5 ms·

Google's Android Will Become the Default Mobile Platform

5 points by Flemlord 17y ago

jmtulloss 17y ago
...Just like windows mobile was going to be.
- ardit33 17y ago
  I really never heard anybody really into mobile space every saying that seriously. Most articles you will find of that time are saying that Windows Mobile has a very uphill battle, as manufactures and carriers are very wary and un-trusting of Microsoft. This is in 2003-2005 when MS was making a large push into the space, and people were still afraid of Microsoft. Android changes the game differently. Open source, pretty good, customizable, and fits in many kinds of hardware, and probably will be a gateway for ARM netbooks. I think android will be the way Linux actually wins. Few normal/average users thining about ditching Windows for Linux. But with android starting from the bottom (phones, then netbooks), it will prove a huge challenge to the Wintel architecture. Android has the promise of cheap, yet very slick and usable interface (still work in progress), plus hundreds or thousands of apps being built for it. It gives users less and less reasons not to start switching from windows. I am saying this is not so right now, but few years from now, the space will look very different.
oomkiller 17y ago
This article makes a pretty big assertion, that Android will be the most common platform in 2 years. I think that's a really naive prediction. First, it's going to take a LOT to knock Apple off of it's roost as 2nd most common platform, due to their ability to sell by making their products part of a culture. Second, I don't see RIM going ANYWHERE soon, they are by far still the best messaging provider, and provider of business services of ANY mobile platform, and they also have a VERY big market share already. Finally, we're going to really have to see some new phones with Android before anything can happen, because as of this writing, the only real Android phone in the US is the G1, which is lacking in many areas. I think Android taking over would definitely be a good thing, but I don't see it happening this late in the game, they just missed the train I think.
- nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
  Other than having a crappy camera, where is the G1 lacking?
  - bayleo 17y ago
    This might sound silly, but it's butt-ugly.
    - nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
      Aesthetics are generally relative; I think the iPhones look pretty ugly too, especially the ones with the silver trim. I do wish the standard G1s had the fancy silk-screen designs on the case like the Google Dev Phone, but with a choice of three colors, I really like the black phone, but my wife really liked the brown/tan model. Beyond that, they look quite a lot like T-Mobile's Sidekick models, which are a giant success, or at least where I live...
  - oomkiller 17y ago
    IMO it's lacking first because it's only on T-Mobile, which is one of the smaller carriers in the U.S, so there is less of an incentive to develop apps for it, because there are inherently less users. Another issue is that T-Mobile has a very small service area compared to AT&T or Verizon, so applications that demand connectivity to work effectively would have trouble. This is a big issue for companies that develop applications for serious business/government use like ours (emergency management). Not being able to listen to your Pandora radio is one thing, but not getting alerts about an emergency is totally different story (this is just our case in particular).
    - nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
      Well, for one thing, the G1 is not locked to T-Mobile; it will work on any GSM network, which in the US means AT&T, although according to some people, the 3G doesn't work on AT&T because of different radio frequencies. Secondly, while I haven't had much experience outside of the Ohio and New York regions, I've never had any problems with service in the three years I've been with T-Mobile, and they're constantly notifying me of new towers going up in my area. I've looked at their coverage maps, and it really seems to me like you'd have to go way out in farm country or forest areas to lose your signal; anywhere with a highway nearby seems to be covered. But then again, I can't tell if they're stretching the truth or not...
jemmons 17y ago
Because...?
- DenisM 17y ago
  Because controversial article titles generate more clicks.

5 points by Flemlord 17y ago

jmtulloss 17y ago

...Just like windows mobile was going to be.

ardit33 17y ago
I really never heard anybody really into mobile space every saying that seriously. Most articles you will find of that time are saying that Windows Mobile has a very uphill battle, as manufactures and carriers are very wary and un-trusting of Microsoft. This is in 2003-2005 when MS was making a large push into the space, and people were still afraid of Microsoft. Android changes the game differently. Open source, pretty good, customizable, and fits in many kinds of hardware, and probably will be a gateway for ARM netbooks. I think android will be the way Linux actually wins. Few normal/average users thining about ditching Windows for Linux. But with android starting from the bottom (phones, then netbooks), it will prove a huge challenge to the Wintel architecture. Android has the promise of cheap, yet very slick and usable interface (still work in progress), plus hundreds or thousands of apps being built for it. It gives users less and less reasons not to start switching from windows. I am saying this is not so right now, but few years from now, the space will look very different.

oomkiller 17y ago

This article makes a pretty big assertion, that Android will be the most common platform in 2 years. I think that's a really naive prediction. First, it's going to take a LOT to knock Apple off of it's roost as 2nd most common platform, due to their ability to sell by making their products part of a culture. Second, I don't see RIM going ANYWHERE soon, they are by far still the best messaging provider, and provider of business services of ANY mobile platform, and they also have a VERY big market share already. Finally, we're going to really have to see some new phones with Android before anything can happen, because as of this writing, the only real Android phone in the US is the G1, which is lacking in many areas. I think Android taking over would definitely be a good thing, but I don't see it happening this late in the game, they just missed the train I think.

nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
Other than having a crappy camera, where is the G1 lacking?
- bayleo 17y ago
  This might sound silly, but it's butt-ugly.
  - nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
    Aesthetics are generally relative; I think the iPhones look pretty ugly too, especially the ones with the silver trim. I do wish the standard G1s had the fancy silk-screen designs on the case like the Google Dev Phone, but with a choice of three colors, I really like the black phone, but my wife really liked the brown/tan model. Beyond that, they look quite a lot like T-Mobile's Sidekick models, which are a giant success, or at least where I live...
- oomkiller 17y ago
  IMO it's lacking first because it's only on T-Mobile, which is one of the smaller carriers in the U.S, so there is less of an incentive to develop apps for it, because there are inherently less users. Another issue is that T-Mobile has a very small service area compared to AT&T or Verizon, so applications that demand connectivity to work effectively would have trouble. This is a big issue for companies that develop applications for serious business/government use like ours (emergency management). Not being able to listen to your Pandora radio is one thing, but not getting alerts about an emergency is totally different story (this is just our case in particular).
  - nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
    Well, for one thing, the G1 is not locked to T-Mobile; it will work on any GSM network, which in the US means AT&T, although according to some people, the 3G doesn't work on AT&T because of different radio frequencies. Secondly, while I haven't had much experience outside of the Ohio and New York regions, I've never had any problems with service in the three years I've been with T-Mobile, and they're constantly notifying me of new towers going up in my area. I've looked at their coverage maps, and it really seems to me like you'd have to go way out in farm country or forest areas to lose your signal; anywhere with a highway nearby seems to be covered. But then again, I can't tell if they're stretching the truth or not...

jemmons 17y ago

Because...?

DenisM 17y ago
Because controversial article titles generate more clicks.