Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th May 2013 12:42 UTC
Google The only thing from the interview I care about: "We are thinking about how to make Android handle updates better. We see ways we can do this. It's early days. We're talking with our partners and working our way through it. We need time to figure out the mechanics, but it's definitely an area of focus for me and for the team." We've seen empty promises about this before, though.
Thread beginning with comment 561473
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
There is one more interesting comment
by chithanh on Mon 13th May 2013 21:24 UTC
chithanh
Member since:
2006-06-18

Thom, I don't know how you can not care about this, given that you wrote an article yesterday titled "Samsung is hurting Android":

Is it a problem for Google that Samsung is so dominant, and makes almost all the money on the platform?

I realize this gets played up in the press a lot. Samsung is a great partner to work with. We work with them on pretty much almost all our important products. [...] Look at Microsoft and Intel. They were very codependent on one another, but it served both of them well.

One might understand this comment like "Google+Samsung could become the new Wintel". That would be a very worrisome development for their competitors.

Reply Score: 3

jimmystewpot Member since:
2006-01-19

not just bad for their competitors.. bad for consumers as well. Having health competition in the market place is critical..

I personally can't stand samsung phones.. while the hardware is great and some of the features are great the overall software is very buggy.. even the core android platforms aside so many of the "samsung value added features" are so buggy.. randomly soak the battery.. often just seem as though they are rushed out to window dress a product with bling.

Reply Parent Score: 2

chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

not just bad for their competitors.. bad for consumers as well. Having health competition in the market place is critical..

I think it will not benefit consumers, but it will not hurt them either, as long as Google keeps its promise to not lock you into proprietary formats and you can take all your data with you at any time.

That way, if a competitor makes a better product, people can switch immediately, and are not held back by vendor lock-in. Admittedly, migrating paid content from the app store is a problem, but that is the same with all DRM schemes.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Android is open-source, Windows isn't. The x86 ISA is patented, ARM architecture is more verbose, while under licensing scheme too. It's less of a threat than it was.

Kochise

Edited 2013-05-13 22:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

I find this to be backwards though. x86 is patented yes, but Intel has done an amazing job at providing everyone excellent documentation and standards on everything. When you have an x86 system you know how interrupts will work, how the timer works, how the thing boots, how to enumerate and talk to accessories, how power is managed, and a lot of other things. The documentation is all available, in a form that for example Linux developers can use. Linux runs, on a basic platform level, fine on millions of different PC configurations. New ones are released every day, and the basic functionality just works, because it is all documented and well understood. Just a thing like USB: a huge R&D project by Intel over many years, then they designed chips and software that worked with it, documented how to make devices that interact with it, and released every part of it for anyone to use for free.

With ARM, with a just as patented core (though easier to license for big players) absolutely nothing of that holds, every SoC does it differently, and it varies from being poorly documented (Qualcomm) to a proprietary secret (Samsung). Getting Linux running on a new SoC is a troublesome undertaking that must be performed over and over.

This is not an argument against the sentiment in your post, but Intel gets an awful lot of hate for one thing (the x86 ISA), and I really do think they deserve a lot better.

Reply Parent Score: 3