Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 117
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    The thing is...it's not just 4G. if that were the case, Android would be a huge flop elsewhere in the world. It's not.

    Android is the only modern, touch-oriented mobile OS that is mature, flush with apps, and available for virtually every price point, carrier, and form factor one could want. THAT is why it is a success.

    Apple/iOS does not offer that, and they have no desire to offer anything in that sentence above after the word "apps". It's not their business model. HP Palm has the OS, but no maturity, apps, or diversity in hardware. In a best case scenario, they could maybe get parity in those areas 18-24 months from now...MAYBE. WP7 is probably the closest to Android in this regard, but they haven't even scheduled their first OS upgrade. So they, too, are months and months away from even having a chance to reach parity. Blackberry....the less said the better. Same goes for Maemo, MeeGo, Mumrah, and whatever other branches Nokia is trying to hang onto in their long, tragic fall from grace.

    oh of course android has all those points currently the reason why they took off in 2010. Besides the Iphone in late 3Q there were no new handsets for most of the year besides ones produced by android. They did it correctly just licensing the OS out to any and everyone who wants to make a device for it. A super onslaught making people who even wouldnt consider android no choice but to, if they wanted something new. My thing is at what point do you try to rev down production on new devices running android, with other OS's coming out this year? for instance the shift coming jan 6 (which is smart for them to release it most likely sooner then the pro 7) but how many people will continue to upgrade early, or choose android over another OS that is now available? Is Google oversaturating the market? Will other OS's on comparable devices also hender android sales on other carriers, and if so how much? WIll Google do to the tablet market what they did to the smartphone market and release dozens of tablets? then if a PalmPad are Playbook and hailed successful will those tablets be obsolete, because of how many their are?
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by jjeffcoat View Post
    When the iPhone is available on Verizon, I wonder how it will affect those numbers?
    The iPhone is too late ocming to Verizon, Android has been able to grow a huge supply of apps and assorted form factors and customizations. Unless Windows 7 is awesome, Android will do well for a while.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Android is the only modern, touch-oriented mobile OS that is mature, flush with apps, and available for virtually every price point, carrier, and form factor one could want. THAT is why it is a success.
    Yup.

    I like the Pre. People I know who have switched from the Pre to othr devices miss its elegance. But they appreciate fast processors, (meaning that calls come through even if you happen to be playing a memory hog like Angry birds) and a huge app store. I'm holding out to CES to see if H/Palm has anything to offer me (on Sprint) but if not, I expect I will be shopping for an Android with a physical keyboard that runs on Sprint. Because the Android market is "saturated", I expect to have a few different models to choose from.
  3. #43  
    Google shouldn't be turning device production down or up, since they are software providers. They should continue to make it available, let carriers and manufacturers have their way to some extent, and then let the market vote with their dollars on what kind of device they want. In the US, people seem to be voting for carrier-branded customized big screen devices that are subsidized.

    In Europe, it's something else altogether. As long as eyeballs are on those devices and using the Web, that's what Google cares about.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Google shouldn't be turning device production down or up, since they are software providers. They should continue to make it available, let carriers and manufacturers have their way to some extent, and then let the market vote with their dollars on what kind of device they want. In the US, people seem to be voting for carrier-branded customized big screen devices that are subsidized.

    In Europe, it's something else altogether. As long as eyeballs are on those devices and using the Web, that's what Google cares about.
    oh ok I see, but do you think at some point with too many options may hender sales a bit just in that regards?
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    oh ok I see, but do you think at some point with too many options may hender sales a bit just in that regards?
    No. Not all of the options are available to all people. Sprint doesn't have Moto Android options or any of the higher end LG ones available in Asia. Verizon doesn't have the Evo or Galaxy S with a keyboard. T-Mobile doesn't have any of the above, but they have the exclusive MyTouch line. Overseas, people are used to a kazillion GSM choices.

    But the sales rate/marketshare of Android has only accelerated with the increase in choices. That can't continue indefinitely, but the inevitable plateau and descent won't be caused by too many choices. At least, I don't think so.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    No. Not all of the options are available to all people. Sprint doesn't have Moto Android options or any of the higher end LG ones available in Asia. Verizon doesn't have the Evo or Galaxy S with a keyboard. T-Mobile doesn't have any of the above, but they have the exclusive MyTouch line. Overseas, people are used to a kazillion GSM choices.

    But the sales rate/marketshare of Android has only accelerated with the increase in choices. That can't continue indefinitely, but the inevitable plateau and descent won't be caused by too many choices. At least, I don't think so.
    I feel you, makes sense.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    oh ok I see, but do you think at some point with too many options may hender sales a bit just in that regards?
    Too many options will certanly hinder sales of competing devices, but how do you expect that to hinder total sales to consumers? There are maybe 100 breakfast cereals in my supermarket, including 3 or 4 brands of "cornflakes" that are almost identical. I still buy breakfast cereal, and appreciate the options.
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
    Too many options will certanly hinder sales of competing devices, but how do you expect that to hinder total sales to consumers? There are maybe 100 breakfast cereals in my supermarket, including 3 or 4 brands of "cornflakes" that are almost identical. I still buy breakfast cereal, and appreciate the options.
    correct, but do you know the sales figures on each of the 100 different brands? Do you know which brand cereal is selling the best, and which is not being sold at all? Do you know which companys brand is making a profit on their cereal every quarter and whos not?
  9. #49  
    Why would I care about any of that?

    I assume that some brands go under, from time to time. Maybe I'll lose a brand I like. But mostly the ones I like are ones that other people like, too, and remain available.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    correct, but do you know the sales figures on each of the 100 different brands? Do you know which brand cereal is selling the best, and which is not being sold at all? Do you know which companys brand is making a profit on their cereal every quarter and whos not?

    I guess this ties in nicely with Nokia's statement that developing android handsets is like peeing in your pants to stay warm. There is little differentiation and so HTC/Samsung and others are set to fall due to the low barriers to entry with android handsets. Google at least is preventing total fragmentation by publishing hardware specs that define which handsets will be able to run each OS version. Gingerbread cornflakes, froyo cornflakes... and it doesn't matter who's brand is on the box and most consumers really don't care. I believe many people buying and activating android phones are unaware that they are running "android". When someone buys an iPhone or a blackberry they know what they have. Saturating the market is exactly what google wants. The app store is completely secondary to getting more devices searching using google and targeting advertisement through gmail and associated services.
  11. #51  
    just a idea of what too many devices rushed out the gate running android from manufactures COULD do to Googles Android in regards to quality.

    Microsoft may be late to the game with a consumer-savvy phone OS, but Windows Phone 7 is aiming to do right a lot of what Google is doing wrong. Based on what I saw during a visit to Microsoft’s headquarters two weeks ago, the Windows Phone 7 team may be on the right track to pose a serious threat to Google.


    Each device must feature three standard hardware buttons, for example, and before they can ship with Windows Phone 7, they have to pass a series of tests directed by Microsoft. (As I mentioned in a feature story about Windows Phone 7, Microsoft has created new lab facilities containing robots and automated programs to test each handset to ensure that features work properly and consistently across multiple devices.)

    The effort to control quality and consistency may be just what Microsoft needs to regain some ground in the phone battle. In the wake of the iPhone revolution, Windows Mobile saw a serious decline in market share; the computer-ey, feature-loaded interface just didn’t cut it anymore. Windows Phone 7 is Microsoft’s complete do-over on a mobile operating system, with a slick new tile-based UI. The first Windows Phone 7 handsets are due in stores November.


    With brand new test facilities, Microsoft is taking on the duty of ensuring that touchscreens and sensors are calibrated properly, for example, and each hardware model undergoes software stress tests to catch bugs and system errors (see picture above). The end result should be getting very close to the same OS on smartphones made by different manufacturers. That in turn could mitigate the issue of fragmentation for third-party developers: They can effectively code the same app for a large party of devices without much tweaking.

    By contrast, Google doesn’t subject manufacturers to similar testing criteria. And we’re seeing the consequences: Some touchscreens work better than others, some apps don’t work on one version of Android while they do on another, and some manufacturers are even cramming bloatware onto Android devices.

    Most importantly, a consistent user experience will help customers understand what they’re getting when they’re shopping for a Windows phone.

    The OS is going to be the same with identical features on every handset, so as a consumer, your decision-making will boil down to the hardware’s look, weight and size. Compare that to the experience of buying an Android phone, which could be running a different version depending on the handset you buy: Donut, Eclair, Froyo, blueberry pie, Neapolitan or whatever Google chooses to call it eventually. You won’t have to ask yourself, “Am I going to get X on this phone or do I have to get another one?” because they’re all running the same OS with a few variations in hardware.

    of course these are just assumptions, but these are the things people will start to ask themselves if competitors make a few handsets a year, with prestine quality, and 1 OS running on all. I myself don't think it will be this extreme at all, but its a thing to think about for the coming years.
    Last edited by wellwellwell11; 01/04/2011 at 01:30 PM.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by konsole View Post
    I guess this ties in nicely with Nokia's statement that developing android handsets is like peeing in your pants to stay warm. There is little differentiation and so HTC/Samsung and others are set to fall due to the low barriers to entry with android handsets. Google at least is preventing total fragmentation by publishing hardware specs that define which handsets will be able to run each OS version. Gingerbread cornflakes, froyo cornflakes... and it doesn't matter who's brand is on the box and most consumers really don't care. I believe many people buying and activating android phones are unaware that they are running "android". When someone buys an iPhone or a blackberry they know what they have. Saturating the market is exactly what google wants. The app store is completely secondary to getting more devices searching using google and targeting advertisement through gmail and associated services.
    I agree completly and think this is Googles complete strategy, which of course up to this point is working.
  13. #53  
    heres also a very good article on what may happen with Googles OS Android. The editor (a android nexus user) also compiles some solutions that seem very feesable for Google to consider.

    The Direction Android Smartphones Are Headed, Why It Might Be Bad, And How Google Can Stop It | Android News, Reviews, Applications, Games, Phones, Devices, Tips, Mods, Videos, Podcasts - Android Police
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    Why do people always say that it's about the marketing?
    I think for lot of people admitting the product is bad is taken as a reflection on them, personally, rightly or wrongly. Because they like that bad product. That means that they are outsiders. most other people want something else. They, rightly or wrongly, view that as a comment on themselves. That they somehow don't measure up. Blaming it on marketing means they dont' have to blame themselves on a poor choice. They can still say I'm right. I'm ok. It was beyond my control. same thing happens when people choose video game consoles, or laptop computers and i'm sure other products. That brand helps some people's self esteem. So much so that they are personally invested in it's success. So they are dependent on it. And they'll fight to defend it, often irrationally. I mean i bought an HD-DVD player. I wanted them to survive cause i wasted $100 on it. It didn't. I'm ****ed cause i wasted $130 bucks on a player and two disks but i honestly couldn't give two ****s about Toshiba or if they succeed or fail.

    As for percentages. I say put the iphone on all 4 carriers, wait one year, then revisit the poll.
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by blackmagic01 View Post
    I think for lot of people admitting the product is bad is taken as a reflection on them, personally, rightly or wrongly...
    Completely agree. Also, It is so much easier to blame a nameless, faceless marketing company for all the problems, rather than have to admit that the company you have expressed loyalty for is not really worth your loyalty. Once you have publicly identified with a company, your fates are inextricably joined. If they look good, you look good. If they look bad... You get the idea.
  16. #56  
    android seems to be getting alot better with every update.
  17. #57  
    so 40% choose ansroid? I wonder if you took and added up all the smartphone models available on the top three or four carriers, what percentage would be android based. Say there are 100 smartphone models available and 75% of them run android. Wouldn't 40% adoption be underperforming? If 75% of smartphone models run android, 40% adoption can be achieved with the uninformed customer just buying whatever the salesman is pushing that day.

    I have no idea what percent of all models run android, but it seems like there's a new choice every 2 weeks or less. The percentage has to be over 40% and if it is, then selling at 40% isn't that big of an endorsement.
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    Why do people always say that it's about the marketing? Couldn't it be about the product? When people say that it's usually all about not wanting to admit that the product that they like is ineferior in the marketplace.
    If it wasn't about the marketing, WebOS would have a much larger share. Most sheeple must be told what to buy.
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by Syndil View Post
    If it wasn't about the marketing, WebOS would have a much larger share. Most sheeple must be told what to buy.
    Or maybe, after seeing/trying/experiencing webOS on a Pre/Pixi, those "sheeple" you describe chose something else they like better. Products have to sell themselves too.
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by mofishmgr View Post
    so 40% choose ansroid? I wonder if you took and added up all the smartphone models available on the top three or four carriers, what percentage would be android based. Say there are 100 smartphone models available and 75% of them run android. Wouldn't 40% adoption be underperforming? If 75% of smartphone models run android, 40% adoption can be achieved with the uninformed customer just buying whatever the salesman is pushing that day.

    I have no idea what percent of all models run android, but it seems like there's a new choice every 2 weeks or less. The percentage has to be over 40% and if it is, then selling at 40% isn't that big of an endorsement.
    LOL @ this post.

    Android takes almost half of the new purchase market and you try to convince people that it is underperforming because it offers too many choices being pushed to uninformed customers.

    Let's hope HP only produces 1 device (call it 1% of the smartphone models) and capture 2% of the new purchase market so we can proclaim how webOS is over-performing when looked at a certain way, with a certain type of lens tilted at a certain angle using a certain colored tint (perhaps rose).

    Gotta love elastic reasoning.
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions