Mobile Competition Part 1: What OS is best for you
0. phoneArena 23 Sep 2011, 12:31 posted on
Part 1 of 2 covering iOS, Android and the smaller competing platforms, the strengths and weaknesses of each, and why you might choose one over another. Part 2 will focus on the overall competition and its effect on the mobile space...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
244. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
BREW is every bit a legitimate OS, as is Android, iOS, or BB. But because Qualcomm designed it to be a basic cell phone OS, and a bit of a step up from our old Startac and Nokia 6110s (boy, I used to love snake). But Qualcomm has somewhat neglected, or at least they didn't evolve the BREW platform very much. If give the proper attention and maybe the same kind of vm that Android uses, BREW could have possibly evolved into a powerhouse OS. But one characteristic that BREW shares with iOS, is that although anyone can make an app in just about any coding language they wish, that app can only be ported by the carrier or the phone manufacture. I know that YOU know I'm speaking the true on that. So let's come together on this.
I can except that the iPhone or any phone being a smartphone seeing only when both of our conditions are meet.
1. The phone can not run the standard BREW format commonly used on current feature phones. And must have the ability to run full programs as opposed to simple games and plug-ins. And of course everything you said before as far as copy and paste and multi-tasking (even though iOS doesn't really have that either, but i digress.)
2. The phone must have the ability to download applications from at least one third party app store. For example, an iPhone, once jail broken, would qualify as a smartphone. (Remember, I never thought even a jail broken iPhone qualified before. So, I'm meeting you half way on this.)
So what do you think? Can we agree that these should be a starting point for smartphone qualifications?
247. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
brew at one time was the main starting OS code on everyone's phone. it could never be a smartphone OS, it wasnt designed to be that way.
#1 i can go for, but #2 i think your really sticking to the wrong point. Because under that guise, then windows mobile, palm, and blackberry didnt become a smartphone until AFTER the iphone did, as they just recently implemented centralized app stores. Windows mobile was the defacto high powered phone OS that is what a full smartphone "was". It may not have always been very stable, but it was the most powerful by far in features and functions. It never got a centralized app store, unless you want to count that crappy half assed try they added in with windows mobile 6.5.
Why exactly does it matter where the app comes from as long as it is a full featured app? Maybe I'm just missing the point in here somewhere. If its the same app from the centralized store, or from some internet site, what's the difference?
251. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
My point isn't so much where they come from, it's the lack of freedom is what I'm getting at. All feature phones are completely locked down. You have no say so in what apps you can have. Smartphones never had that level of restriction. If a software developer writes the app, it was yours for the taking and your carrier had no says so in the matter. A smartphone, at least during my training, was described to me as a mini-computer and one of the neccesary function was the ability to download applications from anywhere. Much like how we have that ability on our desktops, laptops, and net books. You don't have to download all of your software from Dell, Gatewaand or even Apple for those who have iMacs. Why shouldn't a mini-computer have that same capability if it's possible?
258. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
I get where your going with that, and for a while, that was completely true. All smartphones could download apps from any site they were found on. But they also lacked a central location to download apps easily from. you had to know where to go find them.
If you get angry birds on some website, or from the centralized store.. whats the difference? From personal experience, i could say you probably saved an hour of searching the internet by getting it from the central app store. I like being able to get apps from anywhere and I like an OS that gives me freedom. Thats why I choose android. However, if they took away the ability to get apps from elsewhere, I would be mad about it, but I would still consider it a smart phone, as it still can get apps. I think fighting over the location of where you get apps is splitting hairs.
259. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
I concede, the location isn't as important as the freedom of choice. That's why i'm willing to say a jail broken iPhone is a smartphone.
This isn't splitting hairs because again it's not about the location. It about the restrictions placed on the device. The control Apple has over what YOU are allowed to put on YOUR device. It would be one thing if we were talking about your company's IT restricting usage, but its Apple. What other electronic computing devices have their full abilities block by the manufacture? The only thing I can think of is a basic cell phone. And this isn't something that I've set as a standard. This was exactly why some of the reviewers we follow as well as other industry experts had an issue with calling it a smartphone as well. This isn't all me.
261. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
Dont get me wrong, I completely agree with trying to avoid OS's that have huge restrictions from the manufacturer on them. I dont like being told what i cant do, only what i can do. Unfortunately the norm now is app store only restrictions. Exept blackberry and Android, everyone else has pretty much locked their phones down to the app store. So unless we start knocking out OG smart phones like windows and palm, we are just going to have to accept that.
or we could just agree to disagree.. lol.
262. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2705; Member since: 26 May 2011)
Aha, but there's the rub. It isn't YOURS. It's Apple's smartphone that Steve Jobs has been kind enough to let you use. It is still a smartphone however.
You have to remember, smartphones are NOT computers, and you can't place the same definitions on them. Apple wants to ensure a safer environment, so users don't have to worry about virus protection or malware. Regardless of the ease of hacking either device, there can be no argument that the Android Market and ecosystem has a ton of malware in it. What you see as restrictions on what you can do with the device is seen as features of enhanced security and ease of use by many others. And, because all of the hardware is the same with Apple, if there is an exploit that could be taken advantage of with a 3rd party app, it's in Apple's interest on behalf of consumers to not allow that possibility. Remember, most users aren't nearly as savvy with their devices as we are and could easily be suckered into something that could cause a lot of problems in a unified ecosystem like iOS. That's a feature tradeoff and decision for consumers to make whether or not they want to be in that system. It doesn't make the iPhone any less of a smartphone because of it. You don't like it, so you don't buy it. Simple as that.
That said, you posted links before of articles (which seemed to be citing the same source) which claimed the iPhone wasn't a smartphone at launch in 2007. And, I completely agree with that point. Have you shared links with more recent reflections on that topic? (Sorry, I haven't had a chance to go through the entire exchange with you and Taco.)
263. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
How could you? You have a life! But sadly no recent articles. I realize I am a lone wolf on this issue, but the facts of that article has changed only so much. It clearly stated "3rd party software", and when I first read it 4 years ago, it only reinforced what I was told and its tough to change that line of thinking just because Apple says we should.
To use yet another analogy; if Ford bumped up the fuel consumption on the Mustang to 40 MPG, that would make it very fuel efficient, but that wouldn't make it a hybrid, right? Because it's still missing that key feature of having that second power source. Any car that doesn't have that second powerplant, doesn't get the distinction of being called a hybrid. So why is it that Apple is allowed to remove key features and still have that distinction of being a smartphone? And sure, they say its for security reasons, and I know what your saying about the unified eco-system is 100% true. But he did it for the money. Apple gets paid 10 different ways for everything people do on an iphone or ipad. From charging the app developers an application fee, to getting a share of the ad money from our clicks. Apple left flash and 3rd party apps off of iOS because there was no profit in it for them. Blackberry is widely excepted as the most secure mobile OS there is, yet they manage to allow 3rd party apps with very few issues. This is pure greed at its best and its working to the tune of $76 Billion!
Lastly, I know you guys are probably this guy is just too thick headed to get it! But believe me, I get every excellent point both you and remixfa have made. It's just I don't think Apple deserves this pass. This whole thing just reminds me of the Emperor with No Clothes. The Emperor struts his new attire so convincingly that the crowd wants to believe he really is wearing the most elegant of fabrics. And I'm like the little kid yelling, "Hey, the Emperor has no clothes."
266. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2705; Member since: 26 May 2011)
I just think you're misinterpreting "3rd party software". The OG iPhone didn't pass that test because it didn't have any 3rd party apps at all. The App Store wasn't introduced until iOS 2.0. I don't think it has anything to do with being able to install apps from outside sources.
267. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
No, I know 3rd party software is basically any software not developed by the manufacture. With the exception of a few iWork app, everything on the app store is 3rd party. What it seem if done is put to much emphasis on where the apps should come from. My real issue is the lock down. The lock down and control of the device Steve allows his followers to use ishad no other precedence in smartphones, only feature phones. And it would have been okay had they taken the Android route allowing users to decide for themselves. But the lock down and control is my real issue.
269. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
and there in lies the difference. some people like freedom and all the good and bads with that, and some people like confinement and saftey, with all the goods and bads of that.
we all have that choice to make. Is one better than the other? Is one less of a good idea than the other? Each side will talk up their side and point out issues with the other. Its all preference. It is 2 sides to the same coin.. but yet, it IS the same coin. 2 ways to run a smartphone, but it is still a smartphone.
And no, only fools that think apple is always right or have no idea of what a smartphone is or how little the iphone2g did at launch... think the iphone was a smartphone at launch.
223. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
just to bring up a point
the "multiple sources" part is disingenuous. Before the iphone's app store there was no centralized location on any true smartphone platform to get apps. You had to search the internet for them. Neither windows, nor palm, nor blackberry had an app store before the iphone. The one thing apple did right was making apps very easy to find.
226. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Let's not forget about Handango, that's what most people used, but I get your point. Apple was the first to make an app store specifically for their phone. But if that's what makes a phone a smartphone, then nothing before the iPhone would have qualified. So if a centralized app store is what makes a smartphone, where is the line drawn? Downloading apps can't be it, because I downloaded apps long before using a smartphone.
175. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
sorry WEM, but i dont think the app store arguement is a good one.
the iphone IS a smartphone now. It became one after the last few updates. It WAS NOT a smart phone when the iphone 2g launched. It was a really nice feature phone. It was lacking way too many features to be a smartphone. Shady advertising by apple convinced everyone it was a smartphone before it was.
It is nice that we live in a world of updates as any phone can pretty much be turned into a smartphone if it has the horsepower to handle the updates.
122. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
And PS, the vibe in this comment section was harmonious until taco50 came in. There were iPhone fans here that saw the article for what it was and had nothing negative to say to anyone. But as usual, when taco50 sees other people's opinions or talking civilly amongst themselves, he finds a way to throw off the balance in the room. My comment was my comment was to biophone (who BTW took no offense) not taco.
126. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
You made an absurd comment I responded to. I haven't attacked anyone personally. Well maybe sniggly lol.
Here's the thing. Fandroids make disparaging and sometimes ridiculous comments about the iPhone.
Some examples :
Not a smartphone
iPhone users are sheep
Apple is evil
Apple users are disgusting or idiots
Darthball refers to it as idiot phone
Then if I rebut your statement I'm viewed as an instigator or a sheep?
I don't comment on every android article trying to prove iPhone is better. It's you androids that follow Apple articles and talk s**t.
136. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
If you read my posts, you will notice I never made any disparaging or ridiculous remarks. I'm only reiterating what many in the industry have always felt. I don't think an app store make a phone a smartphone. Nor does email or exchange, because as any VZW customer could tell you, our feature phones have all of those things, even an app store. But what VZW feature phones can not do... Is download apps from third party sites and app stores. Just like the iPhone.
141. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
No one in the industry shares your view. Only fanboys.
179. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
1) the iphone was not a smartphone at launch. It IS one now, so why are you still crying about it
2) some iphone users are sheep. Miz and gallito come to mind specifically. You are still a loyal apple customer, but since you have been behaving, i havent been calling you a sheep. A sheep is not only blind to everything apple does that is not awesome (and u still fall under this), but they also act like a complete idiot and dont say anything of note (you have gotten much better at this).
3) i think as an over all company, apple has a bad track record. Is it evil? i dont think it has a soul. But apple has the deaths of many workers on his head and the blood of their slave like work conditions in every iphone. If you can live with that, fine. I want no part of it. Nor do I want any part of their 1984 big brother like attitude on their products. i buy a product from you doesnt mean u get to control me through it for the rest of my life.
4) i have some extremely intelligent friends that are diehard apple users. Then there are people on this board that are the exact opposite. Most people are talking about the loud mouths on the board.
5) did darthball hurt your feelings? Want a tissue? Thats his opinion. You have said many vile things about android, so until you hold yourself to the same standard, quit whining about others.
195. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
I found you an article where samsung was being sued for 60 worker deaths and the article mentioned that samsung employees had complained for years about poor working conditions. The clothes on your back are most likely made in sweatshops. You have selective outrage against Apple.
132. biophone (Posts: 1963; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
I agree with mike. I to understand some people views that the og iphone wasnt a smartphone but i do think there wrong but to say that doesnt make you a fanboy. To say once the iphone got a appstore wasnt a smartphone makes you a instant fanboy. Remixfa is a weird fanboy. When talking about android i enjoy his comments when talking about iphone foot in mouth. To whateverman i have a question for you. What makes something a smartphone. Remixfa says copy and paste. I say all a smartphone is is an advanced feature phone with a more advanced proccesor bigger display/battery has access to email/web and has a keyboard.
138. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
All VZW feature phones were able to go to Get It Now, are those smartphones too? And the Blackberry App World was introduced in 2008, so was it just a feature phone before that?
139. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
What makes the iPhone a smartphone is that it has all the features that any other smartphone has. Not liking that 3rd party apps are installed through iTunes doesn't change facts. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can twist facts.
I think what we're really getting to here is you dont want to PAY for apps.
147. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Never said I didn't like the iPhone or iTunes, as I said, I have thousand of dollars worth of iDevices. So if NOT liking iTunes was an issue, I wouldn't own these devices. And I probably have paid for many more apps then you, so that last comment was really weak.
Having used not only iPhones, Blackberries, Palms, Windows, and several other devices give me a different perspective, one you obviously don't like. Again, you have to get over your own insecurities about your iPhone because it's obviously have an inferiority complex. If you think the iPhone is the best smartphone in the world, that's great for you. But I believe a smartphone should be a mini computer that offers at least the same features as any basic feature phone. Expandable memory and removable battery doesn't make a smartphone, but to me, downloading apps from anywhere does.
150. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
It's not about to you. There's a standard for a smartphone which the iPhone meets. Not liking a feature on it doesn't change what it is.
I have used all of those platforms. iPhone blows blackberry, windows mobile, palm out of the water. That's why 2 of 3 no longer exist.
I understand you work for VZW but you need to get off the fanboy horse. You have the iPhone now. It's ok.
152. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Yeah, it's just okay, it's not a smartphone. LOL. How does lacking something make it a feature? If it can't do it, that's not a benefit.
And since when is someone opinion not about them? I gave an opinion and back it up with artcles writen by people in the industry. You not liking what they had to say doesn't mean they're wrong. But your getting this upset about it sounds rather fanboyish.
154. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
That's like me using an article from 2008 to say android doesn't have a feature which it now does.
You do understand iOS has progressed since 2007 right? Why would you make these completely unreasonable arguments?
165. Whateverman (Posts: 3269; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Because nothing has changed on the iphone since 2008. Oh wait a minute, didn't you guys get MMS last year? Never mind, but yes...the iPhone has progressed into an even BETTER feature phone! The best in the world in fact. But you still haven't answered my question. If all these feature phones can get apps, access the internet, and has exchange email, does that make my old LG Dare a smart phone too? What makes the iPhone a smartphone and my Dare not a smartphone, if I had the same feature back then as you do now? We won't even mention that technically had more features seeing as though it had an SD card slot, syncing and tethering capabilities.
194. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
The iPhone hasn't progressed since 2008? Why do you continue to make ridiculous statements?
Dare didn't have a real web browser it used wap would be one huge reason. It didn't have a real email client is two. Remosync which was a 3rd party brew app doesn't count as real exchange support.
Do you really think the dare was a better phone overall than the iPhone? If so you're so blind this discussion is over for me.