4 ms·

Android inc was founded by Andy Rubin in 2003, bought by google in 2005, and unveiled its first phone in 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_

by dlss 15y ago

Android inc was founded by Andy Rubin in 2003, bought by google in 2005, and unveiled its first phone in 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system) Not being an insider, it might be true that no one at Android inc was talking about touch screens before 2007. But probably not. Ultimately, we can't observe what we really want to talk about here -- what would have happened without iOS. The same compassion can go both ways; here is a link to one of many "iOS after Android" articles: http://techthirst.com/?p=414 http://techthirst.com/?p=414

ajross 15y ago
The techthirst link is great. I'll remember that one for these sorts of pointless flames. And just to be clear: Apple "copying" all that stuff is a good thing, because it improves the platform.
schiffern 15y ago
I got as far as, >since iOS was not built from top-to-bottom for multi-tasking functionality... before realizing that the author is just trolling. iOS supported multi-tasking from day 1 -- it was a stripped-down Mac OS X, after all. They intentionally restricted multi-tasking to avoid performance and battery-life issues, a trade-off which is still paying dividends in their UX. Apple forces developers to ask themselves, "do I really need multi-tasking?" Often the answer is "no," and the user benefits from that conversation.
- vetinari 15y ago
  That's one interpretation. Do not forget, that Apple has attitude "users do not know what they want, they will take what we offer". You don't know, whether users would be better off with multitasking or not, because you can't compare these two scenarios. Sure, you don't need multitasking for checking in with Foursquare. You pretty much need for Location or Tasker. IOS users are not aware, that such applications exists and they are not missing them. If they would be used to them, they would miss it. Same with Swype and other apps available on Android.

by dlss 15y ago

ajross 15y ago

The techthirst link is great. I'll remember that one for these sorts of pointless flames. And just to be clear: Apple "copying" all that stuff is a good thing, because it improves the platform.

schiffern 15y ago

I got as far as, >since iOS was not built from top-to-bottom for multi-tasking functionality... before realizing that the author is just trolling. iOS supported multi-tasking from day 1 -- it was a stripped-down Mac OS X, after all. They intentionally restricted multi-tasking to avoid performance and battery-life issues, a trade-off which is still paying dividends in their UX. Apple forces developers to ask themselves, "do I really need multi-tasking?" Often the answer is "no," and the user benefits from that conversation.

vetinari 15y ago
That's one interpretation. Do not forget, that Apple has attitude "users do not know what they want, they will take what we offer". You don't know, whether users would be better off with multitasking or not, because you can't compare these two scenarios. Sure, you don't need multitasking for checking in with Foursquare. You pretty much need for Location or Tasker. IOS users are not aware, that such applications exists and they are not missing them. If they would be used to them, they would miss it. Same with Swype and other apps available on Android.