- Posts tagged Android
- Explore Android on posterous
Do We Finally Have a Consensus On Android Flash Performance?
So with that in mind, how did Flash video actually perform on the Nexus One?
Shockingly bad.
Another site tries Flash on an Android device and is disappointed.
Looks like Laptop magazine was right. So was Steve Jobs. So was I. Heck, so was Adobe.
Asymco on how Google’s lack of Android control affects their value chain
Google today is faced with the prospect that not only the devices (which sit on its OS) but also services and apps on top would choose to remain on old versions of Android. There is nothing to stop them from doing just that. Unlike Microsoft, Google does not enforce licensing terms for Android. It is at the mercy of the value chain.
The article also points out that even if Google wanted to stop the above scenario, they do not have the license terms to permit it.
Android or iPhone: Where is the Mobile Developer Money?
Android has more developers, yet its percentage of paid apps is much smaller than the iPhone platform. Why is that?
One might think the "open" nature of Android attracts a larger base of developers willing to contribute for nothing, but the fact is it's hard to sell apps on Android. You can only pay for apps in 13 countries, and you can only sell priced apps from nine countries. This is nuts compared to the iPhone's 90 countries, and just another Android "dirty little secret." Take heart, though, you can always sign a petition to make it better.
I know it doesn't have to be about money. Many people do labors of love for "free." Maybe it's a learning experience, a way to unwind, or a sense of community or connecting with people. These could all be valid payments for your work. Not wanting monetary compensation is a personal choice that can't be judged. Indeed, though I buy a lot of apps I appreciate "free" software as much as anybody.
Having said that, if money's what you're looking for the iPhone platform is clearly where you want to be in mobile development.
Business Insider On the Outside Regarding Apple Long-Term
Fast forward 5 to 10 years and it’s not hard to imagine seeing Apple with a small (but probably very profitable) share of the smartphone market. It will be a niche player in the market it revolutionized and could have dominated. History seems bound to repeat itself!
Actually, it's pretty hard to imagine the above outcome. In order to do so you'd have to forget that:
- Phones aren't PCs; that model doesn't apply.
- There's zero price advantage in non-iPhones. Indeed, Apple set the price points at $99 and $199, which initially could only be met by competitors via mail-in rebates.
- The iPod model is far closer to the iPhone model, and no one's touched Apple in this area.
- Android gains are almost all on the back of Verizon, who can't sell the iPhone.
- Android's becoming more fragmented every day. (A new phone released this week is using version 1.5.)
Ignore all of that—as many seem to—and it's still hard to imagine Business Insider's projected outcome. Because nowhere in the scenario does Apple's Board of Directors toss out their brilliant CEO (and the team he's put together) to bring in a line of unprepared bozos as replacements. Nope. Ain't happening.
ZDNet: The dirty little secret about Google Android
After all the work Apple did to get AT&T to relinquish device control for the iPhone and all the great efforts Google made to get the FCC and the U.S. telecoms to agree to open access rules as part of the 700 MHz auction, Android is taking all of those gains and handing the power back to the telecoms.
The article nails it, but I'd like to point out the only reason Android's problems are "secret" is because there should be more articles like this in the tech press, but there aren't. Android has many issues.
Even in this article, in the comments, you've got Google supporters defending the fragmented state of Android, going so far as to deny it's fragmentation, choosing instead the euphemism "choice", and of course blasting Apple. Don't like crapware? Vote with your wallet. Great, except the top Android phones come with crapware. Well, then use root authority to delete hem. Right, because that's what I want do with my "smart" phone.
Android supporters talk like Windows users do about anti-virus. It's not bad, it's just the way it is, so quit complaining and do it. Besides, any platform that doesn't work this way must be "wrong." Or "a toy." Or "closed."
Android Weakness On Display: Motorola's 2.1 and 2.2 Froyo updates
Let’s start off with Android updates for Moto’s smartphones available in the US. Here’s the list of devices, and the expected updates…
As the fragmentation of Android phones continues, I wonder about those who bought Android because they thought it was a good phone that would get better with updates.
Oops.
Let's see what U.S. Motorola Android users can expect in terms of updates (international users fare no better):
Motorola Droid X – Android 2.2 Froyo update to start in “late summer” (as previously rumored)
The X is only a month old but shipped with the old 2.1 version of Android. It could get 2.2 in a month, and if so will finally be on the current version.
Motorola Droid – Android 2.2 update “currently rolling out in phases”
The original Droid gets 2.2 before the X, though it's still rolling out now. Like the X, the phone will then be current.
Is it that it takes so long to test devices for the current version, or that so little emphasis is placed on updating? That the latter is likely is shown by the updates below, which will not even make the phones current.
Motorola Cliq and Cliq XT – Android 2.1 updates “planned for late Q3/early Q4” (no Froyo, huh?)
No current version for these, but they can update to the old 2.1 version in another month. Or two. These phones are only nine and six months old, respectively. There's at least 15 months left on a 24-month contract but they're already outdated.
Motorola Backflip – Android 2.1 should be available in Q3
Just like the Cliqs. Released only five months ago but won't get the current Android version.
Motorola Devour – no plans for an Android 2.1 update, sadly
The Devour is only six months old, yet "devour" is exactly what Motorola did to the phone's chance of getting even the old 2.1 version. Maybe Devour users should've bought a Backflip or Cliq instead—they wouldn't be as badly outdated—but how were they to know?
Let's summarize:
- By "late summer" two recent phones should finally be current.
- By "early Q4" three recent phones should get an old version.
- One recent phone will get diddly-squat.
That's bad news any way you look at it. And don't think it's just Motorola, others are being just as stingy with Android updates.
This major weakness of the Android platform is usually glossed over (not by me). Rather than articles that critique Android's partners for weak update support—or for not pushing the platform forward—it's mentioned in passing, if at all, before discussing how nice 2.2 is. They don't mention that running the current version of Android is the equivalent of a private club to which the vast majority of its users will never be invited.
The Economist: Verizon, Google and the Woody Allen problem
To be clear, if the New York Times is to be believed, Verizon and Google aren't just contesting the FCC's plan; they're deciding to pre-emptively disobey it.
Another good article looking into what Google and Verizon are up to.
Google: "Let's Do Evil." Verizon: "Works For Us."
Said laws of course would have oodles of loopholes, and would not apply to wireless in order to protect Google and Verizon's Android love affair.
Good article taking a look at what Google and Verizon may be up to. I hope we get more tech sites looking into this.
Apple, Their Competitors, and Expectations
But when exceeding expectations becomes the expectation, things get a little sticky.
Good article about Apple and exceeding expectations. Yes, Apple is held to a higher standard. In some cases writers will even explain that they're criticizing Apple for something because they're being held to a higher standard. So Apple gets dinged for things that should cause their competition to get trashed, but never does.
A good example is Android's 2.2 release. Now over two months old, the Nexus One was about the only phone supporting it until this week when Samsung came on board with the Evo, but there are complaints about the install. Imagine if iOS 4 rolled out this way. It runs slow on a two-year-old phone (3G) and the tech community is howling. Android 2.2 can't even be installed on phones released in the last 30 days and no one cares. It must be nice to be in Android's shoes. The bar is set so low for them that anything short of actually setting themselves on fire during a product launch is considered a win.
This is wrong, of course. In fact, a "standard" can't even be a standard if not applied equally. The reality is whatever the "standard" (if properly applied) is, Apple beats it handily. The more you lower the "standard" to include Apple's competitors in the mix, the more Apple exceeds them.
Bottom line is the delta between Apple and their competitors remains the same no matter where you set the bar, as long as that bar is set the same for everyone.
Google's lax vetting allows almost any app in the Android market. Unscrupulous developers rejoice.
It collects a user’s browsing history, text messages, your phone’s SIM card number, subscriber identification, and even your voice mail password. It sends the data to a web site […] That site is evidently owned by someone in Shenzhen, China. The app has been downloaded anywhere from 1.1 million to 4.6 million times.
Though the research comes from a maker of Android security software, they've identified what the malicious app does and where the data is sent; the issue is real.
No vetting is perfect. Apple recently approved a flashlight app that housed a tethering application (though it harmed no users). But Apple shows concern about iPhone privacy. The excellent location services in iOS 4 are a great example. I appreciate the work they do on this.
For Android, we can and should excoriate the developers of this particular app, but we should also excoriate Google for barely trying to avoid this sort of thing.
So this is Android:
- Available apps with little curation, and security issues being exploited.
- Multiple OS releases and features that may or may not be coming to your particular hardware.
- Multiple devices from multiple vendors each having vendor-specific software/services (crapware).
- A real possibility that soon running security software will not only be prudent, but a foolish thing not to do.
Do these sound familiar? It's the Windows OS model of the 1990s. Android resembles it more every day.
