn't be doing this to its users
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you even read the article? Google can't do anything about it. The carriers have created a situation where a ROM cannot be created without them signing the phone apk. In other words, your verizon nexus already isn't AOSP because some of its core functionality is reliant on custom, locked, carrier-installed crap.
This whole issue could have been avoided by verizon/sprint allowing/providing unsigned cell network apks. I'm quite sure google has asked for this by now. The carriers chose to be dicks about it, they chose to make timely google updates impossible, so they don't get google support. Lay the blame where it belongs.
This is why i hate CDMA.. though they have good signal, they are worst in this case.
The levels of fragmentation are incredible, really. And Google happily continues to turn a blind eye to it all. It's sad, really, because Android has some real potential if it were handled better.
Sent from my SGH-I897
i'm not sure why you guys are *****ing. from a PR perspective, Google did the right thing, hands down. Told you what was going on, and stated that they are going to work on it. just because they didn't say they were going after the carriers in a vicious way you guys are mad. ridiculous...
As another said before, don't blame google, blame the carrier. they are the ones that are messing it up
Always the carriers fault. Sigh.
-Sent from my Rezound-
ridethisbike said:
As another said before, don't blame google, blame the carrier. they are the ones that are messing it up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's Google's fault that the carriers are in a position to mess it up.
Sent from my SGH-I897
Hmm somehow Apple doesn't have this problem. Updates available day 1 for both GSM and CDMA phones. Google has no choice but to cater to the carriers since Android is Trojan horse for data mining and mobile advertising while iOS puts consumers first. Truth is Google doesn't care about fragmentation, they're focused on volume at all costs. Since Google(and everyone else with half a brain) are well aware that no single Android phone will come close to iPhone sales they need to get as many manufacturers on board as possible, which necessitates letting carriers run the show. Great for Google since they get to sell your personal data to advertisers, but sucks for the consumer.
alex2792 said:
Google has no choice but to cater to the carriers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, not exactly. They're making the decision to give the power to carriers rather than give it to consumers like Apple and Microsoft do. They could choose otherwise, but they really don't care about you and me.
My two cents tells me Google can fix a lot of issues that Android has by, closing it, not making it Open Source. Then there would be an even bigger cry out towards Google. By closing Android, Google can control every aspect of Android, as they see fit, forcing OEMs to adhere to Google's strict guidelines and policies. That is not what Google had envisioned for the Android OS. Instead Google gave OEM's and Carriers the infrastructure,sources, and starting point to create their own vision.
Giving these Companies free rein to create, ultimately Google gets what they wanted, more Google searches (form devices), creating more revenue for Google. So you might say that Android was not created for the consumer, as much as another revenue stream. Google just needs to keep Android appealing enough to the consumers, and allow OEMs and Carriers to do the rest. I'm surprised that the carriers don't provide Google with the ability to sign the .apks themselves, that would take the responsibility away from the Carriers, and solely on Google's shoulders.
Just thinking out loud hear.
sageDieu said:
its not our fault that cdma carriers are so much better than GSM ones here in the US. google shouldn't be doing this to its users, it's not like they're any less good as developers just because they choose the superior network (in some areas.)
Sent from my ICS SCH-i500
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This
Not all of us live in an area where we are free to choose between GSM and CDMA. I live in a rural area where At&t reception can be spotty, T-mobile and Sprint are almost non-existent and Verizon gets a signal pretty much everywhere.
google confirmed with the verge that it will push updates to verizon galaxy nexus! ... please don't jump to conclusions.
alex2792 said:
Hmm somehow Apple doesn't have this problem. Updates available day 1 for both GSM and CDMA phones. Google has no choice but to cater to the carriers since Android is Trojan horse for data mining and mobile advertising while iOS puts consumers first. Truth is Google doesn't care about fragmentation, they're focused on volume at all costs. Since Google(and everyone else with half a brain) are well aware that no single Android phone will come close to iPhone sales they need to get as many manufacturers on board as possible, which necessitates letting carriers run the show. Great for Google since they get to sell your personal data to advertisers, but sucks for the consumer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is not a trojan horse, seriously most of your comments on android seem very negative and often just apple rhetoric.
Android has to run on lots of phones so its hard to unify that whereas iphone is just one. Very easy to update one phone model whose only difference is carrier type as opposed to thousands of different ones.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
The only way to fix this fragmentation is for google to move to a more apple like approach to selling phones. If they locked down android to where manufacturers had to meet certain specs before they could use android or had to follow certain rules, then there would ultimately be less choice for the consumers. I think what makes android great is the wide range of options we all have, even if that means we have to wait a while for the carriers to upgrade us to the newest OS. We're all aware that when we buy these phones they have a chance of lagging behind the "newest and greatest thing". Just take Android for what it is, a diverse platform that is very fragmented, because thats not going to change.
mistermentality said:
Android is not a trojan horse, seriously most of your comments on android seem very negative and often just apple rhetoric.
Android has to run on lots of phones so its hard to unify that whereas iphone is just one. Very easy to update one phone model whose only difference is carrier type as opposed to thousands of different ones.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if Android's number one goal isn't enabling Google to push "personalized" ads then what is it? I'm negative about Android because Google places carrier interests ahead of the consumer resulting in shoddy user experience. Apple isn't perfect and their propensity to omit seemingly basic features does annoy me at times,but even with that said the iPhone offers a far more pleasurable experience. When I use an Apple product I can see that they really put a lot of thought into creating a first rate experience(which is why they have a ridiculous retention rate) while Android OEMs are just trying to push something out the door. For example used the Galaxy Nexus for a few weeks and I've encountered a ton of issues with reception,random data drop outs and abysmal battery life even with 4G turned off, which simply don't exist on the iPhone. I'm not an Apple fanatic, just someone who enjoys solid, reliable products that "just work" without me needing to spend hours tweaking ****.
wrong forum..
1st off, My house is an android powered house and I love the platform. It is only after months of being around my girlfriend and her family as they used android, that I started to really put a finer point on why so many people prefer other OS's (yes i understand Android is grabbing up market share like crazy). this is my thoughts after watching people I know use and leave android, use and struggle with android, and use and love android.
1st off, a list of the things that aren't google fault per say, but pit falls due to there lack of control over the final product.
#1) battery life. Due to varying hardware design and the freedom to do as you please to the OS, manufactures have made some phones with really bad battery life. this coupled with the constant updating a android device can do for any apps and the increase in popularity of cloud service, android ends up with wildly varying battery life from device to device.
#2) Consistency. If someone had a Verizon "droid", they could be using a Sense UI, a moto blur UI, or vanilla android. That's just in that one "brand of phone" alone. People dont adapt well to tech if they aren't big tech fans.
#3 quality of hardware, and I'm not talking about specs. Most consumers only judge the internals on how smooth the final product is. No, I'm talking about, build materials and the screen. There is some junk out there (allot of them have great internals). some of these phones are built like toys with race car parts inside them.
Now for where google is falling short.
#1 marketing. This is amazing to me that an Advertising company would fall short here but they do. Google ads focus on strange things like the ability to unlock your bootloader. Most people have no idea what this means and why they should care. They probably shouldn't care since they will never hack there phones.
also, every time Apple comes out with an "I" product ad, they are doing a real good job of showing how there "new feature" will make your life more fun and allot easier. The funny thing is, they are almost always features that android already had.
This is one of the things I really started to notice as I was surrounded by the non tech savvy android users. I would say, "funny, android already does that, has for a while now". My girlfriend would then ask, "does my phone do that?". Wow Google, you should be the master and telling people about all the selling points of your product.
#2 ease of use. This one may also be an issue with the carriers but I am going to put it in this section. One of the things I again noticed as I helped my girlfriend master here Nexus S 4G was, weird quirks that are not even a stumbling block to a Tech savvy user but almost a deal breaker to the average consumer.
Example: when my girlfriend 1st got here nexus, she hated it, couldn't believe I recommended it. One of her issues that stuck in my mind was the SMS limit. She hated that the SMS would cap her before she was done texing a message. She didnt care if it sent as two messages but she wanted to be able to type one continues message and then send it, letting the software sort it out. So I said, no problem, my phone doesn't do that (galaxy nexus) so there must be a deep setting to control this. As it turns out there wasn't, at least I couldn't find it. So again, I said no problem and down loaded handsent witch fixed the problem and she loved the easy theming. Well along came here ICS update that I had been raving about and her phone started crashing. Turns out handsent was the reason. Again, I said, no problem and downloaded Go SMS witch she loves even more.
That's just one example, in the mean time, 4 people in her family have switched from android to I Phones and don't regret it. I feel that one of them was mainly due to the hardware they chose and the rest is because they didn't have the live in tech help that my girlfriend has ( don't mean that to sound arrogant). My girlfriend loves her phone partly because I fix each issue as it arises and inform her of cool features.
Conclusion: I really think that the the lack of consistency is the other side of the open source double edged sword. this shows it self in software and hardware. It can be as small as the order in witch the bottom buttons appear, and as big as the Sense UI that changes everything a little bit. I also feel that no one besides Verizon in the early days, is really advertising Android well. Even Verizon doesn't do as good of a job showing you how much the phones can do and why you should want these features as Apple does.
Oddly I aggree with most of that, esp the marketing, you know I just found out just how good google voice was the other day... I have had android phones now for 3 years... Lol.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
funny you should bring up google voice. That was one of the things that I was thinking about when it comes to advertising short comings. It has been a great feature and a solid performer and now with Jellybean, it has every function of Siri, with the performance level I have come to expect from Google voice.
google needs to talk about it in plain English with every day examples of implementation
All of those faults/cons/criticisms can be attributed to just about any device/thing/object/concept that endorses an open-ended nature. The one off the top of my head that fits the OP's bill nearly word for word is Windows (technically Windows is closed-source). The Playstation 3 is a similar concept too. It's got all the nice bells and tech but its advertising sucks.
Google doesn't need to do any advertising, but rather the respective manufacturers. They're the ones that should be selling what Android does for their phones and why people should choose their phones over the others. If there are feature discrepancies from one phone to the other, the manufacturers should work to get those features implemented, that's the real strength of open-source software. It helps a lot if a manufacturer works together with their modding community to make it happen, which in turns makes your product/device more competitive and play on that.
Google caters to the developers because that's what Google is: a developer. That's why Google has their own line of phones: Nexus. Their phones are catered to the developers and well...us XDA'ers. They do a good job at advertising where it matters: recent one being their own conference just a week ago. If it reassures the OP: the rumor that Google plans to expand the Nexus line to more manufacturers is a good thing for us XDAers and friends of XDAers.
alpha-niner64 said:
All of those faults/cons/criticisms can be attributed to just about any device/thing/object/concept that endorses an open-ended nature. The one off the top of my head that fits the OP's bill nearly word for word is Windows (technically Windows is closed-source). The Playstation 3 is a similar concept too. It's got all the nice bells and tech but its advertising sucks.
Google doesn't need to do any advertising, but rather the respective manufacturers. They're the ones that should be selling what Android does for their phones and why people should choose their phones over the others. If there are feature discrepancies from one phone to the other, the manufacturers should work to get those features implemented, that's the real strength of open-source software. It helps a lot if a manufacturer works together with their modding community to make it happen, which in turns makes your product/device more competitive and play on that.
Google caters to the developers because that's what Google is: a developer. That's why Google has their own line of phones: Nexus. Their phones are catered to the developers and well...us XDA'ers. They do a good job at advertising where it matters: recent one being their own conference just a week ago.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1st off, other companies doing it too, its not a reason to ignore said issue. Also, windows is taking steps to correct the hardware issue and make there OS consistent (for example)
If you think google doesn't "have to" advertise, I guess your right but even companies like 3M who sells many products to OEM's that then sell to the end user (like google) advertise to further there brand and promote the use of there products by OEM's. Also, 3M knows more about the products than any one OEM that uses there products, not to mention, the OEM's that use 3M consider 3M to be one of the reasons there product is good, and will not focus on key points of the 3M element.
Also, look at gorilla glass from corning, another product that isn't sold direct to the end user. They do there own advertising to promote there product and increase brand recognition to better sell there product.
I also disagree that google is a developer selling to developers only. Google nexus 7 is a perfect example of that. The nexus 7 tab is meant to further the "play store" brand, and is being sold at a vary low price point in the hopes that play store sales will make up for it just like the Kindle. I also don't think the Galaxy Nexus is a "developer device" at least, not exclusively.
So does google have to, no. Should they want to, yes.
What would you have Google advertise about that other companies should be doing in their stead? Google has brand recognition already and it's pretty clear by Google I/O that their intended audience isn't the Apple crowd: so who else would there be to advertise to? If the Apple crowd is whom you're referring to: that should be Samsung, HTC, Sony's job to do. What can Google do to help those manufacturers sell their features to the consumer that those companies aren't already doing themselves?
This is where we are going to disagree. Google has brand recognition but Android has far less. Verizon, did the best job and now the "droid" brand has more recognition than "android", many times "droid" is used and the general brand for all android by consumers. I don't think Google should depend on hardware companies to advertise there product. Even windows advertises there software. The OEM's should ALSO advertise but not ONLY advertise.
Advertising that the Galaxy nexus has a "unlockable" boot loader is un needed and doesnt further the brand. 98% of the people who want a unlocked boot loader, knew the galaxy nexus had one before the ad hit the streets.
The fact that apple fans are oviusly not googles target market is or should be false (proven by samsung). Google should be polishing there OS so that more of apple users would be interested. Google will not be able to continue on for ever just appealing to a small market such as the XDA community. OEM's will abandon them if that was the case. Look at the OEM's and there behavior, they are not interested in selling phones to the developer community only, otherwise Motorola would not lock there phones down as they did, or at least they would offer developers unlock tools like HTC has done. HTC is a little more "developer marketed" but lets be real, they still drag there feet when ever they can or feel pressure from the big 3.
That leads me to the Carrier's, they do not want to sell phones marketed to developers that are easily hacked and modded. they want control. Google should want to sell the most units they can within reason. This means helping the developer community with there goals and helping the OEM's and Carrier's with there's. Google should be (and I think they are) trying to make android more marketable to the masses and then lead that marketing campaign by example.
Its like that old saying, "alone with your principles". You can stand here and say that the OEM's should do all the advertising but it doesn't change the fact that they aren't doing what needs to be done and google need to sell product that is dependent on the platform. They are an advertising company so do they sit back and hope HTC and Samsung start talking more about there product and doing more to show how it will improve our lives or should they step in and show the OEM's how its done, at the same time increasing the value of there products
I think a lot of your issues are going to be solved for the mainstream with more Nexus devices rolling out. The other great thing is that as more people start looking at Nexus flexibility and timely updates the more other OEMs will be forced to follow suit if they want to stay viable. It seems Sony and to some extent HTC and Samsung are pretty serious about both the hardware and update side of things so anyone else will just have to play catch-up.
As a whole though some of these things will continue to persist. One of the draws of Android devices is having smartphone abilities without ridiculous cost. There will always be people who want the goodies but don't have a lot of extra funds and those devices will simply be a little behind the curve. With the optimizations coming via Jellybean though OEMs won't have the excuse of claiming that newer versions are too complex for older phones and I would hope that they continue to push updates for a reasonable period.
Stupid post. Why? Because you have no clue what android is. Android is an open source operating system. OEM's take android, and just so you know, they don't need google's consent, and manipulate it the way they want to put on their hardware. Google has no say in what they do to it, how they arrange their buttons, or the UI that they add to it. So your post is more directed at OEM's than google.
lowandbehold said:
Stupid post. Why? Because you have no clue what android is. Android is an open source operating system. OEM's take android, and just so you know, they don't need google's consent, and manipulate it the way they want to put on their hardware. Google has no say in what they do to it, how they arrange their buttons, or the UI that they add to it. So your post is more directed at OEM's than google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if you read my post you would have seen I acknowledge that some of these issues are a side effect of open source. They do in fact charge for the "gaps" suite. all hardware sold with gaps on it has paid licensing to Google.
dB Zac said:
if you read my post you would have seen I acknowledge that some of these issues are a side effect of open source. They do in fact charge for the "gaps" suite. all hardware sold with gaps on it has paid licensing to Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So? Google gets no say in how they manipulate the OS. I mean seriously...battery life? How the f*** could that be a google issue?
I spesificly said that wasn't Google's fault, but a short coming of open source
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
dB Zac said:
I spesificly said that wasn't Google's fault, but a short coming of open source
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like you need an Iphone..
lowandbehold said:
Sounds like you need an Iphone..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I have to love it and ignore any and all short coming or be crusified? Ok sounds like a page from apple fanboyism
here, since you will not read the whole thing before commenting, i will post the part you seemed to miss
dB Zac said:
1st off, a list of the things that aren't google fault per say, but pit falls due to there lack of control over the final product.
#1) battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dB Zac said:
1st off, My house is an android powered house and I love the platform. It is only after months of being around my girlfriend and her family as they used android, that I started to really put a finer point on why so many people prefer other OS's (yes i understand Android is grabbing up market share like crazy). this is my thoughts after watching people I know use and leave android, use and struggle with android, and use and love android.
1st off, a list of the things that aren't google fault per say, but pit falls due to there lack of control over the final product.
#1) battery life. Due to varying hardware design and the freedom to do as you please to the OS, manufactures have made some phones with really bad battery life. this coupled with the constant updating a android device can do for any apps and the increase in popularity of cloud service, android ends up with wildly varying battery life from device to device.
#2) Consistency. If someone had a Verizon "droid", they could be using a Sense UI, a moto blur UI, or vanilla android. That's just in that one "brand of phone" alone. People dont adapt well to tech if they aren't big tech fans.
#3 quality of hardware, and I'm not talking about specs. Most consumers only judge the internals on how smooth the final product is. No, I'm talking about, build materials and the screen. There is some junk out there (allot of them have great internals). some of these phones are built like toys with race car parts inside them.
Now for where google is falling short.
#1 marketing. This is amazing to me that an Advertising company would fall short here but they do. Google ads focus on strange things like the ability to unlock your bootloader. Most people have no idea what this means and why they should care. They probably shouldn't care since they will never hack there phones.
also, every time Apple comes out with an "I" product ad, they are doing a real good job of showing how there "new feature" will make your life more fun and allot easier. The funny thing is, they are almost always features that android already had.
This is one of the things I really started to notice as I was surrounded by the non tech savvy android users. I would say, "funny, android already does that, has for a while now". My girlfriend would then ask, "does my phone do that?". Wow Google, you should be the master and telling people about all the selling points of your product.
#2 ease of use. This one may also be an issue with the carriers but I am going to put it in this section. One of the things I again noticed as I helped my girlfriend master here Nexus S 4G was, weird quirks that are not even a stumbling block to a Tech savvy user but almost a deal breaker to the average consumer.
Example: when my girlfriend 1st got here nexus, she hated it, couldn't believe I recommended it. One of her issues that stuck in my mind was the SMS limit. She hated that the SMS would cap her before she was done texing a message. She didnt care if it sent as two messages but she wanted to be able to type one continues message and then send it, letting the software sort it out. So I said, no problem, my phone doesn't do that (galaxy nexus) so there must be a deep setting to control this. As it turns out there wasn't, at least I couldn't find it. So again, I said no problem and down loaded handsent witch fixed the problem and she loved the easy theming. Well along came here ICS update that I had been raving about and her phone started crashing. Turns out handsent was the reason. Again, I said, no problem and downloaded Go SMS witch she loves even more.
That's just one example, in the mean time, 4 people in her family have switched from android to I Phones and don't regret it. I feel that one of them was mainly due to the hardware they chose and the rest is because they didn't have the live in tech help that my girlfriend has ( don't mean that to sound arrogant). My girlfriend loves her phone partly because I fix each issue as it arises and inform her of cool features.
Conclusion: I really think that the the lack of consistency is the other side of the open source double edged sword. this shows it self in software and hardware. It can be as small as the order in witch the bottom buttons appear, and as big as the Sense UI that changes everything a little bit. I also feel that no one besides Verizon in the early days, is really advertising Android well. Even Verizon doesn't do as good of a job showing you how much the phones can do and why you should want these features as Apple does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok let me help you out.
#2: Actually, Droid branding is owned by motorola, therefore they will only be using blur UI.
Marketing: Google is not in the business of advertising an OEM's phone. That is up to the OEM and the OEM only.
Ease of use: Apple owns a patent that breaks up the long text AFTER it is typed. Therefore, it would be illegal for Android to use it. Example invalid.
Conclusion: Verizon sucks.
You really did not point out 1 thing that google has control over in your whole post.
lowandbehold said:
Stupid post. Why? Because you have no clue what android is. Android is an open source operating system. OEM's take android, and just so you know, they don't need google's consent, and manipulate it the way they want to put on their hardware. Google has no say in what they do to it, how they arrange their buttons, or the UI that they add to it. So your post is more directed at OEM's than google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/14/android-isnt-really-open-its-just-less-closed-than-apple/
Google only cares about advertising (and like to snoop in on what you do, say, what you buy, where you shop, visit, etc... ) of course.
But they do have pretty good control over Android.
lowandbehold said:
Ok let me help you out.
#2: Actually, Droid branding is owned by motorola, therefore they will only be using blur UI.
Marketing: Google is not in the business of advertising an OEM's phone. That is up to the OEM and the OEM only.
Ease of use: Apple owns a patent that breaks up the long text AFTER it is typed. Therefore, it would be illegal for Android to use it. Example invalid.
Conclusion: Verizon sucks.
You really did not point out 1 thing that google has control over in your whole post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1st off, "droid" always running blur was not the point and incorrect. Verizon owns the "droid" name, as it is licensed to them by Lucus Industries. hence the HTC phones under that same brand name. I was commenting on the superior advertizing and Branding that Verizon did. The Droid 1 was a great vanilla phone that did well in a large part, due to advertizing. The verizon campain made "droid" a household name, more so than "Android".
2nd google can advertise features and the OS without advertising a specifice peice of hardware, windows does it all the time. Also, since google does have Google branded harware (nexus), they are in the hardware biz and should advertize aas such.
"Verizon sucks" based on what I can only emagin was your reasoning for this statement, I'm sure all major cariers "suck, not really the point here. Out of all the cariers, Verizon, furthered the android the most in the last 3 years out of anyone. Only now is Samsung beging to be the leader in promoting the android platform.
I agree with you on this, anyone who ask me what phone to get, i personally recommend iPhone UNLESS the guy knows his stuff, i myself LOVE android, been using it for 3 years now but i am software developer and very much familiar with kernels and bootloaders and and and , someone was aksing me the other day, since Android has much bigger marketshare, why everything comes out for iPhone first?
answer is simple, as a developer making things for iPhone is sooooo much easier, you only have "ONE" screen dimension to worry about, you only got 3-4 phones to worry about which 90% of them are similar, now compare this with android phones !!!
and last as everyone mentioned is advertising, personally i think google and all manufacturers do a HORRIBLE job promoting , remember when iCloud came out? nothing new really, just another DropBox, but Apple made such a big deal about it, everyone was AMAZED !!! same with siri, and so many other things,
Personally i think iPhone WORKS, its great for people who dont think outside the box, they want something that WORKS and thats it, they like to be TOLD what to do, how to use your phone , and they follow it.
Android is for thone who like to explore, install custom ROMs , play with OC/UV , etc.
Raul77 said:
remember when iCloud came out? nothing new really, just another DropBox, but Apple made such a big deal about it, everyone was AMAZED !!! same with siri, and so many other things
thats another real good example of, others were 1st but Apple advertizes better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually came from a blackberry, where in convention they make and market their devices.
When I switched to android now essentially Samsung was giving me their flavour of what they call android through Touchwiz and I really hated it.
Google should really take sometime to ensure manufacturers aren't dumbing down the platform for consumers and give users a clear overview of how it can serve them. Which is exactly what Google does with its Nexus.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2