Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 29th Dec 2011 16:22 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless It all started with Apple/TechCrunch blogger M.G. Siegler making a huge fuss over something he didn't understand, and while that in and of itself isn't particularly interesting, one of the outcomes of this little internet drama is a comment on Google+ (the tenth one) that so perfectly encapsulates just how important Android is for the world that I felt the need to share it with you. It's the holiday season after all.
Thread beginning with comment 501598
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Revolutionary?
by bonchbonch on Thu 29th Dec 2011 18:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Revolutionary?"
bonchbonch
Member since:
2011-12-29

Gotta love it when techies miss the main point.

Note that you didn't actually refute any arguments or even explain what the main point is supposed to be.

This article comes off like a cheerleading essay for Linux-loving techies on OSNews. That's obvious the moment it tries to dismiss the massive sea change of the iPhone, which practically kicked off the current smartphone industry and set the paradigm that Android has followed ever since. Thom Holwerda has something of a reputation for these kinds of crowd-pleasing posts.

Reply Parent Score: -2

RE[3]: Revolutionary?
by earksiinni on Thu 29th Dec 2011 18:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Revolutionary?"
earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

Thom's central point, if I've understood him correctly, is an analogy: Nokia is to the global spread of dumbphones and cellular telecommunications what Android is to the global spread of smartphones and the (mobile) Internet. The Android revolution is not its development or business model per se but rather a broader social revolution where even dalits in Mumbai have the sum of human knowledge in their hands. To that effect, the iPhone has made very little inroads into third-world markets whereas Thom is implying/saying that Android has (or more generally, non-first world markets).

Personally, I disagree that the iPhone is less revolutionary because I think that the revolution in rich markets was of supreme importance, but that doesn't take away from Thom's main point. What might detract from Thom's point on the other hand is if market stats show that Android has not in fact made significant inroads into poorer markets, but I don't know the issue well enough to evaluate that claim.

I just get annoyed when people don't spend the time to read an article properly and instead insist on bringing their own experience to bear regardless of whether their experience is relevant whatsoever. Happens way too often on this site.

Edited 2011-12-29 18:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[4]: Revolutionary?
by broken_symlink on Thu 29th Dec 2011 21:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Revolutionary?"
broken_symlink Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know much either, but my cousin came from india a few days ago, and he said that android is very popular there. He said they have iphones too, but they are extremely expensive, which is why android is so popular.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Revolutionary?
by tomcat on Sun 1st Jan 2012 03:31 in reply to "RE[2]: Revolutionary?"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

"Gotta love it when techies miss the main point.

Note that you didn't actually refute any arguments or even explain what the main point is supposed to be.

This article comes off like a cheerleading essay for Linux-loving techies on OSNews. That's obvious the moment it tries to dismiss the massive sea change of the iPhone, which practically kicked off the current smartphone industry and set the paradigm that Android has followed ever since. Thom Holwerda has something of a reputation for these kinds of crowd-pleasing posts.
"e

And that bias is one of the reasons why this site isn't that interesting anymore.

Edited 2012-01-01 03:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Revolutionary?
by lemur2 on Sun 1st Jan 2012 04:00 in reply to "RE[3]: Revolutionary?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Note that you didn't actually refute any arguments or even explain what the main point is supposed to be.

This article comes off like a cheerleading essay for Linux-loving techies on OSNews. That's obvious the moment it tries to dismiss the massive sea change of the iPhone, which practically kicked off the current smartphone industry and set the paradigm that Android has followed ever since. Thom Holwerda has something of a reputation for these kinds of crowd-pleasing posts.


And that bias is one of the reasons why this site isn't that interesting anymore.
"

You have a bias, I have a bias, Thom has a bias, everyone who has any kind of a view at all necessarily has a bias.

This is a discussion site. Discussion of views on Operating System News is exactly what this site is all about. I don't know what else you could have expected.

So, what exact bias is it best to have? In my view, then only reasonable bias is one which reflects the best interests of the majority of people. Ordinary people.

Here is an interesting presentation on the topic, espousing the interests of ordinary people:

https://github.com/jwise/28c3-doctorow/blob/master/transcript.md

The Coming War on General Computation
Cory Doctorow
Presented at 28C3

"Freedom in the future will require us to have the capacity to monitor our devices and set meaningful policy on them, to examine and terminate the processes that run on them, to maintain them as honest servants to our will, and not as traitors and spies working for criminals, thugs, and control freaks."


OSNews editorial policy increasingly reflects this particular "bias" towards the interests of ordinary people (who are computer users). I very much welcome this.

So, Tomcat, what particular interest does your bias represent?

Edited 2012-01-01 04:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3