3 ms·

I don't fault him for his love of openness above all else. I like open systems too! But I don't think most consumers care. I certainly don't think they obses

by SamAtt 17y ago

I don't fault him for his love of openness above all else. I like open systems too! But I don't think most consumers care. I certainly don't think they obsess over the couple thousand apps Apple's rejected (like we in tech do). They're too busy marveling at the 75,000 apps that are available. Google will win the Cell Phone Wars if they can iterate fast enough to become "Good Enough" to Apple's "Great". That's what worked for Microsoft. But I don't think a normal consumer will ever choose an inferior open phone over a closed one with more capabilities.

ynniv 17y ago
> I don't think a normal consumer will ever choose an inferior open phone over a closed one with more capabilities. Yep. There are only two ways to "beat" Apple at this point: install Android on the freebee (< $100 unsubsidized) phones with basic contracts that 99% of the world uses (this would be the Microsoft strategy), or honestly build a better product than Apple. Given the limitations of the average cell phone, I can't decide which path is more difficult. People continue to claim that an OS will dominate all of the non-Apple smartphones out there. Symbian is already there and no one is talking about how dominant they are. Dethroning the iPhone is clearly going to be more difficult than most of the cacophonous mouthpieces realize, so my advise to them is to stop making your future self look bad, and think harder.
- utexaspunk 17y ago
  There's nothing about Android that guarantees that Android phones will always be inferior to the iPhone. HTC has made great strides toward rivaling the iPhone's hardware. I suspect, with more and more Android phones coming on the market, and with Android's openness, the apps and improved stability will soon follow, and the iPhone will be left in the dust.
- pospischil 17y ago
  You have nailed it... When apple introduced the iPhone, it became a big to-do because it was 10x better (at least?) than anything else on the market. "Me-too-ing" the iPhone (palm?) (android in another year) isn't going to get you there. The trouble is, Apple had a lot of opportunity -- 3.5 years ago, if you looked at a cell phone, it was absolutely clear that a LOT of things needed to be done. Apple simply executed on those things, but did so in an absolutely stunning way -- it just worked. And it worked in a way that most of us didn't realize was possible. The second idea -- that a low cost version can work, I think is valid. But then, is that the chunk of the market that you want? To be another dell, making $4 per unit? Do carriers even want the smart phone that doesn't come with the data contract? As for openness, as the other commenters have pointed out, most people don't care. If something ends up happening that causes people to actually care about the openness (or lack there of), than Android will be well positioned. For now, with 75k apps, we certainly haven't seen it (regardless of how many rejection horror stories we hear about on hacker news or techmeme).
  - enjo 17y ago
    I hinted at this in another post, but I want to detail it a bit. In short: I think you're wrong. Android can win this by me-too'ing the iphone as long as it has strong differentiation in hardware. Do you want a small stick phone? How about a blackberry style one with a physical keyboard? What about something flashy like the side-kick? Do you want a highly customizable phone with brightly colored cases and add-ons? Android can rise to address those quirks. That high level of segmentation shouldn't be discounted. A cell phone isn't just about software. It's a highly personal choice. If Android succeeds in becoming a mobile operating system with a vibrant 3rd party application base... well then they can win by appealing to a large number of segments through support of a number of form-factors. The issue of course being that supporting all of those form factors in anything resembling a consistent way is VERY difficult. It's something Symbian has never really figured out. If anyone can...it's Google.
    - pospischil 17y ago
      Thats a valid point -- the big issue on this one is, how do you handle the varied screen size/varied capabilities dilemma? Or rather, how do you get developers to target so many different devices? I think you get stuck with devs building for the lowest common denominator. To illustrate the point, consider an imaginary situation where a android has 3 phones on the market, with equally split distribution: 1) black and white 200x300 screen 2) color 320x480 screen 3) color 800x600 screen Which one do developers build for? Multiply this by different capabilities (one has a compass, the others don't. One has a high quality graphics chip, the others don't, etc.) In this latter case, you can really see that it will be difficult to get a significant amount of developers to take advantage of all the capabilities of the phone. I think gruber talked about this a while back, but all I could find with a quick search was this: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/09/24/g1-flaws http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/09/24/g1-flaws
- enjo 17y ago
  Just because no one is talking about it doesn't make it less relevant. Globally Symbian IS dominant, and Apple has only made small in-roads in overall market terms. Clearly it's not because Symbian is a solid OS. S60 is a usability abortion and UIQ is basically DOA. The Japanese mutant versions are hardly any better. Hell S60 basically failed at launching a touch-screen version. What they do have is a boat-load of devices. Nokia alone covers basically every segment imaginable from the very high end to the very low. They've taken a shotgun approach that very directly targets individual consumer preferences. Android is headed down the same road, except with a MUCH more polished product. Is it as good as the iPhone? I don't think so. Is it 'close enough'... I think it is, and it's only going to get better. With something like 18 phones coming out and widespread carrier pentration, I think this is a done deal. Android, in the United States in particular, is going to assume a dominant market share position. What does that mean for developers? I have no idea. The jury is still out as to what the demographic make-up of those users will come to look like. Will they buy apps? Will they support a app-store style eco-system? Will they use the web features and consume data like iPhone users? I have no idea, and really can't come up with anything resembling a sensible guess. I think Apple believes they have the premium user cornered. I think they're betting that the types of users drawn to Android phones won't provide very much market value. That is why they've stuck to this position. The whole thing is very Mac/PC all over again. I wish I knew how it was going to play out in the end.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    Heck, the Blackberry OS is terrible on even worse hardware, but still manages to sell a metric truck load.
chrischen 17y ago
> But I don't think most consumers care. They may not care about openness directly, but openness usually leads to more possibilities. Consumers will care about the new features and possibilities that openness welcomes.
- TomOfTTB 17y ago
  But I think it's an issue of degree. The iPhone IS OPEN to a large extent. Enough to produce 75,000 applications after all. The question really is "Do consumers care about the openness that separates Android from the iPhone"
  - chrischen 17y ago
    But the openness doesn't affect consumers directly. It affects developers first. So a more open platform gives way to more possibilities. And the iphone platform has a $99 fee, which is probably a deterrent to hobbyists. Then on top of that is the closed app store subject to Apple's arbitrary approval. The closed store is probably the biggest hinderance of possibilities. You can already see examples of Apple losing features because of its closed platform: no google talk, among other things. And I think it's only a matter of time the rest of Android get's polished up. But the main point is that while Apple has primacy and great design as it's advantage, Google has the openness as its advantage.
natrius 17y ago
"But I don't think a normal consumer will ever choose an inferior open phone over a closed one with more capabilities." Developers will, which will hopefully lead to consumers following suit after cool stuff gets built.
- weaksauce 17y ago
  I think that the iPhone has reached a critical mass in terms of developers. If the android will gain market share it probably will not take too much from the iPhone as a result. Remember this is not a zero sum game.

by SamAtt 17y ago

ynniv 17y ago

> I don't think a normal consumer will ever choose an inferior open phone over a closed one with more capabilities. Yep. There are only two ways to "beat" Apple at this point: install Android on the freebee (< $100 unsubsidized) phones with basic contracts that 99% of the world uses (this would be the Microsoft strategy), or honestly build a better product than Apple. Given the limitations of the average cell phone, I can't decide which path is more difficult. People continue to claim that an OS will dominate all of the non-Apple smartphones out there. Symbian is already there and no one is talking about how dominant they are. Dethroning the iPhone is clearly going to be more difficult than most of the cacophonous mouthpieces realize, so my advise to them is to stop making your future self look bad, and think harder.

utexaspunk 17y ago
There's nothing about Android that guarantees that Android phones will always be inferior to the iPhone. HTC has made great strides toward rivaling the iPhone's hardware. I suspect, with more and more Android phones coming on the market, and with Android's openness, the apps and improved stability will soon follow, and the iPhone will be left in the dust.
pospischil 17y ago
You have nailed it... When apple introduced the iPhone, it became a big to-do because it was 10x better (at least?) than anything else on the market. "Me-too-ing" the iPhone (palm?) (android in another year) isn't going to get you there. The trouble is, Apple had a lot of opportunity -- 3.5 years ago, if you looked at a cell phone, it was absolutely clear that a LOT of things needed to be done. Apple simply executed on those things, but did so in an absolutely stunning way -- it just worked. And it worked in a way that most of us didn't realize was possible. The second idea -- that a low cost version can work, I think is valid. But then, is that the chunk of the market that you want? To be another dell, making $4 per unit? Do carriers even want the smart phone that doesn't come with the data contract? As for openness, as the other commenters have pointed out, most people don't care. If something ends up happening that causes people to actually care about the openness (or lack there of), than Android will be well positioned. For now, with 75k apps, we certainly haven't seen it (regardless of how many rejection horror stories we hear about on hacker news or techmeme).
- enjo 17y ago
  I hinted at this in another post, but I want to detail it a bit. In short: I think you're wrong. Android can win this by me-too'ing the iphone as long as it has strong differentiation in hardware. Do you want a small stick phone? How about a blackberry style one with a physical keyboard? What about something flashy like the side-kick? Do you want a highly customizable phone with brightly colored cases and add-ons? Android can rise to address those quirks. That high level of segmentation shouldn't be discounted. A cell phone isn't just about software. It's a highly personal choice. If Android succeeds in becoming a mobile operating system with a vibrant 3rd party application base... well then they can win by appealing to a large number of segments through support of a number of form-factors. The issue of course being that supporting all of those form factors in anything resembling a consistent way is VERY difficult. It's something Symbian has never really figured out. If anyone can...it's Google.
  - pospischil 17y ago
    Thats a valid point -- the big issue on this one is, how do you handle the varied screen size/varied capabilities dilemma? Or rather, how do you get developers to target so many different devices? I think you get stuck with devs building for the lowest common denominator. To illustrate the point, consider an imaginary situation where a android has 3 phones on the market, with equally split distribution: 1) black and white 200x300 screen 2) color 320x480 screen 3) color 800x600 screen Which one do developers build for? Multiply this by different capabilities (one has a compass, the others don't. One has a high quality graphics chip, the others don't, etc.) In this latter case, you can really see that it will be difficult to get a significant amount of developers to take advantage of all the capabilities of the phone. I think gruber talked about this a while back, but all I could find with a quick search was this: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/09/24/g1-flaws http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/09/24/g1-flaws
enjo 17y ago
Just because no one is talking about it doesn't make it less relevant. Globally Symbian IS dominant, and Apple has only made small in-roads in overall market terms. Clearly it's not because Symbian is a solid OS. S60 is a usability abortion and UIQ is basically DOA. The Japanese mutant versions are hardly any better. Hell S60 basically failed at launching a touch-screen version. What they do have is a boat-load of devices. Nokia alone covers basically every segment imaginable from the very high end to the very low. They've taken a shotgun approach that very directly targets individual consumer preferences. Android is headed down the same road, except with a MUCH more polished product. Is it as good as the iPhone? I don't think so. Is it 'close enough'... I think it is, and it's only going to get better. With something like 18 phones coming out and widespread carrier pentration, I think this is a done deal. Android, in the United States in particular, is going to assume a dominant market share position. What does that mean for developers? I have no idea. The jury is still out as to what the demographic make-up of those users will come to look like. Will they buy apps? Will they support a app-store style eco-system? Will they use the web features and consume data like iPhone users? I have no idea, and really can't come up with anything resembling a sensible guess. I think Apple believes they have the premium user cornered. I think they're betting that the types of users drawn to Android phones won't provide very much market value. That is why they've stuck to this position. The whole thing is very Mac/PC all over again. I wish I knew how it was going to play out in the end.
- elblanco 17y ago
  Heck, the Blackberry OS is terrible on even worse hardware, but still manages to sell a metric truck load.

chrischen 17y ago

> But I don't think most consumers care. They may not care about openness directly, but openness usually leads to more possibilities. Consumers will care about the new features and possibilities that openness welcomes.

TomOfTTB 17y ago
But I think it's an issue of degree. The iPhone IS OPEN to a large extent. Enough to produce 75,000 applications after all. The question really is "Do consumers care about the openness that separates Android from the iPhone"
- chrischen 17y ago
  But the openness doesn't affect consumers directly. It affects developers first. So a more open platform gives way to more possibilities. And the iphone platform has a $99 fee, which is probably a deterrent to hobbyists. Then on top of that is the closed app store subject to Apple's arbitrary approval. The closed store is probably the biggest hinderance of possibilities. You can already see examples of Apple losing features because of its closed platform: no google talk, among other things. And I think it's only a matter of time the rest of Android get's polished up. But the main point is that while Apple has primacy and great design as it's advantage, Google has the openness as its advantage.

natrius 17y ago

"But I don't think a normal consumer will ever choose an inferior open phone over a closed one with more capabilities." Developers will, which will hopefully lead to consumers following suit after cool stuff gets built.

weaksauce 17y ago
I think that the iPhone has reached a critical mass in terms of developers. If the android will gain market share it probably will not take too much from the iPhone as a result. Remember this is not a zero sum game.