maemo.org - Talk - Nokia N900 vs. Motorola Droid / Milestone

Page 7 of 11

« First

< Prev

Next >

Last »

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)

- Competitors (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Nokia N900 vs. Motorola Droid / Milestone (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=33091)

Laughing Man

2009-10-29 02:07

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

True you could do both camps. But if your seeking to only own one device then for what nilchak wants it seems Android fills the need quite nicely. Better than Maemo since the benefits of Maemo are only secondary interest to him.

cb474

2009-10-29 02:15

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360372)

And, while Nokia might be great at developing the core apps, and give us more core/free apps than Android does ... that's just one company with finite resources. Even if they get a few more companies into the fold, it's not going to be as fruitful as the hordes of people developing useful utilities on Android. Even if some are crap, even if most are crap, there's more monkeys in that room than in Maemo's room. (though, unfortunately, neither has infinite monkeys).

You could be right. I see the logic of this argument. But my experience of Linux as purely and end user is there really isn't much, if anything, I miss from Windows. I think mostly you just get more crap (and viruses too).

It may play out differently in the mobile platform market, but if it plays out the way it has in the desktop Linux world, I think things will be fine. It's not just a question of more monkeys in a room. It's a question of who those monkey's are. A disproportionate number of developers like the open-source world, because they're free to make things how they want--not just at the application level, but with the whole device and platform. So Maemo may have less monkeys in the room, but a higher precentage of smarter more dedicated and more innovative monkeys.

I could see it going either way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin

2) develop a Dalvik engine for Maemo, so that Maemo can harness the Android momentum. Thus allowing Maemo users to receive from it, and allowing Maemo developers to contribute to it. They can probably leverage some of the work that Canonical is already putting into this (to get Dalvik running on Ubuntu).

This could either be a brilliant idea, to leach off of Android's success and bring some of the sweetness back to Nokia. Or it would be a total disaster, because it would just make Maemo a platform for Google to parasitize all the more easily. On top of which, once people get into the Android Market and like it, they may likely just feel like it makes more sense to have an Android device (which no doubt will be better streamlined to work with Android apps). I am inclined to think the disaster scenario is much more likely. But I'm also inclined to think Maemo and every non-Android platform will be parasitized by Google anyway (see my last post).

I think the only strategy with a hope of combating Google is to play their game. Give Maemo away to other device manufacturers. Offer a real alternative. Give up on having the device sale be the primary source of revenue. Go after the services and applications market with a real alternative. Of course this also probably means become an advertister like Google. And Google may already just have way too much of a head start.

Honestly, I'm happy with Maemo having a smaller chunk of the market and remaining more dedicated to open-source. I think it will be less, but better. This may not be what Nokia wants though. It's not the road to riches.

rm42	2009-10-29 03:01

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cb474 (Post 360387)

I am of the opinion that Dalvik in Maemo is a good thing for Maemo. In fact, I think it is crucial. It neutralizes the appeal of Android devices that can only run Dalvik, and showcases why Maemo is so much more powerful. Maemo devices can run Dalvik, Qt, GTK, C, C++, Python, Ruby, etc! Yes, it defeats the strategy of making Symbian more appealing through Maemo. But Symbian is a dead end any way. That is why I say that Nokia should give up on Symbian and put all its weight behind Maemo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cb474 (Post 360387)

I think the only strategy with a hope of combating Google is to play their game. Give Maemo away to other device manufacturers. Offer a real alternative. Give up on having the device sale be the primary source of revenue. Go after the services and applications market with a real alternative. Of course this also probably means become an advertister like Google. And Google may already just have way too much of a head start.

Not so fast there. Maemo can be quite appealing in its own right and especially when pared to Nokia's better devices. With Dalvik running inside Maemo, why go with an Android device?

nilchak

2009-10-29 03:19

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laughing Man (Post 360376)

It seems you should be in the Android camp and not Maemo camp then. Because no matter how far Maemo goes it'll always be behind the iPhone, Android, and what not in those consumer apps.

Mind you I am not saying I will rush to the platform which has the most apps - in that case I would have choosen iPhone.

What I want is usefull apss and a few killer apps (like the Google Navigation app). If Maemo can provide me that - inspite of having lesser number of apps in all (with lesser fart apps as well) I am ok with that.

The thing that bothers me is having system tools as 50 - 70% of the apps count. That's not what I am looking for.

Frankly I have been a linux enthusiast since a long time - have used Linux on my desktops and laptops since Mandrake Linux and those days. Now at this point in my life - I find that I am not driven by my OS religion - I am driven by my use cases. I want function first out of technology. So camps don't apeal to me - functionality of those camps do. But I do hear you.

Laughing Man

2009-10-29 03:22

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Ah, I'm similar in that fashion. It's just that the system tools on the Maemo side and functionality it offers would require hacking other operating systems to get it working.

I wonder if the browser in the n900 have the geolocation support. That combined with Google Maps would go a long way.. If not that browser, maybe fennec.

Nexus7

2009-10-29 03:30

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by quipper8 (Post 360355)

what is the big gold area in the middle of the dpad? I mean, what in the world is it?

It's for the iNuts. "Oh look, shiny object!"

Probably is the "Select" button.

Rushmore

2009-10-29 03:46

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Folks, when people notice they have about 150 megs of free space for apps and that is about it- Droid will not seem so bright and shiny. They will have even less when Flash 10.1 comes out.

cb474

2009-10-29 04:11

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rm42 (Post 360403)

I agree that Symbian is dead (or Nokia will kill itself in the smartphone market if they remain dedicated to it). And I can totally see the argument about how Dalvik could help Maemo. But I think it could also be a real losing argument for Nokia to say, hey look we run Android apps too! For a lot of users they may well just say, then why shouldn't I just get an Android device? After all, it's a sign of Apple's relative weakness and marginality in the desktop market that they have to provide Boot Camp and Microsoft does nothing of the kind in return.

So I'm not saying Meamo wouldn't technically speaking be more awesome if it ran Dalvik. I'm just not convinced it would be a winning strategy for Nokia in the smartphone market. For a sophisticated user they will see how much more powerful Maemo is, if it can run Dalvik. But for the kind of mass market consumer that made the iPhone a runaway success and who will now also flock to Android devices, I think they're looking for a few applications and services, executed in a slick and well integrated fashion. The device that does that the best will appeal to the most people. I can't remember if I said it in this thread or elsewhere, but I think one of the fundamental appeals of the iPhone is that it limits choices. Most people don't want too many choices. They just want the appearance that they're getting the best of the few things they need (whether it's really the best or not).

So it may just be confusing in the end if Maemo devices can run a lot of different virtual platforms like Dalvik. The average end user may just think, why does it have to do all these different things? Why don't they just make it simple and well integrated like the iPhone/Android?

And even for those who stick with Meamo, if those Dalvik based apps dovetail nicely with Google Voice, Google Maps, Gmail, and other services Google provides (by which I mean if in the background they help Google grow its massive cross-referenced data base of user behavior and concomitantly advertise to Meamo users), then Google will end up potentially getting more revenue out of Meamo devices than Nokia does.

You could be right, but for me in the big picture Dalvik on a Maemo device is one more avenue for Google to get its tentacles into even a competitors device. I don't think that's a strategy for going up against Google. It's what Google wants.

johnkzin

2009-10-29 04:40

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cb474 (Post 360422)

After all, it's a sign of Apple's relative weakness and marginality in the desktop market that they have to provide Boot Camp and Microsoft does nothing of the kind in return.

If that were true, then by your logic, Apple would shrivel up and die, because "why not just get a windows machine?"

The majority of Apple customers, in my observation, run OS X only. Almost NONE of them buy Apple for exclusively running Windows (some do, though -- Apple laptops are often the best Windows laptops on the market).

Apple understands that they have a certain market segment. They do things to reach outside of that market segment (compatibility efforts, conversion efforts, etc.), but primarily they cater to their core market. And, as a result, that core market is fiercely loyal to them (irrationally so).

Nokia can forge that same path:
1) Better hardware
2) Better UI (Android's base UI is _ok_, but it's not amazing ... the interesting Android UI's are from the individual vendors, and I'm not convinced any of those are amazing either; but, aside from the portrait mode issues, it seems to me that Maemo5's UI is well ahead of Android).
3) A core market that the other player(s) (Android _AND_ iPhone) have completely neglected (key low level/expert-user features and low-level open-ness).

They probably need to find another advantage as well ... a use case (other than IT professionals, but don't abandon the IT professionals either) that sets them apart from Android and Apple. And then RUN with them. Perfect those 4 advantages, and I predit Nokia will get a sustainable base of fiercely loyal customers.

And Dalvik will _enchance_ it, not undermine it.

The pitfall scenario is "OS/2". Where Windows 16 compatibilty (in the Windows 16 era) meant that no one had to develop for OS/2 to get OS/2 market ... so there was no advantage to developing for OS/2. So no one did. But, OS/2 apps weren't faster or better integrated into the platform than Win16 apps. Native Maemo apps are/will-be faster and better integrated than Dalvik apps, by simple necessity of being native. Plus, OS/2 didn't have a better UI (different, not better), didn't have an existing expert user base (it was entirely new, very different/odd, and so there wasn't this existing community of experts who could easily jump right in), and it didn't have better hardware (the exact same hardware userbase as Windows16 ... only, even less, because not everything had OS/2 drivers).

I don't think the OS/2 scenario is as likely here. I think there are lots of things that differentiate Maemo+Dalvik from OS/2+Win16.

quipper8

2009-10-29 05:14

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cb474 (Post 360422)

I agree that Symbian is dead (or Nokia will kill itself in the smartphone market if they remain dedicated to it).

I don't know about that statement. There are millions of blackberrys still being sold with an interface just about as ugly and old as symbian. I don't think symbian is going away anytime soon, it is a good competitor in the business market against blackberry.

Nokia is big enough that it can do maemo AND s60 AND s40

cb474

2009-10-29 05:30

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360427)

If that were true, then by your logic, Apple would shrivel up and die, because "why not just get a windows machine?"

But that basically is what happened. Apple lost the OS war to Windows. Apple didn't die, but they are permanently marginal. And all that I've been arguing throughout this thread is that Google/Android will be the Windows of mobile platforms. Apple will once again remain forever in the margins. There may not be much room left for a Nokia (or any other) smartphone platform.

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin

Nokia can forge that same path:
1) Better hardware
2) Better UI (Android's base UI is _ok_, but it's not amazing ... the interesting Android UI's are from the individual vendors, and I'm not convinced any of those are amazing either; but, aside from the portrait mode issues, it seems to me that Maemo5's UI is well ahead of Android).
3) A core market that the other player(s) (Android _AND_ iPhone) have completely neglected (key low level/expert-user features and low-level open-ness).

1) and 2) are basically Apple's game. I don't really see Nokia beating Apple at that game. Apple has already won that reputation. It's also a losing game. That was the lesson from Windows vs. Apple. The hardware really doesn't matter that much. Even an inferior GUI doesn't matter than much. It's just has to be more or less comparable and be the platform that gets on every device. That's what Android is trying to do and it's just going to be hard to beat a platform that is given away for free and tied into all kinds of free services and applications. Making Maemo compatible with the Google/Android universe helps Google, not Nokia, it just turns Nokia into a device manufacturer serving another platforms needs. And in the long run, that's not where the money is.

As far as 3) goes, it's good to have a loyal base of IT and other expert users, if they're going to be developers. But they don't represent the mass market. Will it make for a device that I'll like better? Yes. Will it help with mass market appeal and sales? I don't think so. Ultimately, whether it's the iPhone or Android, it's appealing to the lowest common denominator that wins. Not the best hardware, not the best software, just the most convenience for what the mass market perceives its needs to be.

christexaport

2009-10-29 05:51

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilchak (Post 360352)

Unless Google maps comes to Maemo (and Nokia should pursue this), GPS functionality on Maemo leaves much to be desired.

I'd prefer they bring Ovi Maps up to par with Google Maps, perhaps by allowing free navigation for 18-24 months or life of the device, and improving the interface. Adding voice search could be done easily, I think, but where the results come from is probably not so simple. Yahoo/Bing, maybe?

I don't want Nokia to stop developing Ovi Maps. I like it better than Google because of its offline maps and its Navteq images, which are the best in the world since the latest Worldview-2 satellite deal. If they do, there will only be Google Maps, and that would allow Google to start charging exorbitantly for the service as the lone provider.

Quote:

And this is where I am a bit sceptical of the Linux open source developers - I have always as a end user wanted apps - consumer apps, but since the Zaurus days I see linux devs "porting" system tools and claiming app counts. Frankly - I am no sys admin - so VNC, curl, SFTP, SSH, and all that matter less to me as "applications" I want apps which will fulfill my end user need like Stocks monitor, portfolio manager, timesheet app, project planning, note taking, reminders and tasks todo's, and all these types.

During the Zaurus days I was very dissapointed in this aspect. With Maemo I am more positive about it - but still the geekiness around me sometimes makes me sceptical a bit.

We have to remember this isn't a smartphone is the classic sense of the word, but a portable desktop device. What apps do you use on your desktop? Aside from the Photoshops, ProTools, and Nuendo apps, most of us use browser based services and apps. This will be the case for the N900 as well. As for IM and social networking, there are built-in features at the platform level. So the development of apps will be focused on real utilities that can revolutionize mobile computing, not just make it easier to do the things we've always done on our PC's on our phones. Maemo will be the sandbox for mobile innovation.

BatPenguin

2009-10-29 06:14

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360440)

I don't want Nokia to stop developing Ovi Maps. I like it better than Google because of its offline maps and its Navteq images, which are the best in the world since the latest Worldview-2 satellite deal. If they do, there will only be Google Maps, and that would allow Google to start charging exorbitantly for the service as the lone provider.

And this is based on...what exactly? As the many tinfoil hats around here will tell you, Google's business is not charging for its services. You can worry about Google's size and influence and privacy and all that, but there's no examples of them charging for a service, all their basic stuff is free.

Google is in the advertising/information business. Whether or not their offerings will push makers of navigation software, paid e-mail services, office software, mobile OS's etc. out of business is irrelevant.They're not in it to make money in the traditional sense, they make their money elsewhere.

dansus

2009-10-29 06:17

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Looks ugly as sin to me and the keyboard looks unusable but wont know till ive tried one.

One a side note im looking forward to trying Andriod and Mer on the N900, should be fun. :)

christexaport

2009-10-29 06:21

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Symbian is about as dead as any OS that owns half of the market. I have to call some of the shadetree analysts out. You can't quote singular analyst reports and news headlines as reliable sources. It takes heavy scrutinization of the data and a knowledge of the markets across the globe to get it right.

It took Apple's record-breaking growth for two straight years to get just ~15% of the global smartphone market. In one year, Android has a huge ~5%. At that pace, and with Symbian able to hold its 50% share, and a new UI coming soon, and with the fifth most visible brand in the world behind it, and with African, Indian, and Asian markets loving it (besides the US, those are the main growth markets for mobiles), and with a mature core, I wish the competitors luck.

The fact of the matter is that outside of the US market, Android and the iPhone are minor players. They're heavily leveraged in the US, and a disruption like a new Symbian on carrier shelves alonside a new WInMo could have an effect on the both OSes.

Maemo can't replace Symbian, nor can iPhone. It won't run on the cheap hardware needed in the developing markets of Asia, Africa, and India. Its a strictly high end offering. We're geeks, but not everyone can afford a $500-700 device. Symbian is too versatile and expensive to be ditched.

The issue is product development. Carriers, ODMs, OEMs, etc. can't waste budgets making devices for an OS that will be revamped soon, so only the incumbents, Nokia, Samsung, and SE, are making devices now. Once Symbian^4 is hardened, more device manufacturers will join in making hardware, and we'll see the same growth we see in Android with Symbian^4, and not starting at 0%, but at 30-40% marketshare.

So while Andriod is battling WinMo, RIM, and the iPhone, Symbian will reconquer the world. Maemo may take some of the traditonal Symbian ground, but both will eat at the competition, while complimenting each other. Symbian isn't going anywhere, but will be a conduit for Maemo devs to sell code.

dansus

2009-10-29 06:24

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

^^ What he said.

christexaport

2009-10-29 06:33

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatPenguin (Post 360443)

If they control a market, they CAN control pricing or features. I'm not so worried about price as I am competition. If we all had to use IE instead of Firefox, Maxthon, Avant, Safari, WebKit, etc, we would see less web and browsing innovation from competitiors. Choice is competition, and right now, Android will become a Google only space for navigation. NOT good, imo. In their quest to get more customer data, they're taking certain markets from the app development arena and keeping them for themselves.

That they've taken customers from app developers is just as bad. I find that pretty bad business for their developer relations. Pretty soon, Android will be all Google, and all the devs will look for alternative playgrounds. Symbian and WinMo, anyone?

johnkzin

2009-10-29 06:49

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cb474 (Post 360437)

But that basically is what happened.

Quote:

Apple lost the OS war to Windows.

Irrelevant. (and, they didn't lose the OS war, they (arguably) lost the war for mass market dominance, and that's assuming you consider the war to actually be over ... despite Apple publicly throwing in the towel in the late 90's, they've made steady gains since then; almost like they threw in the towel more to get people to shut up about useless topics, than because they actually lost an irrelevant contest)

Quote:

Apple didn't die,

Thanks for agreeing with me (that they didn't die), and disagreeing with yourself (that "that basically is what happened").

Quote:

And all that I've been arguing throughout this thread is that Google/Android will be the Windows of mobile platforms. Apple will once again remain forever in the margins. There may not be much room left for a Nokia (or any other) smartphone platform.

Nokia can find a different margin. And, as long as it's a profitable and sustainable one, that's all that counts. Focusing on who is "Winning", for mass market dominance, is for people who don't understand. As I already said, there's a decent market that both Apple and Google have not only "not addressed", but have outright banned from their OS. That's a good, solid, starting place for Nokia.

Quote:

1) and 2) are basically Apple's game.

Apple is far from having superior hardware (in the mobile space). Nor would I say that their UI is better. The one and only thing their UI has that no one else has is "pinch to zoom/unzoom". Meh. They're ripe for being bested in that arena. Unlike the Mac, where their killer app IS the UI, on the iPhone, their killer app is iTunes, and iTunes only. That's the only "fools errand" in trying to compete with Apple (trying to dominate them in the media experience arena -- you can provide a better experience, you provide a sustainable experience, but at this point you probably wont ever dominate them). Everything else is fair game.

Quote:

It's also a losing game. That was the lesson from Windows vs. Apple.

Then you didn't actually learn the lesson of Windows vs Apple. Because Apple didn't "lose". They're alive, profitable, thriving, and even growing. The lesson is: you don't have to be the biggest predator in order to thrive. The goal is not to be the biggest predator, the goal is to have the resources to thrive and carry on (in the form of sustainable profits).

People who think that "winning" requires "being the biggest predator" are short sighted.

Quote:

As far as 3) goes, it's good to have a loyal base of IT and other expert users, if they're going to be developers. But they don't represent the mass market.

Publishing professionals and artists also don't represent the mass market. Yet, Apple has managed to stay alive on that market for quite a while. And, with OS X, have even branched out into the world of IT professionals. Getting the mass market isn't what's required. What's required is having a big enough niche, that you can hold on to, so that you can (once again) have sustainable profits, so that you can thive and carry on. IT professionals probably wont be that niche all on its own, but it's a good place to start (which, it seems, is exactly where Nokia has started -- they just need to be sure that they don't lose it).

Everything else ("needing to beat Google and/or Apple", "that there's no market niche's left to capture", etc.) is either irrelevant, and/or complete BS.

johnkzin

2009-10-29 06:58

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

The one part of your message I don't agree with is:

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360448)

(Maemo) won't run on the cheap hardware needed in the developing markets of Asia, Africa, and India. Its a strictly high end offering.

Maemo, as a flavor of Linux, is more than capable of running on cheap hardware. The fact that Nokia has chosen to position it as a high end offering doesn't mean that it has to be, nor that it always will be. That's just how they're introducing it to their line-up. Just like, once upon a time, they had proprietary software that was at the bottom of their offerings, and Symbian was only a high end offering. Or, how, recently Symbian S40 was at the bottom of their offerings, and Symbian S60 as only for the high end ... and now S60 is starting to trickle down to the lower end phones.

That doesn't mean that Maemo WILL follow that same evolutionary path, but there's nothing intrinsic about either Maemo nor Symbian that would prevent it.

christexaport

2009-10-29 07:11

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

research shows that more than 2 or three mobile OSes can easily survive in today's market. Soon they'll all have the same support for apps and features. The differentiator will be services embedded, developer support, hardware and the UI. Whoever owns the services can make cash without even selling devices. Whoever has the best hardware has a big chance at winning consumers, not some game, and that's NOKIA! Always has been a Motorola Nokia hardware world, and now its a Nokia world. No one else really focuses on hardware nearly as closely, just copying what Nokia does. Look at the iPhone and compare it to the N95 and tell me who's copying and innovating.

christexaport

2009-10-29 07:18

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360463)

The one part of your message I don't agree with is:

Maemo, as a flavor of Linux, is more than capable of running on cheap hardware.

Try running Maemo on a 320x240 2.2 inch display. Try it without a touchscreen. Try it with 64 MB of RAM. Maemo is versatile, but I doubt it could power the 5800 or 6790. Symbian is versatile enough to run the mythical $100 smartphone one day.

Quote:

The fact that Nokia has chosen to position it as a high end offering doesn't mean that it has to be, nor that it always will be. That's just how they're introducing it to their line-up. Just like, once upon a time, they had proprietary software that was at the bottom of their offerings, and Symbian was only a high end offering. Or, how, recently Symbian S40 was at the bottom of their offerings, and Symbian S60 as only for the high end ... and now S60 is starting to trickle down to the lower end phones.

That doesn't mean that Maemo WILL follow that same evolutionary path, but there's nothing intrinsic about either Maemo nor Symbian that would prevent it.

I'm speaking from a strategic standpoint as well as an architecture position. Maemo's UI will be hardware accelerated in Maemo 6, I believe, whereas Symbian's UI doesn't need a GPU at all at this point. The N900 represents a minimum hardware setup for Maemo 5. Its a high end Symbian device platform, though. It has certain parts that must be high end, whereas Symbian was designed to run on simpler hardware long ago.

mrojas

2009-10-29 07:32

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Did I seriously just read the notion that Apple has better hardware than Nokia?

No.

Just... no.

Too often (and mostly in North American markets it seems), form is considered to be a direct representative of function and it is not. If I take a Volkswagen Beetle and cover it with gold, it is still a Volkswagen.

You want to see a piece of hardware that was truly ahead its time? The N95.

Designs like that, coupled with premier manufacturing installations (which, unlike other manufacturers, are managed by Nokia itself) makes Nokia one of the best hardware providers in the globe. Period.

People can criticize many things from Nokia, but hardware, no.

johnkzin

2009-10-29 07:42

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360473)

Maemo doesn't support 320x240 2.2 inch displays because ... Nokia has positioned it for higher end devices. There's nothing to stop the software from being written for smaller than 800x480 displays.

I've run Linux and X on systems with less than 8MB of RAM, less than 800x480, and less than 50MHz of CPU. It was both comfortable and responsive. A version of Maemo that was optimized for that would be MUCH less frilly than the _CURRENT_ Maemo5 environment (and it might have to give up things like GNOME). But that doesn't mean Maemo _must_ run on higher end devices. That's just where Nokia has positioned it.

For example, a purely Qt based version of Maemo might be able to give up the X server entirely (Trolltech has certainly deployed Qt on devices small and X-less). Such a device would still be Maemo (nokia's linux, with a Qt API), but with a different set of features, probably a different look and feel, and definitely with a different footprint. And depending on how they've gone about it, it should be source code compatible with an app that only makes Qt and Linux type API calls ... and it _MIGHT_ even be binary compatible.

Quote:

Those things are true due to how Maemo is being positioned. It is not intrinsic to being a Linux/X environment that you must have a GPU, etc. Earlier versions of Maemo, for example, had less frills. Maemo5 (and probably Maemo6) is being positioned for the high end, so it has features that are necessary in a high end device, therefore it requires hardware to support those features in a manner that is consistent with being a high end device. Maemo doesn't drive the requirement. Being a high end device does.

Aim it at a low end market, and you can omit those features, and then omit the hardware that's necessary to support those features. It will be less frilly, yes. But that doesn't mean it wont be "Maemo".

c0rt3x

2009-10-29 07:59

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveP1 (Post 360291)

In what way do Google's products lock out the competition? I sync my N810 calendar with Google's because Google developed open APIs. There is an effort at Google to make all data that they store easily retrievable in open formats:

http://dataliberation.blogspot.com/2...ion-front.html

There may be many reasons to dislike Google but this is not one of them. Google dominates the competition, it doesn't lock it out.

Bookmark this statement and return 3 years later. You'll feel ashamed by then...

Google is worse than Microsoft, Apple and Intel combined. Why? Because they (unlike the other big boys) keep their (evil) purposes in secret, and they're very good at it, thus their success. This makes Google look like a nice, competitive company to the public, simply because no one knows what they're really up to... and you have to agree about that's far away from the truth, right?

The only relevant reason for their success is their dominating position of search engines. If it wasn't for that, they'd be nothing, and you know it. Who would even know about Gmail if it wouldn't be directly showcased after you search for any email client in Google Search (maybe the uninformed people would want other companies' services instead, very competitive Google!).

Sorry, but I can't agree about that Google is benefitting competition, I just can't. If you really want, I could easily continue, because I'd rather find it hard to defend Google...

johnkzin

2009-10-29 08:15

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by c0rt3x (Post 360489)

Who would even know about Gmail if it wouldn't be directly showcased after you search for any email client in Google Search

Me.

That's not how I found out about Gmail. I found out about Gmail from the raves of early adopters. For years, I didn't believe them (it's just webmail after all; I had seen other webmail solutions, and they all sucked compared to a nice local mail client). Then a year ago, both in preparation for a project, and because I got a G1, I started to actually use Gmail. Turned out, the raves I had heard were pretty much all true.

I used to be a loyal Apple Mail user (well, actually, a NeXT Mail user ... Apple Mail just inherited the mantle). I reluctantly gave it up for Thunderbird, when Apple refused to fix a few issues in the IMAP client, over multiple versions. And, last year, I gave up Thunderbird. Sure, there are a few little things I wish I still had, but, for about 90% of it, I prefer Gmail.

I have also, for 15 years, been a die hard "run my own mail server" kinda guy. In addition to doing that at work. Google has pretty much put those things to bed ... not by forcing me to, in any stretch of the imagination ... but by simply offering a better alternative in almost every way. "Free" isn't the only dimension in which they're better. "Advertized in their search results" isn't the only draw to them.

Google isn't just leveraging the search engine success to monopolize email. They've created what are, honestly and sincerely, better email products.

I'm not sure I can say exactly the same about their other apps. I barely use their Calendar and Docs. I don't really use any of their other stuff. I can say that I find Google Sites a little annoying, but it has some promise. But my inability to say "better products", except with Sites, is due to my lack of familiarity with them ... not because they aren't better products.

BatPenguin

2009-10-29 08:25

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360454)

If they control a market, they CAN control pricing or features. I'm not so worried about price as I am competition.

First you said they'll "start charging exorbitantly for the service as the lone provider", now it's competition you're worried about.

This is again turning into these "google is evil" discussions. They updated one of their programs. I'm happy about that, you seem to scream "murder!" and see it as a mortal blow to an industry that, for some reason, should have been allowed to exist and continue charging stupid amounts for a product that by modern standards really "should be free" as there are plently of free map services everywhere on the Internet. Navigation industry about to go under? Good riddance.

Why should we, as consumers, care if the navigation business is being forced into a "give your product for free/cheap and figure out how to make money otherwise" business model by somebody deciding to not charge for somethign that has been ridiculously expensive previously? Good for us. If Google messes this up and provides a service/product that's not good enough, there will still be a market for the other providers just like today.

Anyway, certainly in-car systems will stay around and there will be users for navigation gear that doesn't need a net connection. TomTom etc. stock price seems to imply that the guess is that Google will not mess this up and the days of most people paying for a license might be coming to an end. I agree with that, they have a good track record of not messing things up, actually, and I'm very happy that I don't have to put up with paying for a navigation license. I've never paid for Nokia's Maps license (used Maemo Mapper on the tablet) and I highly doubt that I ever will pay for it on any platform. Neither will I ever pay for a web browser, email client, webmail service, blogging service etc. either. I'm sure quite a few companies that provided those went under too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360454)

Choice is competition, and right now, Android will become a Google only space for navigation. NOT good, imo. In their quest to get more customer data, they're taking certain markets from the app development arena and keeping them for themselves.

Uh. So of course Nokia shouldn't release Ovi Maps for free or include its price in the price of phones (as I think they do in some cases, probably more in the future), since this might hurt makers of other navigation software? These mobile systems come with all sorts of things, browsers, media players, navigators, email clients, etc. that some other company could be producing...are you similarly against Nokia including new features in updates that have been provided up until now by commercial applications? Selling navigation software for a system (Android) that has always included a very good map software doesn't exactly sound like the safest business to be in, to start with.

The Google/Android conspiracy theories have been around here long enough and I have no intention of taking part in those anymore, it seems like in order to enjoy the Maemo products, we need to first "denounce Google and Android". That is just silly and really hurts the level of discussion over here. But please: when you whine about Google's latest Maps offering update -- because, let's face it, it makes Android seem even more appealing to the ordinary consumer and Maemo conquering the world might look a bit less likely all the time -- consider if you'll be unleashing the same storm the day Nokia announces that they won't be charging for Ovi Maps anymore. That day will probably come eventually, the cost of Maps will be included in the price of all Nokia phones that come with it, that seems to be the safe way out for them. I expect to hear a lot of moaning about the fate of everybody who provides navigation software for Symbian/Maemo then. (Well ok, nobody provides anything for Maemo, but Symbian must have a few commercial navigation software providers somewhere in that wonderful Ovi store or some other place.)

cb474

2009-10-29 08:31

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360459)

No, it isn't. Apple has a vibrant business. It didn't shrivel up and die, it focused on a market segment it could keep, profit from, and thrive within. That's what counts. Being the biggest predator in the food chain isn't what counts.

Irrelevant. (and, they didn't lose the OS war, they (arguably) lost the war for mass market dominance, and that's assuming you consider the war to actually be over ... despite Apple publicly throwing in the towel in the late 90's, they've made steady gains since then; almost like they threw in the towel more to get people to shut up about useless topics, than because they actually lost an irrelevant contest).

...

Throughout this thread I've been arguing that Google/Android will be the dominant mobile platform, in the way that Windows is on the desktop. That's all I'm arguing. You dismiss my discussing this sort of dominance vis-a-vis Windows and Apple as "irrelevant" and not "what counts," which is a bit bizarre since I'm only making a claim about who will have the dominant mobile platform. How is the question of market dominance not relevant to the question of market dominance?

It seems like you're arguing with every little thing I said, out of context, and ignoring my actual point. So it's like you're responding to somebody else who said something else.

I'm not making a claim about what is the best platform (I'm most interested in Maemo). I'm not making a claim about what sort of development process leads to the best applications. I'm not making a claim about the moral or philosophical superiority of one platform over another. I'm just making a claim about which platform has a strategy that is likely to lead to market dominance--an arena in which I think is Google/Android is leagues ahead of everybody else.

So, by analogy, that is the only sense in which I suggest that Apple lost the OS war with Windows, which you acknowledge yourself (above). Apple lost the war for platform dominance. Is Apple profitable and alive? Yes. Do they still have less than 10% of market share even after their big comback? Yes. And Windows has almost 90% still.

This is relevant because once Android achieves this kind of dominance, it will likely drive other competitors out of the market and as we all know from Windows, effect all remaining platforms (in terms of application availability, file compatibility, security issues, ability to communicate with other platforms, compatibility with services). 90% market share type of dominance gives influence to a platform that far exceeds it's own domain.

It's nice to talk about how Maemo is better than Android (which I agree with). But I think it's naive to ignore how effective Google's strategy is likely to be (free platform tightly integrated with free services and applications, hardware agnositic platform, and the applications and services will also probably be available on all other platforms). Android does not have to be the best, from the point of view of a sophisticated user, to achieve market dominance. Being the best in this sense may even be a hindrance to market dominance. The mass market is won over through the lowest common denominator (and free services and applications does hurt either).

BatPenguin

2009-10-29 08:32

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by c0rt3x (Post 360489)

Bookmark this statement and return 3 years later. You'll feel ashamed by then...

So, let's see, Google was founded in 1998. Did they decide right away THEN that the date they would unleash their diabolical plans on the unsuspecting masses would be October 29th, 2012, or was this decided at a later board meeting?

GeraldKo

2009-10-29 08:39

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laughing Man (Post 360376)

It seems you should be in the Android camp and not Maemo camp then. Because no matter how far Maemo goes it'll always be behind the iPhone, Android, and what not in those consumer apps.

A user can want certain polished consumer apps and, at the same time, not like being closed out of the file system (as in the iPhone), "politically" prefer true (or close to true) open source, and prefer open source flexibility.

cb474

2009-10-29 08:45

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360448)

I only meant to say that Symbian is dead in the sense that I think it's going to die. It's true that it's not dead yet. And it's true that there is a large market for Symbian outside the U.S. and Europe.

However, I think you can't ignore that 50% of the wealth in the world is in the U.S. and Europe and 10% of the worlds population has 85% of the wealth. So the market will disproportionatley cater to these places and people. A lot of money is made by selling a smaller number of high value devices and the expensive mobile carrier plans that go with them to the small number of people who have most of the wealth. In fact, most of the money to be made in a consumer economy comes from catering to the small percent of people who have almost all of the wealth. This is why the iPhone and Android can be massively profitable, without having to account for a huge percent of all mobile devices sold. Also, obviously the popularity of the iPhone far exceeds just the geeks and few people who actually pay $500-$700 for their device, since they are subsidized by the mobile carriers. Tens of millions of iPhones have already been sold. And now the iPhone is going on sale in China, so the inroads are starting elsewhere. And whatever products dominate at the top of the market tend to eventually trickle down and dominate the rest of the market as well. So I really don't think it makes sense to trivialize the rapid growth of the iPhone and Android platforms.

c0rt3x

2009-10-29 09:00

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360494)

The thing is that it's much easier to develop and improve products either if everyone is using them, or if you've an unlimited amount of money. And this is the unfair advantage that Google has, and since they get more and more money for their following services, they'll only get better and better, and more and more, just like "the evil spiral".

That makes it really hard to compete against Google, and you can't honestly say it's a good thing that one single company rules all information about the entire world, and its inhabitants!? And I didn't even mention what Google can do with the data.

By not using Google's services you make a personal short-term sacrifice, but in the end, you'll have made the right decision, because - as debated here - competition is always good, and there won't be any competition if one company will rule the world.

I agree about that Google's services are really innovative, but once Google maintains domination in that area, then they simply quit to innovate, and if there would be other alternatives from the past, which hopefully have survived until now, with their own funds (this is important, and it's difficult to compete against Google's moneyhats), then we'd have much better products, but unfortunately it isn't the case.

Remember, why does Google have to do an innovative service? To make it everyone's (and then I mean everyone's) service of choise. But once everyone uses Google's services, why do they then need to keep innovating, if they already have all possible customers in the world? It's simple, they won't, and just like M$ or any other profitable company, they won't do something that costs AND isn't worth it for themselves.

Of course they have to keep possible competitors away all the time, and think about their position in the long-term, but better products doesn't always mean (read: almost never means) more popular products. Take the Google Pic Search for example. While they're unrivaled in popularity, Bing Pic Search has actually exceeded Google's counterpart in terms of quality, and yet Bing isn't even close to Google's popularity.

Right now Google only has to be "good enough" to keep their dominative position, and as long as they keep the competitors away, which means people won't jump over from Google, they'll still make profits, which is what it's all about, right? But just imagine how much better Google Search could have been, if someone else would also share a piece of the pie (a significant part of the market share).

MONOPOLY IS NEVER EVER GOOD, AND SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS, EVEN IF "PERSONAL SACRIFICES" ARE REQUIRED!!!

Note: This text is somewhat naive and simplified, but I find it better to be this way, because the most well-informed people are already against Google, which means this text should be targetet at those who aren't in this belief yet... (sorry for wasting your time in case you don't fit in this targeted group)

GeraldKo

2009-10-29 09:20

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by c0rt3x (Post 360489)

Google is worse than Microsoft, Apple and Intel combined. Why? Because they (unlike the other big boys) keep their (evil) purposes in secret, and they're very good at it, thus their success.

Well, then, please explicitly "spill the beans" -- tell us exactly what Google's evil purposes are. Apparently you know the secrets.

BatPenguin

2009-10-29 09:31

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeraldKo (Post 360540)

Well, then, please explicitly "spill the beans" -- tell us exactly what Google's evil purposes are. Apparently you know the secrets.

Oh, this could be good. Better get the popcorn. I really hope the cigarette-smoking man is involved in this one, he was always in the best episodes.

c0rt3x

2009-10-29 09:31

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatPenguin (Post 360510)

2012... the end of the world - Google's world. :)

c0rt3x

2009-10-29 09:51

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeraldKo (Post 360540)

Well, then, please explicitly "spill the beans" -- tell us exactly what Google's evil purposes are. Apparently you know the secrets.

I'm short of time right now, but I promise to discuss this later. I'll summarize it like this:

"Watch out when something is free. You may be the price."

mdl	2009-10-29 10:57

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnkzin (Post 360494)

I used to be a loyal Apple Mail user (well, actually, a NeXT Mail user ... Apple Mail just inherited the mantle). I reluctantly gave it up for Thunderbird, when Apple refused to fix a few issues in the IMAP client, over multiple versions. And, last year, I gave up Thunderbird. Sure, there are a few little things I wish I still had, but, for about 90% of it, I prefer Gmail.

I have also, for 15 years, been a die hard "run my own mail server" kinda guy. In addition to doing that at work. Google has pretty much put those things to bed ... not by forcing me to, in any stretch of the imagination ... but by simply offering a better alternative in almost every way. "Free" isn't the only dimension in which they're better. "Advertized in their search results" isn't the only draw to them.

Google isn't just leveraging the search engine success to monopolize email. They've created what are, honestly and sincerely, better email products.

I realize this is somewhat OT, but can you tell me exactly what is better about Gmail compared to local clients? To give a counter-example, I was a Gmail user until I discovered mutt and gnus, which blew Gmail out of the water.

IMO, apart from the convenience of ubiquitous access and virtually unlimited storage (an ambiguous blessing, given Google's data mining), Gmail is a tad bit overhyped. Evidence: the way in which many users assume that Gmail "invented" conversations, when conversations, in fact, are just a poor man's version of threading, which has been around since, like, forever. In my view, the appeal of Gmail was in making some power user features available for "for the masses" in a web mail interface. But it is still a web mail interface....

Now I understand that Gmail is user-friendly. You don't have to set up your own software or server. But it certainly does not have anywhere near the flexibity and power as a good local client, such as mutt or gnus.

archanfel

2009-10-29 11:33

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Gmail really isn't all that good. It's necessary, however, simply because you need an account to access the rest of the google cloud. I would imagine Amazon's cloud system could be a massive threat to google because anybody can deploy their own services on a secure and reliable cloud (well, relatively speaking). The problem is amazon is making it extremely hard to use or understand. I certainly don't want a multi million dollar bill at the end of the month simply because there was an attack on my service. Maybe a prepaid service would be better.

As for the applications, it's still possible that all consumer applications will eventually be on the web. That's the idea behind Chrome anyway. Then all platforms (symbian, android, maemo) are equivalent. That's still a long way off, of course.

Crashdamage

2009-10-29 11:51

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdl (Post 360589)

Now I understand that Gmail is user-friendly. You don't have to set up your own software or server. But it certainly does not have anywhere near the flexibity and power as a good local client, such as mutt or gnus.

+1 for mutt!!

christexaport

2009-10-29 11:57

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatPenguin (Post 360504)

First you said they'll "start charging exorbitantly for the service as the lone provider", now it's competition you're worried about.

Quote:

This is again turning into these "google is evil" discussions. They updated one of their programs. I'm happy about that, you seem to scream "murder!" and see it as a mortal blow to an industry that, for some reason, should have been allowed to exist and continue charging stupid amounts for a product that by modern standards really "should be free" as there are plently of free map services everywhere on the Internet. Navigation industry about to go under? Good riddance.

This has nothing to do with Google, and everything to do with competition and innovation. I like Google's app, just not how it kills competitors. Its half their fault for not figuring how to leverage their products, but having one in control is bad news, whether its Nokia, Google, Apple, or anyone else.

Quote:

Why should we, as consumers, care if the navigation business is being forced into a "give your product for free/cheap and figure out how to make money otherwise" business model by somebody deciding to not charge for somethign that has been ridiculously expensive previously? Good for us. If Google messes this up and provides a service/product that's not good enough, there will still be a market for the other providers just like today.

That's not the point. The point is just like WalMart killed grocery in the South. We used to have Winn Dixie, Minyard's, Jewel T, Albertson's, and many other competitors in the DFW area, and now its just WalMart, Kroger, or Tom Thumb, unless you can afford Whole Foods and Central Market. There are less choices, bad produce quality at WalMart, meat prices and quality are nothing like Winn Dixie, etc. You never know what you miss until its gone. I see offline mapping as a thing of the past in the US without Nokia involved. Maybe this will get carriers into the licensing game with Ovi, but I'd still like to see a TeleAtlas branded app step forward, or Navteq will stop spending on improving map quality, and so on...

Quote:

Anyway, certainly in-car systems will stay around and there will be users for navigation gear that doesn't need a net connection.

That market isn't going to continue to grow, as navigation is becoming a smartphone thing, and automakers aren't going to be able to keep selling $600 Navi packages when we already have them in our pockets. Mobiles are a big threat to ICE companies. There's alot of data on that issue all over the place if you're willing to pay for the research papers. Automakers are trying to figure how to use the mobile data connection and device better to cover the losses, hence media player ports, WiFi and USB connections, etc.

Quote:

TomTom etc. stock price seems to imply that the guess is that Google will not mess this up and the days of most people paying for a license might be coming to an end.

Also, Google has long been a customer of TeleAtlas map data, and now they're using the GPS data of its customers to create its own maps and traffic data. So how does Tom Tom, owner of TeleAtlas, make money now? By selling out, and it'll be cheap. So we'll probably see TeleAtlas sold again, too. Let's hope Google scoops it up, or maybe Garmin.

Quote:

You make it sound as if I'm blaming Google for this mess. Its not all of their fault. Tom Tom had a bad business plan, and Garmin was too late to the party and owns no map data of its own. I just don't want any company running the market period. I enjoy my privacy, and Google isn't big on respecting it. Nokia is, but that's not the point. I want choices, and Ovi or Google may not be enough, especially if tied to specific OSes.

Quote:

The Google/Android conspiracy theories have been around here long enough and I have no intention of taking part in those anymore, it seems like in order to enjoy the Maemo products, we need to first "denounce Google and Android".

That's your opinion. Some feel that way, but this is more of a consumer protection stance for me. I don't use Google much except for search, but I see how they've taken over that, and can imagine if no other search engine existed. I don't agree with Google's privacy policies, either, and if you do, that's fine. This is an open source community, and certain philosophies will be prevalent. Don't hate, just realize some of the members here have experience with companies and organizations that have had Google-like philosophies, and they've negatively affected freedom of choices and options in the long run. You're free to like them, as do I, for the most part. But there's been some good points made, and you should research the root of these stances, not lash out at those that already have. For them, this is bad news. For you, it may be good. That's totally ok either way.

Quote:

That is just silly and really hurts the level of discussion over here.

Its not silly. That you don't agree isn't either. We're all free thinkers. Just respect everyone's opinions.

Quote:

But please: when you whine about Google's latest Maps offering update -- because, let's face it, it makes Android seem even more appealing to the ordinary consumer and Maemo conquering the world might look a bit less likely all the time -- consider if you'll be unleashing the same storm the day Nokia announces that they won't be charging for Ovi Maps anymore. That day will probably come eventually, the cost of Maps will be included in the price of all Nokia phones that come with it, that seems to be the safe way out for them. I expect to hear a lot of moaning about the fate of everybody who provides navigation software for Symbian/Maemo then. (Well ok, nobody provides anything for Maemo, but Symbian must have a few commercial navigation software providers somewhere in that wonderful Ovi store or some other place.)

Only if you place most importance in navigation. Not everyone uses it as much as you'd like to believe, and Nokia could easily match them in pricing and features over time. Their Navteq division is lucrative, and their map data is best in class. I hope they DON'T continue to charge for navigation, but I also hope someone can use TeleAtlas maps for an alternative. The fact they aren't charging for it isn't the issue. That less navigation options exist next year is. Cause is of no matter. The end result is bad for US.

c0rt3x

2009-10-29 12:16

Re: N900 vs. Motorola Droid (Verizon Android device)

Quote:

Originally Posted by christexaport (Post 360625)

I'm allowed to stand behind BOTH of those statements. I studied journalism and biomedical engineering, but I took a few business classes, and this is basic business rules. As long as there's one provider of any service, there is the chance that prices can rise AND competition will decrease. In the end, you'll have little innovation or push for improvement can stall for years.

Right now, the only real navi guys out there are Ovi, Google, and that's it. So Google will literally control US navigation unless Nokia can somehow get itself into the market. So we're already without much choice. See the implications? I don't like any map service that doesn't use Navteq maps, so I'd be SOL in the States.

Let's hope a competitor steps forward with similar pricing, or pretty soon, we'll all be having our lives siphoned by Google via mapping software without an offline component. I don't like using navigation software while connected to the web, only offline, to keep my privacy. Google wants the opposite.

This has nothing to do with Google, and everything to do with competition and innovation. I like Google's app, just not how it kills competitors. Its half their fault for not figuring how to leverage their products, but having one in control is bad news, whether its Nokia, Google, Apple, or anyone else.

That's not the point. The point is just like WalMart killed grocery in the South. We used to have Winn Dixie, Minyard's, Jewel T, Albertson's, and many other competitors in the DFW area, and now its just WalMart, Kroger, or Tom Thumb, unless you can afford Whole Foods and Central Market. There are less choices, bad produce quality at WalMart, meat prices and quality are nothing like Winn Dixie, etc. You never know what you miss until its gone. I see offline mapping as a thing of the past in the US without Nokia involved. Maybe this will get carriers into the licensing game with Ovi, but I'd still like to see a TeleAtlas branded app step forward, or Navteq will stop spending on improving map quality, and so on...

That market isn't going to continue to grow, as navigation is becoming a smartphone thing, and automakers aren't going to be able to keep selling $600 Navi packages when we already have them in our pockets. Mobiles are a big threat to ICE companies. There's alot of data on that issue all over the place if you're willing to pay for the research papers. Automakers are trying to figure how to use the mobile data connection and device better to cover the losses, hence media player ports, WiFi and USB connections, etc.

Also, Google has long been a customer of TeleAtlas map data, and now they're using the GPS data of its customers to create its own maps and traffic data. So how does Tom Tom, owner of TeleAtlas, make money now? By selling out, and it'll be cheap. So we'll probably see TeleAtlas sold again, too. Let's hope Google scoops it up, or maybe Garmin.

You make it sound as if I'm blaming Google for this mess. Its not all of their fault. Tom Tom had a bad business plan, and Garmin was too late to the party and owns no map data of its own. I just don't want any company running the market period. I enjoy my privacy, and Google isn't big on respecting it. Nokia is, but that's not the point. I want choices, and Ovi or Google may not be enough, especially if tied to specific OSes.

That's your opinion. Some feel that way, but this is more of a consumer protection stance for me. I don't use Google much except for search, but I see how they've taken over that, and can imagine if no other search engine existed. I don't agree with Google's privacy policies, either, and if you do, that's fine. This is an open source community, and certain philosophies will be prevalent. Don't hate, just realize some of the members here have experience with companies and organizations that have had Google-like philosophies, and they've negatively affected freedom of choices and options in the long run. You're free to like them, as do I, for the most part. But there's been some good points made, and you should research the root of these stances, not lash out at those that already have. For them, this is bad news. For you, it may be good. That's totally ok either way.

Its not silly. That you don't agree isn't either. We're all free thinkers. Just respect everyone's opinions.

Only if you place most importance in navigation. Not everyone uses it as much as you'd like to believe, and Nokia could easily match them in pricing and features over time. Their Navteq division is lucrative, and their map data is best in class. I hope they DON'T continue to charge for navigation, but I also hope someone can use TeleAtlas maps for an alternative. The fact they aren't charging for it isn't the issue. That less navigation options exist next year is. Cause is of no matter. The end result is bad for US.

Well said! I agree comletely! Thanks for your reply, now I don't have to say that. :D

The reason why Google services are free is because Google records the data what you do, how you do it, where you go, and so on, and then they sell the information about you (but who, does anybody know that for sure, maybe some governments with dictatorship are involved).

You "pay" for Google's services with your private integrity, instead of your physical money.

To me, Google is a Lenin (pro-communist) wannabe - no more, no less.

All times are GMT. The time now is 20:20.

Page 7 of 11

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8