Database Users

whats up with google's lack of widget development?

I'm not just ranting or trying to make a point, I'm legitimately interested in Google's strategy.
Obviously, google cant argue with the fact that htc has widgets that blow googles widgets out of the water. Google cant say theyve worked hard on their widgets and they cant honestly suggest that they are satisfied with them.
Are there any articles or official satements by google/android regarding their refusal to develop Widgets that are more attractive and elaborate? I'm google faithful and wont switch on principle but I can't imagine more than 10% of those people who've tried HTC's subsequently preferring Googles. Its a very strange angle that google has taken.....or maybe its not I'd like to know their view/opinion...does anyone know it? thanks
Incidentally, its not that Google's Widgets are horrible its just that they could be infinitely better at what I would assume to be relatively little effort... off the top of my head if the power widget was broken into single widgets and more options were included that would great and presumably pretty damn simple, and google emphasizes the customizable desktop which I'm all for yet they neglect wiidgets which could really be a draw for potential customers. thank you

Have to agree with you there. They need to add more stock/easy ways to change the look. It would go a long way in selling more phones. People simply think nicer looking things are "cooler" devices. Some of the metamorph's prove the changes aren't exactly difficult. I'm sure they could code a minimal program that had the ability to change the status bar to black, white, gray... A few nice widgets.. Small changes that the XDA community already offers the rooted phones.

If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."

i do agree with you, but those not wanting to void warranty are alittle more limited, i very much want to root but don't want to void warranty to find a month from now something is wrong and theres still no bootloader relock option. i think theres a lot more customization for rooted vs nonrooted and that's where people feel limited and have the "this should have been added" attitude

You have to keep in mind, Google is just providing a basic operating system. They leave it up the the developers to customize it. You can kinda compair it to what microsoft does, loosly. You can build your own computer, buy windows and customise it to your liking. Or you can buy one from Dell that comes pre-loaded with windows and various other applications. Google just really provides the base level OS.
@psylink you dont need root for most widgets. With exception to like the overclock widget and such, or if you are trying to run a widget that was part of a different rom.

JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.

There are a few home screen redesigns on the market that (AFAIK since I've never tried any of them) don't require rooting and significantly change the "look" of the standard phone. Most of them are heavily theme-able as well. On the Behold II forums a lot of people were touting these apps as ways to get rid of the Touchwiz interface that they didn't like (Samsung pouts).
Also, Google created this OS as a platform both for developers to fill with apps, but also for manufacturers to customize to differentiate themselves. If they didn't leave room for manufacturers to customize then the platform would be far less attractive to them and they'd have more adoption problems. If they create too strong of a core UI then they might either be in the position of competing against the manufacturers on that "differentiation" ground, or they might remove any need/desire to customize and the manufacturers would have to consider producing another "me too" phone which they may not like as much, or Google might spend a lot of time on work that will be discarded by the manufacturers during their differentiation. Most of these manufacturers are members of the "alliance" that collaborated on the platform so I'm sure these points were hashed out during that planning phase.
If they don't promote adoption then they lose the win for developers in having a widely adopted platform. Note that even though HTC heavily customizes with Sense and Motorola heavily customizes with Blur and Samsung with Touchwiz, a developer can still write an app that runs on all of those and so everyone is happy.

muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, they could do that, but I don't think they are putting the Nexus One out so much to enter the brand market heavily as they are to put out the canonical reference version of the phone, at least initially. In my mind, the N1 was never to compete with the manufacturers head to head, it was more to have a phone out there that was as open and pluggable as their vision has always been so that if all the manufacturers/carriers decide they are going to take the base OS, lock it down, make people buy ringtones through a carrier market and cripple the browsing so you can't download anything - customers would have an alternative open solution to turn to. In the past there have been classic examples of a given model/brand of phone available from some carriers where you could download any customization file to it that you wanted and then on other carriers it was crippled and locked you in. In those cases you had to buy the crippled versions because there was no independently available canonical "open" version. The N1 fights that tendency not by force or contract, but by simply being. It doesn't have to be the coolest, hippest incarnation, it just has to be pretty and usable and so open that everyone will start to get a distaste for anything closed.
What we are seeing so far with Android isn't so much of this "carrier locking" as it is "carriers customizing so heavily that they threaten the upgrade paths for their customers". I don't think they are doing it intentionally, they just aren't familiar with working on a platform that evolves so quickly. Without the N1 being a bare bones example of the platform they would only be competing with other manufacturers that are similarly locked in by their own lack of upgrade foresight and so the drive to release upgrades wouldn't be so compelling. But, if there are alternatives available that will be keeping up on a much more aggressive pace, like the N1, then they are more likely to fix their differentiating software so that it can move to newer OS versions in a more timely manner. Imagine in a year or two when we can all own Blur or Sense phones and get our OS updates within a month or two of a new OS release.
It's the "reference fully open Android example" and, as such, is less in need of customization as it is to simply stand as an option to keep the others honest. It's meant to be as "close to the raw OS source" as it can be.

muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect

MonkySlap said:
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.

muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but its still content non the less, correct? Doesnt need to be exclusive to be considered content. Me personally I really didnt buy it for stock os or content. I bought mine to tweak, mod, and play with, and it is more then fulfiling that for me . Love the desire rom running so smooth so early in the port.

muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or maybe their philosophy is that any and all "enhancements" should be optional add-ons available to all phones of the breed. As it stands you can only get Sense or Blur if you buy a phone from those manufacturers (or if you root and someone scavenges a semi-compatible ROM from one of them for you). I don't think they want to be in the game of "you have to get your phone from us to get XYZ" and so they provide a reasonably attractive basic package, they set it up so that others can come in and provide openly available enhancements (see the various replacement "home screens" on the market for example) and then the customer gets the benefit of both choice and of an open environment.
I think they view branding as more of an obstacle than as a sales/owner satisfaction tactic.

JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All good points. Now that I think about it I bought this phone for stock google stuff, which in hindsight may have been a mistake. With the g1 and mytouch 3g the google software was often the closest thing to stable available and I've grown to trust mainly them and reputable companies. Its kind of embarrassing to look thru the market and have to sift through countless apps that serve virtually no purpose, have terrible icons, and aren't even close to stable, but perhaps this is a product of androids relative immaturity, though I'm unfamiliar with winmo, palm, and apple. I just haven't been impressed with many third party apps or Widgets, save a select few very impressive ones. 90% of the apps look and feel very amateur. I stick to apps and Widgets produced by real companies because those have the best chance of being usuable. That was quite a gamble by google to go largely hands off and let all software be driven by development. Xda has spotlighted many excellent devs as far as rooting goes but for the average user the options are unimpressive. Maybe google will give in and start developing more usuable/stable/useful apps/widgets

I think that there are two schools of thought on this, yet we are all agreeing on the same concept.
While Google did create Android to be a stock type OS that they could distribute to multiple handset makers (in order to increase their ability to produce smartphones with only minor increases in developmental costs aside from those related to hardware - ultimately getting more people using the mobile web resulting in more ad revenue -whew! ), they also have in a sense slightly abandoned those of us who took the direct to consumers path. This is why they didn't put much into the release of the phone (look up the launch stats - or lack of accessories). While they don't have the responsibility to create widgets, programs, animations, etc. for us (the D2C crowd). I believe that they should have worked out a deal with HTC where we are allowed to unlock the bootloader and tinker/mod/play with/customize, etc as much as we want to without penalty or breaking the warranty. We don't have the funding to purchase a few hundred phones in case we brick them testing out various configs., nor do most of us have the expertise to repair the device if it gets bricked. The only other possibility is that a contract clause is created whereby we are allowed to download ROMs from Android manufacturers (or at least just HTC) and put them on our phones - doesn't that give us the MOST number of options to customize our phones? And isn't the ability to customize an Android phone the original intent of the OS?
By giving us either an allowance to unlock the bootloader or the allowance to download (and maybe play with other manufacturer customized ROMs) or preferably both I think that it would be a win-win situation.

what do google and android want out of this?

I know that when Android began development their focus was on apple and they wanted to compete with the iPhone. Which is a commmendable goal because the iphone ineluctably changed the mobile device world for the better. This makes me think Android has a lot they want to do with the stock ui and not just fixes to further stabilize the software but to give the UI a seeker look and add functionality.
On the other hand I've read here that Google just wants to make a stable UI available for companies like MOTO and HTC to skin and for developers to customize and improve.
Id like to think that Android has big plans for my new nexus one.
So do you guys think Google looks at HTC's sense and says " its all going according to plan, companies are taking our software and vastly improving it so we do the leg work and get our software on mass amounts of phones and manufacturers can customize it to their liking and their customer preferences" or do you think they say " wow HTC has really made phenomenal improvements on our software so we need to step up our game and make 2.2 and on more competitive"
I do understand its open source implying the intention for third party customization. but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way, i just hope android isnt stopping short on purpose to let developers put the finishing touches, thats a great option to have but id rather not be compelled to root.
I'm not saying android stock isn't very solid. Other than sense its the best ui available. I'm just trying to clarify whether android wants stable software by them at the heart of every mobile device and customized by those manufacturers or if they want android stock to be competitive in and of its self. Personally I'm hoping for the latter.
Your thoughts?

I don't know if their focus is so much of pushing people to make their own but more of focusing on the availability. They seem to want to always have the availability of customization and freedom. I think they see Sense UI as "Hey people actually love our work and are willing to spend days/months on working to make something of our product."
Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"

Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
touche.....

i can't see google having any problems with sense UI, any improvement is great. Anything that will make more people use android and use google's services, im sure they will be happy with. Somehow i don't think they are happy with the deals the other companies have made with bing and yahoo though.

DMaverick50 said:
but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.

O
Paul22000 said:
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely understand what you're saying, that they want their software on as many devices as possible. That was actually the first of the two possibilities I offered. Officially google initially indicated they wanted to compete with apple (the second possibility I offered) and as a nexus owner I hoped for the second but it makes a lot more business sense to make their software/applications ubiquitous. And at the end of the day, google has a bottom line to worry about. So I guess in the end the manufacturers using android but customizing it probably offers a more thoughtful interface (though many, many prefer stock) but having stock android is more likely to receive updates fastest while some customized skins may not receive them period. Seems like a win-win for consumers regardless of android and Google's strategy.

I never saw Android as a competition to iPhone. There are huge differences between them. To start with, iPhone is a hardware and Android is an OS.
Android is not just targetted towards phone.. but also a more lucrative platform buisness. Android is targeted towards Windows and Linux and not iPhone.
Windows CE and Linux are pretty much the only choice for platforms. Many GPS units, car control systems, Controllers for many equipment etc.. are all Windows CE or custom linux. Android is targeting this market share. Therefore it is not surprising that Android has similiar policies like Win CE and linux to keep the core seperate from UI. Customers can choose their UI to adapt their implimentation. e.g. many of us don't even relaize that our car GPS has windows in it or our routers has linux in it.
Of course there are other advantages of controling a platform. They have been nicely sumarized by paul.

The Future of Android

Hello Everyone!
Let me start off by reaching out to the XDA Administrative staff. I would like to thank you for keeping this awesome place in operation. Without you, and the XDA community, I'm not sure Android development would be as vibrant. Also, if this thread is in the wrong location, please shift it to where you would like it.
I am an Android user, not a developer, and I feel the future of the Android OS is not headed where I want it to. I'm writing this post to see if anyone has any further thoughts on the matter.
Google is marketing Android as an Open Source OS. You are able to download the source, modify it as you wish, and then build it. If you are running a vanilla build of Android (i.e. Nexus S) you are able to alter your experience as you see fit. The issue I foresee isn't the fragmentation of the Android versions (which is still debated as an issue), but rather the fragmentation of the user experience.
When an end-user purchases a handset from most major carriers, they receive an Android device. Between different handsets, and carriers, the features that are available to a single user can vary exponentially (i.e. the inability to install APK files, bypassing the market, on AT&T devices). This device is still based on Android, but is it still Android?
I have no problem with manufacturers adding their own code to the Android system, as long as the core functionality is kept the same. When you begin to alter the basic functionality of the system, at what point is it no longer Android? Linux Mint is derived from Ubuntu, but it is no longer Ubuntu. The system is a derivative of Ubuntu. If the base of the OS is going to be altered drastically (by manufacturer or by request of carrier) it needs to be known that the device is not Android.
As I am most familiar with HTC Android devices, I will use HTC SenseUI as an example (although, as I think about this more it may not be the best example). The core functionality of the HTC devices is similar, but not entirely the same. Most of the default applications (Browser, Contacts, Dialer) have been altered to what HTC feels is more atheistically pleasing. However, these features are additions. They are not removing functionality from the device.
With my HTC Evo (by default) there are core functionalities removed. Without rooting my device, I am unable to tether via WiFi. Even when rooting, if I want to keep the 4G experience, I need to install a third party application to tether instead of simply using the functionality that was supposed to be built in to Android. Why? Sprint has decided to bake their own hotspot functionality into the core of the OS. Yet to use it, I am required to pay an extra $30 fee on top of my [i/unlimited[/i] data plan. I am not knocking Sprint, here. As long as I have used their service, I’ve had nothing but stellar performance and the price point is perfect.
I feel with this core functionality removed, my Evo is no longer Android. It’s simply Android-based, an Android derived OS. The problem with these manufacturers, and their Android-derived operating system, is the lack-luster experience the consumers get with the product.
I started my Android experience on an HTC CDMA Hero. It took me eight months to get any major software upgrades (The device ran Android 1.5 from factory). Why? Because it was taking so long for manufacturers to bake their Features into the OS. If I was not a techie, I feel this experience would have pushed me away from the Android platform. I fear this fragmentation that is occurring could be the downfall of the Android platform.
I want to be able to buy a device. I want to be running the newest version of Android. If I do not like the ROM that came on the phone, I want to be able to change that. But I do not want to purchase a phone with all of this baked in garbage, or aesthetic features that require me to wait long periods of times for my device to be upgraded to the newest version of Android. And, I hope that I am not the only person to feel this way.
So here is my idea, pending input from the Android community of course: An open letter, with a petition, to all members of the OHA requesting for Android devices to be Android! Unadulterated Android OS from Google (With minor modifications to ensure specific hardware is working properly). Requesting that we are given access to the entire device, that we paid for, without having to exploit the operating system to obtain the ability to modify it as we see fit. If a manufacturer, or carrier, does not wish to comply with this, they will not be able to market the device as being Android. Rather, the device is based on Android.
Honestly, I’m not sure what I am looking to accomplish. Maybe, just so they know we are just as interested in Android as they are. And that we want nothing but for Android to succeed. Or maybe, that we support Android being open source, but not being heavily modified to the point where it’s a bastardized.
What do you think?

Tim, I support you in your belief that carriers, not manufacturers, are taking the wrong turn by messing with the full functionality that people pay a hefty price to OWN!
Do we truly OWN what we paid for, or are paying for? I don't believe so, for example, the SAMSUNG Vibrant t959, aka the Samsung Galaxy S i9000, same phone but the carriers decided to have certain features removed from the phone, not be MADE without these features, the FM radio HW and the FFC. Many people know these features were REMOVED, due to the leftover molding and other " skeletons"! Would anyone want to have a carrier when they know that they don't want there customers to have the FULLEST experience, like it was meant to be?
Sent from my HTC MyDesireHD 4G!

I would also like to share with you that MANUFACTURERS creating these "skins", I'm going to use HTC Sense for my example, is actually NOT a bad thing at all!
HTC Sense has opened a huge amount of rich content and functionality to there users immensely! HTC Hub, HTC Locations for example! All these add ons are very useful to users and does NOT restrict the full functionality but yet BOOSTS its functionality!
Unfortunately though, carriers decide to take these hearty and supreme names and totally rip it apart by taking away functionality, features, and the most...a good user experience! For example, my phone..the HTC MyTouch 4G aka the HTC Glacier. I received it with something called Sense on it, but any owner knows that is NOT Sense! That is not HTC Sense! After burying myself in the bowels of my new phone, I now have a HTC Desire HD Rom on it that will stay on it until I get the new HTC Sense 2.3 update! The full HTC Sense is a good thing and I strongly believe its worth waiting for!
Sent from my HTC Glacier

I agree, but believe Android is a growing mobile OS. If Google did not push their mobile OS (and let manufactures do what they want). Android probably would not have last against the competition. Its all a survival of the fittest situation. Some people are going to make use of their phones others aren't. Too bad bloatware has been the success for some Android phones. Glad someone else noticed this. Thank you for your thread.

The fact that Android is open source will inevitably have benefits and downfalls.
Benefits being that carriers and manufacturers can add cool stuff. Downfalls being that they can remove good or add awful stuff.
However Google can't have double standards. If it's open source, it's open source, for better or for worse.
An advantage of OEMs participating is that more parties are contributing to coding for android. More innovative ideas are potentially contributed.
For techies this is particularly awesome as we can port awesome features that perhaps weren't designed for our phone and disable lame restrictions. By this way we potentially can have all software benefits of more than one company brand etc.
Being an ordinary consumer in this context can suck.

Tim, while I understand your frustration (trust me, I've felt similar over the past few months), I don't fully agree.
The heart of Android is that it is Open. Open Source is a part of the openness that envelops Android, but what is meant by "Android is open" is so much more. OEM's skinning their devices is part of it; carriers stuffing devices full of their crapware is part of it; heck, even manufacturers/carriers limiting devices' use in one form or another is technically part of it. I think that Google's model with Android is that people can use in whatever way they see fit (except, you know, literally stealing it and claiming that they made and own it) and adapting it to be the OS that they want. Android gives people the freedom to do with it what they like.
I think that Google hopes that carriers, OEMs and everyone else will use it for the better and add to the functionality and maybe even contribute to the Open Source project and thus to the greater Android community and the vision thereof. Sadly, it is not always the case and then you get situations where a carrier or an OEM will limit a device in some way for a quick buck (your example of tethering on the EVO being a good one). I think that what AT&T did/does on their Android devices is as a final product a good example of what Android is not intended to be, but their actions are, technically, still in the spirit of Android.
The way I see Android, it is about the freedom to do whatever you like. Android is then also more for the thinking person as there are literally hundreds of devices to choose from and each one has strengths and weaknesses when compared to the rest. You as a user need to consider what it is that you want from your device and then select the device that is the most suited to your needs.
I want to be able to buy a device. I want to be running the newest version of Android. If I do not like the ROM that came on the phone, I want to be able to change that. But I do not want to purchase a phone with all of this baked in garbage, or aesthetic features that require me to wait long periods of times for my device to be upgraded to the newest version of Android. And, I hope that I am not the only person to feel this way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are not the only person that feels that way, I feel the same, which is why I've decided to get myself a Nexus S. It's tricky to get it to this country, but it'll be worth it. I realise that you're on Sprint which means that a Nexus device won't work, correct? A better petition IMO, would be to petition Google to release CDMA versions of their devices.

Sorry to say, but 4G is not derived from android. The phone itself will always support it, harware wise. So, what are you saying? /: Who are you complaining to? ROM chefs for not managing to make the 4G fully functional?

totally agree with you
he is complaining about gimped devices being marketed as android devices. to sum up what i think his messages is; a device should not be called an android device if it is not fully capable of all it's natively supported features, wireless tether, root access etc. but rather should be called android based device.

Good idea but never going to happen. This is driving me away from this platform...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

I'm curious as to what functionality we can get by simply rooting. I'm not seeing the huge deal I may be missing something so I'm asking
Sent from my Incredible using XDA App

To me, they should just change the launcher and add their own apps in (NOT replacing) and not touch other stuffs already. If totally not changing the OS makes them look alike. To me, thinking about Windows phone 7 in the future. Imagine seeing so many people holding a phone that has the totally same UI, its like seeing a Sony Ericsson X10 and a HTC Desire totally same except that the casing is different.

Technically, the fact that its open source is supposed to help the majority of OEMs, and in turnfilter down to end users as price cuts/ feature enhancements.
But premium features are premium features. You want some kind of 4g? You wont be getting it from end users at xda - it will come from manufacturers who build the radios and APIs into the device.
Android is a very modular os... if you want something all you have to do is a bit of research and buy the device that fits you best. If you go with one of the other systems you will simply have less choice. That is why android is cool.

aint gonna happen guys, doesnt make good business sense to make a device that does everything, why sell one model when you can sell two!
you can pick up any device out there and say, "wouldnt it be cool if it had VGA out or HD camera or x y z", they wont do it, and the same goes for the OS as well.
Open source has an inherant flaw, and that is its fragmentation, everyone believes it should be going in a direction they would like (including yourself). at the moment its not suffered as much as its desktop cousins probably because of its market place keeping one common aspect through all devices but give it time and you will be right, it will lose its "android" identification
If you want an alternative and a device that keeps its personality then get an Iphone or a new WP7 device at least until they crack that wide open too. Its a bit ironic really that WM may well suck but its very customizable and has been consistant throughout the ages

evo4gnw said:
he is complaining about gimped devices being marketed as android devices. to sum up what i think his messages is; a device should not be called an android device if it is not fully capable of all it's natively supported features, wireless tether, root access etc. but rather should be called android based device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's just the thing isn't it? Android can probably support ANYTHING. But because of that, you aren't supposed to release hardware that isn't as flexible? That to me.. is just looney.

An Open Letter to Android via Google and Forwarded to Samsung

Hi XDA-Samsung Users,
I've been a member of XDA since Jan last year. I went from owning a Nexus One to a Samsung Galaxy S i9000. The reason for the change was for the better specs and superior hardware of the Samsung Galaxy.
The phone is an incredible piece of machinery, but is severely hampered by the modifications that Samsung makes to the Android OS. I admit that the codec support within TouchWiz is impressive, but too much of the core framework of the phone is inefficient and sluggish.
Even using the latest release of unofficial firmware Samsung, Android 2.2.1 (JPY), there is still the occasional hang and the missing RAM (which is there somewhere, but not for user applications).
Samsung is mostly to blame, but there is also a quality control element that Google should be responsible for.
I have prepared an open letter that I sent to Android via Google Press and then forwarded on to Samsung for their reference. This were all through publicly available channels so will have to filter through customer service centers and the like.
I'm not expecting much, Google appears to use Amazon's customer service approach, "No customer service is good customer service".
But would like to post it here to hopefully get it out into the wilderness.
I tweeted it here http://twitter.com/#!/ibproud/status/27528781828722688
and would appreciate if you agreed with the content to retweet it. Hopefully it should give it a bit more weight.
It would be interesting to get the communities feedback on how mature they believe Android is.
Do they need to keep trying to make everyone happy or can they start to use the weight of their OS to get manufacturers to align the user experience?
Dear Android Team,
I am writing this letter to air my frustrations and to hopefully get some peace of mind that your strategy for Android will resolve some of the main issues plaguing the platform.
I have now been with Android for over 12 months. I used to be an iPhone user, but couldn’t stand the walled garden that Apple put me in. I couldn’t download directly to the phone, replace the messaging app or sync wirelessly. I went to Android because I wanted the freedom to use my phone more as a desktop replacement than as a phone/mp3 player.
When I joined the Android family (January 2010), I started with the Google Nexus One. I was so keen to get into the Android community I didn’t even wait for it to be on sale in Australia to get it, thus I hit eBay and bought it outright.
I was very pleased with the platform but could still see a few rough edges around the Operating System. It had the usability I was looking for but was lacking the polish I had grown use to with Apple. There was good news on the horizon with an Éclair update that would give the already beautiful phone a nudge in the right direction. As I was in Australia and the phone wasn’t here yet, I had to push the update through myself, after seeing how easy this was and getting the feeling of being a little phone hacker, I was hooked, I started preaching Android to the masses. Australia is still building momentum for the platform and it’s taking some time. Most of the major carriers stock between 4-6 Android devices, most of which are low end or outdated in the overseas markets.
I follow all the key players in the industry through Twitter and have a majority of Google News trackers picking up articles with android related words. I have also now converted my Wife to Android (HTC Desire Z, also not available in Aus) and I picked up the Samsung Galaxy S and gave my sister the Nexus One. The problem I face now is that I’ve run out of money and can’t go out and buy a new Android phone just to be up to date with the latest Android OS (Gingerbread), this would also be the case for most consumers. The Nexus S is so similar to my current hardware that I must be able to leverage the extra performance from the update.
But alas, we reach the major problem with the platform. Fragmentation. I’m not referring to the Fragmentation of the various app stores and apps available based on different OS versions but more to the Fragmentation of the OS based on the custom skins and manufacturer update cycles. The open platform that is closed at 2 levels, Manufactures and Carriers. I will continue to buy my phones outright as it gives me the freedom and flexibility to upgrade my plans as better ones become available. This always guarantees that I’m free from the bloatware that is preloaded on most Carrier bought phones and free from 1 of the barriers to the true AOSP experience. The next barrier is one that is running rampant in the interwebs rumour mill at the moment and that’s manufacturer updates and in my case I refer to Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy S phones come loaded with Android 2.1, most of them internationally are running Android 2.2 and just recently as select group of the devices is getting Android 2.2.1. This is now a month after Android 2.3 was released. For Samsung I would consider this largely negligent, considering they had the opportunity to work with Google to build a Google Experience Phone (Nexus S). The specs of this phone are so similar to the Galaxy range that a port shouldn’t be too difficult. I understand that there are a lot of constraints and dependencies in the development cycle that could cause delays as well as manufacturers agendas (mostly in unit sales). It is great that Samsung have sold so many devices globally but at a cost of the user experience as well as potential damages to long term retention.
I understand the Open nature of Android and the push to encourage manufacturers to put there own spin on the platform, but Android is getting bigger and more mature, it doesn’t need to be High school girl bending to the whims and peer pressure from the carriers and manufacturers.
There are a team of Devs in Germany who are working to port CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread) to Galaxy S i9000, but these guys have now spent over four months just trying to get through Samsungs drivers. The team didn’t start just to customise the phone but to actually make the phone work properly, I of course refer to the RFS lag issue and Samsungs modification to the framework that slowed it down. The goal of the team is to maximise the potential of the hardware and operating system.
It would be great to see some muscle from Google thrown into the mix, there doesn’t need to be requirements dictated, but maybe ethics encouraged.
There seems to be a few options here:
- Encourage device manufacturers to share their drivers, if it is too sensitive to share at least work with the community to help them do it themselves.
- Start to break down the way the platform is customised so that way the manufactures (Samsung/HTC/Motorola) skin the platform can sit a layer above the core code, thus be a quick implementation/customisation to get their skins working.
- Get each manufacturer to offer the AOSP experience to advanced users. This can be done through an agreement between the user and manufacture that states this will void the warranty and have its own terms and conditions.
- This last one is a long stretch, but how about taking all the manufacturers drivers into a repository, the way Windows do updates. When a new Android version is developed the drivers can be updated or incorporated and be packaged out through the Android SDK.
I may be completely off the mark. I’m not a developer and couldn’t pretend to know what effort is involved at any stage of the process, from building Android to rolling it out into the latest and greatest phone. The one thing I am though is an End User, a person that wants my phone to do more, to get close to being a desktop replacement.
Maybe I’m also being a bit idealistic.
I hope the Android platform continues to flourish and for it to become the Windows of the mobile era.
Sincerely,
Irwin Proud
E: [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

It's really an excellent summary. Consider there're even more black sheeps out there. For example Sony Ericcson which ones recently made a statement like Android is their favourite Smartphone OS and left Symbian in Nokias hands.
But we found also the good ones like HTC, which every Manufacturer should have HTC as its Paragon concerning Android Software Development.

Great write-up; I agree 100%

I agree with your post fully, and concur that the Windows Phone 7 model for OS updates is more efficient, and strikes a happy medium between iOS and Android's approach to upgrades. However it is also more restrictive in terms of handset hardware limitations
I suppose the idea is that customers should vote with their wallets and buy from companies with good software and firmware support. The problem with that is a majority of phone users (android or otherwise) are technically savvy enough to take such support into consideration when looking at the latest and greatest fancy phone in a store. We could all buy the Nexus One or Nexus S only, but this too is restrictive to the customer as other phones offer more/different features

my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.

What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.

What Google should do?
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please allow me to politely disagree. Google can do a lot about this and they have done this also. When I say they have done this - I am talking about not having Market application on Android OSes which come on non-phone hardware.
Google should put similar restrictions for loosley coupled skins, upgradable drivers. I had been giving this a lot of thought lately. I will sum up my thoughts with above letter as above:-
i) Device manufacturer skinning - Google should mandate that it should be just another APK within AOSP and users should be given a choice to turn it off.
ii) Device Drivers - Google should mandate there should be a better way of installing device drivers - similar to what we have in MS Windows (MS Windows is an excellent model of how hardware device should be handled - this lead to the exponential growth Windows is enjoying now).
iii) Android OS Update - If Google can achieve the above two, then the choice to upgrade the OS should be at user discretion. Of course, Google should mandate that there is OTA availble as an option. And obviously this OTA would be served by Google, not by device manufacturers. This would also free up time, effort and cash spent by device manufacturers in upgrading the OS.
So this is in the best of interest of everybody.
These restrictions if put in place, would free us all from this phenomena of running outdated OS.

Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.

Thank you so far for the feedback.
poundesville said:
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember most members of XDA would be a cut above the average user. The reason this letter was written the way it was, was to demonstrate that I am a typical end user. Although I would consider myself leaning slightly to the more advanced side I wrote the letter based on a very general experience of the platform, an experience a lot of consumers would go through.
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What am I trying to achieve with this letter?
I really don’t know, but it helps to just get the thoughts out there.
With approximately 300,000 activations daily, I don’t think Android sees the true reflection of how their platform is received.
When the Galaxy range of phones was released in the US, they would have been seen as the closest thing to an iPhone that non-AT&T customers could get. So sales and activations shouldn’t be seen as the indicator of clever consumers or consumers wanting an open platform, but of consumers who wanted an iPhone but for the various reasons didn’t want to go with AT&T.
Remember: The international Samsung Galaxy is the only Android phone I know of that looks more like an iPhone than any other phone.
What I would really like to see is, that annually google will release a major version of Android. So V1, V2, V3, etc…. the mobile manufacturers commit to any minor or incremental updates per major version. So if Google says they are releasing Android 2.4 then they are saying to the manufacturer that this version will also work on any phone that currently supports v2.1 to v2.3.
As more and more people move to smartphones and tablets, more and more will we see hackers, spammers, botnets and so on attempt to access our devices. If we can’t have the latest updates that close any open holes then our phones become a huge liability.
Pierreken said:
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure if Samsung has failed as such, but have put too much focus on unit sales rather than quality control and great user experience. They started releasing different iterations and modifications to the same phone without considering that each minor tweak to the hardware would mean more resources to develop updates and maintain each device.
I also agree that without Samsung I would know very little about linux filesystems, kernel and custom roms, but shouldn't all of these be more to push the phone above it's limits and not to just get it working properly?
There's nothing wrong with knowing the advanced stuff, however it shouldn't be a necessity.

The problem ironically is that Android is open source. I agree wit the letter above, but I can;t see how you can stop manufacturers doing what they want.
Also the Drivers being proprietary isn't going to change and device manufacturers aren't going to suddenly start releasing their closed driver sources.
Agreed Google should stand up and restrict the Skins to a single APK that can be removed, this would stop all the associated problems with HTC and Samsung skinning too deep in to the OS that it becomes impossible to remove it. The problem with that is, then any manufacturers APK will be installable on any phone. Which is something we know they don't want.
We already know Androids biggest downfall and so does Google. Fragmentation.
I believe once Google has the strong position they want and users demand Android when they buy a new phone, they will start to put their foot down and try to enforce standardisation across Manufacturers, but until they get to what they feel is that point, we're stuck.
Anyway much luck with the letter, I hope someone who matters get's to see it.
Logicalstep

A Rant: Anroid, Get your Shiz Together!

This is what I type at 3 in the morning. Please read for a minute, I'll keep it short and get to the point. I feel NS owners should see this since they seem the most enthusiastic.
This is generally for Android as a whole, targeting Google. Wow, so it's been how many years since Android first came out? And what is the only other competitor in the market - oh right, iOS. iOS has been destroying the market with only one phone which rarely has any lag/bug/glitch issues, namely the 4S or the new 5 (minus the Maps).
The only reason Android has a large market share is due to the large number of phones at reasonable prices. That is all. There are only two competitors in this oligarchy, and one still can't do it right. Google engineers are apparently among the highest paid, yet they decide to constantly release updates which constantly has bugs. It is a pity, to look at many of you Android enthusiasts that are giving a lot of attention to Android development and are contributing to this world, when Google themselves is not treating you right, thus I feel that you are the reason that the brand is remaining strong. You guys have the capacity to overlook its bugs/lags and see what Android is there truly for. On the other hand, I doubt iOS users actually care about that topic since it is rarely seen.
Next, the phones. So we have like a thousand phones running Android from like 20 different manufacturers. What the..? Alright, phones that are aimed for a low budget do not count, but the Nexus devices that Google works on - they should be at least revolutionary. Google has to partner up with different manufacturers each time when creating the next Nexus? Talk about inconsistency, and inviting a lack of hardware acceleration with its software. Google can even build their own phones if they have to, but just get it right! I mean their latest phone, the Galaxy Nexus, is still not a stable phone (although I thought it would be). Samsung is actually holding it down and implementing their own stuff to create a good user experience (thus the success of the Galaxy line). Other than that, ALL other manufacturers are literally wasting money (but producing profits) by adopting Android and Google themselves are getting much more love than they should be getting.
Creating new updates and naming them after the alphabet and weird food names is quite cheesy. That's not the issue though, it creates hype by many users - the anxiety of waiting for the next update that will 'fix all problems' - but what happens? Promises are broken, and the software is bad once again. Like the JB update - turns out it's bad and many/most users tend to agree. So much for project butter haha. It's simply not worth it, not worth stressing or wasting time on it. I realize I am doing that by typing this post, but it needed to be done. People who are making money off of it - you're fine actually.
The message I am trying to get across is that Google's android software is not worth it, we all know it's bad, and Google seriously needs to get it right before everyone hops on the iBoat. There are actually multiple little things that I tried to get across in the post. That is all.

Cool story. Feel free to jump on the iOS wagon. I, for one, really like android.

I'm with android for the customization and freedom. I came from Windows Mobile where you could change anything you wanted and fell in love with flashing custom ROMS and even had a duel boot of WM6 and android 1.0 when I first came out (hated it back then, by the way.)
I bought an iPhone 3g when they came out and sold it by the next day. As you said, it was "flawless" as far as the operation of the OS, but when the OS imposes so much control over user input what do you expect? The iPhone tells you what you're allowed to do, it's not the user that defines what the phone can do.
After dropping my Tilt 2 flat on its face and tearing the ribbon for the screen, I hit the market for a new phone. Windows Mobile was still in the hundreds, but android was a cheaper alternative. I got a Samsung Moment and never looked back.
Maybe coming from Windows Mobile to android is why I don't have as many bug complaints. WM was mostly ALL bugs and glitches. That's not why I had the phone though - I had it for the features. Namely the ability to tether, which took android AND apple several releases to incorporate into their builds, but which was plug-n-play on every WM device I owned YEARS before. I also really enjoyed Windows Voice Command, better recognized as the Sync system in Ford vehicles. I could wear my bluetooth headset and make calls, open programs, listen to music and change songs all without having to touch the phone. Once again, it took apple and Google several editions to add useful voice commands to their systems.
I still miss remote desktop. I stopped having to store music and movies on my device because I could open a program and directly access every file on my home computer and stream anything to my phone screen.
So ultimately I'm with android for the freedom. The openness. The fact that they ALLOW outside developers to exist at all! It's the creativity found in the android community that has kept me, not the hope for a "fix all" update. Personally, the only problem I've ever had with my Android phones is the actual phone app itself. Delayed ringing and sometimes the inability to answer to even slide and answer the call due to screen freezing.
That's MY rant at 5 am lol
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda app-developers app

I'll have a Lamborghini Gallardo, Olivia Wilde and a cherry Coke, while we're at it (dreaming).

When you buy a new phone it should be completely yours not locked down by the manufacturer. If I want to brick I want to be able to do it.
If you really don't like it there a lot of rotten apple phones out there for you to buy.

anyway, I was on stock JB for a while, I haven't encountered all this **** your talking about. It could be faster, nicer, with more options but it is working quite well
Envoyé depuis mon Nexus S avec Tapatalk

Go get lost. Steve Job is waiting there to pay you for this iPhone advertisements in an android thread. You are required there not here. Lol....
Sent from my Nexus S

madd0g said:
I'll have a Lamborghini Gallardo, Olivia Wilde and a cherry Coke, while we're at it (dreaming).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scratch that lambo make it an Aston Martin Vantage V12. Regarding the other two: Plenty of cherry coke around, but we're gonna have a problem with Olivia: I won't share, no crossing swords!

I love when people try to tell me how I should feel about the products I enjoy.

Logomotph said:
Cool story. Feel free to jump on the iOS wagon. I, for one, really like android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know right?
madd0g said:
I'll have a Lamborghini Gallardo, Olivia Wilde and a cherry Coke, while we're at it (dreaming).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can I get that with no cholesterol burger and fries?
p.pavljasevic said:
When you buy a new phone it should be completely yours not locked down by the manufacturer. If I want to brick I want to be able to do it.
If you really don't like it there a lot of rotten apple phones out there for you to buy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've said this before. I hate when companies wanna slap their branding all over my 4 to 600 dollar smartphone and load it up with their crap I am never gonna use.
styckx said:
I love when people try to tell me how I should feel about the products I enjoy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My best friend is a iPhone fanboy. I have to show him once a month why my Nexus S 4G is better then his iPhone 4s.

to each his own, i don't mind jb's quirkyness, it's also a matter of finding just the right rom/kernel combo... can't speak for stock JB.
aokp JB 4 + marmite 4.8.7 is doing quite nice, steady & haven't had weird reboots yet

I will admit that the Nexus S has a hard time with stock Jelly Bean. It pushes the NS basically to its limits in terms of hardware capability. That said, as a daily driver, it's still very, very usable. If you want to see Jelly Bean run like a f**king champ, run it on a Galaxy Nexus or Nexus 7. It's pretty amazing.

Okay I'm not favouring iOS or anything and no I'm not jumping on their wagon, and I am also not hating on Android's customization/community. I've had my Nexus S for almost 1.5 years now and I still believe it's not outdated (great camera, front-facing camera, good screen, good touch sensor)
I appreciate that Android lets its customers customize the phones more than Apple. But what about the 'majority' who don't root or install 3rd party keyboards, etc. and like to run stock? I for one am running stock and native since I believe it should give the best performance as it is made by the manufacturer. But I'm not getting that! There are the red flags going off.
Additionally, when I was referring to iOS, I mean to say mainly iPhone 4 and up. The iPhone 3 was quite bad (although still better than android at that point in time). But with iOS 5/6, sure it takes away user customization, but the majority does not anyway - they just use their phone for their intended purposes and yet experience difficulties? That's a no no. However, ONE thing I do enjoy is widgets over having iOS.

Plenty of people dont run stock as per your definition. Plenty of people use or at least tried different keyboards / launchers / messaging apps etc
Root is not required and installing those apps is no different then installing any other app like Pandora. They are also often editors choice and top selling / top free apps in the play store. People know about them and use them. You don't need a to be a hardcore user to know about and use them.
People actually do change up there apps all the time and on all platforms. Its like saying people with a iPhone shouldn't use instagram because the phone comes with a camera application out the box.
Bottom line is if the user has a option to try different apps they will. Especially if its easy for the average user to install like a normal app. Imagine for a second if winterboard was freely available in the app store and functioned the same way it does on a jail broken device. I'd bet within 24 hrs it would become the most popular app in the app store. Your argument just seems silly to me. People will and do change things are freely and easily changed

albundy2010 said:
Plenty of people dont run stock as per your definition. Plenty of people use or at least tried different keyboards / launchers / messaging apps etc
Root is not required and installing those apps is no different then installing any other app like Pandora. They are also often editors choice and top selling / top free apps in the play store. People know about them and use them. You don't need a to be a hardcore user to know about and use them.
People actually do change up there apps all the time and on all platforms. Its like saying people with a iPhone shouldn't use instagram because the phone comes with a camera application out the box.
Bottom line is if the user has a option to try different apps they will. Especially if its easy for the average user to install like a normal app. Imagine for a second if winterboard was freely available in the app store and functioned the same way it does on a jail broken device. I'd bet within 24 hrs it would become the most popular app in the app store. Your argument just seems silly to me. People will and do change things are freely and easily changed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wonderfully said.

Another tiny bit to add on to my previous point.
The focal point of apples marketing strategy used to be " there is a app for that". Of course this is after they decided to even include a store. Who can forget the air traffic controller getting the weather from his iPhone?
But this doesn't seem to apply to things apple thinks its users shouldn't change.

What are you going to use your nexus to do as you write it has a hard time using jelly bean? - I my self have not got complications - I think I have used jelly bean nearly from when it was free - and I for my part - find it fast and free from lack - it play film - I read a lot news on it - it is very nice to read ebooks - see tv - you name it - ok - I do not use it for play - as all play for me are more or less the same - but ells I injoy jelly bean on my nexus s
Sent from my Nexus S using xda app-developers app

albundy2010 said:
Plenty of people dont run stock as per your definition. Plenty of people use or at least tried different keyboards / launchers / messaging apps etc
Root is not required and installing those apps is no different then installing any other app like Pandora. They are also often editors choice and top selling / top free apps in the play store. People know about them and use them. You don't need a to be a hardcore user to know about and use them.
People actually do change up there apps all the time and on all platforms. Its like saying people with a iPhone shouldn't use instagram because the phone comes with a camera application out the box.
Bottom line is if the user has a option to try different apps they will. Especially if its easy for the average user to install like a normal app. Imagine for a second if winterboard was freely available in the app store and functioned the same way it does on a jail broken device. I'd bet within 24 hrs it would become the most popular app in the app store. Your argument just seems silly to me. People will and do change things are freely and easily changed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't understand, you're going off on apps when I am not talking about customization. I am just talking about the performance of the phone and the bugs it has. Let me be specific - as I unlock my phone, i swipe through home screens = lag. I open my camera, it takes a while at times = lag. I scroll through a list, and it lags on me. Even though it is minuscule Google needs to clean it up, since I never see it on an iOS device which is a fair comparison as it is the leading competitor.
I am not talking about apps or anything, I think we and everyone has already established that it has more customization. I know most users have 'tried' some customizable app that is not available to iOS but that is no excuse for the actual performance bugs it has. I don't play games (like rarely maybe) on the phone and don't have a huge load of apps installed either. Things just aren't nifty..and it is taking them years to get it right but they'd rather focus on other feature additions which also work poorly.

You are the one who brought up that entire what about the majority of the people out there that don't run third party keyboards etc.
You brought it up. I said it was rubbish.
Android has always been laggy compared to iOS. Apple did a good job with that from the beginning.
The majority of your op is simply not worthy of responding to. Actually I re read it just now and I consider it all entirely flame bait/ trolling. You joined the forum 3 days prior to that as well. Not bothering with that type of silly debate/flaming.
Your 2nd post in the thread actually had something I felt was worth giving a legit response to.

It can be due to Google not paying enough attention to this device, however, I urge you to try new phones like the Nexus and this upcoming LG Nexus. For me, Jelly Bean have been smooth all the way through. Lag is inevitable on this device due to its old single core cpu.
We are atleast fortunate to retain nearly all the features from the latest Android version, Apple withheld features from old phones on purpose so you have to buy their newest and most expensive device.