-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Another "Industry first"???
- Thread starter Whiskeypawz
- Start date
I certainly hope Google and Android's partners are not as short sighted as this.
Android's position is very precarious at this time, and Google would be wise to keep an eye on this MSFT/Nokia deal and plan accordingly
I was at the T-Mobile shop today playing with the HD7 and Samsung Galaxy 4G. Even though Froyo is the more mature OS with more features, it doesn't look or feel like it compared to WP7
Whiskeypawz
Android Enthusiast
Well would you look at that...it's a Windows phone...who knew?! 
What you
What you
Android has two development paths - phones and tablets - that are well underway. WP7 is behind. While Nokia may help sell phones, it won't address the shift to tablets. MSFT already confirmed the WP7 isn't being built for tablets. They could change, but it would take resources that MSFT may not have at the ready. That's Android's strength - it's open enough for good developers to jump in.
It's not that I think MSFT-Nokia won't sell ANY phones, I just don't think their joint path is extended decline as the combination just doesn't seem incredibly compelling. MSFT clearly understood that Nokia's position as a worldwide leader in phone sales. However, I'm not sure how easily those buyers will accept conversion to a new OS that's not as nimble as Android. WP7 and iOS are both easier to use to me, and that definitely has an appeal that drives sales. But they're also limited by their closed-system natures that I think will become even more crippling across the world.
I've really liked the design and features of some of the Nokia phones. I've just never cared for it's OS. With the pairing with WP7, nothing's changed other than Nokia producing phones with one OS that I don't care for and moving to another I don't care for.
If MSFT did a better job of Zune-WINOS-WP7 integration, I'd be more optimistic. That's why Apple has succeeded. Try getting all your MSFT products and devices to work seamlessly - not so good.
All you rationalizations remain short sighted. Android will be poorly served if anyone in Google has this mindset.
Tablets? The market for Android tablets is absolutely tiny and they have to be heavily subsidized to the point of nearly being given away to be desirable. No one wants to hear it, but the fact remains that few want tablets, but many want iPads. There is a difference. This will be perfectly proven on March 2nd when the iPad2 is shown.
Google needs to focus on the user experience because this is what matters more than anything else. Almost no one cares about rooting, or wants to treat their phone as DIY product. Android has prospered as an iOS alternative in the absence of any real competition, and because it is cheap for manufacturers to use, which is why Android's position is a precarious one.
This is android dedicated site so many don't see, or refuse to see how vulnerable android is. The fact that android even with dual cores and potent GPU's still runs pretty bad compared to iOS, WebOS and WP7 shows that Android has a problem in the way it is designed. It doesn't take much to predict if Android doesn't improve its user experience, it will lose momentum, and once it does, it will be very hard to get it back if the hole is filled by someone as large as MSFT with Nokia in their back pocket.
Android really hasn't focused on UI because the phone makers (sometimes jointly with carriers) have had UI overlays. That's actually very smart by Google. Think people don't like the phonemaker overlays - look at how they sell vs Nexus/Nexus S. People do like them, especially when they compliment the OS in a way that makes it a phone first and multimedia device second. Google should not overly focus on UI, because Android lets you customize the phone the way you want it. Don't like the way iOS uses icons in a row - tough. Don't like it on Android - change them. Want a different scene for work versus personal use - can't do it on iOS but can on Android.
iPad is a tablet - just with iOS. It's not capable of full computing functions as most tablets aren't. The entire segment has KO'd netbooks and low-end laptops. The reason iPad2 is coming so soon is because Gingerbread and Ice Cream are forcing Apple to release faster. I find it completely odd that the Google approach is "keep your device, upgrade your OS to get more" while Apple's is "get a new device that has that 1-2 features we introduce with each successive release." Android's pushing the pace. Trust me, if Apple could get away with not releasing the iPad2 because there was no competition or no market, they wouldn't. Android tablets are tiny only because Gingerbread hasn't been available and Froyo wasn't meant for tablets.
I give Google credit for not trying to out-Apple Apple. It's impossible, and the roadside is littered with devices and companies that have tried. Not to mention, it's a path full of lawsuits and patent obstacles to work around.
I haven't rooted my Evo. Neither has my wife. It looks like we have two completely different phones, but they're individually set up the way we use them. Could NOT, I repeat, could NOT do anything like that with iOS. On iOS, we could use them differently, but they pretty much have to look the same. I don't count simply changing the order of icons/widgets as customization any more than I would consider moving a vase from one side of my living room to the other redecorating. On the other hand, WP7 won't be so easy to customize either. The MSFT customization would be like doing nothing to my living room and expecting to see redecoration just by walking from one side of the room to the other.
Nokia understood Android's possibilities. They just didn't jump in because it would have meant giving up on Nokia's OS and it's OS-compatible apps and features. I'd bet if they could rewind time, they'd be on Android right now. Instead, they're stuck on WP7 because they need to make up ground fast and prefer to evolve through WP7 rather than gut it and start over. The fact that Nokia still proclaims that Symbian development will continue just shows that even Nokia isn't seeing this as the solution.
Yes, this is an Android focused site. But I don't work for this site or Google. I'm just a user. I've had Windows Phones. I thought WP7 could be better, but out the gate it wouldn't even fully sync with Outlook. That's an absolute fail. How long until the fix? Another fail.
I don't think Android's going to lose momentum. Google it, yes Google it, and you will see that Android OS momentum is incredible. 4 years ago, no WP7 but it was announced and oft-delayed. 4 years ago, no Android but since then several versions with free upgrades and improvements.
I absolutely cannot wait to see how it plays out, but you can bet that if MSFT charges for upgrades in the WinOS, it's going to do the same in the WP7 and + at some point.
Please, by all means, give WP7 a chance if it fits your needs. But it's not a compelling case to make that joining with Nokia does anything other than give MSFT the ability to sell to existing Nokia consumers. It's a must for MSFT because it's not selling through other phone makers.
Finally, I'd clearly go with webOS if I wanted a non-Apple closed system.
iPad is a tablet - just with iOS. It's not capable of full computing functions as most tablets aren't. The entire segment has KO'd netbooks and low-end laptops. The reason iPad2 is coming so soon is because Gingerbread and Ice Cream are forcing Apple to release faster. I find it completely odd that the Google approach is "keep your device, upgrade your OS to get more" while Apple's is "get a new device that has that 1-2 features we introduce with each successive release." Android's pushing the pace. Trust me, if Apple could get away with not releasing the iPad2 because there was no competition or no market, they wouldn't. Android tablets are tiny only because Gingerbread hasn't been available and Froyo wasn't meant for tablets.
I give Google credit for not trying to out-Apple Apple. It's impossible, and the roadside is littered with devices and companies that have tried. Not to mention, it's a path full of lawsuits and patent obstacles to work around.
I haven't rooted my Evo. Neither has my wife. It looks like we have two completely different phones, but they're individually set up the way we use them. Could NOT, I repeat, could NOT do anything like that with iOS. On iOS, we could use them differently, but they pretty much have to look the same. I don't count simply changing the order of icons/widgets as customization any more than I would consider moving a vase from one side of my living room to the other redecorating. On the other hand, WP7 won't be so easy to customize either. The MSFT customization would be like doing nothing to my living room and expecting to see redecoration just by walking from one side of the room to the other.
Nokia understood Android's possibilities. They just didn't jump in because it would have meant giving up on Nokia's OS and it's OS-compatible apps and features. I'd bet if they could rewind time, they'd be on Android right now. Instead, they're stuck on WP7 because they need to make up ground fast and prefer to evolve through WP7 rather than gut it and start over. The fact that Nokia still proclaims that Symbian development will continue just shows that even Nokia isn't seeing this as the solution.
Yes, this is an Android focused site. But I don't work for this site or Google. I'm just a user. I've had Windows Phones. I thought WP7 could be better, but out the gate it wouldn't even fully sync with Outlook. That's an absolute fail. How long until the fix? Another fail.
I don't think Android's going to lose momentum. Google it, yes Google it, and you will see that Android OS momentum is incredible. 4 years ago, no WP7 but it was announced and oft-delayed. 4 years ago, no Android but since then several versions with free upgrades and improvements.
I absolutely cannot wait to see how it plays out, but you can bet that if MSFT charges for upgrades in the WinOS, it's going to do the same in the WP7 and + at some point.
Please, by all means, give WP7 a chance if it fits your needs. But it's not a compelling case to make that joining with Nokia does anything other than give MSFT the ability to sell to existing Nokia consumers. It's a must for MSFT because it's not selling through other phone makers.
Finally, I'd clearly go with webOS if I wanted a non-Apple closed system.
Whiskeypawz
Android Enthusiast
@Rigmaster I'm going to echo Dan330's reply to Viper...."I don't know what to say" but I'll throw in a WOW! Your reply was just...WOW! LOL 
All the overlays are half baked college student projects, and make the android user experience worse in most cases. Futhermore, UI does not equal user experience. It is just one piece of the user experience.
The concept of "people want iPads, but not tablets" is going over your head. Think about it...
This is silly. Apple has a history of annual updates to their product line, and the iPad's one year birthday is April. Apple is not losing any sleep over anything with Honeycomb. They will sell more iPad2's in 48 hours than Motorola, Samsung and HTC will sell in 6 months.
More likely the Android market is too saturated with devices and will begin to cannibalize itself.
I certainly hope the Google handlers don't envision a 1000 year Reich based upon 4 years. MSFT and Nokia have carpet stains older than Android, and only the most foolish CEO's and executives on the planet would write off the union of industry leaders.
Obviously we have a difference in perspective. But there are a few things that aren't so different. 1) Apple literally is falling into the sameness that sparked it's birth and growth. I've always thought Apple products have been user-friendly, but that user friendliness has always had limits. The limits used to be (and to some degree still are) compatibility with Apple only and a small number of Apple-compatible applications and peripherals. About 40% of Apple total revenue is from iPhone. It's also the most profitable product they make. Along with iPod and united by iTunes/iOS marriage, over 60% of Apple revenue and profit come from it's mobile world. Undoubtedly and I'm not arguing against it, Apple has done something right.
2) Apple (wisely) got the iPad out into the market and secured market leadership.
But unless you work for Apple, it's important to understand:
A) The creator of iTunes literally handed Apple the key. Wisely marketed as "1000 CDs in your pocket," iTunes and iPod made iPhone possible.
B) iTunes then iOS work well, but they are not technically superior in very many ways. But you cannot confuse ease of use and user interface with it being a high-end device worth it's cost.
C) Apple products will never, read that again NEVER, be able to stay ahead of everyone. Even if it takes other 1000 competitors trying 1000 times, there will always be more development support in an open system that can generate changes at speeds and sizes that one company alone cannot produce.
Some people want iPads. Others want tablets because they're the new ultraportables. That concept went completely over your head. You can't dismiss that market. There are too many multiples of netbooks, ultraportables, and other travel computing devices (and e-readers) that lots of buyers want to replace. They realize, they may not need a full computing OS. And so does Google. Try to grasp the concept of Google doesn't want to make devices - just the operating system that device makers use. Once you do that, it's easy to see that Android is about changing the way information is used, accessed, and shared. That's clearly far more than Apple has ever set out to do.
Brin and Page started Google with the idea of making all information available to anyone anywhere. That's so much broader in scope than "1000 CDs in your pocket" that it's unimagineable that anyone following the two companies can't see the clear distinctions in what they're doing.
But back to MSFT-Nokia. Only fools would write the union off? The market (consumers and investors) will prove this one way or another. But the early indicators from investors are that this union may benefit the smartphone ecosystem overall more than it will either of the two directly. Basically, it will give another option even if that option is far behind the other leaders. Nokia did it because they just don't have US presence (and we upgrade phones like crazy over here). MSFT gets to put it's OS on a device without having to "control" every device maker. Yes, good for both on paper, but will it matter if the collective consumer and investor reaction is a yawn?
I do enjoy the point-counterpoint of this discussion, but I guess only time will tell which points will bear more merit. I've tried to follow, but it's getting hard to understand if the point is to just bash Android or not. Jumping from MSFT-Nokia to Apple to make a point about Android's weaknesses is comparing the problems of Android to the best of 3 other companies. Oh, and Android's not even a company.
Now, if you want to compare Google head-to-head with MSFT, Apple, and Nokia that's a different discussion altogether. Probably not suited for this thread or section either. But let's just say they're all good companies, but if you had to invest with these three in order of where you think your money has the best chance to grow MSFT and Nokia wouldn't even be in the discussion. And that is where this all began....
2) Apple (wisely) got the iPad out into the market and secured market leadership.
But unless you work for Apple, it's important to understand:
A) The creator of iTunes literally handed Apple the key. Wisely marketed as "1000 CDs in your pocket," iTunes and iPod made iPhone possible.
B) iTunes then iOS work well, but they are not technically superior in very many ways. But you cannot confuse ease of use and user interface with it being a high-end device worth it's cost.
C) Apple products will never, read that again NEVER, be able to stay ahead of everyone. Even if it takes other 1000 competitors trying 1000 times, there will always be more development support in an open system that can generate changes at speeds and sizes that one company alone cannot produce.
Some people want iPads. Others want tablets because they're the new ultraportables. That concept went completely over your head. You can't dismiss that market. There are too many multiples of netbooks, ultraportables, and other travel computing devices (and e-readers) that lots of buyers want to replace. They realize, they may not need a full computing OS. And so does Google. Try to grasp the concept of Google doesn't want to make devices - just the operating system that device makers use. Once you do that, it's easy to see that Android is about changing the way information is used, accessed, and shared. That's clearly far more than Apple has ever set out to do.
Brin and Page started Google with the idea of making all information available to anyone anywhere. That's so much broader in scope than "1000 CDs in your pocket" that it's unimagineable that anyone following the two companies can't see the clear distinctions in what they're doing.
But back to MSFT-Nokia. Only fools would write the union off? The market (consumers and investors) will prove this one way or another. But the early indicators from investors are that this union may benefit the smartphone ecosystem overall more than it will either of the two directly. Basically, it will give another option even if that option is far behind the other leaders. Nokia did it because they just don't have US presence (and we upgrade phones like crazy over here). MSFT gets to put it's OS on a device without having to "control" every device maker. Yes, good for both on paper, but will it matter if the collective consumer and investor reaction is a yawn?
I do enjoy the point-counterpoint of this discussion, but I guess only time will tell which points will bear more merit. I've tried to follow, but it's getting hard to understand if the point is to just bash Android or not. Jumping from MSFT-Nokia to Apple to make a point about Android's weaknesses is comparing the problems of Android to the best of 3 other companies. Oh, and Android's not even a company.
Now, if you want to compare Google head-to-head with MSFT, Apple, and Nokia that's a different discussion altogether. Probably not suited for this thread or section either. But let's just say they're all good companies, but if you had to invest with these three in order of where you think your money has the best chance to grow MSFT and Nokia wouldn't even be in the discussion. And that is where this all began....
Funny you mention iTunes as being what helped bring Apple back to life. It is iTunes that makes me hate Apple more than anything. I pry would have jumped on the iPod bandwaggon, and eventually the iPhone band waggon if it was not for iTunes. I have disliked Apple ever since. They're products are nice, but I dont want someone having control over my toy. Now with iSyncer on my EVO, I have nothing to worry about... and the PowerAmp app is even better than the iProduct media interface. Just glad I didnt fall into the trap of the restrictive Apple BS. Once you fall in, its hard to get out, they got ya by the balls at that point, so to speak.
Sorry. iTunes is how Apple really drove its mobile strategy. First through iPod, then iPhones, now iPads. Of course, iOS has since grown quite a bit, but since iTunes 7x (forget which version) iPhone OS (iOS) has matured. Now, they're inseperable, but Apple pushes lots through iTunes as it's the link to the App Store.
I use iSyncr too. Not PowerAmp though. I really just wanted some of my music now that it's all loaded onto iTunes. Interestingly, I purchase most of my music via Amazon though.
I have quite a few friends who are Apple-addicted, and that's fine. When they stay within that framework, all's fine. However they get often wish they could do simple things that are restricted (everyone's phone looks the same) like screen customization.
I really don't mind Apple's obsession with controlling look-feel as it does keep open development from straying so far into so many directions that it becomes a distraction (early Android was not appealing to me but has been since 2.1 and 2.2).
I will give Apple credit for this - they make incredibly high profit margins off non-leading edge devices by emphasizing the UI. I just don't fall for it.
That's just me. I'm also the type of person that won't order most chicken entrees at fine restaurants because I know that's were the highest margin is.
Whiskeypawz
Android Enthusiast
I must say this has turned into quite the informative discussion. There is a lot of great information in here that I did not know & I really appreciate that. I realize that's what these forums are probably intended for but often they turn into bickering back & forth about "mine is better than yours". Everyone has a different perspective/opinion/preference on things & what they use their device for. There is no right or wrong answer, just like different personalities. I just wanted to say thanks to the people sharing information in a such a constructive way. I know more about phones now than I did when I bought my Hero a year & a half ago, partly because of information I've gotten off of these forums. I know more about Android than I do Windows Mobile or iOS but I'm smart enough to realize my knowledge is just the tip of the ice berg. I've been better able to make decisions on my purchases because of information I've gotten on here & I've also been able to advise my friends based on the same information. Thanks guys! 
While it isn't like the worlds problems can be solved in this thread, the point is to have google address androids deficiencies in a market that has become far more competitive with the introduction of WP7, and whatever Apple has in store for iOS on iPhone5.
More importantly, Android, even on 2.3, still has a user experience that needs lots of work. Android still needs far too much horsepower to run smoothly, but lacks the apps and software to make dual core really shine. There is still no netflix app leaving 20 million subs to look at WP7 and iOS for cinema on the go.
2011 is still early, so who knows what Android will turn into before Q4. As of right now, there is nothing with android that interests me other than the HTC Flyer. Though, I am eager to see the Epic2 and Evo2, but Ill be keeping an eye out for a Sprint iPhone and high end WP7 phone as well, because I am loyal to me, not android.
The last part would be critical to success. Get market games running, and they're golden. Otherwise?
Meh.