next »

[isthisthingon]

It's so obvious - emphasize the easiness, demo wow stuff and for fuck sake, leave the tech specs home.

  Well said.  @Android is taking over - I say this more tongue-n-cheek than anything else.  I see the tech mags screaming about it but I've still never seen anyone with an actual Android phone.

I'm more interested in the custom development capabilities than anything else.  500 concurrent processes compared to iPhone's 1 at a time approach.  You don't want to cripple the device with too much but still with that flexibility you could write some nice apps.  I'm looking forward to some hobby development time on Android.

Object C on a single processes iPhone with AT&T??  Can't do it...

[kurdt]

I don't even think that a focus on Android will do it... so very much of the iPhone's hipness comes from There's An App For That... so unless they get a pretty big developer base and a whole bunch of cool stuff right quick it will be trouble. And I don't mean a few apps that the iPhone can't do ... I mean a critical mass of games, fart apps and stuff. It's lots of the simple things that make the iPhone seem like it's so far ahead.

And the truth is, it's about 80,000 apps ahead of Android ATM. That's a hard place to start from.

Yeah but always remember that it only takes one strike to the right place to kill the current king. When Apple launched iPhone, there wasn't Appstore. It was only part of their relaunch strategy. The critical hit was the interface. I mean I really wanted to like touchscreen devices before iPhone and I had SonyEricsson's P900 but fuck me running, iPhone's touchscreen was something else just because how it moved your emotions, it was beautiful. THAT'S the goal all device designers should aim at. People buy based on emotions. Very few are able to just look at the hard technical facts where Apple has always been "late". But not because they don't know how to implement it but because they first want to find out how it can be made cool.

Also I'm quite surprised that you Perk fall into volume of something marketing gimmick. 80000 apps and only 200 are any good. I mean really, how many actually searches app for something? It would be interesting to see if people actually search "app for that too" or are the majority like me. I check top 25 list and featured. That's it. Everything else in Appstore is virtually non-existing to me. But I guess this is same type of thinking what used to plague Mac world. "I mean your Mac looks cool but can I open doc file with it?" ... all the users know that there is application that opens doc files in Mac but general public doesn't know that because Windows has 100000000 million applications. Same goes with Android.

Like I said, all it needs is serious marketing effort for the platform, the basic apps, wow factor and it's a serious competition. But I hope this doesn't happen. Anything that comes from Google is evil.

500 concurrent processes compared to iPhone's 1 at a time approach.

Limit is the input device. As long as I have to type with keyboards that can be found in mobile devices including iPhone, I won't do it. I understand your point but when you start to think about, there's very few programs that actually need A LOT of processes but are still usable with small screen and slow-to-use keyboard.

[isthisthingon]

there's very few programs that actually need A LOT of processes but are still usable with small screen and slow-to-use keyboard.

Using one app (1), call comes in (2), want another app handling background tasks (3).  As it stands if you're using an iPhone app and a call comes in the first app is suspended to allow for the second to run, and forget about a simple background task in addition to the two processes.

It is rather surprising since Apple talks so much about being the masters of parallelism. 

I used to do all kinds of custom GPS design and programming on phones and appreciate the need for multiple processes.  Tracking someone's location while they're on the phone and doing other things with their phone, etc.

But my point is more of a tech interest than saying Android is doing it "better" than the iPhone.  Apple products are a million times more marketing success and sex appeal than success based on features/specs alone IMO.

[perkiset]

Yeah but always remember that it only takes one strike to the right place to kill the current king. When Apple launched iPhone, there wasn't Appstore. It was only part of their relaunch strategy. The critical hit was the interface.

True, but essentially flawed argument in this case I think: UI and coolness only go so far. The purchasing public is a fickle bunch and once the Wow factor wears off you'd best have something else in the holster. That's where the app store came in. There was nothing like the iPhone at the time so the UI made it hugely special. But what's given it Mo (way more important IMO) is the app store. Already, Apple has really devalued the Wow experience of virtually any new phone that hits the market... been there done that. Touch screen? nah. GPS? nah. Compass? nah. Do you really think, for example, that the notion of parallel processing and background apps is that sexy that it will shift Mo? I don't think so.

Nope - for anything to succeed now it will need to compete with the iPhone on an app level. And people aren't going to switch for a couple apps ... it's going to have to be really significant set of apps or capabilities that move people en masse. And the challenge will be that if it's a really significant thang, Apple will get on it and have something to compete right quick... and they'll already have the user base to make it a big noise.

500 concurrent processes compared to iPhone's 1 at a time approach.

Limit is the input device. As long as I have to type with keyboards that can be found in mobile devices including iPhone, I won't do it. I understand your point but when you start to think about, there's very few programs that actually need A LOT of processes but are still usable with small screen and slow-to-use keyboard.

Actually the limit at the moment is heat and processor. The specs for the iPhone are so tight that working too hard causes heat overloads and reduces battery severly - both because of workload and heat inefficiency. Remember again just how thin and light the iPhone is ... it is really rather a marvel of engineering at the moment. None of the Android phones will be quite as architecturally elegant for a while. You can even get a sense for just how hard the little thing is working if you have the radio playing while running the TomTom app for GPS ... you've of course for the phone radios on, 3G, the compass is working, the screen is locked on bright, the processor is rejiggering your position many times per second and you're playing the radio. A drive of 100 miles like that makes for one hot little phone - I know this from experience. So I think part of the deal will be tighter and lower power consumption processors (smaller nanometer) and RAM as well as perhaps and OLED screen in the future ... but all of that would make for a more expensive phone today.

IMO, the iPhone was engineered right to the edge of envelope for functionality vs battery life vs size vs reliability.

[vsloathe]

New Barnes & Noble Kindle-killer runs Android.

Can't wait to wrap my sweaty palms around one.

[isthisthingon]

IMO, the iPhone was engineered right to the edge of envelope for functionality vs battery life vs size vs reliability.

I think you're absolutely right about that, and probably more qualified than most to assert this.  The iPhone is trying to be the cool, user-friendly phone for the masses.  Android is far more about being a dev platform, not the iPhone killer.  Who knows if some Verizon will harness Android to combine a killer suite of reasons to drop your iPhone and contract up with them.  I doubt that will happen anytime soon and even if it does I think it will be similar to what recently was revealed about Win mobile - still the dominant choice among businesses with massive contracts. 

If I was Apple I'd be more concerned about the business community at large deciding to standardize on Android devices for corporate purposes as opposed to increased focus on the coolness factor.  Apple already has that market cornered

But as Google knows well, when there's a worldwide buzz about something and a huge amount of brains working behind the scenes to bring certain technologies to life, anything is possible.  Take cloud computing for example.  And you guys should hear the Silicon Valley Android buzz.  It's deafening 

[kurdt]

True, but essentially flawed argument in this case I think: UI and coolness only go so far. The purchasing public is a fickle bunch and once the Wow factor wears off you'd best have something else in the holster. That's where the app store came in. There was nothing like the iPhone at the time so the UI made it hugely special. But what's given it Mo (way more important IMO) is the app store. Already, Apple has really devalued the Wow experience of virtually any new phone that hits the market... been there done that. Touch screen? nah. GPS? nah. Compass? nah. Do you really think, for example, that the notion of parallel processing and background apps is that sexy that it will shift Mo? I don't think so.

You are missing the point. iPhone is stunning phone and it took it to the next level in this cycle of personal connectivity. How it got mass appeal was it's looks AND to be the device that actually took it to the next level, everything else was great also. This is what Steve meant when he said that "every now and then comes along a product...". Now it's really easy to understand why Nokia and other companies are so fucking screwed. They are still thinking in the previous level with their devices.

Nope - for anything to succeed now it will need to compete with the iPhone on an app level. And people aren't going to switch for a couple apps ... it's going to have to be really significant set of apps or capabilities that move people en masse. And the challenge will be that if it's a really significant thang, Apple will get on it and have something to compete right quick... and they'll already have the user base to make it a big noise.

Of course but the point was quality versus quantity. We are thinking alike here because what you are essentially saying is that it needs the right apps and MASSIVE marketing campaign to tell the same audience iPhone has right now or did I misread you?

Actually the limit at the moment is heat and processor. The specs for the iPhone are so tight that working too hard causes heat overloads and reduces battery severly - both because of workload and heat inefficiency. Remember again just how thin and light the iPhone is ... it is really rather a marvel of engineering at the moment. None of the Android phones will be quite as architecturally elegant for a while. You can even get a sense for just how hard the little thing is working if you have the radio playing while running the TomTom app for GPS ... you've of course for the phone radios on, 3G, the compass is working, the screen is locked on bright, the processor is rejiggering your position many times per second and you're playing the radio. A drive of 100 miles like that makes for one hot little phone - I know this from experience. So I think part of the deal will be tighter and lower power consumption processors (smaller nanometer) and RAM as well as perhaps and OLED screen in the future ... but all of that would make for a more expensive phone today.

IMO, the iPhone was engineered right to the edge of envelope for functionality vs battery life vs size vs reliability.

No, you are thinking now with your engineer hat on. Why would it matter if iPhone is 100x faster if we can't use it anymore faster? That was the whole point. I'm not saying that iPhone isn't marvelous piece of technology and if extra processes can make it more stable, bring it on. But I was talking in app point of view. I don't need any more complex applications to my iPhone because I can't use them with the inputs iPhone can offer and because of the screen size.

[perkiset]

You are missing the point. iPhone is stunning phone and it took it to the next level in this cycle of personal connectivity. How it got mass appeal was it's looks AND to be the device that actually took it to the next level, everything else was great also. This is what Steve meant when he said that "every now and then comes along a product...". Now it's really easy to understand why Nokia and other companies are so fucking screwed. They are still thinking in the previous level with their devices.

I don't think I'm missing it at all ... I agree completely. The iPhone changed things up utterly, we see it in every single phone that has come out since. But my point is that if it rested on those laurels it would have gotten beaten by others, because sexiness is timely and fickle. If all it was based on was its architectural genius and coolness cache´ then it could be beaten by the next beauty queen. In this case, I think Apple was brilliant in that they did produce The Next Level of gadget, but then went to produce yet another level for it. And I believe the tablet will be the same. Natch, we see all other manufacturers just trying to catch some of the drippings from the iPhone while Apple is already on to the Next Big Thing. I think we're on the same page here...

Of course but the point was quality versus quantity. We are thinking alike here because what you are essentially saying is that it needs the right apps and MASSIVE marketing campaign to tell the same audience iPhone has right now or did I misread you?

Nope no misread, again, I think we're on the same page. But I'd even say that you need more than the "right" apps and a massive marketing campaign: I believe you'll now need a massive number of apps and something that an ad campaign can't even give you - more buzz than the iPhone. The problem for every other manufacturer out there is that iPhone has all the buzz... all the mindshare (or at least the hugely vast majority...) the only folks that are really looking at Android phones are people that hate Apple or hate AT&T. There is no significant buzz for anything other than iPhone. And here's a bigger problem: with Android you'll soon have (perhaps) dozens of different phones with dozens of different capabilities... meaning that any buzz "Android" can build will be diluted nasty. You're not going to be able to beat the iPhone with the framework notion of Android. You're only going to be able to even compete with iPhone with better VALUE for the customer. Not even features, holistic value. And as soon as (manufacturer A) creates a certain something for their Android phone, (manufacturer B) will create something with an Android phone that is in direct competition and dilutes the notion of manufacturer A's. I don't honestly know if it can be done now, and I really am unsure if we're really even arguing the right way: to argue iPhone against Android is to argue Windows against a Mac computer - two completely different things. Android is a framework/trapset/API ... the iPhone is a product. It remains to be seen whether manufacturers can make use of Android to build a product that actually competes with the iPhone. Note that Apple is now also in 68 countries, and has a deal in China. They are on a ROLL.

No, you are thinking now with your engineer hat on. Why would it matter if iPhone is 100x faster if we can't use it anymore faster? That was the whole point. I'm not saying that iPhone isn't marvelous piece of technology and if extra processes can make it more stable, bring it on. But I was talking in app point of view. I don't need any more complex applications to my iPhone because I can't use them with the inputs iPhone can offer and because of the screen size.

Well, my engineer hat for hard reality - I see your point by I think you're missing something here. If I could run TomTom in the background as well as Skype and AIM, then while I'm listening to my music and taking pictures I could be pinged by an IM or have Shirley (my GPS voice of choice) tell me to make a right at the next intersection ... without having to be actually ON that app to have it go. But here again I think your point is well taken: how many of Me/You/Nuts/ITTO/VSloathe/RC etc etc etc are there that would make use of a phone to that level... I know my mother in law won't. And she's the reason that iPhone sales are so high... she's the non-tech purchaser that suddenly has a piece of tech, thank you very much Apple.

I think you've hit upon a really fundamental point about why they could engineer the phone to be as light, tight and elegant as it is: multiprocessing is just not as compelling to the masses as cute, tiny and cool is. So they made a choice and it's obviously worked for them - even though many of us really want it to be so much more.

[rcjordan]

Google to offer turn-by-turn driving directions with new navigation product for Android 2.0 phones

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSN2727452520091028

[isthisthingon]

   Wow that looks nice.  Thx rc

The product also uses voice-recognition technology, making it well-suited for use while driving, Google said. And the navigation software can display live traffic data that Google collects from various sources, including data it collects on the speed and distance that users of Google mobile maps are traveling.

Gundotra said the company does not collect any personally identifiable information in the Google mobile maps and the navigation products. (Reporting by Alexei Oreskovic; Editing Bernard Orr)

[nop_90]

The 80K apps means fuk all.
Winmo platform which is based on WinCe probably has 80K games/apps easy.
Also you never hear people talk about it but they have a 9% market share.

With QT now GPL, and targeting WinCE and Sybian it will be a lot easier to make apps for both platforms compared to IPhone.

[vsloathe]

Yes, but Apple came out with the revolutionary idea of putting the apps in a REPOSITORY!

Tongue in cheek aside, it was a good idea. It wasn't their idea, but it was a good idea. I wish someone had taken the ball and run with it sooner, and since as well. There is still too much of the computing world wrapped up in the idea that you download an app and then you double-click on it.

[nop_90]

I guess pocketgear just opened yesterday
http://www.pocketgear.com/en_US/html/index.jsp

And the 100 other sites like it.