I really hate these arguments. The argument basically comes down to this:
No one should make *any* smartphones unless they can
immediately top the iPhone. If you can't top the iPhone
on day one, then just don't bother competing at all.
It's one thing to call out hype. It's another thing entirely to say, "X is over-hyped therefore it shouldn't exist."
> But it’s still effectively tied to the smallish T-Mobile cell phone network.
No it's not. So far as I can tell, you can use it on AT&T's network. The only catch is the you can't use AT&T's 3G with it. But this seems to be a one or the other choice. AT&T and T-Mobile apparently use different frequencies for their 3G (T-Mobile's is non-standard), and no one seems to be putting out phone that support both (in my limited research on the topic). This leads me to believe that there must only be chips that support one or the other. In that case, there's no pleasing everyone. If you choose AT&T, you'll piss off a bunch of people, but you'll also piss off a bunch of people if you choose T-Mobile.
> And the Nexus One lacks the convenience of being connected to iTunes.
So... the only phone that will ever appease you will, by definition, need to be an Apple-branded phone.
> The Android app store is a fifth the size of Apple’s.
It's the quality, not the quantity of the apps that matters. Comparing on size alone is useless. There have been a number of articles on the number of crappy and rehashed apps that get poured into the AppStore marketplace by people hoping to use the shotgun approach to AppStore success. And how exactly is Google supposed to remedy this with the launch of a phone? Make the phone iPhone-compatible and hack their way into AppStore access?
> Meanwhile, Apple is getting ready to announce an entirely new iteration of its iPhone in three weeks — the tablet — that will likely make every other player in the market look like a laggard — again.
This is the stupidest thing I have read lately.
> Why didn’t Google offer a phone with both a GSM and a CDMA radio that would work on any U.S. cell phone network?
It's not that simple. See the GSM 3G comments above. I thought that there used to be GSM/CDMA chips. Maybe they were part of that whole Qualcomm lawsuit a few years ago?
It's the quality, not the quantity of the apps that matters. Comparing on size alone is useless.
OK, but of course if we make a default assumption that the same percentage of apps are actually good on both platforms, you'll end up with five times as many good apps on the iPhone. So unless you're suggesting that Android has better quality apps on average, I really don't see what your point is.
Honestly, I'd personally expect to find better quality apps on the AppStore - Apple vets them for UI coherence and basic functionality. Plus devs don't have to try and target multiple types of device, all iPhones share the same basic functionality in terms of screen size, input devices etc.
> This leads me to believe that there must only be chips that support one or the other.
IIRC, Qualcomm are preparing the very first baseband/radio chip(s) that can support both. I believe it's a soft-radio, so you can reprogram it for whichever frequencies and protocols you need to support.
So, could this also support CDMA in addition? That would be awesome if we could make it to the point where phone don't have to be 'one or the other' anymore.
That would still depend on Verizon letting you use a phone they didn't sell you, without a crippled branded OS and locked hardware. The Droid is the first un-fucked-with phone they've ever sold.
They've promised some 'open network' changes, but the most that's come out of that is the ability to use data cards that come built-in to laptops.
People still stuck it out though. Personally I would rather have a phone that could be used on any cell carrier's network though (except maybe Japanese carriers, IIRC they use network tech that no one else in the world uses).
Man that sucks. I can understand all of the US using a different standard from the rest of the world (like with NTSC and imperial measurement) but having the US use two standards at once is clearly not in their own interest.
Canadian carriers are the same. The only difference is that all of the smaller carriers have been swallowed up and you basically have the choice of 'The GSM Carrier' (i.e. Rogers who grew their empire out of cable tv) or 'The CDMA Carrier' (i.e. Bell -- the government mandated telephone monopoly).
I actually use my phone primarily to make calls and texts. Access to a 3G network is nice, but it's an accouterment. For many people, the slower data speed is not too big of a hassle when you only need to use it occasionally.
It is standard for everywhere except the USA; mobile usage has been traditionally significantly higher in Europe than USA, so you wouldn't really want to miss out on that market!
Guess I should also add that AT&T's 3G is compatible with Telus 3G in Canada... at least according to an article that I read, the Droid/Motorola Milestone that will be sold for Telus will only be compatible with AT&T 3G, and not T-Mobile.
Ok, I was under the impression it was the opposite. But I wasn't able to find much material explicitly discussing the differences (pros/cons) of AT&T's 3G network vs T-Mobile's.
> But it’s still effectively tied to the smallish T-Mobile cell phone network.
No it's not. So far as I can tell, you can use it on AT&T's network. The only catch is the you can't use AT&T's 3G with it. But this seems to be a one or the other choice. AT&T and T-Mobile apparently use different frequencies for their 3G (T-Mobile's is non-standard), and no one seems to be putting out phone that support both (in my limited research on the topic). This leads me to believe that there must only be chips that support one or the other. In that case, there's no pleasing everyone. If you choose AT&T, you'll piss off a bunch of people, but you'll also piss off a bunch of people if you choose T-Mobile.
> And the Nexus One lacks the convenience of being connected to iTunes.
So... the only phone that will ever appease you will, by definition, need to be an Apple-branded phone.
> The Android app store is a fifth the size of Apple’s.
It's the quality, not the quantity of the apps that matters. Comparing on size alone is useless. There have been a number of articles on the number of crappy and rehashed apps that get poured into the AppStore marketplace by people hoping to use the shotgun approach to AppStore success. And how exactly is Google supposed to remedy this with the launch of a phone? Make the phone iPhone-compatible and hack their way into AppStore access?
> Meanwhile, Apple is getting ready to announce an entirely new iteration of its iPhone in three weeks — the tablet — that will likely make every other player in the market look like a laggard — again.
This is the stupidest thing I have read lately.
> Why didn’t Google offer a phone with both a GSM and a CDMA radio that would work on any U.S. cell phone network?
It's not that simple. See the GSM 3G comments above. I thought that there used to be GSM/CDMA chips. Maybe they were part of that whole Qualcomm lawsuit a few years ago?