Active Topics

 


Page 6 of 6 « First 45 6
Reply
Thread Tools
c0rt3x is offline c0rt3x
2009-11-08 , 09:11
Posts: 367 | Thanked: 176 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#51
Originally Posted by Nexus7 View Post
What a bunch of hooey, frankly! It isn't clear if these are your words or a quote from a former Google employee. Please attribute clearly if that's the case. OK, on to your (or former Google-employee's) arguments.

Google has a lifetime value on each customer? OK, and every other company does business for purely altruistic reasons, right? The truth is this, Google has changed the entire business model in every area is has touched, and this confuses people who are used to thinking of say, email, as a product you have to pay for if you want any industrial strength features (say, a fast interface and lightning quick searches).

Then, in your posting, you launch into a confused mess out of which I got this - that Apple phones are beautiful, but Apple phones are made for Dumb-istan; and Google is targeting Android to Dumb-istan now also, and this is very bad; and oh, Apple is fighting the Microsoft evil empire.

Please.

Apple products, once we get past the days when advanced publishing and graphics tools were only available for the Mac, are made for the computer un-sophisticated, and marketed as a lifestyle. The underlying business model is to tightly lock and control hardware and software. This much you say. But then Android isn't bad because it has apps to buy like the Jesus-phone. Android is its own thing. It's great, it was the software engine for the first consumer Linux phone. I see that as very good. I don't see it as having anything to do with Apple.

And there are aspects of Microsoft that are "evil." But MS is also responsible for the explosion of PC hardware, which in turn helped the propagation of Linux (or you could argue that Linux cleverly leveraged). A development which wouldn't even be possible in an Apple world.

And finally, Google doesn't "lie" about the price you pay for its products. They monetize in the least obtrusive and most free (as in freedom) way of any company in the same product/service area. In contrast, every Apple ad is uninformative nonsense, which may not be a lie but is certainly misdirection.

Android vs. Maemo? Great. Two different software architectures. Competition.
I might be a little late with a reply, but anyway, thanks for reading the whole sermon. Not everyone does.


First off, Google's Android was created as an Iphone competitor in the first place - it wasn't made to be the best mobile Linux distro availible, or anything else like that for that matter. But Google had to keep a certain potential for the platform, due their later planes for the mobile market. But according to your post, Android was made as a Linux alternative in the first place, which it obviously wasn't.

I though it was kind of obvious, I mean, the 480x320 resolution cap (which "happened" to be the same as the Iphone, what a coincidence!), the Qualcomm 528 MHz CPU requirement (again, almost the same as the first Iphones) and the OS' other limitations (which all was shared with the Iphone, such as the lack of Bluetooth transfer, and so on)... all this made it obvious which market Google was targeting at. But this was only the beginning.

But you can't count a part of "the entire plan" as the reason why Android was made in the first place. Android, just like any other Google products, was made to control the entire world's information, and you can't disagree with this. No really, this should be obvious for everybody. If not, why do you think Android phones are constantly syncing with Google's servers, or with other (Google's) words "are always online". Now, who is being more honest: Google or Apple!? Decide yourself...

Google has two major projects in their sleeves right now - Android and Chrome OS - but they both have the same reason of existance (goal): to make users always connected to the web - or more specificly - to make everyone always being connected to Google's information database.


It's a different situation right now, as Android has evolved, and it isn't as limited as it was originally - but still - you can't deny the fact that Android was originally made to replace the Iphone. The later goal (after having the Iphone defeated) was to capture the entire market - worldwide. And that's probably why Google is only focusing on America right now, since the Iphone has yet to be defeated, and it can't be defeated in a region where it has never been dominant, right?
Last edited by c0rt3x; 2009-11-08 at 09:21.
 
Nexus7 is offline Nexus7
2009-11-09 , 01:28
Posts: 147 | Thanked: 42 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#52
Originally Posted by c0rt3x View Post
First off, Google's Android was created as an Iphone competitor in the first place - it wasn't made to be the best mobile Linux distro availible, or anything else like that for that matter. But Google had to keep a certain potential for the platform, due their later planes for the mobile market... the 480x320 resolution cap (which "happened" to be the same as the Iphone, what a coincidence!), the Qualcomm 528 MHz CPU requirement (again, almost the same as the first Iphones)...
Android and Chrome OS - but they both have the same reason of existance (goal): to make users always connected to the web - or more specificly - to make everyone always being connected to Google's information database.
As to Android and G1 being made to compete with the iPhone - any phone that comes out is deemed to be made to compete with the iPhone. This is merely the Steve Jobs reality distortion field extending to most blog writers. The G1 was very unlike the iPhone, it has a slide-out QWERTY, hard buttons, and wasn't a soap-bar without protrusions. Yeah, it had the same processor, but that is because manufacturers have a limited field to choose from - notice that the latest high-end smartphones out now will most-likely have the OMAP 3430.

As for Google wanting everyone to be always connected to their cloud - what company doesn't want a captive audience? The Google model is to have the information store in the cloud, which is a great idea for a lot of applications. You get the most reliable service wherever you can connect to the internet. Doesn't work for some applications, but it's a good model. Google gets to index your data in return so they can serve ads (unless you pay for Google Apps Premier Edition). That's their model. You may like the Blackberry push-email model better. Or the no-model iPhone. Your choice. Nothing evil about it.
 
Nexus7 is offline Nexus7
2009-11-09 , 01:43
Posts: 147 | Thanked: 42 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#53
So I got to try out a live Droid (had looked at the store dummy last week). The keyboard isn't as bad as I thought it'd be. The keys are slightly domed. Typing is possible. Typing was as accurate as on the N900 for someone like me trying out both keyboards for the first time. The N900 was however handicapped by the weird lighting in the Chicago store, whereas the Droid has the benefit of full-power halogen vapor lamps at Best Buy. Still, the edge goes to the N900, because the fingers will have to move less, once we get used to the keyboard.

The screen is great on the Droid, but surprisingly, its capacitive nature is a drawback. It is vague, and has ghost movements because it detects finger moving around, even if you don't intend for the movement to be registered, such as when reorienting the device, etc. And the 4 soft-keys (Home, Menu, and 2 more that I forget) are a nice lifeline to get home, when the browser is locked up trying to process the ghost movements, but other times you "hit" them by mistake too, since they're right there at the edge of the screen. In addition, the phone kept going into "1X" from "3G" frequently, the rep said this was because of hands covering the antenna. In summary, the screen looked great, but its use wasn't too great. Obviously, I didn't have these issues with the N900, it didn't do anything I didn't want it to.

As for the cost, you can get it for $200 down (or $149 at Sears), and get by with a $40 voice + $30 data plan, which is quite nice. They have corporate discounts on the service, which is 18%, which takes a huge chunk off. Apparently T-Mo won't apply corporate discounts on the EM & EM+ plans (please correct me is this isn't the case).

So right now, the N900 has better and more hardware (about the only thing it doesn't have is a compass, but this seems to be unnecessary as long as you have a GPS lock). But the VZW monthly cost is lower.
 
johnkzin's Avatar
johnkzin is offline johnkzin
2009-11-11 , 19:38
Posts: 1,878 | Thanked: 646 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ San Jose, CA
#54
Originally Posted by c0rt3x View Post
First off, Google's Android was created as an Iphone competitor in the first place
Amazing feat, considering Google started Android at least 2 years before anyone knew about the iPhone.

It wasn't made to compete with the iPhone. It was made to expand Google's sphere is influence, getting their apps (and adds) into more hands, in more places. They may have delayed it, in the last year, to make it more appropriate for the impact that the iPhone had upon the market, but that's its late phase development, not "in the first place".
__________________
My Personal Blog
 

The Following User Says Thank You to johnkzin For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 6 of 6 « First 45 6

Tags
android, motorola

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:31.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top