NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 11:58 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:40:31 -0400, in <znu-C3649B.11403108082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >In article <2nit56p0t9a20u676p834ajnqvca1mc8fi(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> Choice is _better_ for consumers, not only because one size doesn't fit >> all, but also because one bad apple doesn't spoil the whole barrel the >> way it does with Apple. > >But issues related to specific Android models receive sufficiently >little coverage that regular consumers aren't going to hear about them. As it should be, since they don't affect most consumers. >> Android looks better because its model is better. > >There are a lot of Android handsets on the market, and only a handful >that are really even in the same class as the iPhone. These are the ones >that everyone focuses on in tech newsgroups, but I'd bet it's some >combination of the lower-end Android handsets (some of which have been >subsidized down to $0 or handed out in 2-for-1 deals at various times) >that account for most of the sales. Pretty much all Android handsets to date are in the same class as the iPhone. We'll probably see a lot of lower class Android handsets in the future, but not thus far. >This will tend to make Android look _worse_ on average, to people who >come into contact with it in the real world (friends' phones, etc.). That's not been my experience, and would seem to be contradicted by the rapid boom in Android sales. >> I think the evidence is strong that there are far more blind Apple >> loyalists than Apple critics. > >Even if that's true, a) the blind Apple loyalists also attack Apple (see >above) and b) the blind loyalists also visit web sites with negative >coverage (half the fun of being a blind loyalist is presumably being >able to get nice and outraged occasionally, I'd think), which encourages >web sites to stir up this sort of controversy. I think that's a big stretch. ;) -- John If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive, then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 12:00 On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 08:58:07 -0700, in <0okt5612iuuo278292n1gps0hgkrm15530(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:40:31 -0400, in ><znu-C3649B.11403108082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU ><znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >>There are a lot of Android handsets on the market, and only a handful >>that are really even in the same class as the iPhone. These are the ones >>that everyone focuses on in tech newsgroups, but I'd bet it's some >>combination of the lower-end Android handsets (some of which have been >>subsidized down to $0 or handed out in 2-for-1 deals at various times) >>that account for most of the sales. > >Pretty much all Android handsets to date are in the same class as the >iPhone. We'll probably see a lot of lower class Android handsets in the >future, but not thus far. What specific Android models do you think are not in the "same class" as the iPhone, and what is their share of Android sales? -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 12:22 In article <0okt5612iuuo278292n1gps0hgkrm15530(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:40:31 -0400, in > <znu-C3649B.11403108082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <2nit56p0t9a20u676p834ajnqvca1mc8fi(a)4ax.com>, > > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > >> Choice is _better_ for consumers, not only because one size doesn't fit > >> all, but also because one bad apple doesn't spoil the whole barrel the > >> way it does with Apple. > > > >But issues related to specific Android models receive sufficiently > >little coverage that regular consumers aren't going to hear about them. > > As it should be, since they don't affect most consumers. They'll affect consumers buying those models, obviously. > >> Android looks better because its model is better. > > > >There are a lot of Android handsets on the market, and only a handful > >that are really even in the same class as the iPhone. These are the ones > >that everyone focuses on in tech newsgroups, but I'd bet it's some > >combination of the lower-end Android handsets (some of which have been > >subsidized down to $0 or handed out in 2-for-1 deals at various times) > >that account for most of the sales. > > Pretty much all Android handsets to date are in the same class as the > iPhone. We'll probably see a lot of lower class Android handsets in the > future, but not thus far. This is simply not true. There are Android phones on the market with screen resolutions as low as 240x320. There are Android phones with slower processors, less internal storage (they practically all have less internal storage), user interfaces bastardized by clueless hardware companies, accelerometers that don't really work, unremovable apps bundled or features disabled by clueless carriers, old versions of the operating system, etc. All of this stuff tends to get ignored when people are comparing Android phones to the iPhone -- they compare the best Android phones, not the Android phones the masses are necessarily using. And even then, it's quite common, when someone points out some issue with one of those better Android phones, to just say "Well, then buy another Android phone". But of course that doesn't usually help -- the other Android phone you pick will just have some other issue. "Choice" isn't a substitute for quality. [snip] > >Even if that's true, a) the blind Apple loyalists also attack Apple (see > >above) and b) the blind loyalists also visit web sites with negative > >coverage (half the fun of being a blind loyalist is presumably being > >able to get nice and outraged occasionally, I'd think), which encourages > >web sites to stir up this sort of controversy. > > I think that's a big stretch. ;) I think it's blatantly obvious. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 12:29 In article <rtit56t3l063ds16d17bdatpag6m7fdg5g(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:20:00 -0400, in > <znu-5B8248.11200008082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <h1ht56h23jirsiu43ndgtb69nmrmihu60c(a)4ax.com>, > > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 18:11:05 -0400, in > >> <znu-DD830A.18110507082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > >> <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <H2k7o.3910$EF1.1599(a)newsfe14.iad>, > >> > "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec(a)AnoOspamL.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "ZnU" <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote in message > >> >> news:znu-7283CB.14165507082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET... > >> > >> >> > Antennagate demonstrates _very_ clearly that Apple is not > >> >> > remotely held to the same standard as other industry > >> >> > participants. It is simply unimaginable that any such > >> >> > controversy could have arisen with respect to any other > >> >> > specific handset model. > >> >> > >> >> Perhaps, but I see it as a popularity issue, coupled with the > >> >> dearth of models. If Nokia or Motorola had a "radical new" > >> >> antenna design on one of their phones with a similar problem, > >> >> it'd be one model of dozens. Other than Apple continuing to > >> >> sell "last year's model" along with the iPhone du jour, the > >> >> iPhone 4 is THE Apple phone, meaning if the device has an > >> >> alleged problem, the "entire line" has an alleged problem. If > >> >> there was an iPhone Classic, iPhone Nano, iPhone Shuffle, etc., > >> >> I think this would be less of a big deal. > >> > > >> >Yes, this is absolutely part of why individual Apple devices get > >> >more scrutiny. But they _do_ get more scrutiny. So you can't just > >> >say that since people make a big deal out of these things with > >> >Apple devices, but not with other devices, other devices must not > >> >ever have any issues. > >> > >> Google's own Nexus One received comparable criticism to iPhone 4 > >> even though its problems were less severe. > > > >This supports my point. > > I can't imagine how. Perhaps I'm missing your point. An Apple > problem affects the entire population of phones, whereas a given > Android handset problem doesn't affect all the other Android > handsets. Advantage Android, a matter of the open business model, > not fairness. The odds of any _specific_ model of Android phone having an issue are no lower than the odds of a given year's iPhone having an issue. From the perspective of an _individual user_ this is all that matters. The fact that more people will have the same issue with the iPhone vs. on average the same number of people having assorted _different_ issues with Android phones results in Apple getting more negative PR but doesn't actually indicate there are more users with issue. That was my point. [snip] -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 12:37
In article <sgkt569kivh80jiji4hm81iassi99cktn6(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:34:21 -0400, in > <znu-A77FF2.11342008082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > > >In article <4iit56lonjtsmk04cd357uppkqoi2epga1(a)4ax.com>, > > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:09:57 -0400, in > >> <znu-6A80F1.11095708082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > >> <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <s9gt56pusp7qj8ui39t376ba8uv627dnji(a)4ax.com>, > >> > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 18:17:49 -0400, in > >> >> <znu-EC978A.18174907082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU > >> >> <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >In article <0fir569ng2c2k6seobom2mnubitl9jok38(a)4ax.com>, > >> >> > Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 06:02:13 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >[snip] > >> >> > > >> >> >> >If you look at the application sales estimates, it's not > >> >> >> >clear that users even understand Android as a platform; > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I don't see the connection. If app sales were higher, it would not > >> >> >> necessarily create a better understanding of the OS by the users. > >> >> > > >> >> >I'm speculating that the cause/effect relationship runs in the _other_ > >> >> >direction. That users aren't buying Android apps in large numbers > >> >> >because many don't understand that a) their phones can actually run > >> >> >apps > >> >> >and this is useful and that b) they'll be able to take their apps with > >> >> >them to other Android phones in the future. > >> >> > >> >> That wouldn't seem likely, what with: > >> >> (a) heavy promotion of Android apps (e.g., Verizon ads) > >> >> (b) similar app experience between Android and iPhone, > >> >> (c) multitasking in all Androids, and > >> >> (d) heavier data consumption by Android than by iPhone > >> >> <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38456202/ns/technology_and_science-wireless > >> >> />. > >> > > >> >http://larvalabs.com/blog/android/android-market-payouts-total-2-of-app-s > >> >tores-1b/ > >> > >> <http://www.appolicious.com/tech/articles/2275-consumers-find-more-free-app > >> s-o > >> n-android-phones> > > > >That difference fails to account for such a large gap. Actually, I'd see > >it as evidence that a larger fraction of Android apps are hobbyist > >projects. Which we'd expect anyway, because the barriers to entry are > >much lower. > > Nothing wrong with that -- Android is getting the best of both worlds. See next response. > >You don't need a Mac to write Android apps, and they're > >written in Java, which is a more widely used language than Obj-C. > > Benefits of the Android model. Not if it results in junky hobbyware crowding higher quality apps out, it's not. > >In the long run, a platform which actually allows professional > >developers to make money from their apps is going to get much better > >apps. > > Available evidence suggests otherwise; e.g., > <http://www.gomonews.com/android-go-boom-mobile-analytics-points-to-explosion- > of-development/> The data is from last October, which was still early days. It's easy to have huge relative growth that early in the game, because the baseline is so low. See also: http://blog.flurry.com/bid/31825/iPad-Developer-Support-Continues-to-Soar Android project starts are still growing, but iOS project starts are growing even faster, thanks in part to iPad. (RIM just appears totally screwed in making the transition from e-mail appliances to real smartphones.) -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes |