It IS like PC vs Mac. With Mac you have closed hardware and closed specs, only newer or older.
With PC you can build your own computer selecting or cherry-picking the components you want, and then install the version and flavour of OS fits better to your liking or needs, Windows server/desktop, lots of Linux distros, even BSDs, you name it, as long as it is x86 architecture.
It's more like Windows vs Mac, since he's talking about Android which is the software operating system vs the iPhone which is the hardware plus iOS.
If HTC made a phone exactly the same as one of their Android phones and put Windows Mobile on it (which they basically do) then it's no longer an Android phone.
I note that he claims there is only one iPhone and you're guaranteed to get this years model, which is of course nonsense. Apple sold the 3G as the low-end model when the 3GS came out, and they're still going to sell the 3GS now that iPhone 4 is out. I can't recall if they still sold the 2G after the 3G came out but it wouldn't surprise me. This may seem like a small quibble but there seems to be a pattern of making stuff up about both the iPhone and its competitors that to me is an interesting sign all by itself.
At least with the iPhone there's a clearly documented and understandable progression of models, each obviously and unambiguously better than the one before.
I wouldn't know where to start with Android, let alone how to explain it to someone who doesn't care about anything other than having a nice mobile telephone.
There's also the issue of upgrades. Every iPhone user can run the latest OS (minus the features the hardware can't support), and it's easy to upgrade without losing your data. How do you explain the Android upgrade process to an Android user?
Things get clearer when you look from a phone maker's point of view. Android's goal is to be there for phone makers to be put on their new phones. Just like Symbian and the like. You can make iPhone-killer phones with it. You can make crap with it. We all want iPhone-killer phones so we can show off, right? But that's not the point of the OS. That's the duty of the phone makers.
For a fair comparison, compare e.g. the Nexus One with the iPhone, not Android as a whole.
If you want to choose an iPhone, you have a 3GS (low end), a 4/16 and a 4/32. The progression from one to the other is clear and well delineated, the choice is not hard.
Now if you want an android phone, you have the N1, the Evo 4G, the Droid Incredible (which is not the same thing as the Droid or the Droid Eris), the Desire and probably half a dozen others for the latest generation on Snapdragon and 2.1 alone.
Look at it the other way around. If you want an iPhone, you have essentially one from factor to chose from. If you don't like it, tough. With Android I can pick the hardware features I want, screen size, processor speed and battery life, camera quality, hardware keyboard etc. etc. and then pick up the phone that fulfils my requirement list.
Basically it all depends which approach you take to buying a phone. Do you start with an OS requirement or do you start with a set of hardware and form-factor requirements.
I admit I've not gone through this yet but have been looking into how my wife's nexus one will upgrade to froyo, but I was under the impression that your phone just got the update over the air, I assume it tells you it's updated and restarts. Is this wrong? edit: no it looks like it's right:
I'd guess it's only going to get easier now that they're out of the early sprint stage and most of the "apps" part of the OS (e.g. maps, directions, browser as opposed to the JIT) will simply just get better.
That's for the N1. Most Android-bearing phones are not N1s, and their ability to be updated at all depends on both the builder and the carrier. Many earlier (as in "from last year") android phones still cannot get 2.1 (let alone Froyo) via official channel. Some likely won't ever.
But much, much worse due to Motoblur and Sense: you buy an Android phone, get used to the UI, buy another Android phone and get a completely different UI from the base package.
> I can't recall if they still sold the 2G after the 3G came out but it wouldn't surprise me.
They didn't, they didn't consider the entry-level market at all (which is what the 3G serves currently and the 3GS will serve after the 4th generation's release) so the 2G got instantly deprecated the day the 3G was released.
buy another Android phone and get a completely different UI from the base package.
Which is very much by design. HTC as no interest in you buying a completely different Android phone. They want you to replace your old HTC phone with a new HTC phone. If the UI on the new Samsung phone is identical to that of your old HTC phone, then you might decide to get the Samsung phone and HTC loses.
Yeah, the "its not even pc vs mac" sentence wasn't really backed up in the post. I didn't want to get into it and get off topic but maybe i shouldn't have worded it like that.
I think the main reason this isn't pc vs Mac now is that with pcs the hardware plays a much smaller role in the user experience than with phones. Windows could present a more unified front on lots of different hardware than the current phone ecosystem can. Also in the early days of the windows vs Mac battle compatibility and workplace computers played a much bigger role in the choice. Those factors let windows get a very solid mind-share foothold even if the underlying ecosystem was just as fragmented.
How can this little bit of "opinion" even hit the frontpage of hackernews? This is pretty "thin" information (if at all) and looks like it was written by a mac fanboy. Where is the "news" in that blog post?
Cars have the same exact problem. I can't just buy a "car". No, first I have to pick the kind I want, and then the manufacturer, and the size, and the color.
Why can't they make just one "car" and stop this fragmentation of the transportation market.
It's more about branding than choice. For example BMW is a brand, they pour all their branding energy into their overall brand and each car is just a model number: 3 series, 5 series, etc. Toyota is a brand but it also brands each of it's cars, for example the prius is a very well marketed and focused brand.
Both these marketing strategies work, the question is in android vs iPhone which strategies there are working. I see the droid brand being handled much better by verizon than the android brand is being handled by google. In the end the mind share may be droid vs iphone, but then it's not a software or hardware company that owns the brand, its a network.
19 comments
[ 5.7 ms ] story [ 60.7 ms ] threadIt IS like PC vs Mac. With Mac you have closed hardware and closed specs, only newer or older.
With PC you can build your own computer selecting or cherry-picking the components you want, and then install the version and flavour of OS fits better to your liking or needs, Windows server/desktop, lots of Linux distros, even BSDs, you name it, as long as it is x86 architecture.
If HTC made a phone exactly the same as one of their Android phones and put Windows Mobile on it (which they basically do) then it's no longer an Android phone.
I note that he claims there is only one iPhone and you're guaranteed to get this years model, which is of course nonsense. Apple sold the 3G as the low-end model when the 3GS came out, and they're still going to sell the 3GS now that iPhone 4 is out. I can't recall if they still sold the 2G after the 3G came out but it wouldn't surprise me. This may seem like a small quibble but there seems to be a pattern of making stuff up about both the iPhone and its competitors that to me is an interesting sign all by itself.
I wouldn't know where to start with Android, let alone how to explain it to someone who doesn't care about anything other than having a nice mobile telephone.
There's also the issue of upgrades. Every iPhone user can run the latest OS (minus the features the hardware can't support), and it's easy to upgrade without losing your data. How do you explain the Android upgrade process to an Android user?
For a fair comparison, compare e.g. the Nexus One with the iPhone, not Android as a whole.
If you want to choose an iPhone, you have a 3GS (low end), a 4/16 and a 4/32. The progression from one to the other is clear and well delineated, the choice is not hard.
Now if you want an android phone, you have the N1, the Evo 4G, the Droid Incredible (which is not the same thing as the Droid or the Droid Eris), the Desire and probably half a dozen others for the latest generation on Snapdragon and 2.1 alone.
Basically it all depends which approach you take to buying a phone. Do you start with an OS requirement or do you start with a set of hardware and form-factor requirements.
http://google.com/support/android/bin/answer.py?hl=en&an...
I'd guess it's only going to get easier now that they're out of the early sprint stage and most of the "apps" part of the OS (e.g. maps, directions, browser as opposed to the JIT) will simply just get better.
Not entirely true: the 2G does not get iOS 4 at all, and the 3G likely won't get iOS5.
But much, much worse due to Motoblur and Sense: you buy an Android phone, get used to the UI, buy another Android phone and get a completely different UI from the base package.
> I can't recall if they still sold the 2G after the 3G came out but it wouldn't surprise me.
They didn't, they didn't consider the entry-level market at all (which is what the 3G serves currently and the 3GS will serve after the 4th generation's release) so the 2G got instantly deprecated the day the 3G was released.
Which is very much by design. HTC as no interest in you buying a completely different Android phone. They want you to replace your old HTC phone with a new HTC phone. If the UI on the new Samsung phone is identical to that of your old HTC phone, then you might decide to get the Samsung phone and HTC loses.
I think the main reason this isn't pc vs Mac now is that with pcs the hardware plays a much smaller role in the user experience than with phones. Windows could present a more unified front on lots of different hardware than the current phone ecosystem can. Also in the early days of the windows vs Mac battle compatibility and workplace computers played a much bigger role in the choice. Those factors let windows get a very solid mind-share foothold even if the underlying ecosystem was just as fragmented.
Why can't they make just one "car" and stop this fragmentation of the transportation market.
Both these marketing strategies work, the question is in android vs iPhone which strategies there are working. I see the droid brand being handled much better by verizon than the android brand is being handled by google. In the end the mind share may be droid vs iphone, but then it's not a software or hardware company that owns the brand, its a network.