6 ms·

But you have to admit, there's a cultural divide between Android and iOS. Android is extremely well suited for working, passing data seamlessly between applicat

But you have to admit, there's a cultural divide between Android and iOS. Android is extremely well suited for working, passing data seamlessly between applications, etc. It makes it easy to get things done in the same way you might interact with a desktop computer. iOS, however, takes a different tack, focusing on self-contained, bite-sized apps. You hop into something, use it, then leave. And when you're in that app, it completely owns the experience. In that world, things like intents, task killers, and filesystem browsers just don't make sense. Which almost by definition precludes things like Chrome-to-Phone or Swype. In that way, I see Android and iOS relating very similarly to Windows and OS X. "Beautiful" simply isn't part of the Windows application lexicon, and yet, it's used frequently in reviews of OS X software, along with terms like "polished," "lovely," "stunning," and "gorgeous." What allows OS X to have beautiful apps? What's preventing Windows from having beautiful applications? And are those same factors at work in Android and iOS?

cheald 16y ago
Absolutely, I'll admit that straight away. It's very much a different expectation of how you use it, and I think that's at the core of Gruber's complaint. He is very used to the iPhone paradigm, where you engage with those bite-sized pieces and then you stop and go do something else. His complaint seems to be that Android doesn't really have bite-sized pieces like that which flatly trump their iOS couterparts, but I think it misses the point because Android isn't just an ugly iPhone, it's a completely different approach to mobile computing. He's effectively asking "Why isn't the Nexus One a better iPhone than my iPhone?" which...just completely misses the point. The iPhone does the iPhone experience extremely well, and I don't think you'll find many people who will seriously argue that the iPhone UX isn't amazingly polished, but the assumption that it's the only way to use a mobile phone is naturally going to lead you into some completely wrong conclusions. If your whole world is the iPhone, the concept of Android intents and what they mean for how you use your phone is going to be completely lost on you. I think that "beautiful" apps start with the platform. Most people would agree that OS X has better aesthetic sense than Windows, and most would agree that iOS has better aesthetic sense than Android. Each platform establishes a baseline for what apps should look like, and apps tend to conform to that baseline for the sake of uniformity. On Windows, the worst-looking apps are the ones that diverge from the OS baseline (I'm looking at you, iTunes and anything that uses GTK+). Android's baseline is pretty low - it's highly utilitarian and very typical of Google, which is famous for doing all of its UI design based on how things test out, and while there are some apps that diverge and look good (Twitter, Tweetdeck), there are others that are just terribly bad (Fring, for example). My hope is that Gingerbread raises that baseline, and sets a new visual target for developers to hit with their apps. We'll see.
dejb 16y ago
> I see Android and iOS relating very similarly to Windows and OS X. Actually I think the comparison Gruber makes of 'PC vs Console' is more accurate.
5teev 16y ago
I don't understand how Android allows you to pass data between applications while iOS does not. I'm under the impression that I can use copy/paste and custom protocols to pass information between applications on my iPhone. Am I missing something? If there's any cultural divide Gruber alludes to, it's that iPhone users tend not to know a whole lot about how the phone works deep inside, and whether by necessity or curiosity, Android users do.
- bjelkeman-again 16y ago
  You say "iPhone users tend not to know a whole lot about how the phone works deep inside, and whether by necessity or curiosity, Android users do." I don't think that is true. Most Android users have no idea how their phone works inside. They are not techies, they are just smartphone users. Most people have no idea what a computer does inside. Don't think that all Android users are techies because many on HN are.
  - commandar 16y ago
    I probably know a dozen people in my circle of friends with Android phones at this point. Of those, maybe 3 would give you any more than a blank stare if you asked them what CDMA and GSM are. I'm the only one out of that group that has a rooted device. I think technically inclined people are more drawn to Android, but I don't think that anything close to the majority of Android's user base is technically inclined by a long shot.
  - 5teev 16y ago
    I don't mean hardcore, nuts and bolts stuff, just that they're more involved with managing how the operating system behaves. And I'm not saying this, I was inferring from Gruber, who notes how many task managers, etc., are the most popular apps.
    - Locke1689 16y ago
      That's the worst kind of user, though. The "power user" is almost the bane of my existence as they do not truly understand anything yet think they understand everything. These are the same morons that dig into the Windows registry for "super speed optimizations" and end up blowing their installation to hell.
elblanco 16y ago
> iOS, however, takes a different tack, focusing on self-contained, bite-sized apps. You hop into something, use it, then leave. Right, if you think of the user workflow as a graph, the iOS enforces a kind of star topology on the experience. That's the model it's built on. You start from the homescreen, then jump to an app, then back to the home screen, repeat. Android is more of a web browser stack model, you jump into an app, that app may launch another app, but you can always hit back and slide one step back, if you hit "back" enough, you end up where you start (or you can shortcut it with the home key). The user workflow graph is more random as people bump around between apps. It would probably be more appropriate to call Android apps "pages" instead.
jawee 16y ago
From what I've seen, this ideal workflow is not near as much of a reality on cheap Android phones with not as great hardware. It is a reality on phones like most of the Droid series (I own a Droid 2) and the Nexus One, but most of the people I know with Droids have the cheaper phones like the LG Ally and Motorola Backflip which just don't work as nicely this way. You end up wanting to go back to the app paradigm on phones with smaller screens and slower processors.

cheald 16y ago

Absolutely, I'll admit that straight away. It's very much a different expectation of how you use it, and I think that's at the core of Gruber's complaint. He is very used to the iPhone paradigm, where you engage with those bite-sized pieces and then you stop and go do something else. His complaint seems to be that Android doesn't really have bite-sized pieces like that which flatly trump their iOS couterparts, but I think it misses the point because Android isn't just an ugly iPhone, it's a completely different approach to mobile computing. He's effectively asking "Why isn't the Nexus One a better iPhone than my iPhone?" which...just completely misses the point. The iPhone does the iPhone experience extremely well, and I don't think you'll find many people who will seriously argue that the iPhone UX isn't amazingly polished, but the assumption that it's the only way to use a mobile phone is naturally going to lead you into some completely wrong conclusions. If your whole world is the iPhone, the concept of Android intents and what they mean for how you use your phone is going to be completely lost on you. I think that "beautiful" apps start with the platform. Most people would agree that OS X has better aesthetic sense than Windows, and most would agree that iOS has better aesthetic sense than Android. Each platform establishes a baseline for what apps should look like, and apps tend to conform to that baseline for the sake of uniformity. On Windows, the worst-looking apps are the ones that diverge from the OS baseline (I'm looking at you, iTunes and anything that uses GTK+). Android's baseline is pretty low - it's highly utilitarian and very typical of Google, which is famous for doing all of its UI design based on how things test out, and while there are some apps that diverge and look good (Twitter, Tweetdeck), there are others that are just terribly bad (Fring, for example). My hope is that Gingerbread raises that baseline, and sets a new visual target for developers to hit with their apps. We'll see.

dejb 16y ago

> I see Android and iOS relating very similarly to Windows and OS X. Actually I think the comparison Gruber makes of 'PC vs Console' is more accurate.

5teev 16y ago

I don't understand how Android allows you to pass data between applications while iOS does not. I'm under the impression that I can use copy/paste and custom protocols to pass information between applications on my iPhone. Am I missing something? If there's any cultural divide Gruber alludes to, it's that iPhone users tend not to know a whole lot about how the phone works deep inside, and whether by necessity or curiosity, Android users do.

bjelkeman-again 16y ago
You say "iPhone users tend not to know a whole lot about how the phone works deep inside, and whether by necessity or curiosity, Android users do." I don't think that is true. Most Android users have no idea how their phone works inside. They are not techies, they are just smartphone users. Most people have no idea what a computer does inside. Don't think that all Android users are techies because many on HN are.
- commandar 16y ago
  I probably know a dozen people in my circle of friends with Android phones at this point. Of those, maybe 3 would give you any more than a blank stare if you asked them what CDMA and GSM are. I'm the only one out of that group that has a rooted device. I think technically inclined people are more drawn to Android, but I don't think that anything close to the majority of Android's user base is technically inclined by a long shot.
- 5teev 16y ago
  I don't mean hardcore, nuts and bolts stuff, just that they're more involved with managing how the operating system behaves. And I'm not saying this, I was inferring from Gruber, who notes how many task managers, etc., are the most popular apps.
  - Locke1689 16y ago
    That's the worst kind of user, though. The "power user" is almost the bane of my existence as they do not truly understand anything yet think they understand everything. These are the same morons that dig into the Windows registry for "super speed optimizations" and end up blowing their installation to hell.

elblanco 16y ago

> iOS, however, takes a different tack, focusing on self-contained, bite-sized apps. You hop into something, use it, then leave. Right, if you think of the user workflow as a graph, the iOS enforces a kind of star topology on the experience. That's the model it's built on. You start from the homescreen, then jump to an app, then back to the home screen, repeat. Android is more of a web browser stack model, you jump into an app, that app may launch another app, but you can always hit back and slide one step back, if you hit "back" enough, you end up where you start (or you can shortcut it with the home key). The user workflow graph is more random as people bump around between apps. It would probably be more appropriate to call Android apps "pages" instead.

jawee 16y ago

From what I've seen, this ideal workflow is not near as much of a reality on cheap Android phones with not as great hardware. It is a reality on phones like most of the Droid series (I own a Droid 2) and the Nexus One, but most of the people I know with Droids have the cheaper phones like the LG Ally and Motorola Backflip which just don't work as nicely this way. You end up wanting to go back to the app paradigm on phones with smaller screens and slower processors.