3 ms·

However, if you don't like a given crapware-laden, locked Android device, you can not buy it, and buy a different Android device, either from a carrier that doe

However, if you don't like a given crapware-laden, locked Android device, you can not buy it, and buy a different Android device, either from a carrier that doesn't add crapware, or just unlocked (and unsubsidized). There's a reason Google continues to promote the unlocked route for the Nexus line of phones. Buying a heavily subsidized phone from a carrier is a model where all the incentives point the wrong way. "Putting" the manufacturers in control (otherwise known as failing to limit the control they already have) means putting the market in control.

recoiledsnake 15y ago
>However, if you don't like a given crapware-laden, locked Android device, you can not buy it, and buy a different Android device, either from a carrier that doesn't add crapware, or just unlocked (and unsubsidized) The problem is that the general populace are not aware of this at all. HN users are anyway capable of rooting the device and them putting in custom ROMs without all the junk. Also, what have unlocked and/or unsubsidized phones got to do with bloatware? They're similarly loaded with the bloatware too. >There's a reason Google continues to promote the unlocked route for the Nexus line of phones. Buying a heavily subsidized phone from a carrier is a model where all the incentives point the wrong way. Huh? I thought Google tried and failed selling the phone unlocked with the G1 on TMobile? How is it promoting the unlocked route for Nexus phones? >Putting" the manufacturers in control (otherwise known as failing to limit the control they already have) means putting the market in control. And the "market" has shown that it's not to be trusted with that control well. Phones and tablets not getting software updates, malware issues etc. are plaguing the landscape. OEMs and carriers have shown time and time again that they're not going to do things that are in the interest of the consumer if it results in them making a few more bucks.
- samstokes 15y ago
  The market is not just OEMs and carriers; those are the vendors. The market also contains buyers (us). It's true that buyers need education regarding better options (like unlocked phones). Google have stepped back their promotion of unlocked Nexuses since the Nexus One, where they promoted unlocked as the preferred route. (Whether they "failed" is a question for them, and what the aim of that experiment was. Perhaps the market wasn't ready for such assertive education.) But at least when I bought my Nexus S, they were very much still promoting the unlocked route on equal footing with the carrier-tied route. They're still trying to educate the market that unlocked phones even exist. Update: missed this point. Also, what have unlocked and/or unsubsidized phones got to do with bloatware? They're similarly loaded with the bloatware too. Err, no they're not. I'm not talking about buying a phone from T-Mobile that you could use on another carrier if you wanted. I'm talking about buying a phone as a pure device, with no preexisting relationship to any carrier; and then buying a cellular service from a carrier independent of what phone I own. I didn't buy my laptop from Comcast, and indeed they don't even know what devices I use to consume their internet connection. Why should a smartphone be any different?
raganwald 15y ago
I agree that "a" market is in control, rather than "the" market is in control: Not all markets act alike. I find it confusing to talk about "The Market" as if choosing a phone from a handful of carriers is just like buying a commodity like heating oil from any of thousands of buyers and sellers trading a fungible substance with low friction and nearly symmetrical information.
- samstokes 15y ago
  Sure, it's currently an illiquid (due to lock-in) and uneducated market. I believe Google is trying to change that. That's why I think "users vs manufacturers" is a false dichotomy. Users and manufacturers are essentially on the same side, as the natural participants in a handset market that the carriers are trying to convince everyone doesn't exist. Update: worth noting that Apple, as a handset manufacturer, is also trying to educate the market here. One of the big advances of the iPhone was to get people buying the iPhone, not the "Verizon iPhone" or any such thing. Apple is a handset manufacturer and Google is (in this arena) a platform vendor, so their strategies look quite different, but I believe they're both interested in fixing the broken handset market.

recoiledsnake 15y ago

>However, if you don't like a given crapware-laden, locked Android device, you can not buy it, and buy a different Android device, either from a carrier that doesn't add crapware, or just unlocked (and unsubsidized) The problem is that the general populace are not aware of this at all. HN users are anyway capable of rooting the device and them putting in custom ROMs without all the junk. Also, what have unlocked and/or unsubsidized phones got to do with bloatware? They're similarly loaded with the bloatware too. >There's a reason Google continues to promote the unlocked route for the Nexus line of phones. Buying a heavily subsidized phone from a carrier is a model where all the incentives point the wrong way. Huh? I thought Google tried and failed selling the phone unlocked with the G1 on TMobile? How is it promoting the unlocked route for Nexus phones? >Putting" the manufacturers in control (otherwise known as failing to limit the control they already have) means putting the market in control. And the "market" has shown that it's not to be trusted with that control well. Phones and tablets not getting software updates, malware issues etc. are plaguing the landscape. OEMs and carriers have shown time and time again that they're not going to do things that are in the interest of the consumer if it results in them making a few more bucks.

samstokes 15y ago
The market is not just OEMs and carriers; those are the vendors. The market also contains buyers (us). It's true that buyers need education regarding better options (like unlocked phones). Google have stepped back their promotion of unlocked Nexuses since the Nexus One, where they promoted unlocked as the preferred route. (Whether they "failed" is a question for them, and what the aim of that experiment was. Perhaps the market wasn't ready for such assertive education.) But at least when I bought my Nexus S, they were very much still promoting the unlocked route on equal footing with the carrier-tied route. They're still trying to educate the market that unlocked phones even exist. Update: missed this point. Also, what have unlocked and/or unsubsidized phones got to do with bloatware? They're similarly loaded with the bloatware too. Err, no they're not. I'm not talking about buying a phone from T-Mobile that you could use on another carrier if you wanted. I'm talking about buying a phone as a pure device, with no preexisting relationship to any carrier; and then buying a cellular service from a carrier independent of what phone I own. I didn't buy my laptop from Comcast, and indeed they don't even know what devices I use to consume their internet connection. Why should a smartphone be any different?

raganwald 15y ago

I agree that "a" market is in control, rather than "the" market is in control: Not all markets act alike. I find it confusing to talk about "The Market" as if choosing a phone from a handful of carriers is just like buying a commodity like heating oil from any of thousands of buyers and sellers trading a fungible substance with low friction and nearly symmetrical information.

samstokes 15y ago
Sure, it's currently an illiquid (due to lock-in) and uneducated market. I believe Google is trying to change that. That's why I think "users vs manufacturers" is a false dichotomy. Users and manufacturers are essentially on the same side, as the natural participants in a handset market that the carriers are trying to convince everyone doesn't exist. Update: worth noting that Apple, as a handset manufacturer, is also trying to educate the market here. One of the big advances of the iPhone was to get people buying the iPhone, not the "Verizon iPhone" or any such thing. Apple is a handset manufacturer and Google is (in this arena) a platform vendor, so their strategies look quite different, but I believe they're both interested in fixing the broken handset market.