The day after Google announced its answer to Apple's iPhone App store, it has announced the winners of a contest wherein developers win $275,000 or $100,000 for developing a top app for Google's upcoming Android mobile phone OS. To get an idea of where the trend in mobile computing is heading, all of the top ten use location-based data via GPS. Check out the winners.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
There is a significant difference though. In the Apple vs PC battle the Apple hardware was significantly more expensive than a comparable PC. The cost involved in the Apple made it a significant investment.
The iPhone is within the same cost range as other smartphones at this time, (arguably) has a better User Interface, great marketing, and the fickle consumer mob working for it.
I am hopeful that the android platform will be a success but being open to hardware manufacturers won't be enough to push Android to the front. It needs a good UI and a viable software ecosystem. I plan on picking up the Android device coming to T-Mobile but it will probably not be replacing my Artemis just yet.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-07-12
The last time a closed and controlled computer platform took on an open and uncontrolled platform, the former lost.
Poppycock! By your logic, Linux would have swept away Windows / Macs on the desktop and Sun / HP / IBM on the servers a long time ago.
And we heard exactly the same arguments about how the 'closed' iPod/iTunes will loose after it's initial success against the 'open' Creative / Dell / Napster / "Plays for sure" / Zune / <whatever> on the long run (as if the freedom to pay licence fees to Microsoft has anything to do with 'open' or 'free').
It's rather simplistic to predict future events on some selected past events. Wishful thinking, I guess. Still problems to accept that Apple has not surrendered against mighty (boring) Microsoft?
Member since:2007-02-05
Linux has some problems that keeps it from getting really popular. (It's getting better though, I bet Linux will start growing slowly but steady in desktops in a couple of years...)
Anyway. Android seem to be stable, and it's a bit different computers. Macs, and maybe esp. Linx haven't taken over partially because they're not included on a lot of computers. Few people bother with actually installing another OS than the one that came with it. (Or even understand this!)
Same with mobile phones. However, buying a new mobile phone is a a much smaller step than buying a new computer IMHO. Mobiles are cheaper. And besides: people break them all the time, so they need new ones!
Just my cents(or ører to be exact)...
Member since:2006-01-12
Excuse me what planet you live. Ever heard Nokia and its S60 platform? Strike 1! Also why you say things look similiar since they aren't. Back in IBM vs Apple battle most people didn't have computers, now almost everyone has mobilephone, strike 2! Also Android phones are gonna be more expensive than Nokias and other traditional manufacturers phones offering all that most people need for mobile phone(calling, SMS, MMS and internet). Strike 3! Your comment is out really.
Member since:2005-06-28
>Also Android phones are gonna be more expensive than Nokias
And who told you that?? Only the non-touchscreen phones by Nokia MIGHT be cheaper, not the S60 4.0 touchscreen ones. People who want a real modern smartphone will go for touchscreen, so prices between Nokia and Android might not be as far off as you think.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-06-29
[cliche alert]
Those who do not understand history, are bound to repeat it.
The last time a closed and controlled computer platform took on an open and uncontrolled platform, the former lost. The open and uncontrolled platform wasn't better, but it was good enough, and it was a platform that allowed competition on price AND quality, not just quality.
I'm of course referring to Apple vs. the IBM PC.
History is repeating itself. Google is offering the IBM PC in the form of Android, and Apple is still offering basically the same thing as 25 years ago.
The similarities are so striking, it's almost sad that no one is really seeing it coming. We had a diverse phone platform market. It started with limited devices - devices that slowly gained features, becoming evermore advanced. There are a lot of players in the phone market, but no one has gained a dominance yet [just like in the early home computing days]. Apple is repeating its past mistake of thinking that people will pay for quality - whereas Google took a long hard look at IBM/Intel/Microsoft, and quickly realised that people are willing to settle for "good enough" as long as it's cheaper.
Mark my words.
Edited 2008-08-30 18:09 UTC