| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
AndroidAndroidPosted Jan 6, 2010 8:01 UTC (Wed) by SimonKagstrom (subscriber, #49801)Parent article: Looking forward to 2010
I would not be surprised if the next year would become the year of Android (in some ways I guess you can say that 2009 was that already). I think Windows Mobile, Palm, Maemo and Symbian will have tough times ahead of them.
One could just hope that the kernel work for the various Android phones would target mainline more.
Disclaimer: I've been wrong before :-)
(Log in to post comments)
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 8:18 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Hopefully.The two major problems with Android on mobile phones are: * The parties involved in the hardware and telephony radio have extremely pro-proprietary outlook on the world and really try to do everything they can to fight against the trend of cheaper and more generic hardware we see in the personal computer market. They want to be a Apple and not a Dell. This is going to continue to be a huge kick in the balls for people coming from a OSS Free Software background. * Due to the lack of desire for handset makers to keep up to date Android firmware available for their phones then the more Android handsets you see out there the more various different Android versions developers and users are going to have to deal with. They want to use newer and improved software to compel consumers to buy new hardware... so providing newer versions of Android to existing users is totally counterproductive from their perspectives. In other words: If they offer Android 2.1 upgrade for a phone currently running Android 1.x then that totally eliminates a major reason why a customer will want to buy a new phone. It's much better to blow through development as quickly as possible and get the software out in the shortest time and move on to the next device then it is to bother doing things like getting drivers upstream. If you are not paying them money for a new handset then you are nothing to them so they are not going to lift a finger to help out with third party development. Both of these things are going to be large roadblocks to Android's continued success. Compared to Apple, who retains tight control over the hardware and will offer OS upgrades for older handsets as long as the hardware can support it. It will be interesting to see how Google is planning on dealing with these issues and how the 'Nexus One' is going to help them do it.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 13:53 UTC (Wed) by Zenith (subscriber, #24899) [Link]
This could be turned around to a selling point:
- We provide updates to older phones!
While not as flashy as "look, we have the newest and shiniest phones", it is hopefully a sales point worth mentioning.
But granted, this only affects the buying process, and does nothing to capitalize on existing users.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 14:50 UTC (Wed) by SimonKagstrom (subscriber, #49801) [Link]
I hope it will be. I've just recently bought a Samsung Spica (I believe it's called Moment in the US), and whether it will get upgrades is still a matter of speculation and rumors.
Unfortunately, as Drag says there is not much incentive for Samsung and other phone producers to upgrade software for existing phones. The Apple Iphone is obviously much better in that respect, perhaps since Apple get revenue from owners that buy apps and itune songs. Not like that with Android.
Of course the best thing would be if the devices were open enough for people to modify the installations by themselves.
I took a look at the kernel source code for the Samsung Spica by the way, and unfortunately it very much looks like a hack to get the phone out in time - much of it would be quite difficult to get mainlined. Still, Samsung seems to be moving in the right direction at least.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 16:43 UTC (Wed) by gnb (subscriber, #5132) [Link]
>They want to use newer and improved software to compel consumers to buy new
>hardware... Certainly true from the handset maker's pov, but in places where it's common for the carrier to subsidise the handset and make back the money on the contract software upgrades seem quite attractive as a way of keeping customers happy (and hence paying) without spending all that money on new hardware. So they have an incentive to apply pressure for handsets to be supported at least for some number of updates.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 17:54 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
The carriers use handset subsidies as ways to lock people into 2 year
service contracts, which are much more lucrative and attractive to creditors then month by month payments.
(If you can guarantee to people that you will have a X amount of dollars in
So, no. Carriers think they benefit from this upgrade train also.
Now in reality a happy customer is a paying customer. If they have a
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 18:51 UTC (Wed) by Zenith (subscriber, #24899) [Link]
You are not allowed to lock people into 2-year contracts everywhere, though. In Denmark 6 months is the maximum for private persons, while business can be locked for 1 or 2 years I think it is.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 20:00 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
No carrier in the USA forces anybody to do anything. People volunteer for it since they can do things like get a 600 dollar phone for 200 dollars. Once you agree to a contract then it's a contract.
If you don't want to do that you can just pay monthly rates and buy phones at full retail price. It's just not that normal to do that. Most people just assume that you have to sign a contract; but that is mostly because carriers don't promote monthly plans and people are too lazy to do research on their own.
Usually most carriers you can choose 'pay as you go' (aka prepaid plans), 'monthly contract', or 1-2 year contract.
Usually it's not worth it to do prepaid unless you only use your phone rarely. Probably monthly makes sense for most people that buy their phone at full retail.
It's not to the point were you can run into any store and buy a disposable SIM card just yet (you can, but it's not common), but as the economy declines and people cut back on luxury spending then it'll probably be more like Europe.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 20:20 UTC (Wed) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link] If that's true, why don't I get a discount on a plan for buying my own phone without a subsidy? Why isn't the subsidy (more like a lease) a separate line item on the bill? Why can (and do) phone companies arbitrarily increase termination fees for existing customers?That's not fair-and-square assistance with getting the phone. That's MBA-begotten corporate malfeasance, and it ought to be illegal.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 20:49 UTC (Wed) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
T-mobile's new plans give an ~$20 discount if you don't have a subsidised phone.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 21:52 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] I really don't care personally.The way fees add up and the costs of the company is not really clear cut. It is certainly cheaper, as I partially pointed out above, to have people in long term contracts even though they may pay the same amount of money as a person with a monthly contract. Also one of the big deals about selling a subsidized phone is that the carrier installs restrictive and custom firmware on it. These firmwares are designed to 'encourage' users to use services that cost extra. So in that way customers using custom firmwares are more profitable then customers using retail. So that is another reason for the subsidy that is not going to show up in when you compare rates. If you want to do government action on it then more laws is not the answer. The only reason wireless carriers are able to be assholes to their customers is because the USA government has handed over monopoly access to the most useful parts of the radio spectrum. Any significant amounts of regulation is not going to hurt them or help you one bit. Instead what it is going to do is raise the barrier of entry for competing companies; therefore allowing these corporations to get away with being even bigger assholes. I work in a heavily regulated industry so I know for a fact that is what happens. The corporations are so heavily regulated that they pretty much do whatever the fuck they want with no serious repercussions. If any of these companies ever decided to leave the market then the government would be completely screwed... why? Because there is nobody stupid enough with millions and millions of dollars and years of time to blow on building a infrastructure that can meet the requirements the government has set up. It's now impossible for any new corporation to enter the market so the existing ones can do pretty much anything they want as long as it's not blatantly illegal. As far as cell phone carriers go if you make this sort of behavior illegal they will just find some other way to screw people over. And you know what the catcher is? People volunteer for it. From what I can tell most people overwhelming prefer to get into 2 year contracts. Who are you to say that they are not allowed to do this if they want to? Why should they not be able to trade some liberty for cheap smart phones? The best way you can do things is talk with your cash and convince others to agree with you. That is a lot more effective way to control the corporations then your votes are to control the government. And if you want to have more control then tell the FCC to open up the radio spectrum and get rid of the DRM-ish restrictions on radios.
Android Posted Jan 7, 2010 23:51 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]
> No carrier in the USA forces anybody to do anything. People volunteer for it since they can do things like get a 600 dollar phone for 200 dollars.
Same in Europe.
> Once you agree to a contract then it's a contract.
Merely signing a contract is not enough to make its content legal. If some country decides for consumer protection that phone contracts can never, ever be longer than 1 year, then you can sign whatever you want and legally cancel the contract after 1 year. I guess that's what Zenith meant about the 6 months limit in Denmark.
Although at a much different money scale, such a consumer protection law is similar to... forbidding subprime loans: a very strange idea implemented in some European countries.
Android Posted Jan 8, 2010 17:31 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] But aren't there common products in the US that are offered only with 2 year commitments? ISTR AT&T/Apple sell their i-phone that way. I think the laws in the US differ on the ability to have long term phone service contracts. I know for a while at the beginning of the wireless phone era, in California it was not possible for a consumer to commit to any phone service at all in exchange for a handset. BTW, I think it's misleading to view it as getting a $600 phone for $200. Even California sales tax law doesn't look at it that way -- the sales tax due is based on a $600 selling price (CA sales tax applies to hardware, but not phone service). The healthy way to look at it is as a phone service bundle that includes a handset and 2 years of service, with a $200 upfront payment and the rest spread over 2 years. As opposed to buying them separately, which involves a $600 initial outlay. I'm not entirely sure why companies that offer month-to-month service demand the same monthly price as for the bundle, but it may be because they expect service prices to go down over the next two years and it may be because they expect customers to switch around and it costs lots of money to re-acquire a customer. IOW the commitment itself is worth $400.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 22:24 UTC (Wed) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] Those are hardly the only major problems with Android on mobile phones. Here's your most damning summary, a presentation on the subject by Matt Porter, shown at Embedded Linux Conference Europe. Tidbits from it:
There are lots of other reasons cited why Android is poorly maintained and portable only with difficulty. Rick Moen
Android Posted Jan 8, 2010 18:49 UTC (Fri) by MattPerry (guest, #46341) [Link]
> Compared to Apple, who retains tight control over the hardware and will
> offer OS upgrades for older handsets as long as the hardware can support > it.
Don't forget that Apple is also a hardware vendor, and it's in their best interest to have you purchase new hardware as often as possible.
Android Posted Jan 6, 2010 13:34 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] I would bet for Maemo instead. It was already a great platform for the N770, with all its warts; it got better for the N800 and the N900 seems to be a winner. Pros: mature, standard software, Debian package format, power management, healthy community. Cons: many proprietary bits, poor usability sometimes.Anyway it's kind of a win-win situation for us, since both are Linux-based and both are reasonably open (and willing to open even more).
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 6, 2010 13:49 UTC (Wed) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link]
Android has a much larger mindshare than Maemo. It runs on devices from
multiple vendors (predominantly HTC and Motorola), and it benefits from marketing not only by Google, but also by multiple phone carriers. (At least in the US.)
Maemo is all-Nokia, and is pretty much unheard-of in the US. Even Nokia
I'm sure the story is different in Europe though.
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 6, 2010 16:01 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Yes, here Nokia has a lot of market share in the traditional mobile market. Not so much in smartphones, but the N900 might change that. It is not popular yet though.
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 6, 2010 18:17 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
In the USA market Nokia is not so hot, but in the world smartphone market
Symbian phones still outsell pretty much everybody else combined.
Maemo may have a chance world-wide, but in the USA it has a low chance of
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 6, 2010 18:19 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] As an interesting data point, here's a usability survey of ten smartphones. At #2 on the list was the iPhone; #1 was the N900. The best Android phone came in at #5. To say that the survey is unscientific is to be charitable, but it's still perhaps worth a look.
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 6, 2010 19:09 UTC (Wed) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185) [Link]
I wouldn't know about scientific -- but I so love my n900. I haven't even
coded for it or anything yet, but the apps are lovely, the keyboard is much better than the n810's, connectivity is great -- and, of course, and xterm with ssh is much nicer than putty on the E72.
Android vs Maemo Posted Jan 14, 2010 13:07 UTC (Thu) by wookey (subscriber, #5501) [Link]
Maemo is no longer all-Nokia. Mer is the generic version of Maemo, which has separated out the
Nokia-specific parts. I'm not quite sure how much hardware is currently supported, but certainly SmartQ is one and others are in the pipeline (openmoko, airgoo and maybe balloon if I get my finger out).
|
|
||||||||||||