Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Well it figures... (Score:5, Funny)
They are probably waiting for the Duke Nukem Forever port.
Re:Well it figures... (Score:5, Funny)
No, actually, they were waiting for WINE 1.0 to be r....oh, nevermind.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Android phone? They're probably just waiting for a compatible headset:
http://www.henriksonline.co.uk/pods.htm [henriksonline.co.uk]
http://www.cybusindustries.net/earpod.htm [cybusindustries.net]
Huge shocker (Score:5, Insightful)
Disorganization?
Everything tagged "beta?"
Welcome to Google.
Have you released a product today?
Re:Huge shocker (Score:5, Interesting)
This is what sent Palm into limbo, made people forget about HTC and the WinMob phones, the Motorola Q and Razr...it just keeps going. I'm someone whose spent his entire career in the mobile arena, and I can say that this is one competitive business considering how much of a pain it is to reengineer a smartphone every year just to keep your head above water. Because if you don't keep improving and releasing, the industry writes you off. Companies as big as Google have been stymied and left behind as roadkill before and it'll happen again for sure.
Parent
Rats! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Huge shocker (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, then, you're quite lucky. My phone right now is the only one I can even stand, but even I wouldn't say it does everything I want it to do already.
I'm glad you're happy with your phone, and since you feel so special, I'll even give you a cookie. Now shut up while the rest of us hold out hope we won't get shitty phone after shitty phone from shitty telcoms who only want to make a quick buck or ... 1000 off of us.
Not really (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10419263/1/google-android-phones-coming-this-year.html [thestreet.com]
PC World is reporting old news. Q4 08 has been the target for a while now.
Yes Way (Score:2)
Then why does the update from Google confirm the target is still the second half of Q2?
Q4 seems way more realistic to me.
Re:Yes Way (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps they meant to say the third quarter of the second half which puts it firmly at the third half of the third quarter.
WSJ says fourth quarter. Google says second half. Last I checked, Q4 falls in the 2nd half of the year. Perhaps this ass-clown didn't do so well with fractions.
Parent
Google denies rumors... (Score:5, Informative)
Google says Android delay is a rumor, launch on target for 2008 [google.com]
Didn't stop the usual attention grabbers from writing knee-jerk I Told You So articles [google.com] though...
Incidentally, the original post is mis-credited (Score:5, Informative)
The Wall Street Journal reported the delay. PC World merely parroted the report with Slashdotian flourish.
Parent
This report is inacurate! (Score:5, Informative)
This report at PCWorld and WSJ today are *inaccurate*. Google always said that the "second part of 2008" will be the time that the first Android phone will get released, and now these guys are writing article saying that "Q4 2008" is late??? It's right up with the schedule if you ask me! Engadget also wrote about how these articles are either mischievous or simply wrong.
Re:This report is inacurate! (Score:5, Informative)
July 1 also counts as "Second Half" of 2008. I'm not shocked, maybe some people were hoping for more from Google.
Parent
Excellent.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Excellent.. (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
You say innovation, I say evolution!
Original Wall Street Journal Article (Score:5, Informative)
Documentation (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Documentation (Score:4, Funny)
Well what do you expect, it's not scheduled to be out of Beta until 2057.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I noticed this myself but no worries on he docs, the .Net SDK had the same problem when the PDC version was released. The documentation is still playing catch up in some newer sections, but it's always the last thing to be updated.
Also missing is of course the features that haven't been rolled out yet.
But this is all normal for any large first release, particularly an open source community effort. For instance, how much has changed in any major open source release such as GNU/Linux, Apache, etc? Developers
New Paradigm For Them (Score:5, Interesting)
While I'm sure Google is talented, providing an OS and API is new ground for them. I'm not sure what their culture is like, but I would think time to iron out the kinks would be expected for this type of thing.
Apple/Next has been developing APIs for developers for years and have lots of lessons learned. Google is new to this. Give them time.
Re: (Score:2)
That's all well and good, but they should have waited until they had their act together a little more before they announced anything. If you're going to create hype you need to make sure you're in a position to live up to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that that philosophy is a bit more problematic when you've got such a significant hardware component as part of your master plan. Maybe it's not impossible to figure it out, but asking people to put down money to buy an unfinished phone and carry it around with them is different than asking a bunch of computer geeks to download some free software and screw around with it to find bugs.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The FOSS guys say "release early release often"
Well, it's good to "release early release often" when you're writing code for existing device (read: PC or some other common hardware). It's totally different game when you're trying to lure hardware developers to make hardware for your platform, while changing that platform on weekly basis.
I don't have doubt that Google is full of very smart people that wants to build the best platform possible, but they need to put their act together and understand simple fact - they can't put everything in release 1.0,
Re: (Score:2)
Have you actually looked at the demo videos available online. I would say they definitely live up to and possibly exceed the hype. Notice this article says SOME of the phones may be delayed. They don't mention the HTC dream that has been expected as the first android phone for quite some time. That article is purposefully vague so people start talking about Google not living up to expectations. Seems like worthless rumor mongering to me.
And only for one carrier (Score:2, Informative)
Only one carrier is currently planning on supporting Android phones, anyway: T-Mobile. (Otherwise known as the most open cell carrier in the US market anyway.)
Sprint deserves a dishonorable mention at this point, because while Sprint is a MEMBER of the "Android Alliance" they currently have NO plans to allow Android phones on their network, 2008 or 2009. Plus they're Sprint and they'll "fire" customers over attempting to use the features they were sold, so even if they did offer Android phones, don't expect
News flash (Score:3, Insightful)
Large companies tire quickly of trying to hit a constantly moving target which breaks applications every time they get a new build.
In other news, developers still prefer to deal with the mess that is Win32 rather than constantly changing interfaces of open source software. Shocking youtube video at 11.
Theres a reason companies don't all jump on the open source bandwagon ... its too much damn effort to support and maintain when none of the core developers give a damn about keeping things compatible. Spend countless man hours supporting every revision of open source software, and pay no up front licensing cost, but a fortune in support ... or ... pay a large up front chunk of change, write it once, and know it will work for several years assuming you followed the spec properly and didn't do anything blatently against the API documentation. Try them both, see which one is more profitable and less nerve racking.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't write successful software, do you?
Reverse "Win32" and "open source software" in your post, and it will get more accurate... You'll still need to throw things like .NET, and JDK, and POSIX in there to get an even more accurate picture, but it'll be an improvement.
Companies that develop for open source platforms don't spend effort on supporting "every revision". They do, however, enjoy selling into a market with less worry about being embraced and extended by one of the handful of successful Windows
Re: (Score:2)
Reverse "Win32" and "open source software" in your post, and it will get more accurate... You'll still need to throw things like .NET, and JDK, and POSIX in there to get an even more accurate picture, but it'll be an improvement.
Um, fail. I can still write code for 64-bit Vista that's binary compatible with NT 3.0.
All of the later acronymic bells and whistles were optional, and remain so.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I can still write code for 64-bit Vista that's binary compatible with NT 3.0.
Hello world! :-)
News flash: "open source" != anarchy (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. GNOME has been kept backwards-compatible for years now (the last platform ABI break was generally at 2.0). Same for KDE, at least they don't break compatibility inside stable branches. Now take X.org, Apache, Eclipse, or just about any open source project with a sizable third-party developer base, and you'll see they take great care in maintaining backward compatibility.
Parent
Android Phones Delayed - Androids get angry (Score:5, Funny)
On the bright side (Score:2, Funny)
Good news for OpenMoko.
Similar to Apple and iPhone (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this was why Apple wouldn't allow programs on their iPhone. They were updating the core too often after release and they knew it would likely break most third party code. Now that their core is stable, they'll release the 2.0 version with an SDK.
Android could've gone the same route: released, but not allowed 3rd party apps until stable. But I think that would be as frustrating as it was for iPhone users.
Google Andriod is about to be hit by a steamroller (Score:5, Interesting)
With Nokia's acquisition of Trolltech (makers of Qt and Qtopia [wikipedia.org]), Google is set to butt heads against a VERY large competitor, who is all-in on re-entering the US cellular industry.
Nokia is roughly the same size as Google (bigger in some ways, smaller in others), but more importantly, it's got more at stake. Qt/Embedded (a.k.a. Qtopia) is a heavyweight competitor to Android which has had far more design time, with a much more solid basis (Qt and Qtopia are both many years old, though Trolltech only recently aimed at cellular technology, which should be quickly rectified by Nokia's massive development teams). Google's dot-com mentality allows them to toss megabucks at an idea, like throwing things against a wall to see what sticks. If Android doesn't stick, whatever; they can afford it. If Qtopia doesn't stick, Nokia is back the drawing board and fighting a losing battle against LG.
Google's only merit is that they've been working on Andriod for longer than Nokia has been working on Qtopia (Nokia only finalized the Trolltech purchase last week). Google's only chance is to bring Andriod to dominance before Nokia manages to release Qt-powered phones. While they appear well-poised for this, the setback of this and other delays hurt the Andriod line more than you might think at a quick glance.
The cellphone platforms of tomorrow will be Apple iPhone, Google Andriod, and Nokia Qtopia. The other players (Motorola, Erickson, LG) will be left in the dust (or they'll adopt one of the above platforms rather than squeezing as much as they can out of standard J2ME). We'll see where Palm fits in with their revamped platform; they could easily go either way.
Can Google really face Microsoft on one front (office apps) and Nokia in the other? What about its bread & butter of web searching (their original front against Yahoo)? What's next, a car [google.org] to take on Ford and Toyota? :-p
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Greenphone was ditched in favor of better options. The current development platform of choice is the Neo1973 [wikipedia.org], the same platform used by the OpenMoko folks. Nokia hasn't yet announced a new development platform (i.e. one that they actually make) for Qtopia Phone Edition.
As to portability, that's one of Qtopia's biggest merits. It was so extreme that before the Greenphone was nixed, people were finding better support on other platforms (since Trolltech had no idea of how to design cellphone hardware).
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you're right. Because if that happens then I won't even care who wins; they're all infinitely better than the locked-down stupidity that's available now.
Re:Google Andriod is about to be hit by a steamrol (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yeah. That will matter.
I'm not putting any bets on that. Nokia's name isn't meaningful (at least here in the US). The name Qt is completely meaningless to a consumer. I'm not going to pick a phone because it has Nokia software on it. I don't think most Americans would. Google is different. Google is a big brand here. People know Google. They like Google. That has sales power. Nokia may have more mindshare in Europe, but I'd imagine that Google still has a very strong brand there, so things may be more equal.
Of the two, I'd put far more stake in Google's effort. Is Nokia trying to get other cell phone companies on board?
Now I think the iPhone will kick both of them. I hope Google does good, but I frankly doubt it. The carriers are far too corrupt. Read the WSJ article that this story is based on. They talk about Sprint's problems integrating and branding all their stuff in, T-Mobile's problems, etc. In other words all the carriers are taking the software that exists and trying to turn it into their normal drivel that they sell. Apple stood up to that. The iPhone isn't covered in bad AT&T interface. Yet an Android phone will either be "Googly" or look quite a bit like any other Verizon phone.
Every story about the iPhone since first word last year has been "Wait for OpenMoko", "Wait for Qtopia", "Wait for Android". Apple is out there doing it. It may not be fully open, but it's there and it's rather open (in how easy it is to get an application up, compared to what you have to do with normal carriers and normal phones).
Google talks a nice game (and I trust them), but they are still up against the carriers who will have enough freedom to crush their ideals on every "Android" phone they release.
OpenMoko doesn't have the push either the iPhone or Android have. Qtopia may end up just another platform (like Symbian or Windows Mobile) that fails to take over the mobile phone world.
All in all, I don't care. I don't trust the phone companies. I love the iPhone interface (and will be buying the next version mostly because of it). But if the iPhone and others (like Android) can push the phone companies to better interfaces, I'm all for it. Just about every phone I've touched has a poor to horrid interface. The Samsung Instinct seems to have an improved interface, until you get to web surfing where it's just as bad as just about every phone released in the last couple of years.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Whats it like to feel oppressed by entities that aren't really oppressing you?
That ASL... (Score:2, Interesting)
"The ASL will allow individual handset makers to develop proprietary customizations for the platform as needed to accommodate the unique technologies in their individual products."
So even if people decide to fork into FreeAndroid under the GPL we're screwed cause the drivers to make the phone freaking ring will be proprietary with a different interface for Motorola, Nokia
spin being spun (Score:5, Informative)
Confused, I asked Google for clarification. Will the Android phones be delayed as the WSJ reported? The answer was a resounding, "no."
"We remain on schedule to deliver the first Android-based handset in the second half of 2008 and we're very excited to see the momentum continuing to build behind the Android platform among carriers, handset manufacturers, developers and consumers," a Google spokesperson told me today."
um 4th qtr '08 is still "second half of '08" *head asplodes*
Re: (Score:2)
Which, by my count, is indeed part of the second half of 2008. Is somebody's calendar broken?
Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Because Apple's products always ship on time, and developers have no complaints whatsoever about the iPhone API.
Parent
AND....... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am also bewildered by the supposed reports of a schedule slip. Shoddy reporting.
As far as "difficult to develop for?"...
Well, let's start with the fact that the SDK will have been out in some form for nearly a year before we even see the OS released on consumer hardware...as opposed to one year AFTER the iPhone was released. Considering that fact, any comment on maturity seems overly harsh. BTW, this SDK runs on just about anything...also unlike the iPhone SDK...assuming that you received a blessing from Cupertino to get a copy.
Let's also consider that an OS like Android is going to have to be far more robust and flexible than the iPhone OS. The iPhone, like the MacOS/Leopard/Snow Bunny OSes, has the convenience of running on only a small number of device architectures. Those architectures are finite and well-known by Apple. In contrast, Android must be an OS that supports a wide range of ever-evolving architectures and feature sets...or lack thereof.
This complexity extends from the OS to the application development environment. When you write an application for the iPhone, you know the exact screen size and available resources. Not so for Adroid. Your UI must scale...or be lowest common denominator. You may leverage supporting peripherals like a camera, GPS, trackball, physical keyboard, SD card slot...but then again, you better be prepared for them not to be there. Processor? Memory size? There may be min specs, but having to build an OS that runs on the expected range of offerings is not trivial.
Masking some of this complexity is a task for the Android OS developers...which is why it is inherently more complex than an OS for a finite set of devices...but it is worth it...at least to the consumer...by fostering an environment that motivates hardware innovation by a range of competing vendors.
Seriously folks, let's not be disingenuous and just pretend that the only difference between the iPhone and Android (or the MacOS and Windows) is Apple's genius.
Parent
Re:Counting your blessings (Score:4, Funny)
Anyone can download the iPhone SDK today.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, your link is broken do to an extraneous slash mark. Here's [openmoko.org] the correct one.
Second, does this mean the software is complete and stable enough that it can reliably be used to make and receive calls through the UI?