Questions on Android phones?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Boot_Comp said:
Was wondering why Android OS phones cost almost as much as phones with proprietary OS (Blackberry, iPhone, Windows etc.)?
Does Google provide support for Android the way MS does with their OS (helpline, customer service resolution of any issues etc.)?

Also how do end users (we consumers) benefit from using a phone with Android as compared to one with WinMo or a blackberry?

Appreciate any insights into this.
Click to expand...
To be short and straight..... U use Android if u like it..... There are no 'benefits' that are unique to Android...... :)

OS doesn't matter..... it is the cost of the hardware that makes the price go up or down...... Also, the initial Android hype kept the prices way up for even el cheapo phones like the HTC Tattoo.

Support is provided by the Handset manufacturer. U see that MS provides support coz u BUY Windows/Office/whatever from them...... U never BUY Android from Google & so, google cannot be expected to provide the type of support that MS provides.....

:)
 
Boot_Comp said:
Well here's some info on the actual Android OS development scenario for developers.

Google's Android platform: not so open after all

Is Android Evil? | VisionMobile :: blog

IMO Android seems to follow the 'letter' of open-source but not the 'spirit'.
Click to expand...
Buddy, in this world, the main aim of Google and the carriers is to make money. Don't expect free food and everything to be so nicely done for the consumers.

Right now, Android is the most open OS available for mobile phones. HTC and Samsung phones are EASILY customizable and hackable, and there are tons of mods, themes and apps that you can do on it. Look up this app called Tasker, which is one of the apps making use of Android's openness. Carrier bloatware and stuff do not affect people in Europe and Asia ; only in America. Even then most of the phones are customizable.

I don't see your point ; you want Android to be fully open such that everything ; the source codes, the phone everything should be open. In that case, get out of your dream world. If the manufacturer actually kept the phone completely open as you said, they would lose a lot of money. What makes you think that they make money with every phone that they replace? Are you in the industry or do you have credible facts giving some weight to that claim?

With the release of Adobe AIR, things have gotten even more easier for developers. Not to mention that Android allows installing apps that are not from the market incase the devs want to sell through their own portal (Gameloft, EA). Even Amazon is coming up with its own App Market for Android.
 
Well it seems that corporates like Google are banking on folks like you to propagate what they call 'openness' when it is actually not.

Since Android is based on the open source Linux (not something Google developed from scratch), we should expect the same choice we have come to expect of Linux. Why settle for less?

As a consumer I will always expect choice for myself especially when they market it as open-source, the same as I do when I opt to use Linux any other device.

Also what industry facts do you want to support the fact that selling stuff makes money?

Anyway was interesting seeing the responses here. Am trying to get a feel for the impact Google has created with their marketing on 'openness'.

And seems they are quite effective especially with folks even defending their so called "openness". :rofl:

Here's hoping to a future where phones are open like desktops are today.

Peace. :thumb:
 
Since you've said that Android isn't open like you want it, mind expanding on that?

All you've done so far is say that Android isn't actually open but I don't see any real points of debate. And in the end you've just poked at us trying to have a discussion with you.
 
Superfrag said:
Since you've said that Android isn't open like you want it, mind expanding on that?

All you've done so far is say that Android isn't actually open but I don't see any real points of debate. And in the end you've just poked at us trying to have a discussion with you.
Click to expand...
lol don't wait for him to respond to that..With a nick like his, you really expect him to known anything about "open". I am amazed he can even spell open correctly :rofl:
 
desiibond said:
Even if you take hardware wise, take a look at sub 20k Android phones. They are worthless piece of crap and most non-android phones beat them to pulp in feature set. If Android is free to use, when the heck will manufacturers stop acting like a greedy idiots and bring out some VFM Android phones?
Click to expand...

you should understand a company does not sell product for charity , it will introduce product a premium. See the ex. of Samsung Galaxy series . There is huge price difference btw SGS & Galaxy 3 ( sub 20 k) , why . We should understand not all folks having luxury to buy such 20K + phones , but still they want to use such features . so company either introduce less feature with less money cost for end customer , result = both happy . Low value phones targeted with mass with low income & it will sell more in quantity , giving more spare /service future money to company .

Greedy idiots can make money such way for future R & D till their current product dies out . They will not decrease the price till their new cost effective model going to introduce in market . This is fact & no 1 customer like us can change it :ashamed:
 
desiibond said:
Even if you take hardware wise, take a look at sub 20k Android phones. They are worthless piece of crap and most non-android phones beat them to pulp in feature set. If Android is free to use, when the heck will manufacturers stop acting like a greedy idiots and bring out some VFM Android phones?
Click to expand...

You statements aren't all correct. There are already VFM Android phones in the market such as Galaxy 3 and they are superior hardware wise AND feature wise to many non-android phones, such as X6. Wave is the only exception, and that too coz its a BADA flagship device, and it beats some 20K+ devices even.
 
How I (& many others) wish that Android was fully open source like how you say. Unfortunately the carriers and phone manufacturers/partners won't allow that to happen, not in today's scenario. Maybe we can look forward to seeing how Meego grows..

Sent from my T-Mobile G2.
 
Is Android Open Source Or Not? | Shantanu's Technophilic Musings

And if anyone wants to discuss this any further, don't make any sweeping statements, read and reply with facts.

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---
Superfrag said:
How I (& many others) wish that Android was fully open source like how you say. Unfortunately the carriers and phone manufacturers/partners won't allow that to happen, not in today's scenario. Maybe we can look forward to seeing how Meego grows..

Sent from my T-Mobile G2.
Click to expand...

It'd be same with Meego.
 
But since Nokia (AFAIK) is the only one using Meego, the carrier/hardware restrictions shouldn't be there right? Or will it be similar to how Android scenario is?
 
^^ Nokia is the prime contributor and leader for meego but it will be available for all to use. It will be similar to Android scenario as no manufacturer (including Nokia) would like to take the risk of warranty support that can ensue by selling open phones.

However, they might have dev phones just like Google.

Edit: Read this http://meego.com/about/licensing-policy This is the meego licensing policy and they are taking the same permissive approach as Android, which is very necessary to make it beneficial for someone to actually use this stuff in a commercial product.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom