Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Jul 2014 21:57 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

Samsung has delayed its first Tizen phone yet again (this one).

The official launch was to come at Thursday's event for Tizen developers in Moscow, complete with market-ready products. But, in an echo of Samsung's most recent failure to launch a Tizen smartphone - in Japan earlier this year - the launch was canceled just days earlier.

Samsung provided no concrete date for the rollout of the commercial version of the phone at the developer summit but said in a statement Thursday that "the smartphone will appear on the Russian market later, when we can offer our users a fullest portfolio of applications".

While few people will care about this delay, there is one small group to whom this will be devastating news.

In all seriousness, nobody - not even Samsung itself - sees Tizen as a serious option or competitor to Android, and this news only serves to make that even clearer. Certain people keep trying to posit Tizen as some sort of huge threat to Android or as a sign that Samsung is seriously considering dumping Android (presumably thereby crippling Android and Google), but anyone with even the remotest bit of sense realises this makes about as much sense as a software patent.

No amount of wishful thinking is going to make Tizen happen.

Thread beginning with comment 592319
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Meanwhile...
by crystall on Sat 12th Jul 2014 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Meanwhile..."
Member since:

Not really:

And besides low-end Android phones offer a pretty poor experience in comparison being mostly based around Android 2.3.

(full disclaimer: I work for Mozilla and specifically on FxOS)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Meanwhile...
by moondevil on Sat 12th Jul 2014 18:04 in reply to "RE[4]: Meanwhile..."
moondevil Member since:

With $50 you can already have a KitKat device,

Even if for $25 the best is Android 2.3, it already offers a mix of Java and C++ support for native applications, all of which way better than so called web applications.

Plus all the native applications that matter.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Meanwhile...
by richarson on Sat 12th Jul 2014 18:35 in reply to "RE[5]: Meanwhile..."
richarson Member since:

That's not really fair,android 2.3 is practically obsolete and newer versions will probably functon very sluggishly on the hardware FFOS targets.

On the other hand, once/if FFOS gets all the features Android has, it will probably be the same.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Meanwhile...
by unclefester on Sun 13th Jul 2014 05:07 in reply to "RE[4]: Meanwhile..."
unclefester Member since:

And besides low-end Android phones offer a pretty poor experience in comparison being mostly based around Android 2.3.

WTF? The LOWEST spec Android phone I've seen lately is running Android 4.1. Bottom of the range ($50-8100) prepaid Android phones sold in Australia have 800x480 screens, 512MB RAM and dual core CPUs. There are quad core phones selling for a just over $100 now.

By Xmas most entry level phones will be quad core running Kit Kat with 1GB RAM.

Reply Parent Score: 2