Related
From el reg.
Google has unveiled its phone platform, Android. It's yet another Linux OS, freely licensed, that will appear in devices in the second half of next year. Google has signed up over 30 partners including Qualcomm, Motorola, HTC and operators including Deutsche Telekom for the "Open Handset Alliance".
CEO Eric Schmidt described it as "the first truly open platform for mobile devices." Android, named after the start-up company Google acquired in 2005, encompasses middleware and applications as well as the base kernel. An SDK is promised for download next Monday under an Apache license. However, the ad-supported model will take awhile to shake out.
"Contrary to a lot of speculation out there, we won't see a completely ad driven cellphone based on Android for quite some time," said Andy Rubin.
If this all sounds a bit familiar, it's because it is.
Two such alliances appeared in 2005, and two more this year. The LIMO Alliance, backed by NTT DoCoMo, Motorola and Samsung was unveiled in January. ARM announced yet another industry Linux OS coalition just a month ago.
Despite clocking up a healthy air miles account for all involved, real momentum has stalled for Linux on mobile phones: you'll look for a 3G Linux phone in vain, today. Motorola made a strategic bet on open source in 2003 but discovered that integration complexity and costs outweighed the advantages: the company recently returned to Symbian for its smartphones. Nevertheless a wide alliance of industry backers have come to Google's launch.
Currently Symbian dominates the smartphone business. It's painfully built-up almost a decade's worth of integration expertise, in giving manufacturers what they want, including a successful Japanese business where carriers dominate. Symbian's chief technical advantage today is the platform's maturity, and more recently, its real-time kernel. This permits manufacturers to build lower-cost single-chip phones, while running their older proprietary baseband stacks as an OS personality.
With Nokia, whose volume drives lower component costs, pushing Symbian into its midrange feature phones, Android faces a stiff challenge competing in this market.
And as we pointed out earlier this today, it isn't clear that failure of rich mobile data services isn't due to anything on the supply side - people just don't find them very useful.
There's a significant gap, however, for "two box" solutions that only Blackberry and Apple fill today, as phone companions. Rubin said the system requirements supported QWERTY and large screen sizes, and Schmidt hinted at bringing the PC experience to mobile devices.
Android may yet find a niche in which to flourish.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/05/google_android_announcement/
Wounder if it will be compatible with our devices... lets hope!
dferreira said:
Wounder if it will be compatible with our devices... lets hope!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everithing is possible... even in our dreams
so just a thought , you guys know of any other new os for phones that are in development that look really promising?
With out the app market systems og Android, IPhone, and the Windows, I do not see how any OS Will grab a foothole for a long time.
boominz28 said:
so just a thought , you guys know of any other new os for phones that are in development that look really promising?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's bada, which appears to be stripped down android that samsung wants to start using for entry level "smart" phones.
MeeGo springs to mind as the only OS that isn't already out and has a chance to be a contender
The only two real possibilities might be WebOS and Meego, but even they probably have no real future unless they can encapsulate Android compatibility and offer something compelling that goes above and beyond it. WebOS might pull it off, but IMHO Meego is a lost cause, just because:
a) Nokia is its only real supporter,
b) Nokia has allowed itself to become almost completely irrelevant in America as both a brand name AND technology provider,
c) it's almost impossible IMHO for any hardware platform with basically zero mindshare in America to become more than a niche local product. America might be a small part of the global market in terms of units sold, but it's a very influential part of it. Nokia's fatal mistake was assuming that the sole value of the American market was the (minimal) revenue it made by selling phones to American carriers, while totally ignoring the staggering global influence of American media on the rest of the world. The outcome is something we've all seen... 5 years of "Smartphone Roundups" that didn't even mention the EXISTENCE of Nokia phones, and led to them becoming all but irrelevant among high end phone users even in their own home market: Europe. Nokia might try waving the flag and getting people to think Android is "too American"... and they'll fail, because it seems like at least half of Android's core developers are European (even if they live and work in Mountain View), and I don't think even Google will ever really be able to control Android's future global destiny once Chinese developers get tired of waiting for Google to fix things they care about passionately and just take matters into their own hands in ways that cause it to lose full compatibility with "mainstream" Android in ways that can't easily be reconciled.
It's not impossible that some other standard might emerge from China (unique in the sense that its domestic market is basically the same size as the entire rest of the world minus India and Africa, and most phones sold worldwide actually COME from China), but even in China, I'd put the smart money on either Android or a mostly-compatible fork of it. IMHO, China's contribution to our future happiness will be phones that are like PCs... more or less commodity hardware differentiated by speed, aesthetics, ergonomics, and niche peripherals that's perfectly happy running GoogleAndroid, a Chinese variant of Android, Windows*, or a slightly hacked & pirated copy of IOS. Phones sold by companies like Motorola and Samsung will be the equivalent of a micro-sized PC made by HP, sold at Wal Mart, ships with Windows, and nobody has ever successfully gotten Linux to work on because it uses some wacky proprietary video chipset that's undocumented and lacks drivers for anything besides the specific version of Windows that PC shipped with from the factory. Companies like Dell and HTC will sell phones intended for Android, but capable of being coaxed into other OS'es with a bit of work (like running Linux on a Dell Laptop today), and most of US at XDA will have phones designed and marketed by medium-sized companies that focus on trying to outdo each other with arms-race hardware based on bleeding-edge chip and circuit designs that looked good in cad, in the analyzer, and maybe even in the prototype... but inevitably have some major problem that didn't become obvious until 250,000 were made, sold, and bought by users who assumed the flakiness was due to rushed beta drivers instead of some deeper design flaw or premature attempt at cost-cutting that went a bit too far.
SBP Mobile Shell 5.0
Lets not forget android has only been out a few f years and its in its infant stage still. I think future development will blow away the competition once its fully established. The monopoly windows has on pcs is why people still haven't realized the advances of linux yet at the same time we are starting to see that break with some major pc companies shipping systems with linux pre loaded.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
To a degree, yes... but pervasive Windows hegemony is also part of the reason Linux could get a foothold in PCs at all. By being largely compatible with hardware capable of running Windows, PCs capable of running Windows ended up being capable of running Linux by default.
Even now, the fact that it's *possible* to run desktop Linux (KDE, Gnome, etc) on non-x86 hardware doesn't mean that your life won't be *way* more complicated if you insist on trying. Even x86-64 users get a pretty good taste of the sting that comes from deviating from the de-facto hardware norm.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
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
Microsoft and Nokia have just announced a broad partnership which could possibly mean a big threat to HTC.
What do you guys think about this?
Open Letter from CEO Stephen Elop, Nokia and CEO Steve Ballmer, Microsoft
Microsoft blog editor
10 Feb 2011 8:51 PM
Today in London, our two companies announced plans for a broad strategic partnership that combines the respective strengths of our companies and builds a new global mobile ecosystem. The partnership increases our scale, which will result in significant benefits for consumers, developers, mobile operators and businesses around the world. We both are incredibly excited about the journey we are on together.
While the specific details of the deal are being worked out, here’s a quick summary of what we are working towards:
• Nokia will adopt Windows Phone as its primary smartphone strategy, innovating on top of the platform in areas such as imaging, where Nokia is a market leader.
• Nokia will help drive and define the future of Windows Phone. Nokia will contribute its expertise on hardware design, language support, and help bring Windows Phone to a larger range of price points, market segments and geographies.
• Nokia and Microsoft will closely collaborate on development, joint marketing initiatives and a shared development roadmap to align on the future evolution of mobile products.
• Bing will power Nokia’s search services across Nokia devices and services, giving customers access to Bing’s next generation search capabilities. Microsoft adCenter will provide search advertising services on Nokia’s line of devices and services.
• Nokia Maps will be a core part of Microsoft’s mapping services. For example, Maps would be integrated with Microsoft’s Bing search engine and AdCenter advertising platform to form a unique local search and advertising experience
• Nokia’s extensive operator billing agreements will make it easier for consumers to purchase Nokia Windows Phone services in countries where credit-card use is low.
• Microsoft development tools will be used to create applications to run on Nokia Windows Phones, allowing developers to easily leverage the ecosystem’s global reach.
• Microsoft will continue to invest in the development of Windows Phone and cloud services so customers can do more with their phone, across their work and personal lives.
• Nokia’s content and application store will be integrated with Microsoft Marketplace for a more compelling consumer experience.
We each bring incredible assets to the table. Nokia’s history of innovation in the hardware space, global hardware scale, strong history of intellectual property creation and navigation assets are second to none. Microsoft is a leader in software and services; the company’s incredible expertise in platform creation forms the opportunity for its billions of customers and millions of partners to get more out of their devices.
Together, we have some of the world’s most admired brands, including Windows, Office, Bing, Xbox Live, NAVTEQ and Nokia. We also have a shared understanding of what it takes to build and sustain a mobile ecosystem, which includes the entire experience from the device to the software to the applications, services and the marketplace.
Today, the battle is moving from one of mobile devices to one of mobile ecosystems, and our strengths here are complementary. Ecosystems thrive when they reach scale, when they are fueled by energy and innovation and when they provide benefits and value to each person or company who participates. This is what we are creating; this is our vision; this is the work we are driving from this day forward.
There are other mobile ecosystems. We will disrupt them.
There will be challenges. We will overcome them.
Success requires speed. We will be swift.
Together, we see the opportunity, and we have the will, the resources and the drive to succeed.
Stephen Elop, CEO, NOKIA and Steve Ballmer, CEO, MICROSOFT
I think this will help wp7 become a major competitor of android and iphone. It will bring some competition to HTC, but that's what brings innovation and creativity. HTC will be fine. We might be seeing some nice devices from nokia... and nokia devices have always been pretty hackable. So whether this is good or bad for HTC, I think this will be good for us consumers.
• Nokia will help drive and define the future of Windows Phone. Nokia will contribute its expertise on hardware design, language support, and help bring Windows Phone to a larger range of price points, market segments and geographies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm guessing by "Larger range of price points" they mostly mean cheaper phones. While budget phones have traditionally been one of Nokia's strong points, I think it's not necessarily a good idea for Microsoft to use WP7 for this. Given the hardware requirements for WP7, they simply won't be able to beat Android there. At the same time, they will most likely be eroding WP7's image as a premium experience. This, to me, seems like a huge mistake.
• Nokia and Microsoft will closely collaborate on development, joint marketing initiatives and a shared development roadmap to align on the future evolution of mobile products.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great! I can't wait for Nokia to add the same magical touch to WP7 that made their own flagship phones, like the N97, such a joy to use!
• Nokia’s content and application store will be integrated with Microsoft Marketplace for a more compelling consumer experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're not talking about that OVI stuff, are they? A more compelling consumer experience, really? From what I can see, Microsoft's Marketplace is doing quite well as it is.
Overall, I see this as a desperate move by both players involved. Nokia has failed utterly to bring something worthwhile to the smartphone market in the past years. I'm guessing Microsoft is just desperate to put more WP7 hardware out there - right now, it seems that for every WP7 phone, the same manufacturer will have at least 10 Android phones in its line-up.
I like this. Nokia is still a huge player. And both could benefit from this.
Nokia is known for its great and robust hardware.
Nokia could bring a n95 like device, with a larger screen, slide out nummeric or qwerty keyboard and carl zeiss optics, where HTC has to do it with other camera lenses.
Good move all round.
I think it is a good move allround remember Nokia own NAVTEQ
the leading global provider of maps, traffic and location data.
It’s not like they can put out cheep W7P, due to the minimum speck Microsoft has I am looking forward to a high end W7P in about a year, when my contract runs out.
WP7 may be superior to Apple iOS when used by the novice consumer. Nokia does create marvelous hardware.
Together, they may give Apple and Google a real run for the money.
I think the best thing for us is real competion in the market.
Plus I really hope that the new WP7 will grow strong in time - after all the having choice is the best thing for us - the consumers.
Btw. I found this thing on the net no so long ago - wonder if this will be real
http://www.nokiaphones.net/nokia-concept-windows-phone-7-smartphone/
looks pretty nice and apparently it's designed by a design studio from poland
http://www.mindsailors.com/
I would change the term "threat" from the thread title to "chance".
HTC has been the strongest fighter for the Windows Mobile platform, and they are the strongest competitor with Windows Phone 7, too.
Microsoft won´t be that stupid to endanger that valuable long-term partnership.
In the opposite, I do believe the new partnership between MS and Nokia might bring a certain boost to WP7. But then again, 2 big losers in the same ship doesn´t mean this makes everything a winner. Both of them missed too many opportunities for too much time.
Problem is usually, they are too big, too slow, too far away from us, the users.
In the sum, HTC might be one of the bigger winners on the long run.
Yes I know this is a forum dealing with Android and the Galaxy S...however there are some moments that need to be commemorated.
As most of you know by now, HP has responded to the humiliating failure of their webOS based TouchPad tablet by ending all production of webOS devices (and seem to be about to do the same to their PC line as well). They are saying they are open to someone purchasing the operating system, or licensing it for other devices...but rational voices are rightfully declaring webOS dead once and for all...the final end of Jeff Hawkin's Palm Computing.
webOS is the descendant of the classic Palm OS developed by Hawkins which basically created the market for mobile computing devices for consumers. It was purchased a bit more than a year ago by HP who had intended to use it as the cornerstone for a panoply of mobile products...which never came to be. It is open to debate if the cause of that failure was market realities, or HP corporate chaos, or brand mismanagement, the rise of Android, or Apple being Apple...to be fair the "why" doesn't really matter.
I first entered the mobile computing world with a Palm Tungsten E. I adored it and went on to own 6 Palm OS devices. I still have my favorite Palm device, a Tungsten C, lovingly displayed on my desk like a relic. Palm OS seemed to me at the time to be the perfect compromise between portability and computing power, a simple architecture with thousands and thousands of apps. At the time, Palm and Microsoft's PocketPC were locked in a battle to see who would rule mobile computing...how naive that seems now.
Palm should have been Apple. They really should have been. They had a totally unique niche, and thousands of loyal developers. They had positive buzz in the market and were well liked by the tech press. Their name was synonymous with handheld computers and a powerful brand. They were poised to go beyond PDAs when the Treo was the premier smartphone on the market. Then however, for many sad, inexplicable legal, financial and creative reasons...Palm OS development just stopped and some horrible mistakes were made.
After Palm had been bought and sold by such likes as US Robotics and 3M, Palm was spun out into an independent company again and chose the opposite road that Apple would one day take, splitting into PalmOne for hardware, and PalmSource for software. Palm had lost control of their own OS, with PalmOne licensing the software from PalmSource. From 2002 to 2007 Palm OS 5, codenamed Garnet, was the only offering from PalmSource. They kept promising a next generation OS, to be called Cobalt, but after numerous delays and a half baked attempt at offering both Garnet and Cobalt at once, no devices were ever created using Cobalt. and the Palm OS went into development hell, and PalmSource was bought by ACCESS in a scheme to create the first consumer oriented Linux mobile OS. No devices have ever used the Access Linus OS, either. When it was clear ACCESS had no clue what they were doing, PalmOne renamed themselves Palm again and chose not to license their own OS back and instead created webOS. The Palm Pre was supposed to be the great iPhone killer...but wasn't. Then HP bought Palm and the rest is history...or tragedy.
If Palm had made use of the years between 2005 and 2010 to innovate and make use of their army of developers, Apple's iPhone could very well have found themselves struggling to enter a marklet dominated by the Treo 3G. Instead, Steve Jobs just swept the bones of the Palm OS out of the way and claimed many of the revolutionary features of Palm OS among his own inventions.
What can Google learn from all of this to help Android? First of all, keep control of the OS at ALL COSTS. Hardware may come, hardware may go, but the OS is the key. Next, keep momentum at all times. If a mobile OS stops developing and innovating, it dies.
Lastly, never assume that the status quo will remain static. Ten years ago the companies to watch in the mobile space were Palm and Microsoft...now one is gone and the other is a minor force in mobile. 5 years ago Blackberry ruled. Now, the question is who will buy them for patents and customer base. Currently Apple and Google are titans which fanbois will tell you will reign forever...but either one could be sent back to being an also-ran and a trivia question by just a few serious mis-steps.
The mobile market is a volatile, ever changing thing...for now, we all love our Samsung Android phones...in a year, will we still say the same, or will my SGS sit next to my Tungsten C as I write about how great Android was back in the day?
Very nicely written and informative post. But perhaps it would get more attention in the general android section? It really deserves it!
Very nice reading my friend!... I think you have a really valid point... "Hardware may come, Hardware may go...." If Google doesn't take FULL control of Android it will fragment to much until it dies... If the companies (Samsung, Sony Ericsson, HTC, LG etc...) Want Android to power their devices then is up to them to standarize some sort of hardware and Not Android to accomodate to each one of them...
At the end only time will tell what's going to happen as you clearly mention with Palm vs Microsoft example...
My 2 cents...
JIM
Yup, RIP webOS. It really is freaking awesome OS, my other phone is palm pre. It's a shame it never really took of, ot would be killer OS on a proper hardware.
Hope they make it open source and/or license it to OEMs.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk