Is Choice a Problem For Android? 361
New submitter mjone13 writes "Dave Feldman, in a blog posts, says that the problem Android faces is giving consumers too much choice. He cites several studies which state that consumers generally are unhappier when they have too much choice. 'Catering to all individual preferences creates a bloated, bland product. Not to mention a UI that’s impossible to navigate. Furthermore, people are notoriously bad at identifying what we want. And what we do want is influenced heavily by what we know — our expectations are constrained by our experience.' He then goes on to talk about Android fragmentation, app developer problems and bug issues. Finally he says the people who general prefer the choice Android provides are tinkers similar to gear heads who love tinkering with their car. 'I think many who extol Android’s flexibility fall into the tinkerer category, including some tech bloggers. They love all the ways they can customize their phones, not because they’re seeking some perfect setup, but because they can swap in a new launcher every week. That’s fun for them; but they’ve made the mistake of not understanding how their motivation differs from the rest of us.' Is choice really a problem for Android?"
Whether it's a problem depends on what the goals are. Providing a satisfying experience to a bunch of tinkerers is a very different thing from providing a satisfying experience to the multitude of non-tinkerers who buy smartphones.
what I want to say is, (Score:2, Funny)
Somewhat lacking in logic. (Score:5, Funny)
The problem that the PC faces is giving consumers too much choice....
Clearly that hasn't worked for the PC, or it would be the 100% dominant platform, rather than just the 99% dominant platform...
And for PCs the be able to run OS-X, Microsoft or Linux operating systems? Clearly wayyyy to much choice...
GrpA.
For users or hobbyist authors? (Score:2, Funny)
On the one hand there are advocates who want it to be used by as many people - ordinary people who neither know nor care about "open" software - as possible. On the other hand, the whole product line is completely dependent on people writing code, who's primary motivation is to show to their peers how clever they are.
Sadly these two groups have little in common. Users don't care about options, flexibility, "free" (of either variety), choice, source code or customising. All they want is TO GET STUFF DONE. For them an operating system is an annoyance and a UI a necessary evil that's difficult to navigate, keeps changing and is badly documented. Both of those layers are seen as stuff that gets in the way of them having the results want.
For developers, users are a pain in the arse. They report bugs, they're resitant to upgrading, they ask stupid questions (which they could answer for themselves if they ever bothered to check the source code) and they complain that features change between releases and they want backwards compatibillity - sometimes all the way back to last year. Worst of all, they don't appreciate the leegance and completixty of the software the developers have written.
Obligatory Car analogy (Score:2, Funny)
Cars that can go straight, to the left and to the right, that can go at different speeds, that have a reverse gear simply offer too much choices. Thousands of accidents per year are proof that we need simpler vehicles. Maybe a sofa, people rarely get into traffic accidents driving a sofa.
Re:choice doesn't *require* bad defaults (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't this just some random communist kook anyways? The "anti-choice" guy? Some people will just go to any lengths to try and justify their consumerist fixation while ignoring the actual state of the market (many markets actually) in the process.
Re:choice doesn't *require* bad defaults (Score:5, Funny)
Makes me think there's a tech-journalist troll-list that rotates with standard topics.
It's called Slashdot.org
Re: choice doesn't *require* bad defaults (Score:4, Funny)
Apparently anecdotal evidence is now data. Everyone I see has an iPhone. Does my anecdotal evidence trump yours?
By the Rules of the Internet Arguments, no, because he gave his anecdotal evidence first. You must one up his evidence to trump his. In general it goes with things lower of the following list as trumping the things above:
General statement.
Statement supported by 2nd hand anecdotal evidence.
Statement supported by 1st hand anecdotal evidence.
Statement supported by web link.
Statement supported by proper citations.
Statement supported by well reasoned argument and proper citations. (but really, who cares at this point?)
Some versions of the Rules of Internet Arguments allow for authoritative statements when the person making the statement either has professional or academic experience in the field being discussed that sometimes trumps the same level of statement.
So, really to trump the previous statement you would at least either need to claim some sort of professional or academic authority in the field of cell phone purchases, or support your statement with a web link.