9 ms·

Ask HN: Has iOS irrevocably fallen behind?

53 points by aditya42 16y ago

There is no good place to ask this, since there are loyalists on both sides. I can only hope that Hacker News has enough sane-minded people who will answer this properly (if it gets upvoted enough to show up on the front-page, of course). After watching the complete Google I/O keynote and WWDC '10 keynote, even I have to admit that Android (Froyo) has left iOS behind on features. Articles like [these][1] might say that Apple has given a solid reply, but I don't think they have. When I see features like Android's cloud-to-phone messaging APIs, I long for them to be in iOS. But then iOS 4 has nothing of this sort. Froyo also has APIs to make app data searchable, which iOS 4 doesn't for non-Apple apps. And these are just a few things that looking back at it now makes iOS 4 just seem so much weaker. Gingerbread will be out in October if I believe Engadget, and that will pull Android further away from iOS. People can talk about fragmentation — which will become less of an issue with Gingerbread, and the fact that users don't care about such features. But developers do. If Apple falls behind on features that developers want, the App Store numbers they like to tout to loudly will stop growing so rapidly. To be honest, as a user, iOS 4 adds nothing that truly stands out as "THIS is why I must have the iPhone" except for Facetime and the Retina Display. Being a long time Apple loyalist and enthusiast, it both worries and saddens me to see Apple so blatantly miss the boat. So my question is, has Apple dropped the ball after a solid start and fallen behind so much that the trickle of developers will slowly become a full flow which they won't be able to stop? [1]: www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/06/08/apples-ios-wwdc-strikes-back-after-googles-android-io/

mikecane 16y ago
You don't know what Apple is working on. Nor do you know if any of those Android features will work properly or will be "all that." This is just the typical hopscotching that happens all the time in the industry. In a few months, you might be doing a post about webOS vs Android vs iOS. Buy something and just enjoy it.
pedalpete 16y ago
As an unabashed Apple hater who thinks the company is little more than hype and marketing, I have to say strongly NO, iOS has not fallen behind the other OSs. You point to Android specifically, but I don't think anything you've mentioned is a selling point on the device/os specifically. is 'cloud-to-phone messaging api' really something that a customer is going to be looking at when comparing devices? And if so, is it actually a feature that can't be replicated in any OS quite simply? I think the market share challenges in the mobile space are less about OS feature capabilities like you describe than the more basic requirements like battery life, screen quality, design and brand perception. Using your cloud-to-phone example again, is this really that much different from app notifications in iPhone (I'm pretty sure that is in the api). You say it's the features that developers want, but developers need to focus on the needs of consumers, rather than just what's the geekiest thing I can build. If Apple is falling behind anywhere, I suspect it is in the UI design, which I don't find particularly compelling. It does a decent job of getting out of the way, and it is nicer than blackberry, but it very quickly seemed to have gone from cutting edge to ho-hum. I don't look at an iphone and think that it is beautiful and easy to use. The home screen with all the buttons and no way of organizing them seems clutter, and the grid is bland without any character.
- chc 16y ago
  Just a small correction: Apple actually has introduced the ability to organize your apps in iOS 4. Nothing revolutionary, basically just folders, but it is something.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- neonfunk 16y ago
  I don't understand your first sentence.
- raystar 16y ago
  notifications in IOS need to be completely redesigned, they are terrible at the moment, and trivial things can completely interrupt a tweet/game/email.
angrycoder 16y ago
Go tell your mom about the new features that Froyo has. Watch her eyes glaze over as you talk about "cloud-to-phone messaging APIs" and "APIs to make app data searchable". Now show her the iphone 4 retina display.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- chrischen 16y ago
  Those features obviously don't appeal to the general user: they appeal to the developers. The developers are ultimately responsible for creating apps which speak to the general user. The iPhone without apps would at most be 50% of what it is now. Cool features to developers attract developers, and they in turn purify those raw features in to cool easily understandable applications. Cloud to phone Apis is not meant to be a marketing point for your mother.
- fgf 16y ago
  Smartphones have enormous potential to supplement and even substitute PCs for everyday uses of non geeks. (Plumbers, store owners, salesmen, lawyers, accountants, doctors etc. etc.) Searchable app data will be important to make this happen. There is nothing frivolous about a feature that allows users to, for example, quickly access one of dozens of customer profiles.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    Many of those uses already have specialized apps, which do search within their context-relevant data, in context-relevant ways. iPads in medical environments are a perfect example. Why, if you're searching for symptom X, would you want to find emails with X, text messages with X, and that image which just happens to contain X in its filename? Essentially every laptop / tablet / whatever-PC in use in the medical field works similarly - they use one application which handles all relevant data, and it doesn't search outside that. And this is on a PC, which is essentially wide open to application interoperability (if not as easy to do). Developers and users have already apparently decided that it's not as important / desirable as many would like to believe. Granted, there are cases where this is useful, but it's a fundamental iOS / Android(/Unix) design choice. Android favors interoperation through APIs, iOS favors using one application for the job at hand.
ErrantX 16y ago
If Apple falls behind on features that developers want, the App Store numbers they like to tout to loudly will stop growing so rapidly. Highly unlikely; unless they lose their consumer market too. Because, at the end of the day, developers will jump through a few hoops (and rightfully gripe) to sell to the biggest user base.
- codingthewheel 16y ago
  Not once they realize how hard it actually is to make any money on the platform. http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2010/06/full-analysis-of-iphone-economics-its-bad-news-and-then-it-gets-worse.html http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2010/06/full-an...
  - glhaynes 16y ago
    Is not the story worse on every other mobile platform?
  - jonhendry 16y ago
    It ought to get better if they use iAds. That would provide an ongoing revenue stream from each user.
drawkbox 16y ago
I'll say it again. Apple iOS and the platform is at least 5 years ahead of all competitors. Keep this in mind, noone has an answer for the iPod Touch or the iPad yet. The iPod Touch outsells the PSP and nearly the DS in devices and in terms of content sales via iTunes (games and entertainment, none come close). The iPad is another gaming console in a way and a pretty cheap laptop replacement. Not to mention the book market. The iPad and iPod Touch make up over 65%+ devices sold by Apple and brings the total iOS devices to over 100 million. Other companies keep thinking this is a Phone only market. When in fact the iPhone is only about 35-40% of Apple's devices that use the iOS and the iTunes/Appstore platform. Where is the response to that? How many years will it take others to understand this. Apple is owning the mobile and handheld market and is making a ploy for all entertainment devices not just phones. Apple has to love that the competition looks past 65%+ of their market every new device. The iPod Touch and iPad are the equivalent of Apple II's in schools and candy cigarettes when it comes time for kids to grow up and buy a phone. All their apps and games will be there waiting for them when they get one. This market is about so much more than phones...
- Tichy 16y ago
  Market share is not the same as technical quality. By that logic MS Windows is also years ahead of it's competitors.
  - mcav 16y ago
    Most people consider Apple's products to be superior technically than Microsoft's respective products.
    - brudgers 16y ago
      That explains Apple's share of the computer market perfectly.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
      - 16y ago
yurisagalov 16y ago
I'm not particularly an Apple fan boy, but I do admire their design decisions. Apple has an _uncanny_ ability to take a block of marble (a set of features for a phone) and grind away at it until what's left is a minimally complete set of features that are (in general) perfect. I was definitely the first to gripe and complain when the iPhone didn't have cut and paste, but I'll also be the first to admit that they _did_ get it right when they finally released it. I was also one of the many loud voices complaining that I couldn't run backgrounded apps, but when you look at the HTC phones coming out right now running Android and full backgrounding, and you hear the stories of how the battery runs out by the early afternoon, you start to realize that, it is true, "it is easy to add <feature x>, but it is hard to get it right" (or whatever it was that jobs said in his announcements) I'm not saying that the features in Android aren't impressive, they very well may be, but Apple's design decisions don't just go after "impressive", they try to go after "perfect", and sometimes getting features perfect means cutting them until you're ready Your entire post is targetted as "features that developers want" and you're right, you need a healthy ecosystem of developers, and Google is certainly building one. However, you also need a healthy ecosystem of consumers who love the product, and at the end of the day, I really think most developers will go to the platform where they can reach the widest audience. Apple cares about their consumers first, and their developers second (and sometimes it feels like second last), but it seems to work for them... edit: of course, sometimes apple's PR doesn't respond to consumers as best as it could (i.e. the "you're holding it wrong"), but I'm trying to focus on design/product decisions
- srbloom 16y ago
  "However, you also need a healthy ecosystem of consumers who love the product, and at the end of the day, I really think most developers will go to the platform where they can reach the widest audience." This is exactly what I was thinking. It is an interesting question- do consumers follow developers or do developers follow consumers? It seems that those agreeing with the OP would argue the former while those disagreeing would argue the latter.
  - steadicat 16y ago
    Unix has developers but no consumers. Android is the same. The iPhone was a huge success before it got any developers. The Wii had very few games on launch compared to competing platforms. And the recent resurgence of the Mac seems to have been led by consumers. There were not that many Mac apps in 1998 when the iMac came out. History seems to suggest that developers (especially those who want to get paid) go where the consumers are. The only exception is, perhaps, DOS/Windows? I'm not sure I remember the history right though. It could be that consumers switched to Windows because of the cheaper hardware, and developers followed.
OoTheNigerian 16y ago
I do not think that iOS' weakness versus Android would be based on its quality But on reach. The iPhone is on a single form of Phone while Android is available on various forms of phones. Android will be to Phones what Windows is to PCs (personal computers). Its added advantage is Google is more open than Microsoft will ever be. One more thing, Android competes favorable with iOS. Much better that Windows does with OSX
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
fleitz 16y ago
Probably, but also BaseCamp has fallen incredibly behind MS Project in terms of features. Apple doesn't compete on features they compete on profit margin. When Google has something that will convince people to stop paying Apple's margins then I'd start worrying about iPhone's viability as a platform. If you want to develop on a platform where people are willing to pay premium prices for premium products then you have nothing to worry about with Froyo.
- codingthewheel 16y ago
  What platform are you talking about? The App Store is one of the (by the numbers) worst places to actually try to make real money as a developer. Average app price, by the numbers: around $1.90. Average sales $ per annum: around 3K. Half of all devs will earn less than $700 per year. The App Store is in a bubble and that bubble will burst, not because the App Store is evil, but because it's in the nature of bubbles to burst. You'd literally have gotten better traction developing ActiveX controls for IE5, back in the day.
  - matwood 16y ago
    You keep saying this like it's news. Any platform, and not just mobile, is going to end up with winners and a long tail of losers or those that are not as successful. The current iPhone sdk and app store gives the lone developer a decent chance at making something that is successful though.
    - biafra 16y ago
      But only if they are not competing with current or future unknown products of Apple. Or if they disobey some other of Apples (un-)written rules. The problem here is not the AppStore, the problem is that developers have to distribute their apps through it.
jsz0 16y ago
There's good arguments to be made both ways but you're doing a lot of speculation/editorializing about the future instead of addressing more specific examples of how you think iOS is falling behind in a more concrete way. I don't think that's a good approach to get substantive opinions. Besides this cloud-to-device feature, which sounds a lot like Apple's Push notifications to me, can you cite a few more examples? You mention Gingerbread is going to address fragmentation but Google has stated <2.2 will remain in use for lower end/legacy devices. How does that solve fragmentation anytime soon? If Gingerbread is coming out in October there is a pretty good chance 50% (at least) of Android devices won't even have 2.2 by then.
TomOfTTB 16y ago
As a developer I think you're obsessed with features. Whereas users don't necessarily want those features. Apple's bet is that users will reject the platform with more features in favor of the platform that works better. Let's take your examples. When most people search their phone they're looking for information in either mail, contacts, or SMS messages. They don't want the data from the other hundred programs on their phone cluttering up the important results from those areas. So in this case Apple's stance is actually an advantage for the users. On the cloud to device API it is nice but it's not like you can't accomplish the same goal simply by polling. So while this is an area where android is superior I don't think it's a feature that makes that much of a difference. All that said the greatest argument against android winning because of features is the fact that they've always had more features than iOS. I mean if multitasking wasn't a big enough feature to woo users to android than I don't think something like cloud to device messaging is going to do it.
- Tichy 16y ago
  "When most people search their phone they're looking for information in either mail, contacts, or SMS messages." Why even bother with a smartphone and an app store then?
  - TomOfTTB 16y ago
    I'm not sure I'm understanding your point but let me clarify my own and see if that addresses it. What I'm saying is when people use the phone search they are trying to search the phone part of the device (SMS, email, etc...). That doesn't preclude developeres from putting search in their own apps they just can't clutter up the phone search with results from their apps. That in mind I see Apple's point here as being "we think developers will abuse search if they are allowed in and we don't think users want that so we're keeping them out". Not "Google beat us to that feature" Apple might not be right in thinking that I'm just trying to point out that's their design philosophy and not a sign that Android has leap frogged them.
    - Tichy 16y ago
zokier 16y ago
Nothing is irrevocable. This reminds me of the people telling "AMD/Intel/nVidia is doomed" when competitor happens to release a bit better product. AMD did manage to get a profitable quarter after being unprofitable for many many years.
GiraffeNecktie 16y ago
As much as I dislike Apple as a company and love the idea of the Android, I think Apple has totally nailed the concept of the handheld as a sweet and sexy little unit that the average person can take great pleasure in using. It's got very little to do with "features" and everything to do with the experience. So yeah, Android might have features that make the average geek go weak at the knees but Google, at least so far, hasn't shown the ability to get past the engineering and into the joy of the interface. I'm hoping that Gingerbread will get there, but it takes a supreme focus to do good UI. Apple's got it, Google needs to get it.
wglb 16y ago
So I am wondering why you would particularly care, unless you are just an observer. If you are a developer, you want to ask 1) is it programmable 2) is there a market for something that I create. It seems that the answer is yes for both of these. Bullet points are for bystanders.
joeynelson 16y ago
I just wish Apple would fix this: http://jnjnjn.com/161/ipad-volume-indicator/ http://jnjnjn.com/161/ipad-volume-indicator/
albertzeyer 16y ago
Don't use words like "irrevocably". They kind of tag your post as FUD. (Along as statements like "being a long time Apple loyalist... it saddens me...".) And, why do you really think something like this should be irrevocably? How can it be? Then, when I read the title, I just thought 'wtf'? Behind? So I read your post because I was curious about what you mean. Again, I even more wonder what you mean by irrevocably. And how those few missing APIs should be the reason that iOS is behind Android.
- aditya42 16y ago
  Blame that on the time I posted the question (2 in the morning). But it's not FUD. This was just a question, not a statement. By irrevocably, I had a deeper meaning: Android is shooting for share, and they will get it eventually, because of the number of devices it ships on. Once they have that, most (if not all) developers will follow. Missing APIs can be added, but users are hard to convert back — Apple and we know this from the PC vs. Mac days. My question was, has this shift already been set in motion fast enough that Apple will not be able to catch up. (Of course, tech news on the Internet is very US centric, but those of us who are outside the US can see how non-existent Android is here. I haven't been able to factor in the whole "Android for world domination" theory just yet.)
lleger 16y ago
I think the important thing is that Apple doesn't include features for the purpose of having them. It's frivolous to have a feature that doesn't work properly or can't effectively be leveraged by developers. Apple patiently fleshes out everything before it's publicly released. So while Android's OS might technically be more advanced than iOS, in practicality and implementation iOS is the best mobile platform. For example, look at the front facing camera. iPhone 4 wasn't the first to have a front facing camera, but it was the first to have one that simply works — and that's what consumers want. So, to answer your question, no: iOS hasn't irrevocably fallen behind. Has it fallen behind, technically? Yeah, probably. Irrevocably so? No.
drivingmenuts 16y ago
It doesn't matter - iOS and Android both have features that will require at least 5 years for the mass of consumers to catch onto. Most people still want to make calls, check their email, surf the web and play a game on their phone. So, as long as phones can do that, anything extra is developer wankery.
natch 16y ago
When did Froyo become available?
alanh 16y ago
> When I see features like Android's cloud-to-phone messaging APIs, I long for them to be in iOS. But then iOS 4 has nothing of this sort. Isn’t that exactly what push notifications are? Apps like Notifo, and Boxcar for that matter, allow you to implement push notifications for anything (c.f. Github integration) without even a dedicated iPhone app. > users don't care about [fragmentation]. While Joe Consumer may not grok fragmentation, it definitely impacts his experience. E.g. the official Twitter app not being available on Droid or the Incredible, last I heard. I don’t see Apple as missing the boat so much as taking their time to do things right. Just like copy-paste and multitasking. Patience for the polish, or yeah, go to Android. To answer your question, iPhone will, yes, always lack features Android has, for the foreseeable future, but the experience is smoother and more consistent. Strictly in this sense, it it Android that will never catch up. (This is pretty much what Gruber has been saying: http://www.macworld.com/article/151235/2010/05/apple_rolls.html http://www.macworld.com/article/151235/2010/05/apple_rolls.h...)
- stanleydrew 16y ago
  Am I the only one who absolutely prefers Android's copy/paste to the iPhone's?
  - masklinn 16y ago
    Could you explain how/why you do? I just can't get how you could prefer Android's three-taps-deep switch to text selection mode (for non-editable text), and the text range selection seems so damn imprecise.
- aditya42 16y ago
  I realised about an hour after I posted the question that push notifications are almost exactly the same thing, except that cloud-to-device message APIs is something Google is using themselves to show the power it has, which Apple didn't do. But yes, one could write an app (I think Boxcar is in the best position to do this) that can push "intent"s to iOS devices and open them in the proper apps like it already does with Twitter.
- biafra 16y ago
drewcrawford 16y ago
> After watching the complete Google I/O keynote and WWDC '10 keynote I was at WWDC. There are a lot of things I saw there that I'm not supposed to talk about. Suffice it to say that the cool stuff was NOT in the keynote. I came out of WWDC thinking that Google may very well never catch up. They don't seem to care about Android like Apple cares about the iPhone. Apple cares enough about the iPhone to learn how to do cloud services (see Push) and advertising (see iAd) better than Google, things that Apple has no experience doing well. But Google doesn't care about Android enough to invest into build quality or UI, things that Apple does well.
- dieterrams 16y ago
  > But Google doesn't care about Android enough to invest into build quality or UI, things that Apple does well. Build quality, probably not, especially since Google doesn't really do hardware. But it's been widely reported that they're making a big UI push. I expect them to do well on usability: they've got the talent to catch up to Apple on that. Aesthetics are another matter, however.
  - alanh 16y ago
    > talent to catch up to Apple on that With the exception of the better-than-Apple notifications, isn’t Android just attempting to copy lots of UI idioms from iOS in a slightly less usable manner? This is a Mac → Win GUI situation again, is it not? With engineers and programmers driving Android as essentially a Google side project, what’s to actually instill serious quality control and innovation for interfaces?
    - dieterrams 16y ago
      I agree that Android up till now has been as you describe, but I've no idea what they're planning for Android 3.0. I assume that part of the reason why Android's UI idioms have been a less usable copy of iOS's so far is because they were rushing to rework what previously resembled BlackBerry into something more iPhone. I get the Mac/Win analogy, but Microsoft never really grokked UX, while Google generally does. Given that UI is their focus for 3.0, I'd assume their UX people will have more input this time around.
jarsj 16y ago
"To be honest, as a user, iOS 4 adds nothing that truly stands out as "THIS is why I must have the iPhone" except for Facetime and the Retina Display." I am confused. You started your post as a developer and end being an user. There are some big things in iOS4. Multitasking (done properly), iAds, Game Center and 1500 New APIs and tonnes of improvements that apple has put in after taking experiences of millions apps created by thousands of developers. And That's HUGE.
cageface 16y ago
Apple does better frontend. Google does better backend. It will be interesting to see which makes the difference. The transparent, sync-free integration with Google services is the main reason I prefer my Android phone but if Apple steps it up with Mobile Me and bundles it with the phone they might be able to catch up. My hunch is that Google will have an easier time staying close enough on the UI front than Apple will catching up on services but we'll see. Lawsuits might make the difference.
bonaldi 16y ago
1. That I/O keynote was something else in terms of mindshare. Before, Android was an ugly also-ran where devs were making a tenth of the income they made on iOS. After, Android was still ugly and making a tenth of the income for devs, but was transformed into an inevitable iPhone-killer. The facts were the same. If you bash Apple for hype, take Vic with a pinch of salt. 2. iOS 4 is packed with features for devs. Some of the new APIs and block-based animations have taken hundreds of lines of code out of my apps. Doing common tasks like throwing a new view on the screen are massively simpler compared to doing the same on Android. 3. Feature comparisons impressed IT managers in 1989 as they sat choosing between Word and WordPerfect from a list in Byte. Users don't care; they want things that work. They didn't care that the iPod didn't have wireless or as much space as a Nomad, and they still don't. 4. Seriously, features don't factor into it. For 8 years companies were trying to best the iPod by ladling in features, and each time the market told them to go zune eggs. 5. The phone companies are absolutely destroying Android. They're still launching devices with hacked-up versions of 1.6, with no promise of when Froyo will ever make it on there -- that is if the carriers decide to allow it. Imagine if Microsoft had been launching XP but Dell decided it would keep on shipping Win 98, and AOL wouldn't let users even upgrade to Win 2000. Ludicrous.
slashclee 16y ago
Are you joking? The iPhone has been behind on "features" since before the G1 even came out. Let's roll back the clock, shall we? When the first iPhone came out, the OS didn't have support for copy/paste, or MMS, or video recording, or any way to install third-party applications, or a whole ton of Bluetooth devices, or a dozen other random things that everybody claimed were totally necessary. It is absolutely not the case that iOS had a huge head start and Android has just now caught up (from a feature perspective). Android has been banging the "We have more features!" drum since before the G1 even launched. But here's the thing: even with all those awesome features, the Android software is still nowhere near as well-designed as iOS or the apps that ship with it.
napierzaza 16y ago
The store is a selling point for users. That's the one unique thing that's not going to be written off by people (like design). It can change, Google might start getting decent quality apps. But so long as the users are there, and developers can make money, I see no reason for either the user or the developer to leave. Yes, there is intense competition now and each player has to keep up with its OS features. We'll see who can keep their OS up to date with features that are important enough.
ww520 16y ago
"Perfection is achieved by nothing else to remove, not adding more."
tlrobinson 16y ago
Us nerds care about obscure nifty features, but 99% of people don't. In fact, I think in some ways iOS 4 is a step backwards, in that it adds half baked "features" like folders and the multitasking UI (my gripe is with the UI only). They aren't nearly as well thought out as the rest of the OS. Android does have some well implemented features which I like though, specifically Facebook integration with the address book, etc.
- zygen 16y ago
  What makes the folders/multitasking UI less well thought out? I don't have anything that can run iOS 4 yet, so I haven't tried them out.
gord 16y ago
I'm moving from native iPhone to web apps for mobile. The tools will catch up to flash rapidly. The browsers will kick themselves into line, so its viable to have one code base. But most of all... Javascript is just less verbose than Objective-C, and you go straight to market, bypassing appstore/signing madness. I don't think its iOS4 specific, once you have geo-location + offline + appdata + GPU graphics you've got the killer features you need, so why go native? WebGL will happen, theyll have to support it & its easy to do so. Now I guess you might want to do AI in-game as the device gets more powerful, and write effects shaders for rich games.. But a lot of that can be deferred to server-side, so I think even for 3D games it will soon make more sense to go web app. What apple have is slickness and consistency... but I think the slickness of web on Android will approach that asymptotically. The web dev platform is more scaleable, less pain, and wont go away. What is missing is a good appstore + billing system for web apps [and google will probably be there in a year]. I think it needs to support a SaaS model where I rent a group of apps at a discount on a yearly basis. That way you have people invest more effort over time, innovate, and reach beyond the iFart apps.
c00p3r 16y ago
Apple already won consumer mobile market, while Google with its Android will dominate emerging so-called enterprise one. If you want to write some module or extention for your corporate system for mobile devices - Android is the obvious choice. The history repeats itself, Google will be to Apple what Redhat was to Sun, Data General, SCO, and other now dead UNIX vendors. It just a matter of a time.
- zygen 16y ago
  I thought RIM was the obvious choice for enterprise, though.
  - c00p3r 16y ago
    There are a lot of life outside US.. ^_^
ashr 16y ago
yes

zaphar 16y ago
Why, if you're searching for symptom X, would you want to find emails with X, text messages with X, and that image which just happens to contain X in its filename? You could very well want any of those things searchable for symptom X if the email, text message, or Image has relevant details for symptom X. Perhaps the image is an X-ray, the email is a diagnosis from a colleague, or the text message is relevant data about the diagnosis. The very fact that you think they should have to load 3+ different apps to find all the data relevant for symptom X or purchase a high priced propietary app that somehow bundles email, imaging, documents and sms all into one interface shows a lack of vision. Just because every medical device in the field works that way doesn't mean it should.
- Groxx 16y ago
  But without it being in database X, it's (very) hard to know the context of those sources. Without context, you're more likely to get irrelevant data which just happens to contain X. Unless your machine has no irrelevant-to-your-current-query data in it (unlikely). And in that case, the whole device is effectively a one-trick-pony, significantly less useful than simply being bound to a single application. Know of a search API which properly handles (every possible use of) context? Without that, people distrust searching because of irrelevant results. Google does well because of PageRank; as far as I'm aware, nobody has arbitrary-context searching which is effective, because it's such a ridiculously complex and/or processing-intensive problem. Such a filter would probably be integral to passing the Turing test, so we'd probably have heard of it if it existed.
  - zaphar 16y ago
    I think your inflating how useful having it in a database is. The context comes from reading/viewing the content. A database isn't automatically going to fix that. If you need information about "Lupus" (yeah I know it's never lupus) and it's about Tom your new patient. And you know you getting either an email or SMS from Greg the specialist on the way to the office and all you have to do is hit the search button and type in Lupus, Tom and Greg to get that information then your phone has just made your life easier. The context space is much smaller on a device like a phone and it's quite possible to craft a query that finds what you need faster than finding the app, opening it finding the search option then typing it in. On my Android phone I love the search feature. It's a lot like having quicksilver on my phone. A single button that gets me access to everything.
    - Groxx 16y ago
      On a simplistic smart-phone, sure. But most beasts-of-burden nowadays have at least a few gigabytes of storage. That's not any smaller than a PC - few applications have that much data (aside from games), even in the medical field. I may very well be inflating things, but the instant you mention "craft a query" you've lost 99% of people, minimum. They'll type "lupus", and give up if they don't find what they want. Or "Tom", and stop trying if they don't find Greg and Lupus as well. And then resort to finding the information through whatever roundabout means they last succeeded in. Beware the average user's depth of knowledge of your system; many don't understand how to use tabbed browsing, and possibly more use Google to find the Facebook login page despite the login link appearing at all times when you're logged out. If you're trying to get as many people as possible, you've gotta plan for the bottom to be as functional as possible. And there are more at the bottom than at the top.

igorgue 16y ago

"5 years ahead of all competitors." I like your future guessing skills :-). I don't think I have clue what's going to happen next month.

drawkbox 16y ago
How long would it take a company, even of Google's size, to create a handheld android device that competes with game handhelds? How long would it take to create a tablet that is as successful as the iPad? How long would it take to create a platform and store and get all the deals with the music industry, movie industry, book publishers, attract video game developers and more that could beat Wal-mart? All that isn't happening in a month... I think 5 years is actually pretty generous considering it took Apple about 10 years (while they control both the hardware and software side making it much easier) and everyone else can see the path that worked.
- igorgue 16y ago
  I don't know if we're going to be using handheld devices like the iPad 5 years from now. I don't want to make fun of you or anybody but trying to predict the future, seems to be something everyone fails. People fears to say "I don't know" it's kinda like religion, lol.
  - drawkbox 16y ago
    @igorgue: Not trying to predict the future just stating how long it would take to catch up to present products/platforms based on how long it took Apple to create them. The nature of this question was speculative and I was basing it on some current present facts. I don't know for sure but that is the way it seems, this whole topic is about predicting the future. So you don't think handheld devices like the iPod Touch, DS, PSP will be around in the future? iPad aside if you don't think people will use larger screen flat devices in the future. I thought we were having a discussion not just joining the religion of 'I don't know', how fun is that? Ok then the probability of people carrying personal media, creative, entertainment, gaming devices is probably going to go up rather than down. But I don't know for sure...
    - igorgue 16y ago
      I just don't know, that's my opinion, maybe we're going to be using something like Futurama's eyePhone.
  - zygen 16y ago
    I disagree, we can use the past to inform the future so it's not the same as religion. I think it's a much better bet to say that devices like the iPad will be more popular 5 years from now than to bet that they're going away. Sure it's silly to put specific numbers to it, but we can estimate the broad strokes to a better than chance accuracy.
  - wallflower 16y ago
    Don't predict the future. Bet on the future. If you want to have the mobile skills that will be in demand two or even five years from now, pick what that will be and invest in learning them. You can always hedge by dabbling in the other platform. For me, I am learning iOS first and Android later (Actively pursuing and coding iOS projects and monitoring the latest flavor-of-the-month Android state-of-the-art and evolving best-in-class Android apps with interest)
- mlinsey 16y ago
  To answer your first two questions, it would take many years. But unless you're privy to insider information from a lot of different companies, you can't rule out that all those devices are several years into their development already. I would be shocked if there aren't at least a couple Android tablets that have been under development for more than a year. As for your third question (how long to line up the content providers): not very long at all. Once Apple has paved the way, it is much easier to get those same media companies to give the same deal to a competing device, since those media companies don't like Apple having that much control over their content i the first place.

gord 16y ago

I think its more like 5months. I do get it.. they are driving amazing innovation, and exceptional polish that everyone else will have to copy. But they will catch up, because its fundamentally about engineering - its better when you decouple hardware and software. Most people wont pay for the difference of that extra level of superb integration that Apple offer.. the gap will close as there is so much volume and competition in the mobile and tablet space. I actually think we are close to optimizing the mobile form factor. What other hw features could you have on these devices.. [natural spoken language translation in realtime?] its all software from here on up.

jodrellblank 16y ago
What other hw features could you have on these devices. Solar panels, e.g. Apples's patent for a screen integrated one, contactless inductive charging, pixelqi style sunlight readable display, e-ink style display which uses no power to keep a static display, display privacy with a display that can change it's viewing angle right down, make the back optionally touch sensitive as well, if you remember Doc. Brown from back to the future had some augmented reality binoculars, you could speculate about possible camera improvements which would aid that kind of thing such as infra red sensitivity to help apps locate people in scenes, haptic feedback more than just 'vibrate', and again very speculatively dynamic changing materials - e.g. If the handheld device could change texture, kinetic charging, pico projectors, pressure sensitivity both on the screen and on the device generally, someone made a nice hack to wear a magnetic ring so they could gesture above their phone and sense it using the compass - theremins can do similar using some kind of em field distortion, could a device integrate anything like that without a huge aerial? I'm not sure if you're saying there's nothing else we could put in a device now in hardware terms, or if there's nothing else interesting we could put in a handheld device ever, or just nothing we could put in that a consumer would want, but I'm not convinced for any interpretation. its better when you decouple hardware and software. Citation needed.
- gord 16y ago
  Im saying theres not much more we could put on a mobile device that is a game changer [and yes I entertained the tricorder idea with a DNA sampler & diagnosis, but I guess thats out of range for a decade ] Agreed longer battery life has room for improvement, but would it change usage, given current devices can be used for 4 or 8 hours already? re decoupling hw / sw : Ill give an explanation, rather than a citation : We write in high level languages that use logical abstractions, not machine specific ones. These can be ported across various hardware platforms, and thus reused, saving work. I think everyone prefers to have the same HTML5/javascript api work on all devices.

mechanical_fish 16y ago

And why is the rest of the market so fixated on phones? Because Google cannot sell an Android device on its own. They tried, remember? Google as an institution knows even less about selling retail products than the average hot dog vendor. Meanwhile, Apple has very deliberately spent a decade building the best direct-to-customer retail operation in the tech industry, perhaps even in any industry. So Google's customer-facing sales operation consists of mobile phone carriers. That's been effective so far, though I still wonder how much of its success is driven by the existence of iPhone carrier exclusivity -- nothing motivates Verizon to sell, sell, sell those Android devices like the threat of losing a flood of subscribers. But carriers are only interested in selling phones, because phones come with usage fees and contracts. The lack of direct connection to the customer has all sorts of side effects on Google's business, and one is that they have no obvious way to effectively bring an Android-powered iPod Touch to market. They need to build a retail system from scratch - an even more difficult version of the task at which Gateway, Sony, and Microsoft have already failed - or they need a partner. Which partner? Existing gaming companies, the ones with the brands, all have their own platforms. Microsoft, for the moment, has their own platform. PC vendors have been selling commodity widgets for so long that they've forgotten how to sell something new. Is Google supposed to just buy shelf space at Best Buy and hope? Go back in time to the 1990s and ask the old Apple Computer how well that strategy worked.

masklinn 16y ago
> Because Google cannot sell an Android device on its own. They tried, remember? I'm not sure about that, if you're talking about the N1. They barely even tried to sell it, I see the N1 as defining a (tentative) baseline for Android, which is supported by rumors of its configuration (1GHz CPU, 512MB RAM, 800xwhatever 3.5" screen) being the minimum configuration required for gingerbread.

stanleydrew 16y ago
> Unix has developers but no consumers. Android is the same. What? 160,000 new Android phones are now activated each day I thought?
- masklinn 16y ago
  Versus how many iPhones + iPod Touch + iPad?
  - stanleydrew 16y ago
    The parent comment wasn't making a comparison. That was an absolute comment that Android has no consumers. But to answer your question I don't know how many iOS devices are shipping each day. Do you?
    - masklinn 16y ago
      > The parent comment wasn't making a comparison. That was an absolute comment that Android has no consumers. It's always a comparison. > But to answer your question I don't know how many iOS devices are shipping each day. Do you? No, which is why I'm asking. If I knew I wouldn't have to ask.
DrJokepu 16y ago
I think it works the other way around as well. It's not a coincidence that Apple marketed the 3G and 3GS models with the "There's an app for that" line - the sheer number of (useful) applications in the App Store is a huge selling point for the iPhone and a real asset for Apple.
enjo 16y ago
Android has no customers? Seriously? There are thousands of Android devices shipping every day. I still see no way that this doesn't end with Android in a (far and away) market dominant position. They're already well on their way.
- gamble 16y ago
  Do Android users buy even a tenth of the apps that iOS users do? If simply having the greatest number of handsets in circulation supporting a particular platform equalled victory, Java-based feature phones or Symbian handsets would have trounced the iPhone years ago.
  - moe 16y ago
    Do Android users buy even a tenth of the apps that iOS users do? Probably not yet. I'd blame this mostly on the low number of "killer" apps in the android market. Many good apps have arrived, but the number is nowhere near the appstore, yet. Here's the kicker, though: This will inevitably change. It is already changing. When you compare the android market today versus a few months ago then you'll notice quite a number of high-profile apps have appeared. As a developer you can't ignore android anymore. You're not building an iPhone app nowadays, you're building an iPhone app and an android app. And it won't be long before the priorities reverse. Once android devices outnumber iPhones by 10:1 the question will be whether you build an iPhone app along with your Android app - not the other way round. Remember Apple is at its absolute peak today. There's nowhere to go from here in terms of features or polish. Sure, they can add voice recognition, brush up the hardware even more and perhaps they'll even find another killer-feature or two to add. But HTC and Google are breathing in their neck now, the gap in user experience is closing. From there the primary differentiating factor becomes price. And competing with HTC on price will be tough[1]. [1] http://moconews.net/article/419-android-sales-exceed-iphone-but-not-blackberry-in-q1/ http://moconews.net/article/419-android-sales-exceed-iphone-...
    - jodrellblank 16y ago
      Remember Apple is at its absolute peak today. There's nowhere to go from here in terms of features or polish. Sure, they can add voice recognition, brush up the hardware even more and perhaps they'll even find another killer-feature or two to add. There's nowhere to go in features or polish unless they add more features or polish more - what kind of argument is that? From there the primary differentiating factor becomes price. Because Apple have always been driven out of markets by competitors with lower prices...
      - moe 16y ago
        There's nowhere to go in features or polish unless they add more features or polish more - what kind of argument is that? I meant to say that they're about to hit a wall with that. What do you think they could add or change to prevent android from catching up? Because Apple have always been driven out of markets by competitors with lower prices... Depends on your definition of "driven out". They have about 10% of the desktop market - which may be considered "driven out" by some.

pyre 16y ago

> What I'm saying is when people use the phone search > they are trying to search the phone part of the > device (SMS, email, etc...). > That in mind I see Apple's point here as being > "we think developers will abuse search if they > are allowed in and we don't think users want that > so we're keeping them out" This is a straw man. Apple can weight the search so that search hits in the more important apps are always at the top of the results.

TomOfTTB 16y ago
Ok well...first...you're using "straw man argument" wrong since I'm not trying to refute Apple's position (not trying to be snide but just to make you aware for future use) On your point you're certainly right but I'd argue this is where we get into the realm of "pragmatist vs perfectinist". There is a UI hit to returning 1,000 results as opposed to 2 or 3. It's a small hit but it is there. Apple, as the creator of the device, has the right to choose to be perfectionist about things even if it makes developers unhappy
- pyre 16y ago
  In my original post: s/straw man/weak argument/ I'm in disagreement with the idea that developers will abuse something that Apple has ultimate control over.
  - extension 16y ago
    A few will abuse it, ruining it for everyone, unless Apple polices it vigilantly, which is a lot of work and tends to cause PR problems.
    - Tichy 16y ago
      An app that goes wild can simply be uninstalled.
    - pyre 16y ago
      s/will abuse/can abuse/ I guess I should have been clearer. Apple can make it so that it's impossible for developers to abuse it.
- davidmduarte 16y ago
  Yes, Apple has that right. Is just a matter of choice for Apple and for developers.
jsz0 16y ago
Google could do the same thing but unfortunately when I use the search function and search for "Rachel" (I have two in my address book) the first result is a web search for Rachel Maddow -- useless.
- pyre 16y ago
  I was pointing out that if Apple enabled developers to their data into the main search functionality, it doesn't necessarily mean that the search results will be useless.

Lewisham 16y ago

"Apple's bet is that users will reject the platform with more features in favor of the platform that works better." For as long as Mac OS X 10.2 (that's when I jumped on board, so I can't comment about the OS 9 days), this has been how Apple has operated. Mac OS X is actually pretty feature devoid, out-of-the-box. First thing I have to do when I get a new machine is install Google Search Box, Growl, Skitch, MarcoPolo just so it feels like it works right. I don't count these as applications; I think of them as base OS features. By laundry list of features, Windows comes out on top. What is different is that Mac OS X's UNIX underpinnings, coupled with a thoughtful Cocoa API means that developers can fill in the gaps for power users, whereas everyone else is happy with the experience they get. I'm not sure if Apple's strategists really understand this, or if it is just the engineers. You could be forgiven for thinking the UNIX core is just some accident of history due to NeXT rather than any conscious effort. iOS doesn't support extension like this, and it's deliberate and calculated. The App Store is not there to protect normal users, it's there to protect Apple. If you gave users the option of App Store apps and also the ability to install unsigned apps (with appropriate scary warnings), all the people Apple claims to be concerned about would function exactly as they do now, downloading from the App Store and avoiding everything else. Why would they need to do otherwise? Instead, we have an App Store that seems to be all about sticking it to Google and maintaining some Disney-esque political landscape. It's nothing like the Apple we used to know.

GrandMasterBirt 16y ago
Its simple actually... 1) Apple was first-to-market. And I don't mean the iPhone. The iPod was when apple just used a rocket booster to jump ahead of the game, and finally their steam is running low. - The iPod was revolutionary. - The iPod was never quite cloned "correctly" there was more to the iPod than meets the eye. By the time Apple removed the DRM restrictions it was too late for consumers, Apple had already made a dent in the market which others could not recover from. - When everyone finally caught up to the iPod... poof there goes the iPhone again darting apple ahead of the game. For at least 2 years before again anyone even came close. - The iPad is another attempt to do the same, but by now it did not dart them as far as the iPhone did. The competition is now riding on unicorns and are hard to out-meneuver. 2) Apple literally filled the void of the tech industry. The void was in usability. It was simple, give users a very friendly UI, and lets do away with core concepts we find important but most don't. I don't know how to explain "files" to my grandfather. He asks me "will my programs be there when I leave home with my laptop?" I tell him yes and no. You need an internet connection because to him his "programs" are the websites he visits. He can't even grasp the concept of moving files from hard disk to usb flash drive. To him "files" are mythical unicorns. And I see this from many people, he is just the best example. Apple is trying to cater to the audience of people who are completely lost with computers by making computers behave like "real" objects are inside them. The ipad is a great example because it makes things tangible. A child can understand it. The point at the end is this: Apple never had "features" they had "usability". OSX is a great OS because it combines user friendliness with unix. That is why developers love it. Hey I can't get over how awesome it is that uninstalling an application is dragging it from applications to trash (just got a mac). And to top it all off its quite easy to find all configurations and such for any installed application. On top of it all I don't feel like I need to re-install mac osx every 6 months like I had to with windows xp. AND to make it even better their keyboard shortcuts are a perfect fit for a laptop keyboard without having to resort to a lack of home/end/page up/page down keys. I swear check out those 4 frequently used keys layout in ANY pc laptop. It is insanity. Look at mac, the defaults are made so that you can use the say layout/combinations everywhere, brilliant! In the end apple is running out of steam. I think they will level out in a year or two taking their place as the new Microsoft of the industry (which is fine). I just wish macs were not so f-ing expensive. I mean I feel like I am getting inappropriately touched by Steve Jobs every time I add more ram to my order.

alanh 16y ago
I hope you’re right. If we may dive into a tangent, I am quite interested in why you say Google "generally groks UX." Their search home page is a great example, sure, and Gmail for the most part (certainly not their Contacts organizer). But then I think to Buzz, where I think the UX was terrible (I wrote about this here: http://alanhogan.com/buzz-is-already-dead http://alanhogan.com/buzz-is-already-dead, HN discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1125126 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1125126). I’d love to hear your thoughts on Google and UX.
- dieterrams 16y ago
  Nice critique. I never really used Buzz, because my first instinct was to turn it off, but what little experience I have with it seems to match up. I've never worked at Google, but I know someone who interned for the UX team, who complained that UX wasn't as involved with design as they could be. I'm guessing that the usability of non-core Google projects depends a lot on whether the engineers who start them seek input from their UX people. If you're doing a 20% project and want other people to work on it with you, you've got to find and convince those people yourself. So at least initially, the involvement of UX people outside of core Google projects depends on whether their involvement is sought. Buzz in particular appeared to have been launched with little forethought, so there's a good chance it didn't get much of a UX pass, either.
  - chriscardinal 16y ago
    Google's always approached design as an objective engineering challenge and less as an artistic endeavor. As a result, their designs are minimalist, utilitarian, and functional, but they sometimes seem to give up the ghost when they attempt to build complex or unique software like Buzz or Wave that could benefit badly from someone with a passion for aesthetics and UX. Regarding Android, I'm encouraged by news that Google picked up WebOS's lead designer, (as reported here: http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/05/27/palm-loses-their-lead-webos-designer-to-the-google-android-team-others-may-follow/ http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/05/27/palm-loses-their-lead...) as WebOS is often lauded as an intuitive and innovative user interface in a manner Android simply isn't. When Douglas Bowman (Google's former lead designer) left the organization, he cited, among other things, a fastidious, over-engineered, design-by-committee-and-hard-numbers approach that drove him crazy. He mentioned an example where Google had A/B tested 41 shades of blue to determine which to go with. That's demonstrative of the greater issue their culture seems to suffer from: if you want to bring about creative or subjective change, you often need objective facts and figures—metrics lacking by artistic design's very nature. I wrote briefly about Google's methods in a bit of a rant on Facebook's whiplash-inducing approach to design here: http://www.htmlist.com/design/google-vs-facebook-interface-design-design-by-committee-vs-baptism-by-fire/ http://www.htmlist.com/design/google-vs-facebook-interface-d..., but in the end, it comes down to balance. I have high hopes for Android 3.0 because I'm hoping that they just shipped with what they had and told themselves they'd worry about making it pretty later. Later is now, evidently, and it will be really interesting to see what Google does in this next round, especially if they've removed the handcuffs and decided to trust their designers.