|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|10-22-2012 11:02 AM|
|10-20-2012 05:36 PM|
Originally Posted by john doe View Post
|10-20-2012 05:15 PM|
Originally Posted by linvillegorge View Post
|10-20-2012 03:41 PM|
Originally Posted by faridk89 View Post
|10-20-2012 02:55 PM|
It's long but interesting. Since Steve Wozniak left Apple really hasn't invented any technology. Everything has been mixing the tech from others in a marketable way.
|10-20-2012 12:06 PM|
Originally Posted by snowklinger View Post
As for Google stepping in and "placing hardware minimums for Android," that can't really happen because the Android platform is free for anyone to use/develop/use. That's the main benefit of it, I can go and build any technological device and install an Android OS on it for free legally.
|10-20-2012 11:15 AM|
I've just seen no indication that Google has long-term interest in maintaining a hardware manufacturing arm. They claim they will treat Motorola like any other manufacturer in terms of preferential treatment, access to software, etc. Sorry, I just don't buy that. I just don't see how that is a sustainable model. You own a manufacturing arm, yet you're still trying to maintain an open source model available to everyone while giving your own in-house brand no advantage?
Samsung is going to be making the tablet you speak of.
I just don't see how Google can maintain their relationship with their other manufacturing partners while they own an in-house manufacturing branch. It just seems like a huge conflict of interest no matter what Google says. Sooner or later there will be an alternative OS available. Maybe Windows finally gets their shit together or maybe it's something that isn't even on the radar right now. But, if there was a legit alternative, I have to think that manufacturers would give it a long, hard look due to the perceived conflict of interest with Google/Motorola. HTC, Samsung, and LG have all been fairly aggressive already pursuing options with Windows - primarily in AT&T, Windows just can't seem to get their shit together.
I completely agree with you that Google needs to step in and place some type of hardware minimums for Android. This hasn't been a big issue as of late with phones on the major carriers as they all have pretty robust hardware these days, but early on, you'd see phones launch and within 6 months or so they'd stop getting updates or the updates would cause huge problems because the hardware just wasn't sufficient for the new OS. Google also has to reduce the fragmentation on the market. There are way too many versions of Android out there. They said about a year and a half ago that they were actually looking to slow down the rate of development with Android in an effort to reduce this fragmentation, but I've seen no signs of that actually happening. Hell, the rumors about Jellybean started within a month of Ice Cream Sandwich officially rolling out. Jellybean has been out with the Nexus for several months and it's still not rolling out to other devices yet. I guarantee you that by the time it starts to roll out to other devices (by the end of the year) there will already be all kinds of rumors about what's next. You can't always be focused on what's next. You gotta take care of the here and now first. There are way too many versions of Android currently in use. You have low end pre-paid models still on Eclair. There's plenty of FroYo phones running around. The majority are on ICS and soon you'll have Jellybean and whatever's next after that. It seems like there are always a healthy dose of about 3 different versions on the market. That's just too much for app developers to have to deal with. The fragmentation causes most of the app problems seen in Android. The rate of development also means the app developers are constantly having to tweak their apps to ensure they're running properly. Not only do they have to deal with software fragmentation, but there's also the wide variety of hardware specs out there that they also have to consider. I'm not a developer, but I have to think it'd be a helluva headache.
|10-20-2012 11:01 AM|
Originally Posted by linvillegorge View Post
Do you mean software or hardware patents, I can see the value of the software patents of course but if their not going to create their own hardware what's the point of having those Motorola hardware patents.....are they profitable via licensing or something?
I mean I can't see them going full Apple walled garden style but I could see them forcing hardware manufactures(it's not like Samsung/HTC have another viable mobile OS to choose from) to at least meet some kind of minimum requirements as far as CPU/memory and button layout configuration......I wanna say Microsoft is doing something like this for the new windows phones which shocking I don't think are really that bad especially for the casual user that wants a cheap simple to use iOS alternative.
|10-20-2012 10:54 AM|
My wife's school just got some new ipads the other day, and staff were allowed to take them home for the weekend, so I just got my first real chance to try one out. There's no question that the graphics are superior to anything in the pc world. Given the price of the damthing, that should be no surprise. However, I don't find the interface behaviour to be any more intuitive than anything pc-based or android-based. "Intuitive" is mostly a matter of what you're used to.
As others have pointed out, Apple's strength and apple's weakness are the same thing -- the fact that they have total control over their hardware and software. They can guarantee that all software adheres to their interface standards, that all hardware is interoperable with other hardware, and so on. But it also creates a bottleneck. For a small startup hardware or software company, it is so much easier to get into the pc or android marketplace. And that's the strength and weakness of the pc/android marketplace. Way more competition and innovation, with unfortunately a lot more opportunity for crap to get on the market.
As for Apple's much ballyhooed lack of need for anti-virus products, sorry no sale. Even 386bsd, arguably the most secure consumer-level o/s ever made, has had virii. Apple is simply a smaller and less interesting target. All *nix variants have been exploited, and Apple's base o/s isn't any more bulletproof.
Bottom line from my POV, is I really don't care. The main reason I don't own Apple hardware (other than an ipod) is simply that it's too pricey for me and doesn't offer anything that I need that would make me pay the extra fare. If that changes, I'll pony up the $.
|10-20-2012 01:48 AM|
If you get viruses on your pc, that is just straight darwinism, and you deserve it.
Heads up Apple/Mac users: we no longer get viruses. If you know someone who does urge them to unplug or educate.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|