12 ms·

At this point they don't have many options. Google seems determined to limit Assistant to their hardware. That being said, I'm not sure the developer community

by wklauss 10y ago

At this point they don't have many options. Google seems determined to limit Assistant to their hardware. That being said, I'm not sure the developer community has enough interest in supporting that many AI assistants on their apps (Siri, Assistant, Alexa, Cortana...)

CapitalistCartr 10y ago
People seem to love an oligopoly of two. I call it Coke vs. Pepsi thinking.
- shostack 10y ago
  Personally in this case I'd love for more competition. However I'll probably never buy a Samsung phone now between how awful their version of Android is, lack of updates, explosion concerns, and the fact that I don't think they will ever have an assistant that can rival Google. They are good at hardware in ways Apple is not, but both Apple and Samsung are horrible at web integrated services like this compared to Google. I just don't think it's in their DNA.
  - canes123456 10y ago
    Can we really still say they are good at hardware? Especially compared to Apple, I think the hardware as always lagged behind. It was closer recently, but the explosion issues makes it seem like there were taking big risks to keep up with apple.
    - shostack 10y ago
      They are good at hardware. For starters the S7 Edge is an incredible phone and they had been doing good things with the Note aside from the battery. Further, they are good at selling hardware and the distribution side in ways Apple isn't. They are also prominent in several other important hardware fields. So yes, I'd say they are objectively pretty good at hardware.
      - canes123456 10y ago
        Yes, they are excellent at distribution. They are much better at making deals with carriers. I don't consider that hardware besides just managing more SKUs.
    - sz4kerto 10y ago
      > Especially compared to Apple, I think the hardware as always lagged behind No, they're ahead I think. You can argue that on the SoC front Apple is ahead, but compare the WQHD OLED screen of an S7 with the screen of an i7 (or even a Plus, which is larger). S7 is IP68 waterproof (you can make nice underwater videos, etc.), larger battery (and longer battery life, actually). It also has more built-in sensors (which you might call a gimmick, but still, it's not _behind_ Apple in any sense).
      - CountSessine 10y ago
        No, they're ahead I think Aside from their screens, I have to disagree. Everything else in Galaxy phones is gloriously second-rate. The compass in my S4 and Note 4 never really worked properly. Their GPS is just slightly better than a wild guess. Their SOCs went from awesome in the exynos 4000 series when Apple was designing their cores to awful in the 5000 series when they had to do it on their own, and they've only recently started coming close to Apple again. Their external speakers are so bad that they've provided HTC and others with key market differentiation. They don't seem to be able to design an earpiece that doesn't sound like its playing through cheese-cloth. And the fit and finish of their phones is 'luxury-plastic' at best. The only piece of hardware they seem to do really well is their screens, and that happens to be the most important component for smartphone users. But the rest of their hardware? If it wasn't for Samsung's dominance of OLED, the Android handset market would be much more balanced. S7 is IP68 waterproof The difference between IP67 and IP68 waterproofing is 50cm of immersion in water (1m vs 1.5m). It isn't rated for swimming or underwater photography. In practice, both an S7 and an iPhone 7 could probably be taken into a pool. But remember that the S7 still comes with water immersion detection stickers inside (or at least the Note 7 did). They'll know if you take it for a swim. larger battery (and longer battery life, actually) Definitely not my experience. My iPhone 7+ is approaching 3 days of battery life. When new, my Note 4 could get about 1.8. It also has more built-in sensors (which you might call a gimmick, but still, it's not _behind_ Apple in any sense). None of which really seem to work very well. The GPS and compass in my Note 4 were really flaky.
  - djsumdog 10y ago
    I feel like Samsung is preparing for the day they can leave the Google eco-system behind. But as of now, it's not viable. The lockin is strong. It's hard enough to build apps to work with both Google services and Amazon Fire services. Their UI is pretty terrible. I wipe my devices and usually install a mod like Cyanogen or Omni. But I wish we didn't need mods; I wish we could just install stock AOSP on everything just like a base install of Windows (before MS started adding junkware to it in Win10). I wrote a post about this a while back: http://penguindreams.org/blog/android-fragmentation/ http://penguindreams.org/blog/android-fragmentation/
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      Their S7 phones got nice reviews partially because (as far as I understood it) the had de-bloated it - removed most of their duplicated apps. Maybe they are changing again but it hasn't been their strategy as late as last year IMO.
    - shostack 10y ago
      > "Samsung is preparing for the day they can leave the Google eco-system behind" I think you mean "preparing for the day Google leaves them behind." Google's path with the Pixel, if successful, puts them on more of an Apple trajectory. I saw a recent stat that 9/10 smartphones run Android, so they've dominated the industry already. The question though is whether that would still stay the same if Samsung wasn't in the mix. Beyond that, the hardware is fast becoming commoditized as everyone realizes that at a certain point, the core features that make people buy a phone will be cloud-based and increasingly with wearable peripherals your fancy phone will be sitting in your pocket while the inputs are worn. Those who can't differentiate on software and services will be relegated to low-margin commodity hardware providers. However those who own the ecosystem are asserting their control to build what will likely be an insurmountable moat.
      - bitmapbrother 10y ago
        I was about to say the same thing. The problem for Samsung is that they need Google and their ecosystem. The other problem for Samsung is that Google doesn't need Samsung anymore. That's not to say Google doesn't want Samsung as an Android partner, but if that day ever came and Samsung decided to switch to Tizen their impact on the Android landscape today wouldn't be as impactful as it would have been years ago. As Google establishes their supply chain, carrier relationships and grows their hardware unit they'll soon have all of the pieces in place to become the only true competitor to the iPhone in terms of a unified software and hardware experience. Pretty much every review of the Pixel has raved about its performance, touch responsiveness and camera quality. If you're trying to decide which high end Android phone to buy then the Pixel is at the top of that list. Not bad for a first try that was made in only half the time of their competitor's phones.
- r00fus 10y ago
  People are hardwired to a small set of choices. Products or markets with network effects pressure those choices to become 2 or even 1 (though almost everyone agrees that a 1 is too low/risky, and thus we have things like regulation to ostensibly prevent those situations). Thus 2 is the lowest stable set that's agreeable.
  - Florin_Andrei 10y ago
    Looking at politics in the US, sometimes a choice of 2 can spawn some really toxic dynamics when the real phenomenon is far more complex than that.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  I think it is that mass market dynamics will lead to that end state unless some heavy regulations gets enforced.
Eridrus 10y ago
One of the things I found interesting about Viv is their demos of 3rd party integration, which none of the other main players have really done a good job with. AFAIK Alexa is the only one you can integrate with right now, and it's only in the most basic way you could imagine. I don't know how it will play out with developers, but I think Samsung has a decent shot, particularly given their other consumer goods.
hammock 10y ago
Google Now is not limited to Google hardware. And Google Now is itself way better than Siri, Alexa or Cortana. What is the difference between Assistant and Google Now?
- Mahn 10y ago
  Assistant has a little bit more conversational skills going by their Allo implementation, but otherwise the difference is mostly marketing. I assume that Google will eventually phase out (or stop supporting) Google Now voice commands in favor of concentrating on Assistant.
  - ihsw 10y ago
    Except nobody uses Allo because it's junk and Google has shown absolutely zero interest to address users' concerns. But Assistant's conversational capabilities cannot be downplayed -- they are definitely leading the way there.
    - digi_owl 10y ago
      Sadly the guy in charge is either: A. clueless about Android internals. B. fanatic about UX above all else. C. both
  - Klathmon 10y ago
    IIRC Assistant is very similar in what it looks like, but it's a completely different back end. It's also why some people are peeved because the Google Assistant on the Pixel can't do some things that Google Now can.

by wklauss 10y ago

CapitalistCartr 10y ago

People seem to love an oligopoly of two. I call it Coke vs. Pepsi thinking.

shostack 10y ago
Personally in this case I'd love for more competition. However I'll probably never buy a Samsung phone now between how awful their version of Android is, lack of updates, explosion concerns, and the fact that I don't think they will ever have an assistant that can rival Google. They are good at hardware in ways Apple is not, but both Apple and Samsung are horrible at web integrated services like this compared to Google. I just don't think it's in their DNA.
- canes123456 10y ago
  Can we really still say they are good at hardware? Especially compared to Apple, I think the hardware as always lagged behind. It was closer recently, but the explosion issues makes it seem like there were taking big risks to keep up with apple.
  - shostack 10y ago
    They are good at hardware. For starters the S7 Edge is an incredible phone and they had been doing good things with the Note aside from the battery. Further, they are good at selling hardware and the distribution side in ways Apple isn't. They are also prominent in several other important hardware fields. So yes, I'd say they are objectively pretty good at hardware.
    - canes123456 10y ago
      Yes, they are excellent at distribution. They are much better at making deals with carriers. I don't consider that hardware besides just managing more SKUs.
  - sz4kerto 10y ago
    > Especially compared to Apple, I think the hardware as always lagged behind No, they're ahead I think. You can argue that on the SoC front Apple is ahead, but compare the WQHD OLED screen of an S7 with the screen of an i7 (or even a Plus, which is larger). S7 is IP68 waterproof (you can make nice underwater videos, etc.), larger battery (and longer battery life, actually). It also has more built-in sensors (which you might call a gimmick, but still, it's not _behind_ Apple in any sense).
    - CountSessine 10y ago
      No, they're ahead I think Aside from their screens, I have to disagree. Everything else in Galaxy phones is gloriously second-rate. The compass in my S4 and Note 4 never really worked properly. Their GPS is just slightly better than a wild guess. Their SOCs went from awesome in the exynos 4000 series when Apple was designing their cores to awful in the 5000 series when they had to do it on their own, and they've only recently started coming close to Apple again. Their external speakers are so bad that they've provided HTC and others with key market differentiation. They don't seem to be able to design an earpiece that doesn't sound like its playing through cheese-cloth. And the fit and finish of their phones is 'luxury-plastic' at best. The only piece of hardware they seem to do really well is their screens, and that happens to be the most important component for smartphone users. But the rest of their hardware? If it wasn't for Samsung's dominance of OLED, the Android handset market would be much more balanced. S7 is IP68 waterproof The difference between IP67 and IP68 waterproofing is 50cm of immersion in water (1m vs 1.5m). It isn't rated for swimming or underwater photography. In practice, both an S7 and an iPhone 7 could probably be taken into a pool. But remember that the S7 still comes with water immersion detection stickers inside (or at least the Note 7 did). They'll know if you take it for a swim. larger battery (and longer battery life, actually) Definitely not my experience. My iPhone 7+ is approaching 3 days of battery life. When new, my Note 4 could get about 1.8. It also has more built-in sensors (which you might call a gimmick, but still, it's not _behind_ Apple in any sense). None of which really seem to work very well. The GPS and compass in my Note 4 were really flaky.
- djsumdog 10y ago
  I feel like Samsung is preparing for the day they can leave the Google eco-system behind. But as of now, it's not viable. The lockin is strong. It's hard enough to build apps to work with both Google services and Amazon Fire services. Their UI is pretty terrible. I wipe my devices and usually install a mod like Cyanogen or Omni. But I wish we didn't need mods; I wish we could just install stock AOSP on everything just like a base install of Windows (before MS started adding junkware to it in Win10). I wrote a post about this a while back: http://penguindreams.org/blog/android-fragmentation/ http://penguindreams.org/blog/android-fragmentation/
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    Their S7 phones got nice reviews partially because (as far as I understood it) the had de-bloated it - removed most of their duplicated apps. Maybe they are changing again but it hasn't been their strategy as late as last year IMO.
  - shostack 10y ago
    > "Samsung is preparing for the day they can leave the Google eco-system behind" I think you mean "preparing for the day Google leaves them behind." Google's path with the Pixel, if successful, puts them on more of an Apple trajectory. I saw a recent stat that 9/10 smartphones run Android, so they've dominated the industry already. The question though is whether that would still stay the same if Samsung wasn't in the mix. Beyond that, the hardware is fast becoming commoditized as everyone realizes that at a certain point, the core features that make people buy a phone will be cloud-based and increasingly with wearable peripherals your fancy phone will be sitting in your pocket while the inputs are worn. Those who can't differentiate on software and services will be relegated to low-margin commodity hardware providers. However those who own the ecosystem are asserting their control to build what will likely be an insurmountable moat.
    - bitmapbrother 10y ago
      I was about to say the same thing. The problem for Samsung is that they need Google and their ecosystem. The other problem for Samsung is that Google doesn't need Samsung anymore. That's not to say Google doesn't want Samsung as an Android partner, but if that day ever came and Samsung decided to switch to Tizen their impact on the Android landscape today wouldn't be as impactful as it would have been years ago. As Google establishes their supply chain, carrier relationships and grows their hardware unit they'll soon have all of the pieces in place to become the only true competitor to the iPhone in terms of a unified software and hardware experience. Pretty much every review of the Pixel has raved about its performance, touch responsiveness and camera quality. If you're trying to decide which high end Android phone to buy then the Pixel is at the top of that list. Not bad for a first try that was made in only half the time of their competitor's phones.
r00fus 10y ago
People are hardwired to a small set of choices. Products or markets with network effects pressure those choices to become 2 or even 1 (though almost everyone agrees that a 1 is too low/risky, and thus we have things like regulation to ostensibly prevent those situations). Thus 2 is the lowest stable set that's agreeable.
- Florin_Andrei 10y ago
  Looking at politics in the US, sometimes a choice of 2 can spawn some really toxic dynamics when the real phenomenon is far more complex than that.
digi_owl 10y ago
I think it is that mass market dynamics will lead to that end state unless some heavy regulations gets enforced.

Eridrus 10y ago

One of the things I found interesting about Viv is their demos of 3rd party integration, which none of the other main players have really done a good job with. AFAIK Alexa is the only one you can integrate with right now, and it's only in the most basic way you could imagine. I don't know how it will play out with developers, but I think Samsung has a decent shot, particularly given their other consumer goods.

hammock 10y ago

Google Now is not limited to Google hardware. And Google Now is itself way better than Siri, Alexa or Cortana. What is the difference between Assistant and Google Now?

Mahn 10y ago
Assistant has a little bit more conversational skills going by their Allo implementation, but otherwise the difference is mostly marketing. I assume that Google will eventually phase out (or stop supporting) Google Now voice commands in favor of concentrating on Assistant.
- ihsw 10y ago
  Except nobody uses Allo because it's junk and Google has shown absolutely zero interest to address users' concerns. But Assistant's conversational capabilities cannot be downplayed -- they are definitely leading the way there.
  - digi_owl 10y ago
    Sadly the guy in charge is either: A. clueless about Android internals. B. fanatic about UX above all else. C. both
- Klathmon 10y ago
  IIRC Assistant is very similar in what it looks like, but it's a completely different back end. It's also why some people are peeved because the Google Assistant on the Pixel can't do some things that Google Now can.