Post a Comment
I switched from a Blackberry to an iPhone and am seriously considering an Android phone. They compete for me.
Blackberry: Great email. Horrible web browser.
iPhone: browser is excellent but the mail app sucks. I use Gmail for Domains and REALLY miss their Blackberry app. Google adding IMAP support is an improvement but still not close. Maybe come February they'll port their app. I never use the iPod features.
Android: Better have a great web browser. This play is all about the mobile internet! Gmail integration is assumed. If it doesn't have both this'll be a failure.
What makes you think Apple isn't listening to the countless complaints about the MobileMail app interface? Unlike Nokia, Apple has clearly expressed that the iPhone software will never be set in stone, and the revenue accounting procedures were set in place explicitly to enable delivering software updates, minor and major, from the occasional new app (like the Wifi Store) to complete overhauls (which I suspect will begin to show up after the SDK is published).
Anyway, the MobileMail app is *the* sore thumb sticking out, so I'm confident Apple will overhaul it completely just for the sake of avoiding the harsh criticism they're getting so far. Even if you count out the ego factor, the fact that they're publishing job offers that are squarely directed to MS Exchange is enough for me to believe they intend to come up with something that will put Blackberry's interface to shame.
Just watch.
It probably will bundle some version of Firefox, or even WebKit (the source is open, after all). OTOH, I've seen nothing on MobileSafari that makes using the web interface to gmail less than stellar. Zoom is your friend (and the pinky finger, as a last resort).
Disclaimer: I don't have an iPhone, but I played a little with the iPod touch and I've seen numerous, numerous, numerous videos demoing each app.
it is likely that Android is a Java based system (some of the members in the page deals with java). it can be like Savaje, a very thin OS layer and everything else is running on a Java virtual machine. i think Savaje was Java 1.4 compliant, so it is not a far fetched guess that Android supports a form of Java standard edition, not micro edition. There are already fully functional java browsers available, such as http://www.webrenderer.com/ so,browser can be covered easily. But still, all are guesses.
So far the only technical detail I can find, other than that it's based on a Linux kernel, is that "it utilizes a custom virtual machine that has been designed to optimize memory and hardware resources in a mobile environment."
It's anyone's guess whether this VM is a bare-metal abstraction underneath Linux or a high-level runtime for application development.
Although the list of alliance members is impressive, it seems like a lot of these corporations are hedging their bets amongst the plethora of competing Linux-based smartphone projects. The FOSS community won't have any incentive to vote with its participation until somebody gets a viable and open device on the market.
Yes, I was waiting with bated breath for yet another announced linux-based open stack for smartphones, it's been at least six months since the last one. I suspect we'll probably see one or two more, before the industry starts to run out of ideas to standardize on and actually gets around to producing something.
RE[2]: Get a clue, people...
Apple HAD to partner with AT&T?
Puhlease... You don't think that if Apple created the iPhone as a pure GSM phone with a SIM card slot, and then sold it without a specific cell company contract that people wouldn't buy it? And, are you telling me that none of the cell companies would accept the millions of new customers just because the phone isn't an exclusive to them? People would FLOCK to the company that wanted the customers, which would be all the GSM ones (look at the ones that accept iPhone customers that have unlocked their phones).
Maybe you're right... I mean, depending on what they were trying to do, partnering exclusively with AT&T was required (If they were trying to lock-in people to no third party software, and get a huge kickback from AT&T from the contracts.).
Apple was in probably the best position of any company to be the one to break the mold, but instead they showed their true colors. Google is probably the next best positioned company, but they're not a hardware company with a huge following of loyal consumers that are already locked in to their products (see: iPod and iTunes).
Disclaimer: I can't stand apologists of any company.
Oh, and though I disagree with you, I modded you up because it appears some people are trying to silence you because they disagree... That's never an intelligent action.
Edited 2007-11-10 00:57








