7 ms·

This article highlights one of my frustrations with Android as a platform. As a longtime Linux user, I couldn't wait to get an Android smartphone. For some reas

This article highlights one of my frustrations with Android as a platform. As a longtime Linux user, I couldn't wait to get an Android smartphone. For some reason, I thought I would enjoy the same freedoms on a familiar and secure platform. But I shortly discovered that Google reinvented the wheel (poorly) for everything, manufacturers went to great lengths to lock down devices, and carriers blocked security and version updates even when the manufacturer had released them in other markets. The Android I had to endure for the last two years looked nothing like the Linux I used on my desktop and servers; it was more reminiscent of Windows 95. So, in an ironic twist, I replaced it with a Lumia 920 running Windows Phone 8 this past December. It isn't Linux either, but it excels as a smartphone and the UI is fantastic (I much prefer live tiles over icons littering a desktop). When I use it, I get the sense that Microsoft paid close attention to the things users hate about Android and iOS. If they can resist feature creep and retain their focus on simplicity and security, they might have a real contender. It's too bad Google didn't exert more control over the user experience in Android and allowed manufacturers and carriers to create such a mess that exists today.

w1ntermute 14y ago
The "only icons" problem is only an iOS issue. You can get much the same functionality as live tiles on Android with widgets.
- myko 14y ago
  Heck, you can even install launchers that clone the Windows Phone interface entirely. I'm kind of surprised Microsoft hasn't released an Android UI library for Modern apps on Android, as I think it could push more Android users into choosing Windows Phone when its time to purchase their next device.
  - gte910h 14y ago
    Microsoft doesn't think like that. They still make it damn impossible to run the windows phone simulator on Mac (even with a virtual machine, can't run the game part), so no iOS devs bother with the platform.
    - pjmlp 14y ago
      Does Apple make their development tools available for Windows developers to bother with iOS?
      - gte910h 14y ago
        Apple developer relations doesn't go round to windows phone developer groups trying to convince people to port apps to their platform. Microsoft DOES go around to iOS devs.
        pjmlp 14y ago
        So?! It is ok for Apple to force me to buy a Mac, but not for Microsoft to do the same? At least Microsoft does not force me to buy a specific hardware for their operating system. Talk about double standards...
        gte910h 14y ago
        You're making some argument from fairness here. I'm talking about MS's lackluster ability to entice mobile developers. It may not be fair the people who came out with a C# only phone 3 years after the iPhone can't convince the vast majority of mobile developers to swap, or even develop for it too, but they can't because they made their tools require onerous effort to get up an running. It most certainly IS a double standard. You have a different standard trying to take away from the incumbent. The incumbent MOBILE development platform is a mac, running OS X, and this is because mobile developers want to release on iOS (as there is a ton of money there and it was "the first"), and Android is supported great on mac as well. To do Windows phone development, buying a virtualizing tool such as VMWare isn't good enough: The simulator only half works for windows phone 7, it can't use any of the 3D APIs. So in the age of macbook airs (with small SSDs) and developers who replaced their optical drives with SSDs in MBPs (A HUGE pile of people were doing this in 2010-2011), they're saying "Give us a huge space to install windows and the tools, and go through complicated basecamp setups to make our shit work". When told to do all this work, THEN having to port our games and apps (which can often be made cross-platform to Android with far less work), most of us just skipped the platform.
contingencies 14y ago
Woah woah. Hang on. I used to work in this area so I want to comment. First, the mobile market has of late always been a mess. The whole Apple-introduced smartphone era is basically about who owns the customer: the carrier or the device manufacturer. Clear winner? Not yet. Google's whole play on the Android thing was to ensure Apple didn't triumph too far, and they've succeeded. It was never about putting Linux on phones. Look, Nokia's died. (Though last time I mentioned this someone on HN got upset.) The other device manufacturers (including Smart TVs now) are essentially presently dependent on Google (though Samsung is trying very hard not to be), and our mobiles are all online without us buying Apple devices. Second, the whole lockdown thing is dual-faced. First, the carriers in the US and other markets that subsidise phones (advertising: $0!) with long term lock-in contracts don't want people hacking the phone. Therefore there's a requirement for them to make it a bit hard to open up. On the other hand, often a content licensing requirements from content partners force them to include this stuff, typically Hollywood studios. (I have it on good information that Microsoft paid a hundred million dollars up front to Samsung to convince them to introduce their new DRM solution in the Galaxy series. So the DRM thing is basically a moot point, if you are paid that much!) And finally, the devices do need some secure storage for cryptographic purposes, for example storing passwords. Net result: the consumer is shafted. Thanks, industry. I hope FirefoxOS can get some traction. Here's what I believe 'should' happen: - Carriers realize their value-add is the consumer relationship, actually provide decent billing interfaces to all and sundry, replace PayPal and the credit card companies. (Problem: They can't. Their internal billing systems are generally a mess, custom hacks layered on to black boxes they outsourced to AMDOCS) - Device manufacturers should embrace openness, encouraging people to load whatever they want with an OPTIONAL vector for validating cryptographic trust of a codebase. The manufacturers should actually invest in facilitating this. In most of the world, people are super keen to muck with phones, there is a community that will fix bugs and improve things, and those who sell the devices have time to customize. - AOSP people should join FirefoxOS and work for a more open world instead of working on Google's pretend-open platform (step 1: upload everything to google, step 2: see step 1) for free. Work on there a year or so, then pimp yourself out to a device manufacturer. Guaranteed cash, feel good about your work, help break the unhealthy Googopoly.
- levesque 14y ago
lucian1900 14y ago
Sadly, only Nexus devices are actually good. And I mean really good. I absolutely love my Nexus 4.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  Have you used the Galaxy S3? You can root/unlock it and install CM. I'd say that's better than a Nexus 4, especially if you have LTE.
  - ajross 14y ago
    You seem not to have read the linked article, which is about one of the CM developers dumping work on one of the GS3 (there are a bunch of different phones labeled with the same name) devices because of unsolvable problems and poor support from Samsung. Seriously: Buy. A. Nexus. Phone. Almost everything else is going to bite you.
    - w1ntermute 14y ago
      Sure, there are issues with certain GS3 models. That doesn't mean that, as a consumer, you can't get one that works with CM. Plus, I have no special loyalty to Samsung or the Galaxy brand. It could be an LG, or HTC, or Sony, for all I care. And getting a Nexus isn't an option for me, not anymore. I have a Galaxy Nexus on Verizon (a great phone) at the moment, and none of the other carriers have as good coverage where I live. They definitely don't have 4G, which Verizon does. Plus, I have grandfathered unlimited data, which I'm never giving up. I'd love to get another Nexus, but that's not an option for me. After the fiasco with the Galaxy Nexus on Verizon, I don't see Google releasing another Verizon Nexus, not for a long time. So I'll probably buy a phone that's 6-8 months old, has been unlocked/rooted, is quite popular, and was a premium model when it was released. Then I'll install CM on it and go on my merry way.
    - evandena 14y ago
      Unless you're on Verizon (unlimted LTE) and can't get Tmo, or won't deal with greater of all evils (ATT). Plus most of CM gripes with the S3 are related to Exynos SoC and not the Qualcomm SoC.
jan_g 14y ago
You can enjoy all the freedom you want. Just root the phone (and install custom ROM, if you want). Carrier and manufacturer lock is then irrelevant. The only problem is locked bootloaders, but you can avoid that also - buy a phone that hasn't got a locked bootloader. Nice to hear that you like WP8 UI better, but it's got nothing to do with freedom or linux.
- dubfan 14y ago
  "Just rooting the phone" is sometimes much easier said than done, even for technically savvy people. I tried to root my LG Thrill (an absolutely horrid phone, so bad LG abandoned it 6 months after release instead of fixing its very serious problems) but I found that my Windows 7 PC would not run the utility required to root the phone. It turns out that it only reliably runs in Windows XP. I'm not about to go buy a license for a 10-year-old OS just to root a phone.
mtgx 14y ago
While in the beginning you say you wanted more freedom like in the Linux ecosystem, everything you said afterwards contradicts what you said, and it seems you wanted the exact opposite - you wanted the company behind it to be in full control - and not really yourself to be in control of it. If you look at the Linux "ecosystem", it's a lot more fragmented than Android, and every vendors does whatever they want to their own distro, and can completely change the UI, and they don't even have the same app extension across distros. So yeah, it seems to me like you wanted the opposite of all of that all along and not really the freedom/flexibility of such an ecosystem (that by default comes with many people doing different things in the ecosystem).
marshray 14y ago
Sometimes when people say "Linux is a kernel, not an operating system" it's an important distinction being made.
ladzoppelin 14y ago
Actually I kind of agree. They should of developed an easier way to bring HWA to the UI from the beginning instead of waiting until 2012 to address the issue. Google also messed up the pro audio stack in Android and phones still cant compete with Apple/MS when it comes to low-latency audio. "Google reinvented the wheel (poorly)" is unfortunately a very true statement for many of their products.

w1ntermute 14y ago

The "only icons" problem is only an iOS issue. You can get much the same functionality as live tiles on Android with widgets.

myko 14y ago
Heck, you can even install launchers that clone the Windows Phone interface entirely. I'm kind of surprised Microsoft hasn't released an Android UI library for Modern apps on Android, as I think it could push more Android users into choosing Windows Phone when its time to purchase their next device.
- gte910h 14y ago
  Microsoft doesn't think like that. They still make it damn impossible to run the windows phone simulator on Mac (even with a virtual machine, can't run the game part), so no iOS devs bother with the platform.
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    Does Apple make their development tools available for Windows developers to bother with iOS?
    - gte910h 14y ago
      Apple developer relations doesn't go round to windows phone developer groups trying to convince people to port apps to their platform. Microsoft DOES go around to iOS devs.
      - pjmlp 14y ago
        So?! It is ok for Apple to force me to buy a Mac, but not for Microsoft to do the same? At least Microsoft does not force me to buy a specific hardware for their operating system. Talk about double standards...
        gte910h 14y ago
        You're making some argument from fairness here. I'm talking about MS's lackluster ability to entice mobile developers. It may not be fair the people who came out with a C# only phone 3 years after the iPhone can't convince the vast majority of mobile developers to swap, or even develop for it too, but they can't because they made their tools require onerous effort to get up an running. It most certainly IS a double standard. You have a different standard trying to take away from the incumbent. The incumbent MOBILE development platform is a mac, running OS X, and this is because mobile developers want to release on iOS (as there is a ton of money there and it was "the first"), and Android is supported great on mac as well. To do Windows phone development, buying a virtualizing tool such as VMWare isn't good enough: The simulator only half works for windows phone 7, it can't use any of the 3D APIs. So in the age of macbook airs (with small SSDs) and developers who replaced their optical drives with SSDs in MBPs (A HUGE pile of people were doing this in 2010-2011), they're saying "Give us a huge space to install windows and the tools, and go through complicated basecamp setups to make our shit work". When told to do all this work, THEN having to port our games and apps (which can often be made cross-platform to Android with far less work), most of us just skipped the platform.

contingencies 14y ago

Woah woah. Hang on. I used to work in this area so I want to comment. First, the mobile market has of late always been a mess. The whole Apple-introduced smartphone era is basically about who owns the customer: the carrier or the device manufacturer. Clear winner? Not yet. Google's whole play on the Android thing was to ensure Apple didn't triumph too far, and they've succeeded. It was never about putting Linux on phones. Look, Nokia's died. (Though last time I mentioned this someone on HN got upset.) The other device manufacturers (including Smart TVs now) are essentially presently dependent on Google (though Samsung is trying very hard not to be), and our mobiles are all online without us buying Apple devices. Second, the whole lockdown thing is dual-faced. First, the carriers in the US and other markets that subsidise phones (advertising: $0!) with long term lock-in contracts don't want people hacking the phone. Therefore there's a requirement for them to make it a bit hard to open up. On the other hand, often a content licensing requirements from content partners force them to include this stuff, typically Hollywood studios. (I have it on good information that Microsoft paid a hundred million dollars up front to Samsung to convince them to introduce their new DRM solution in the Galaxy series. So the DRM thing is basically a moot point, if you are paid that much!) And finally, the devices do need some secure storage for cryptographic purposes, for example storing passwords. Net result: the consumer is shafted. Thanks, industry. I hope FirefoxOS can get some traction. Here's what I believe 'should' happen: - Carriers realize their value-add is the consumer relationship, actually provide decent billing interfaces to all and sundry, replace PayPal and the credit card companies. (Problem: They can't. Their internal billing systems are generally a mess, custom hacks layered on to black boxes they outsourced to AMDOCS) - Device manufacturers should embrace openness, encouraging people to load whatever they want with an OPTIONAL vector for validating cryptographic trust of a codebase. The manufacturers should actually invest in facilitating this. In most of the world, people are super keen to muck with phones, there is a community that will fix bugs and improve things, and those who sell the devices have time to customize. - AOSP people should join FirefoxOS and work for a more open world instead of working on Google's pretend-open platform (step 1: upload everything to google, step 2: see step 1) for free. Work on there a year or so, then pimp yourself out to a device manufacturer. Guaranteed cash, feel good about your work, help break the unhealthy Googopoly.

levesque 14y ago

lucian1900 14y ago

Sadly, only Nexus devices are actually good. And I mean really good. I absolutely love my Nexus 4.

w1ntermute 14y ago
Have you used the Galaxy S3? You can root/unlock it and install CM. I'd say that's better than a Nexus 4, especially if you have LTE.
- ajross 14y ago
  You seem not to have read the linked article, which is about one of the CM developers dumping work on one of the GS3 (there are a bunch of different phones labeled with the same name) devices because of unsolvable problems and poor support from Samsung. Seriously: Buy. A. Nexus. Phone. Almost everything else is going to bite you.
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    Sure, there are issues with certain GS3 models. That doesn't mean that, as a consumer, you can't get one that works with CM. Plus, I have no special loyalty to Samsung or the Galaxy brand. It could be an LG, or HTC, or Sony, for all I care. And getting a Nexus isn't an option for me, not anymore. I have a Galaxy Nexus on Verizon (a great phone) at the moment, and none of the other carriers have as good coverage where I live. They definitely don't have 4G, which Verizon does. Plus, I have grandfathered unlimited data, which I'm never giving up. I'd love to get another Nexus, but that's not an option for me. After the fiasco with the Galaxy Nexus on Verizon, I don't see Google releasing another Verizon Nexus, not for a long time. So I'll probably buy a phone that's 6-8 months old, has been unlocked/rooted, is quite popular, and was a premium model when it was released. Then I'll install CM on it and go on my merry way.
  - evandena 14y ago
    Unless you're on Verizon (unlimted LTE) and can't get Tmo, or won't deal with greater of all evils (ATT). Plus most of CM gripes with the S3 are related to Exynos SoC and not the Qualcomm SoC.

jan_g 14y ago

You can enjoy all the freedom you want. Just root the phone (and install custom ROM, if you want). Carrier and manufacturer lock is then irrelevant. The only problem is locked bootloaders, but you can avoid that also - buy a phone that hasn't got a locked bootloader. Nice to hear that you like WP8 UI better, but it's got nothing to do with freedom or linux.

dubfan 14y ago
"Just rooting the phone" is sometimes much easier said than done, even for technically savvy people. I tried to root my LG Thrill (an absolutely horrid phone, so bad LG abandoned it 6 months after release instead of fixing its very serious problems) but I found that my Windows 7 PC would not run the utility required to root the phone. It turns out that it only reliably runs in Windows XP. I'm not about to go buy a license for a 10-year-old OS just to root a phone.

mtgx 14y ago

While in the beginning you say you wanted more freedom like in the Linux ecosystem, everything you said afterwards contradicts what you said, and it seems you wanted the exact opposite - you wanted the company behind it to be in full control - and not really yourself to be in control of it. If you look at the Linux "ecosystem", it's a lot more fragmented than Android, and every vendors does whatever they want to their own distro, and can completely change the UI, and they don't even have the same app extension across distros. So yeah, it seems to me like you wanted the opposite of all of that all along and not really the freedom/flexibility of such an ecosystem (that by default comes with many people doing different things in the ecosystem).

marshray 14y ago

Sometimes when people say "Linux is a kernel, not an operating system" it's an important distinction being made.

ladzoppelin 14y ago

Actually I kind of agree. They should of developed an easier way to bring HWA to the UI from the beginning instead of waiting until 2012 to address the issue. Google also messed up the pro audio stack in Android and phones still cant compete with Apple/MS when it comes to low-latency audio. "Google reinvented the wheel (poorly)" is unfortunately a very true statement for many of their products.