Forum Discussion
Inking on Web Pages - Discussion
HotCakeX Although I find your ideas appealing, I nevertheless have to disagree.
Android did not succeed because it was open source. The ten people for whom that is a deciding factor produce nothing and won't pay for anything.
Android succeeded because it went to market with app dev tools a year ahead of Windows Phone allowing it to define expectations both for developers, for end users, and for board manufacturers. Once that happens, different is wrong, putting competitors at a huge disadvantage. This is the same thing that entrenches Windows on the desktop.
Huwaei has the Chinese market to prop it up, and the support of the Chinese government which is probably quite pleased with the severing of dependence on an American company. From that point of view, Microsoft would not have been an improvement and such a change would have made Chinese language support a second class citizen.
To port Android or any other OS to a given suite of phone components you need a thing called a BSP (board support package). This is provided by the hardware manufacturer and is seldom open source. It is essentially a giant device driver written to provide APIs. Because Android got to market first by a wide margin these APIs are defined by the Android specification. The situation is parallel to gaming hardware where everything ships with Windows drivers, and anything else is pot-luck and poorly tested. For phones, everything ships with an Android BSP.
IndustrialAutomation I'd add that Android first sold that much because it was a cheap iOS copy. To many buyers back in 2006-2007, it was "like an iphone but less expensive"; because at that time, what people wanted was basically an iphone. That's what make it succeed at first, IMO.
EmmanuelBeziat wrote:I'd add that Android first sold that much because it was a cheap iOS copy. To many buyers back in 2006-2007, it was "like an iphone but less expensive"; because at that time, what people wanted was basically an iphone. That's what make it succeed at first, IMO.
Oh? how about this. 100 million ios users vs 2 Billions Android users in the world.
45% of them in the US. the numbers explain everything.
even if i was richer than Bill Gates, i still wouldn't go near a closed source spyware like IOS.
it's not even about prices. it's about quality, features, power and compatibility.
you can buy Iphone if you want to pay monthly and it can be cheap. so price is not an issue.
apple is creating a monopoly and monopoly is bad, it's bad when a company dictates everything for everyone.
oh and not to mention apple employees listen to iphone users 🙂
Apple contractors 'regularly hear confidential details' on Siri recordings
- I'm not really sure on what you're talking about?
I'm talking about how Android introduced itself on a new-but-closed market at the birth of smartphones, and you're replying me with market shares of today and stuff about privacy?- You said Android was a cheap ios copy and at first people bought it because of that.
I said it's the other way around now, ios devices can be bought cheaper than Android devices but still we see people choose Android because it's not about price but something else.
then I explained what that "something else" is.
