Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2012 09:50 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "For a seventh consecutive month, the Samsung Galaxy S III is the most popular smartphone in the United Kingdom. The data compiled by uSwitch is based on live searches, pre-orders, as well as postpaid sales. Curiously, Apple's current smartphone flagship is not even second. The iPhone 5 is outperformed by its predecessor, whose lower price and improved contract offers helped it remain appealing. The Samsung Galaxy S II completes the quartet at the top. The rest of the top ten smartphones is entirely an Android party. It includes the Google Nexus 4, who entered the rankings a solid fifth. The second half of the top ten includes the Samsung Galaxy Ace, Samsung Galaxy Note 2, Sony Xperia U, HTC One X, as well as the Samsung Galaxy Ace 2." This is getting ridiculous, and it's not good for the market. For the love of Fiona, people, buy something that's not Android. I don't want to live in an Android-dominated smartphone world.
Thread beginning with comment 544294
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Monopoly is always bad
by Torbjorn Vik Lunde on Wed 5th Dec 2012 16:23 UTC in reply to "Wellâ¦"
Torbjorn Vik Lunde
Member since:

While Android is certainly more open than iOS, it’s still not anywhere near open the way for instance Ubuntu is. Development is closed and sometimes they release the source (and sometimes they release only binaries). How open your particular Android handset is often depends on carrier and manufacture.

Although Android is released under an open license I think they are more open in the sense windows was open (same platform, different PC manufacturers), not the way GNU/Linux systems are open.

Personally I don’t believe one open system will «save» us. I think monopoly is bad even if it’s by an relatively open platform, because it still makes people lazy and discourages innovation (at least for a while). Having any player dominate phones and tablets is really bad, regardless of who that player will be.

I think the console market is relatively healthy. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo is in constant competition and pushing each other to make better and better consoles. I’d love to have such a healthy market in phones/tablets, a repeat of the WinTel-era will be a pretty sad outcome IMHO.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Monopoly is always bad
by Ford Prefect on Wed 5th Dec 2012 16:34 in reply to "Monopoly is always bad"
Ford Prefect Member since:

I too see room for improvement. However I don't see Androids openness near the one of Windows, it is much closer to the one of Ubuntu.

The reason is that competition indeed can innovate and use the platform without Google's blessing! An example is Amazon, who use their fork of Android on the Kindle. They create their own competing platform, yet stay compatible (as far as they wish) to the Android ecosystem.

That's exactly what is not possible with Windows. You cannot fork Windows!

With Ubuntu, you also have a controlled platform, where Canonical decides to incorporate upstart, not systemd, and to create their own Desktop (Unity). It is not community driven. And as well as Unity can be used by other distributions, the Android software, after Google made the decisions, is available for everybody, e.g. Amazon.
And on the other side, while Ubuntu is very dominant in the Linux distro market, it did not create the situation where everybody would jump on Ubuntu's boat and stop innovating (stop developing Gnome 3, KDE4). As a matter of fact, you could argue that Android is to the phone OS market what Ubuntu is to the GNU/Linux world! And yes, it would be bad if Ubuntu would gain whole dominance, but a competing distro that is closed would not help at all.

Don't get me wrong, I am totally with you in that Google has more tight control, did not release Android 3 sources, and so on. I am also happy that there is competition in the market. But I would value open(!) competition, e.g. Firefox OS, much more. And whatever the market looks like, I would never support a closed system as in iOS, Windows Phone, with my own pocket money. I'd rather be able to innovate myself than be at the mercy of somebody else.

Edited 2012-12-05 16:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3