Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Aug 2012 11:32 UTC
Google One company's response to the jury verdict in Apple vs. Samsung was still missing: Google's. The company has now responded to The Verge, and there's almost a certain bitterness in their language. Not, as you would expect, directed at Apple; no, the bitterness is directed at Samsung. The message Google is sending to other Android OEMs? Stick to stock Android, and you'll have no problems.
Thread beginning with comment 532581
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: That's not the way.
by tidux on Mon 27th Aug 2012 13:05 UTC in reply to "That's not the way."
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

Hardware manufacturers suck at software interface design, with the possible exception of Apple. None of the custom OEM ROMs provide a single damn thing over stock Android, except for that one Chinese phone that comes with MIUI preinstalled.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: That's not the way.
by dsmogor on Mon 27th Aug 2012 13:21 in reply to "RE: That's not the way."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I don't agree. Both Samsung and HTC have added some goodies that made early Androids less lacking in the feature front, not to mention the fact that a lot of their ideas were later put on stock Android (using sick US law logic they should sue Google now).
Sony corner icon approach on the other hand actually makes a lot of sense on their mini devices.
A number of changes are simply required to support additional hardware.
E.g Galaxy Note has narrow touch mode to make it bearable for one handed use. I also hail Samsung decision to leave HW buttons at the bottom as Google decision to put back action at top left corner is brain-dead given the trend to expand screen size.


Not that they always hit the spot frequently shipping downright buggy code, but as time passes they are getting better. GS3 is for one an impressive device even on stock skin.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by JAlexoid on Mon 27th Aug 2012 13:32 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Google decision to put back action at top left corner is brain-dead given the trend to expand screen size.


You do know that there is a back button at the bottom, right?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: That's not the way.
by Tony Swash on Mon 27th Aug 2012 17:55 in reply to "RE: That's not the way."
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Getting the Android OEM community to use a generic version of Android may be quite difficult. They are obviously looking for ways to differentiate their products and the limitations of the smart phone form factor and build components do not make easy to make something distinctive.

That's why customisation of Android is so popular, both the OEMs and the carriers love to load up their handsets with apps and customisations, the problems is that neither the OEMs or the carriers have shown much ability in terms of software development so their efforts tend to be poor and tend to degrade user experience and satisfaction. Their lack of software development ability will be made worse now that they will be all trying not to appear to copy Apple and will thus be more inclined to try ill considered experiments.

The problem for the Android OEM community as a whole is that it is financially so precarious and the only OEM that has made a business success of Android has now been found guilty of copying Apple, a strategy which appears to have paid of as it has allowed Samsung to create a high brand profile and to make high profits, now however they face the difficult task of retaining that brand profile whilst coming out with designs that cannot be confused with Apple's.

Reply Parent Score: 3

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

I buy Samsung for the hardware. I root them to get back to stock.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by dsmogor on Tue 28th Aug 2012 11:46 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

Watching evolution of Galaxy devices one sees Samsung have been preparing for this for some time.
Their Touchwiz consequently change with each generation and (I believe) GS3 devices can't be reasonably accused of infringing Apple brand face (in terms of both device outline and software).
But that's not the biggest problem. That is Apple managed to validate the concept of owning absolutely fundamental multitouch interaction patterns (compare it to owning mouse click). That should never happen, but now that happened, producing modern CE devices for US market will be virtually impossible w/o Apple approval.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by dsmogor on Tue 28th Aug 2012 12:17 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

The Android infringement argument (I would say FUD campaign) is repeated adnaseum by countless tech bloggers but none of them has pointed to a single feature that is actually Android specific in all of this.

The fact that Apple and MS play in concert to destroy Android using litigation doesn't mean other os is inherently more safe from their questionable tactics.
In particular Apple and MS tactical alliance (edit) doesn't guarantee that in the future e.g. Apple programmers won't be sued by MS or WP oems by Apple.
Their cross licensing deals (who they actually cover?) have a limited time span.

Edited 2012-08-28 12:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by zima on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 17:28 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

the only OEM that has made a business success of Android

In your usual bubble, you focus on old ~western-visible brands (which mostly, like with PCs before, will falter to the benefit of newcomers; this time even more rapidly, it seems) ...but ZTE does quite fine, is possibly the 3rd largest mobile maker by now. Oh and ZTE, together with Huawei, use quite standard Android on their (popular via carriers) handsets.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: That's not the way.
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 28th Aug 2012 04:53 in reply to "RE: That's not the way."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Hardware manufacturers suck at software interface design, with the possible exception of Apple.

Apple sucks at being even a semi-decent corporation, so I would say that anything potentially positive about them is null and void. They don't get my respect or acknowledgement of possible "good" they've done or "innovations" they've made. It's a corrupt corporation and clearly Mr. Dead Jobs must have chosen a successor that will keep the company going down the same path he set it on (ie. scumbagginess, not that that's a word) before he croaked.

Edited 2012-08-28 04:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: That's not the way.
by Neolander on Tue 28th Aug 2012 08:30 in reply to "RE: That's not the way."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Hardware manufacturers suck at software interface design, with the possible exception of Apple.

If anything, Apple nowadays are more of a software company which happens to build some hardware, like Microsoft, than a hardware company trying to get into software, like PC OEMs.

As far as I can tell, the last time they introduced a significant innovation in the realm of hardware design, rather than "stealing" or buying it, was with the iPod click wheel and the iMac G4 in the early 2000s. Nowadays, it seems to me that all they do in this realm is picking standard components on the market, sometimes buying a shiny extra from a smaller company that does actual hardware R&D, and then putting a pretty shell around the bunch.

On the few occasions where they still design something, like with their SoCs or the aforementioned casing, they do so in a very conservative way, with little bold moves (think Eee pad transformer, Galaxy Note, Xperia X10 Mini and Sola for examples of "risky" hardware design). And even then, they still manage to make beginner mistakes sometimes, like with the iPhone 4's unprotected glass panes and failing antennas.

No, really, if I were to find a good example of companies that are skilled at both hardware and software design, I would rather take a look at some of IBM's business offering (think AS/400, nowadays ironically called "i Series" if I'm not misunderstood). Sure, these are not designed to appeal to the general public, but for what they do, they provide an interesting example of a blend of clever software and hardware design, with lots of integration between both.

Edited 2012-08-28 08:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by dsmogor on Tue 28th Aug 2012 12:26 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

> example of companies that are skilled at both hardware and software design

Sun, SGI, Bee, Palm, unfortunately ,they all have something in common.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by tidux on Wed 29th Aug 2012 14:25 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

I do love my G4 iMac. Who knows, maybe in the far off magical future of R2, I'll be able to use Haiku on it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: That's not the way.
by zima on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 16:05 in reply to "RE[2]: That's not the way."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

As far as I can tell, the last time they introduced a significant innovation in the realm of hardware design, rather than "stealing" or buying it, was with the iPod click wheel and the iMac G4 in the early 2000s.

Hm, and if we were to accept the rules of contemporary patent system (well, Apple does seem to subscribe to those rules...), iPod click wheel might be not a very clear-cut example ;) (the middle section)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod#Patent_disputes

(plus, I suppose it might be seen as a natural evolution of "selection dials" placed on steering column, that some car radios had in the late 90s?)

Reply Parent Score: 2