Actually you can, but that's not the point here Yes windows dominates, and yes its similar to android in many levels (it's open nature, the easy of hacking, the insecurity etc) - but the reason for Windows dominance was completely different. Windows was released into such a young market, personal computing was not mainstream in the slightest and it was the first affordable(in relative terms, it was still very expensive!), usable OS to make it into the mainstream market. The smartphone market is totally different and much more mature.
Anyway I don't want to get embroiled in yet another "Android Vs <other_smartphone_os>" debate here, done that enough times. I think that it won't dominate, at least until the usability issues are solved (Google bundling HTC Sense as standard would solve that immediately!) it won't become the most popular smartphone OS, long term. There is a current boost in sales due to clever mobile phone salesmen (caused 100% by the higher commission paid on these handsets at the moment), but this won't last. Too many non techie users have problems using these handsets (especially the really low end ones like the ZTE Racer).
Plus, to get back on topic, i've never seen a queue to buy an Android device..that total lack of excitement is telling.
It's only Apple fags who get excited though.
Kalniel: "Nice review Tarinder - would it be possible to get a picture of the case when the components are installed (with the side off obviously)?"
CAT-THE-FIFTH: "The Antec 300 is a case which has an understated and clean appearance which many people like. Not everyone is into e-peen looking computers which look like a cross between the imagination of a hyperactive 10 year old and a Frog."
TKPeters: "Off to AVForum better Deal - £20+Vat for Free Shipping @ Scan"
for all intents it seems to be the same card minus some gays name on it and a shielded cover ? with OEM added to it - GoNz0.
razer121 (27-03-2011)
Really? i would have though balancing a laptop would be easier as you can make the screen face in the correct angle meaning the process can be completely free of using your hands except to type in the location and scroll. The place i saw tables was in places where you dont really have the space for a laptop to be out like the tube or something.
This is kind of true but the tight integration is completely internal to the device and in the modern home of multiple smart electronic devices people are starting to understand the advantages of getting them all to communicate with each other, it only really works at a consumer level if you go for a full Mac environment. If you can afford to have an iphone, macbook/imacs, apple tv etc etc then yeah everything is great but not everyone can. In my experience, trying to integrate a mac in a mixed OS environment isn't particularly easy and the reality of it is that most homes will be mixed OS, its rare that people will be able to afford all mac, more probable that at least one of the house members will have a work laptop that will be windows based.Apple sell a tightly integrated product, hardware and software are very tightly integrated and controlled. The user experience across the Apple range is consistent. And the products work, out of the box, and they work well. And if that integration and control comes at a price premium, then there are lots of people prepared to pat that because they have had enough of BSOD in the past, driver problems etc - even if MS have come to grips with quality control (as far as they can with third party developers).
I personally struggle to believe anyone who says they buys them for practicality anyway, most people buy them because they are cool and everyone else has one. The responsiveness of the iphone vs other phones is almost valid, but to me with my desire the difference is so unbelievably tiny the point seems very facile when you consider how dreadful the iphones performance is as an actual mobile phone.
As for queuing up for specific electronic device releases, no i don't really get it. I don't get queing up to be the first of anything, in fact i think its totally dumb BUT the way i do things (wait for the numpties to buy into the marketing and rush out to be the first to deal with all the flaws before i buy into the revised and polished product) wouldn't work if it wasn't for those brainless goombas so i hope they keep at it!
Yes it will dominate since you again fail to see the much bigger picture. A near 900% increase in Android phones and moving from 5th place to 2nd place in the market in only on year itself indicates this.
Firstly smartphones have traditionally been targeted as more expensive devices. Blackberries are targeted at the business market,Windows Mobile is again is a higher end device and Symbian smartphones again until recently are higher devices. Most Symbian phones are not smartphones.
Is iOS going to be found on £20 to £40 devices?? How many of the other OS are going to be found on lower end devices apart from maybe Symbian which is now dead?
Is iOS going to be found on a £50 to £100 tablet?
I am talking about unsubsidised retail prices .
What you fail to realise again is that Android will help bring smartphone and tablet technology to many poorer people in the world unlike any of the other OS. Where this is a phone today it will be replaced by a low end smartphone.
It has the advantage of being free and has the backing of Google and many hardware companies too.
This is why I made the following statement:
"Android will have a much bigger impact worldwide as it has a much bigger potential market. It has meant that the smartphone has become accessable to more people worldwide and it will do the same for tablet PCs too."
Android like Windows is not tied to one companies hardware,ie,not an Apple made computer or an IBM made computer for example and this is one of the reasons Windows did well.
It meant there was much more competition among hardware manufacturers which lead to reductions in hardware price and Apple took advantage of this moving to PC hardware when the G5 stalled.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 27-03-2011 at 11:46 AM.
crossy (28-03-2011),j.o.s.h.1408 (27-03-2011)
I'd actually argue that Nokia have already brought smartphones to poorer people. I don't know where you get this idea that only some Symbian phones are smartphones; each and every one of them is a smartphone. However, now that Symbian has dropped out of fashion, Android is beginning to pick up where Symbian left off.
Android will do well, but it'll be plagued by the same sort of issues that Windows has in the PC market.
You may be right, but I don't think the majority of 'phone users think about the operating system when they buy it. They want the functionality of the device regardless of how it is obtained, or what drives it.
Maybe - depends on the size of the laptop (and the heat it generates if it 8is balancing on your knee) and personal preference, but passing someone a tablet to show them (say) a photo) is (IMO) than passing an open clamshell laptop. And I was sceptical too, until I used an Ipad, which put it onto my 'like to have but not essential' list.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
If they achieve a similar level of growth in 2011-2012 i'll be impressed, and will eat my hat. Doing that in their first real year in the general market is OK, but nothing more. It's not some amazing "zomg android will take over the world" type of number - apple had similar if not better growth in their first real year also. You have to look at the bigger picture for those numbers to mean anything.
mrochester is correct - ALL symbian phones can be considered smartphones, so we don't really need to debate that Also remember that in the USA and much of europe, RIM devices dominate the consumer marketplace as well as business - BB Messenger saw to that.
I don't really take your point about low end smartphones either - no you won't get iOS in a £40 device, and I really really wouldn't want it! It would perform really badly, just like the cheap Android phones, the cheap symbian phones, the cheap BlackBerry phones..all of them are terrible and whilst they are technically smartphones, they function so poorly in that role that you can barely call them that. If you don't believe me go and try a ZTE Racer - thats an android 2.1 device that you can get for £60 on PAYG. Sure it runs Android so in theory it can do everything that a high end one can do..but really it can't.
We won't see good, usable low end smartphones for a long time, and when we do they will be cut down versions of the higher end ones, running who knows what. It will effectively be a different OS anyway..for the moment and the near future we're not going to beat the Series 40/60 nokias, or the Samsungs of this world for low end phones. There is of course a big debate about what makes a smatphone "smart" - since even series 40 phones can have pop/imap email access and basic web browsing capability.
The cheapest usable Android "smartphone" that I have heard about is the ZTE Blade (san francisco), and that barely copes imo.
We obviously won't ever agree, but I just don't think that Android will have that big of an impact over the next few years, at least not in its present form. Whether or not a cut down version will ever appear that is suitable for cheaper phones - who knows (That will depend a lot on touch screen prices I presume), but at least for the near future..It will remain a major player, but it won't take the top spot.
It really depends what you mean by low end.
Snapdragon is now so cheap they can turn out fully fledged phones based on it for $200. I bought an AMOLED qualcomm device for £320 including contract of £20 a month for a year, no cash backs, no silly farting about, unlimited data and enough calls. I mean that is considerably cheaper than the iPhone than the desire HD.
I don't think people actually need much more processing power in phones, dual core... really?! I want more battery life and lower cost, more money for apps on it etc. But this is off topic.
Telling about what thou?
If you look at the market share side of things, one would conclude that symbian is the best mobile OS by a wide margin? If you look at the number of emails sent etc, we all know it would be BB that would win.
You can't take a product's value by the 'buzz'. Look at twitter for instance, fix gear bicycle owners, they are absolutely retarded. But they rant a lot about how great it is, because that is part of their enjoyment of it.
There is as mentioned also the physcology of it, being first is important to some people, heck I've taunted a college of mine about him not having a 3DS because his wife wouldn't let him by one, that was just this morning. But then again I'm a next tuesday and I know it. However i'm not enough of one to queue for it.
But some sheeple do behave that way, they see more people queueing up and they automatically think it means it must be good. We've probably evolved this trait for good reason too, as a simple heard communication technique but, it doesn't for second make it 'the best' or 'better'.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Perhaps, perhaps not.
Sure, although their vocalisation is amplified by the RDF.
And while I'm certain there are a significant number of iPhone users who make use of the phone to good, and even profitable effect, the vast majority of iPhone totting and worshipping muppets I've observed merely use it to send and recieve calls and texts, play a handful of tracks over and over, and maybe goof around with crappy freebe games to alleviate boredom as an alternative to masturbation due to lack of flash.
I think it's fairly safe to say that the few thousands that queue at launch are vastly outnumbered by the many millions who end up buying the product.Perhaps, perhaps not.
That probably sums up the vast majority of smartphone users. As a user of public transport pretty much every day of the week, I see a lot of smartphones in my travels, and most people are just dicking about with them. They could probably easily get by with a feature phone, but then it'd probably be a whole lot less fun.And while I'm certain there are a significant number of iPhone users who make use of the phone to good, and even profitable effect, the vast majority of iPhone totting and worshipping muppets I've observed merely use it to send and recieve calls and texts, play a handful of tracks over and over, and maybe goof around with crappy freebe games to alleviate boredom as an alternative to masturbation due to lack of flash.
Wow, using a 'phone to make phone calls and send texts - what small minded irtrational people they must be. And playing games - well, what utter time wasters, and clearly anyone who plays a game on their phone or (shock horror - listening to music) must be an iphone user. Users of other brands of smartphones are so much more rational and sensible than to use them for anything like that.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
There was no need to queue, every phone operator had iPads in stock, Three having the best deal out there.
10 minutes walk from Covent Garden [500+ people in queue] local Currys had sh!t lots of stock, every model with 10 people at the very best in the queue.
I went to Covent Garden and at 5:30PM [they started selling at 5] 16GB flavours of both 3G and Wi-Fi were gone. Crazy.
Quick wonder down the road discovered more stock
There was soo much hype in the air its unreal, people running like mad asking about iPads
My Blog => http://adriank.org
That's an interesting point: you wander around, decide it's time to eat, and see two restaurant. One is queued all the way outside, and the other barely has three customers inside. You have no mean to look up the restaurants. The menu and pricing are similar. Do you:
1. Join the queue on the basis that the restaurant with the queue must be really good and / or the empty one really bad.
2. Walk into the near empty restaurant because the queue is just some kind of coincidence / an elaborate set up / everyone else queueing have a different taste.
3. Flip a coin, because you think that 1 and 2 are equally likely.
Let's assume that you are hungry, not starving, there is nothing else around and you aren't rushed for time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)