3 ms·

There's a really major difference between the Windows/PC argument and the Android/HW one. It's important to remember because without it you end up describing sy

There's a really major difference between the Windows/PC argument and the Android/HW one. It's important to remember because without it you end up describing symptoms as causes and not the other way around. Phones are much more of a fashion/status/tribe statement for better or worse than your desktop or laptop was and you use them way more in social settings than you do a laptop or desktop. So while this is true "PC OEMs mostly failed to differentiate in design" it's because that's not what drove sales. Corporate PC buyers didn't care and personal buyers really didn't care enough to spend $200 for better design because no one saw it (or if you did care you went with a Mac). Same goes with "Second, PC OEMs never managed to create any meaningful differentiation in software" - Even if you had it's unlikely to have made much of a difference unless it had productivity differences. Because that's why you cared - you were (are) on these things for 8 - 10 hours a day trying to make a living vs 1 - 3 hours on your phone for work/social blend. We're not arguing that Xiamoni's suite of software makes the user more productive. It's just a "feel good" thing tied up in "Well I can't afford Apple but this thing is actually pretty sweet too" and/or "I'm not going with stock Android because that's too boring/crowdlike" Whatever the exact reasons they're emotional not productivity driven. The reason this all matters is that the argument appears to be that Xiamoni may not be Dell - destined to rise and flame out in a commodity hell - but something that's neither Apple nor Dell but a third way. However, if the things it's differentiating on are different to what PC manufacturers differentiated but only because of unique aspects to this vertical then they're different barbarians but nevertheless still just barbarians.

adventured 12y ago
Not to mention that Microsoft strictly controlled the Windows desktop environment. PC OEMs had no choice but to follow their instructions on what was ok or not ok to alter when it came to the experience the consumer had. Not doing what Microsoft told you to, was a fast way to lose your license pre consent decree. With Android the situation is dramatically different. There's really no apples to apples comparison to be had between the software context re Windows OEMs and Android OEMs.
- pinaceae 12y ago
  did they now. no crapware, no special toolbar add ons, no Lenovo battery manager, no nothing, we all got stock Windows with clean driver installs. are you a visitor from a different dimension?
nextos 12y ago
I also think the smartphone market is quite different from the PC business. It's much easier now to create a viable platform than it was back then. Apps are much simpler. You can bootstrap an entire ecosystem by just implementing a few services (messaging, email, maps & a few others). Nokia was on its way with the N700-N9/Maemo-Meego series, and afterwards with Nokia X. Both killed before getting the chance to succeed, but they might have had an impact had they lived longer. Jolla is now taking the same route, but also adding an Android VM which offers almost seamless interop with Android apps. Very interesting approach. Not fully open yet, though. If I were Xiaomi, I would go full steam ahead with MIUI. Don't just create another shallow Android mod. There are too many of those already. Try to evolve it into a whole open ecosystem free of Google. Think Cyanogen + f-droid, on steroids. It would really make them different.
- Lx1oG-AWb6h_ZG0 12y ago
  If bootstrapping an ecosystem is that easy, why is Microsoft having such trouble with Windows Phone? They have perfectly serviceable equivalents for all the services you mentioned (maybe not compared to Google, but certainty against their other competitors), so clearly there is something else that is missing.

adventured 12y ago

Not to mention that Microsoft strictly controlled the Windows desktop environment. PC OEMs had no choice but to follow their instructions on what was ok or not ok to alter when it came to the experience the consumer had. Not doing what Microsoft told you to, was a fast way to lose your license pre consent decree. With Android the situation is dramatically different. There's really no apples to apples comparison to be had between the software context re Windows OEMs and Android OEMs.

pinaceae 12y ago
did they now. no crapware, no special toolbar add ons, no Lenovo battery manager, no nothing, we all got stock Windows with clean driver installs. are you a visitor from a different dimension?

nextos 12y ago

I also think the smartphone market is quite different from the PC business. It's much easier now to create a viable platform than it was back then. Apps are much simpler. You can bootstrap an entire ecosystem by just implementing a few services (messaging, email, maps & a few others). Nokia was on its way with the N700-N9/Maemo-Meego series, and afterwards with Nokia X. Both killed before getting the chance to succeed, but they might have had an impact had they lived longer. Jolla is now taking the same route, but also adding an Android VM which offers almost seamless interop with Android apps. Very interesting approach. Not fully open yet, though. If I were Xiaomi, I would go full steam ahead with MIUI. Don't just create another shallow Android mod. There are too many of those already. Try to evolve it into a whole open ecosystem free of Google. Think Cyanogen + f-droid, on steroids. It would really make them different.

Lx1oG-AWb6h_ZG0 12y ago
If bootstrapping an ecosystem is that easy, why is Microsoft having such trouble with Windows Phone? They have perfectly serviceable equivalents for all the services you mentioned (maybe not compared to Google, but certainty against their other competitors), so clearly there is something else that is missing.