3 ms·

This is why the Xoom is so intriguing. Motorola and Google are two companies that have proven their ability to see around the corner and they have made it much

This is why the Xoom is so intriguing. Motorola and Google are two companies that have proven their ability to see around the corner and they have made it much easier for developers to get applications to market than Apple has with the iPad. Really, Motorola has proven their ability to see around the corner? What have they been successful with since the Razr? Seems like the Droid is a success much more due to the Android OS than anything related to Motorola's manufacturing of it. Also not sure why anyone would lump Motorola in with Google as having "made it much easier for developers to get applications to market". Besides, the innovative features that the author mentions the Kno having, like split-screen functionality or things for note-taking - who's to say future versions of iOS couldn't incorporate those? This doesn't need to be a winner take all, one-shot market.

dspillett 16y ago
Also Motorola's attitude to OS upgrades certainly does not compete with other products (including Apple's). They refuse to allow user or third party updates and while some of their phones have seen updates to later versions of Android most (including mine which is still on 2.1) have not. I don't mind with my current phone as it only cost £150 (I always buy the phones I use directly rather than from my mobile network) in a new-year offer so it won't matter so much in a years time if I want to upgrade enough to warrant buying a new device, but there is no way I'm plumping down £400/£500/what-ever for a Motorola device. For that sort of money I'd buy a device from another Android using manufacturer (or, <deity> forbid, maybe I'd consider becoming part of the Apple nickel-and-dime lock-in racket).
bitwize 16y ago
Seems like the Droid is a success much more due to the Android OS than anything related to Motorola's manufacturing of it. More like Verizon's positioning and the fact that at the time of its release, the Droid was the most advanced consumer Android phone around and the first credible iPhone competitor. Before that there was pretty much just the weaksauce T-Mobile G1, and Android was really nothing to write home about.
herval 16y ago
I'm not sure if anyone remembers, but the very first "iPhone" was Motorola's MotoROKR. It seems to me they're pretty good at seeing around the corner - just not that good at delivering...

dspillett 16y ago

Also Motorola's attitude to OS upgrades certainly does not compete with other products (including Apple's). They refuse to allow user or third party updates and while some of their phones have seen updates to later versions of Android most (including mine which is still on 2.1) have not. I don't mind with my current phone as it only cost £150 (I always buy the phones I use directly rather than from my mobile network) in a new-year offer so it won't matter so much in a years time if I want to upgrade enough to warrant buying a new device, but there is no way I'm plumping down £400/£500/what-ever for a Motorola device. For that sort of money I'd buy a device from another Android using manufacturer (or, <deity> forbid, maybe I'd consider becoming part of the Apple nickel-and-dime lock-in racket).

bitwize 16y ago

Seems like the Droid is a success much more due to the Android OS than anything related to Motorola's manufacturing of it. More like Verizon's positioning and the fact that at the time of its release, the Droid was the most advanced consumer Android phone around and the first credible iPhone competitor. Before that there was pretty much just the weaksauce T-Mobile G1, and Android was really nothing to write home about.

herval 16y ago

I'm not sure if anyone remembers, but the very first "iPhone" was Motorola's MotoROKR. It seems to me they're pretty good at seeing around the corner - just not that good at delivering...