3 ms·

I'm routinely offended by things MG Siegler says about Android but I actually found his article refreshingly open about his biases (not that he ever really hide

by zmmmmm 15y ago

I'm routinely offended by things MG Siegler says about Android but I actually found his article refreshingly open about his biases (not that he ever really hides them). In this piece he's at least very open that he's talking about perception and the war over "tangible" issues is pretty much over (in that both platforms are sufficiently good). My main problem is that just as the intangibles matter on the iOS side they also matter on the Android side, but the Android ones don't seem to get any merit. The fact that I'm free to use my device how I want, write an app for a friend, give it to them for their birthday, share it by email. The fact that the Android ecosystem lets me choose the kind of device I want, how much I want to pay for it, how it should look and feel and behave. Those things are in many ways intangible because many of them are just potential things that I don't actually do but the ability to do them is important to me. So sure, "you either see it or you don't" is a fine statement, but it goes both ways: you either value your freedom or you don't.

realize 15y ago
That response repeats the party line about Android being "open", but part of the narrative that MG and Gruber keep pointing out is that it's just not true. The carriers lock things down and fill your phone up with unwanted junk far more than Apple does. "Open" means open for the carriers to do what they want, not for you to do what you want.
- zmmmmm 15y ago
  > The carriers lock things down I don't believe there are any carriers any more that stop the user installing from non-market sources. Many offer ways to unlock the boot loader so you can completely control the device. You can always buy a Nexus device. These are all forms of openness (although I would tend to call it "freedom" since that more accurately describes it). > it's just not true As I point out above, it's very true. What I think iOS advocates point out is that it's not practical: no regular consumer uses these things in practice (although the Amazon Appstore might be an example). What matters in practice is how the device comes out of the box because 99% of people just use it like that. I acknowledge this, which is why I say it's an intangible feature of Android. You only value it and benefit from it indirectly. I guess my only point is, if the Sieglers and Gruber's of the world want to claim intangible things as assets for iOS then they should be acknowledged for Android too.
  - fpgeek 15y ago
    Even if 99% of consumers use Android devices just as they come out of the box, the existence of escape hatches is still an important check against carriers, manufacturers and even Google. For instance, nothing like Apple's in-app purchase crackdown could have happened on Android. The big players (Amazon, B&N, Netflix, Hulu, ...) would have just taken their apps out of the Android Market, clearly communicated to their customers where the apps were now and moved on. Similarly, as I understand it, it was the Android hacking / ROM development community that discovered Carrier IQ in the first place, specifically because they are taking apart the software on their phones and trying to understand every bit of it. Personally, I find the contrast with the iOS jailbreaking community quite instructive. Once they knew there was something to look for, they found the Carrier IQ traces in iOS quickly enough. Nevertheless, without the initial pointer, they didn't notice anything..

by zmmmmm 15y ago

realize 15y ago

That response repeats the party line about Android being "open", but part of the narrative that MG and Gruber keep pointing out is that it's just not true. The carriers lock things down and fill your phone up with unwanted junk far more than Apple does. "Open" means open for the carriers to do what they want, not for you to do what you want.

zmmmmm 15y ago
> The carriers lock things down I don't believe there are any carriers any more that stop the user installing from non-market sources. Many offer ways to unlock the boot loader so you can completely control the device. You can always buy a Nexus device. These are all forms of openness (although I would tend to call it "freedom" since that more accurately describes it). > it's just not true As I point out above, it's very true. What I think iOS advocates point out is that it's not practical: no regular consumer uses these things in practice (although the Amazon Appstore might be an example). What matters in practice is how the device comes out of the box because 99% of people just use it like that. I acknowledge this, which is why I say it's an intangible feature of Android. You only value it and benefit from it indirectly. I guess my only point is, if the Sieglers and Gruber's of the world want to claim intangible things as assets for iOS then they should be acknowledged for Android too.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  Even if 99% of consumers use Android devices just as they come out of the box, the existence of escape hatches is still an important check against carriers, manufacturers and even Google. For instance, nothing like Apple's in-app purchase crackdown could have happened on Android. The big players (Amazon, B&N, Netflix, Hulu, ...) would have just taken their apps out of the Android Market, clearly communicated to their customers where the apps were now and moved on. Similarly, as I understand it, it was the Android hacking / ROM development community that discovered Carrier IQ in the first place, specifically because they are taking apart the software on their phones and trying to understand every bit of it. Personally, I find the contrast with the iOS jailbreaking community quite instructive. Once they knew there was something to look for, they found the Carrier IQ traces in iOS quickly enough. Nevertheless, without the initial pointer, they didn't notice anything..