My bet is on the stores to screw it up. Most stores get edgy about you whipping out a camera in their store. Now use that camera to potentially lose them money and see them throw a big hissy fit.
Besides which, who cares about this bar code scanning crap? What's important is that we have an open platform with some decent market penetration that an industry can grow up on.
Capturing data in this way is a killer app that justifies the whole expense of the device to me -- even if the device had no other features at all. Cordless barcode scanners are pretty spendy units.
So yeah the freedom is great. Let's not overlook that it's the freedom to share your killer app and so enhance the utility of this tool for people with similar needs to yours. There will be a lot more way cool stuff presently.
Capturing data in this way is a killer app that justifies the whole expense of the device to me -- even if the device had no other features at all. Cordless barcode scanners are pretty spendy units.
So yeah the freedom is great...
How free is this? Am I free to use non-google searches? Can I input the barcode info only into a Google searchfield? Or can I use it with other websites, like maybe Amazon?
The software involved is not made by Google but rather a third-party. Presumably the search will dump the barcode info into whatever search engine that was programmed in. Considering the sheer number of programs duplicated for the iPhone (and that requires a $99 entrance fee), I imagine it won't be long before you can search with whatever engine you can think of. And then someone will add a plugin interface to one of those clones, which will allow usage with the remaining engines you haven't thought of.
"I imagine it won't be long before you can search with whatever engine you can think of."
And then Google will release a standard search engine plugin which the majority of non-technical users will then simply use by default. Plus the Google one could even be pre-installed by default. Google then gets the information they origonally designed this feature for. The ability to know what products the majority of users are interested in. This is just like Google's way of profiling searches on their web site, to
And then Google will release a standard search engine plugin which the majority of non-technical users will then simply use by default. Plus the Google one could even be pre-installed by default.
So? This is already the case with Firefox. The point is that it's open to have the choice, and whether or not most people end up use Google's is pretty irrelevant in that regard.
Google wants to becoming Big Brother. Because with total information comes huge power (even political power) and with huge power they have the potential to earn huge amounts of money profiling everyone, to then sell that data to advertisers. But then even political campaign's need to be advertised and marketed, so Google is aiming to become litrally Big Brother.
If your point is that Google is processing more and more of data relating to our use of online services, it's true but very, very poorly stated. I can safely say you have no crystal ball that gives you claim to know the company's intentions, and the potential to do something is hardly proof they will.
With this? Probably, but it doesn't really matter.
The Barcode reading software is opensource, and after that all anyone here cares about it passing it to a website or some other application.
Called ZXing or "Zebra Crossing" and is part of the google code project. It can be found here [google.com].
Freedom really is the killer app, but this thing is still kinda neat, and wireless barcode scanners are way overpriced. A few hundred dollars for a handset is really cheap by comparison.
Yes, that was the right answer. Because Android is open, you can run whatever barcode scanning software you want on it, and use the open cam to capture barcodes to be interpreted in any way you like.
That makes the G1 smartphone the cheapest available wireless barcode scanner. The leverage of freedom is that there are a lot of expensive special purpose proprietary tools that are about to go obsolete because they solve a problem that this device can solve with the addition of software. Since this device i
So you want to see a smart app which mixes OCR and barcodes, so that you can walk around associated prices with products and the gps location of the front door.
When I worked in large regional retailer (clothes, groceries, toys, electronics, etc) a half-dozen years ago, it was a rule that there was to be no picture-taking on the premises, at all. Standard action was to either ask them to stop, or call management or security, depending on which one seemed most appropriate.
In fact, it was even a policy that pictures from inside of the store, if dropped off at the in-store photo lab for development, should not be printed for the customer.
Retailers *really* *are* paranoid about stuff like that, and not even just as related to prices. The layout of things on shelves, the colors and placement of signage, use of lighting, how the back stock is managed -- basically, they consider everything in the entire bloody store to be their own trade secret, even though almost all of it is right out in the open for all to see.
And in this world where almost everyone has a cell phone, and almost every cell phone has a camera, those retailers are just plain sc
If a store trys to stop me whipping a camera out to compare prices ill just not shop there. If they dont stop me theres just a possibility I may not shop there. If they try to stop me using my own device they can fuck right off, even if they are the cheapest. ill just go to the next cheapest etc.
Pretty drunk so please dont mod me harshley for this mini rant
Not to mention that customers with the money and interest to do this are the very kind of customers stores should want to treat right and have come back. This scanning is pointless (but probably still fun) for a can of beans. It only makes sense for expensive stuff.
I once went on a photo scavenger hunt....one of the things I needed a photo of was in target. I (like an idiot) had a Nikon D40 with a massive freaking external flash mounted on the top.
I thought I was going to get thrown out or arrested, instead the store employees thought it was funny/a neat idea (the scavenger hunt, i mean).
So you never know. Keep in mind that most fo the clerks you encounter are, in fact, 17 year old kids.
I don't understand your fear. Why would anyone even care that you're taking a photo in the shop in the first place? Is this an American thing?
Paranoia? Yeah - that's a pretty big deal here in America;-) Seriously though, I really don't understand this fear/concern at all. Nobody's going to arrest you for taking a picture of a lightsaber in the Target toy department. I've taken literally HUNDREDS of photos of products and price labels at big box stores, over the past few years, and nobody cares.
Precisely, while I could probably find a given item for less somewhere else, often times that would require another stop. Which usually renders the savings moot after time and energy.
But being able to pull up reviews of the item would indeed be useful.
That being said, it's sort of questionable whether an owner would bother to do it or not. I suspect it would depend upon the return policies at the store. Any store with a decent return policy should be fine with it, and probably would benefit from people doin
I'd also like to be able to use it to capture product info (and pricing) into my own database.
I could envision creating a little inventory app for the household that would help you create your own shopping lists (you're low on detergent, have plenty of toilet paper, etc.) and then interface to a database of pricing that then builds a shopping list for you so that you know that you need to go to Store X to get these 8 items and Store Y to get these 5...
The bar codes just make it faster/easier to capture
Yeah, like if I want a review of a product, all I need to do is type the model number into google search and I'll go straight to a review... not ten pages of shopping comparison sites.
(disclaimer: I work on a price-comparison / info / review site called ewelike [ewelike.com])
I've looked up reviews and done price-comparisons on the spot for years now. I've even been the ass at PC World asking them to match online-prices by showing them a website on my phone (it works.) - and (more disappointingly) I've been the uber-ass at HMV trying to get them to sell CDs at the same price they sell them on their own website.
Looking up product-reviews on the spot is great. I'm a big horror-film fan, and used to e
Apparently, whatever application supports scan-barcode-and-show-comparison-pricing needs to also take into account:
The distance from where you are to the store with the better price,
The fuel efficiency of your vehicle, and
The current price of gas.
Ideally, it'd also warn you of the time involved, especially with an on-line order that needs 2-3 weeks to get to you, but even for just driving across town (which can be hours for large towns, especially during rush hour(s)).
Kinda like the idiots that drive all over the place looking to save a few cents per litre (or worse, per gallon) when filling up. Seriously, folks, saving an entire cent per litre, in my 60L tank, means I'm saving an entire 60 cents. At current prices, that's about half a litre of fuel. At my current fuel economy, that's approximately 5km of driving. Yours won't be significantly different. Same comparison has to be made about saving $1 on your DVD, or $250 on a couch (much more worth it). e.g., I saved about $300 on my last computer by driving to the other side of town (approx 30km each way). That was worth it. But most day-to-day purchases won't be worth it. Any app that fails to remind math-challenged users about this fact will be doing their users a huge disservice.
I agree that pricing is one of the least interesting aspects of these kinds of systems. Reviews are better, but you can still go a lot further.
We've built a system, Pivot, that uses UPC codes (no barcode recognition unfortunately) that gives you one-click Add to Netflix Queue for DVDs, trailers for DVDs and Videogames, Buy from iTunes for CDs, and Facebook integration. (If you scan the Babylon 5 DVD at Best Buy, you get a list of all your Facebook friends who like Babylon 5.)
It works well, it's free,
Stores already fuck it up by putting their own stickers over the barcode (see Borders), or using display cases without barcodes on 'em at all (e.g. console games.)
In those cases, you need to fall back to standard type and search. CDs often have the barcode number printed on the spine too - and sometimes it's the same as the catalogue number. Books have ISBNs and/or you can search by banging in the book and author name.
Want to use barcodes for price-comparison now? Try summat like http://ewelike.com/ and
Stores can try to screw it up by sticking their own codes over the UPC codes but all that need happen is a store code to UPC code database and you're back in business.
Two basic problems trying to scan store codes and convert to UPC
1) the store's internal numbers may not be unique (may clash with another store, of they may re-use a number again and again as stock comes in and out.)
2) The barcode will need different decoding software. Taking Borders as an example again, their barcodes contain far more stripes than a standard UPC barcode. More stripes require greater phone resolution and clarity to accurately scan. And different decoding algorithms (the barcode could be
The cameras are an obvious place for "my dick is bigger than yours" competition. The resolution will come up in time and so the internal bar code schemes will eventually be resolvable. Smart programmers will set their software up so that adding schemes will be easy and require minimal recoding. Your point on reusing internal numbers is more difficult to overcome.
Eventually, those who make their stores more of a pain than necessary will lose business and ultimately become a problem that solves itself.
I can see the camera resolution being a possible issue for right now*, but currently there are only a tiny handful of standard linear encodings; support the Big Four (UPC/EAN, Code 2 of 5, Code 3 of 9, and Code 128) and you decode 99.9% of linear codes. A de-facto standard(s) for 2-D codes hasn't yet emerged, but it will be some years yet before those become common.
* although in two years' time of cellphone manufacturers comparing dicks, you'll have 12MPx on your phone;-) For now photo stitching should wor
Bingo. I've already been told by a Best Buy that they'd throw me out if I continued taking pictures in their store. I took 1 picture of the box of a game I knew my friend was looking forward to, and suddenly there's a crowd of employees staring at me, and then a manager coming to talk to me.
At first, I apologized and said I'd stop. Then I realized that I wasn't in the wrong and it pissed me off, so I went and found that manager, handed him everything I was going to buy (that I already had in my hands) an
Assuming you live in a reasonably populated area, there are more than enough alternatives for any store. If some drone objects to your actions, speak to the manager, and if that doesn't help, never visit the store again. It is that simple.
you're missing the point. even if google and her telco partners screw it up, you can still make a google g1 appstore app and a website and everytime people scan an item with the g1 they give a location and price, and in return they get a list of locations and prices near them.
even if google screws it up, anyone willing to becoem an android developer can fix it. except for 1 thing. the cost of using all the bandwidth this is going to take...
well, you don't have to send the photo, so what you send is a 10 d
Let's hope they don't. But really, that's the nice thing about an open platform. unless they absolutely decide to kill it, it'll fly because the consumers want it to. And that's different from any other platform -- American cell phone systems have tried desperately (and largely succeeded) in absolutely killing anything the customer might want, because they see everything as a revenue stream ala ring-tones.
It's bizarre. If the customer wants it, the telcos gleefully KILL IT and give them a crippled, pay-as-you-go version. This when the cell phone manufacturers are begging them to take phone with features, so the manufacturers can get some market cred/traction. But no, the cell phone carriers demand that features in phones be killed.
Sigh. It's been embarrassing. You go to just about any other country and they've got better phones than use. Why? Because the telcos have the American consumer by the balls, thanks to a hefty lobbyist (read as "bribery") budget.
But unless I'm missing something, here, if a telco supports an Android based phone, the consumer gets control and whistles and bells. Period.
Hence, either telcos accept android based phones, or...
They SAY they will and phone manufacturers make 18 models of android phone, and then the telcos say, "GREAT! We love it! Just disable this and this and this." The phone manufacturers say "Sure!" and the phones go out, and we fix them. This happens for one year, and the telcos start telling the manufacturers to drop Android, or they won't buy their cheaper, crappier phones in bulk. And the manufacturers will get very, very afraid, and mysteriously stop supporting Android.
We'll see. I hope this represents a real change.
---
It's not the acting. When just one actor stinks, that's acting. When they all stink, that's writing and directing. Mostly directing. And it's not that you get inured to it, Straczynski and his helpers got better at it.
You know, I've witnessed this trend, and I wasn't sure what to make of it, but it is happening. I had a Motorola SLVR -- kind of an underpowered phone, but an attractive candybar style phone nevertheless. One feature it had which I liked was the ability to use voice dialing with a bluetooth headset.
When I upgraded to a Samsung A737, I got a phone which was much more capable in some ways (faster processor and more memory, thus faster at running Java apps and so forth), but I noticed that voice dialing was
Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's just hope Google (and her telco partners) don't fuck it up.
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
My bet is on the stores to screw it up. Most stores get edgy about you whipping out a camera in their store. Now use that camera to potentially lose them money and see them throw a big hissy fit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You must go to different stores to me.
Besides which, who cares about this bar code scanning crap? What's important is that we have an open platform with some decent market penetration that an industry can grow up on.
I care about this barcode scanning crap (Score:2)
Capturing data in this way is a killer app that justifies the whole expense of the device to me -- even if the device had no other features at all. Cordless barcode scanners are pretty spendy units.
So yeah the freedom is great. Let's not overlook that it's the freedom to share your killer app and so enhance the utility of this tool for people with similar needs to yours. There will be a lot more way cool stuff presently.
Question about this barcode scanning crap (Score:2)
Capturing data in this way is a killer app that justifies the whole expense of the device to me -- even if the device had no other features at all. Cordless barcode scanners are pretty spendy units.
So yeah the freedom is great...
How free is this? Am I free to use non-google searches? Can I input the barcode info only into a Google searchfield? Or can I use it with other websites, like maybe Amazon?
Re: (Score:2)
The software involved is not made by Google but rather a third-party. Presumably the search will dump the barcode info into whatever search engine that was programmed in. Considering the sheer number of programs duplicated for the iPhone (and that requires a $99 entrance fee), I imagine it won't be long before you can search with whatever engine you can think of. And then someone will add a plugin interface to one of those clones, which will allow usage with the remaining engines you haven't thought of.
barcode scanning crap (Score:3, Interesting)
And then Google will release a standard search engine plugin which the majority of non-technical users will then simply use by default. Plus the Google one could even be pre-installed by default. Google then gets the information they origonally designed this feature for. The ability to know what products the majority of users are interested in. This is just like Google's way of profiling searches on their web site, to
Re: (Score:2)
And then Google will release a standard search engine plugin which the majority of non-technical users will then simply use by default. Plus the Google one could even be pre-installed by default.
So? This is already the case with Firefox. The point is that it's open to have the choice, and whether or not most people end up use Google's is pretty irrelevant in that regard.
Google wants to becoming Big Brother. Because with total information comes huge power (even political power) and with huge power they have the potential to earn huge amounts of money profiling everyone, to then sell that data to advertisers. But then even political campaign's need to be advertised and marketed, so Google is aiming to become litrally Big Brother.
If your point is that Google is processing more and more of data relating to our use of online services, it's true but very, very poorly stated. I can safely say you have no crystal ball that gives you claim to know the company's intentions, and the potential to do something is hardly proof they will.
I feel silly to point out the ob
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully the phone is completely open and you can replace the browser with something else if you want to? I don't see why not.
Re: (Score:1)
With this? Probably, but it doesn't really matter.
The Barcode reading software is opensource, and after that all anyone here cares about it passing it to a website or some other application.
Called ZXing or "Zebra Crossing" and is part of the google code project. It can be found here [google.com].
Freedom really is the killer app, but this thing is still kinda neat, and wireless barcode scanners are way overpriced. A few hundred dollars for a handset is really cheap by comparison.
Mod parent up (Score:2)
Yes, that was the right answer. Because Android is open, you can run whatever barcode scanning software you want on it, and use the open cam to capture barcodes to be interpreted in any way you like.
That makes the G1 smartphone the cheapest available wireless barcode scanner. The leverage of freedom is that there are a lot of expensive special purpose proprietary tools that are about to go obsolete because they solve a problem that this device can solve with the addition of software. Since this device i
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Capturing data in this way is a killer app
So you want to see a smart app which mixes OCR and barcodes, so that you can walk around associated prices with products and the gps location of the front door.
ok, I like that idea, too.
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe people who are reading a story about bar code scanning?
Re: (Score:2)
When I worked in large regional retailer (clothes, groceries, toys, electronics, etc) a half-dozen years ago, it was a rule that there was to be no picture-taking on the premises, at all. Standard action was to either ask them to stop, or call management or security, depending on which one seemed most appropriate.
In fact, it was even a policy that pictures from inside of the store, if dropped off at the in-store photo lab for development, should not be printed for the customer.
Retailers *really* *are* para
Re: (Score:2)
And in this world where almost everyone has a cell phone, and almost every cell phone has a camera, those retailers are just plain sc
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps.
It'll be interesting to see how long one can be observed taking careful photographs of retail products before being asked to leave.
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
If a store trys to stop me whipping a camera out to compare prices ill just not shop there. If they dont stop me theres just a possibility I may not shop there. If they try to stop me using my own device they can fuck right off, even if they are the cheapest. ill just go to the next cheapest etc.
Pretty drunk so please dont mod me harshley for this mini rant
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Funny)
Pretty drunk so please dont mod me harshley for this mini rant
+1 en vino veritas?
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:4, Informative)
+1 en vino veritas?
s/en/in/
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Funny)
I live in the Vatican, you insensitive clod!
Disclaimer: I don't actually live in the Vatican.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Grammar Carthaginian
That's a Roman's version of the boogie man.
Re: (Score:2)
it's Inquisitor Grammatici.
Re: (Score:3)
Grammatici Cluent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Pretty drunk so please dont mod me harshley for this mini rant
+1 en vino veritas?
Psst. "In vino veritas"
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that customers with the money and interest to do this are the very kind of customers stores should want to treat right and have come back. This scanning is pointless (but probably still fun) for a can of beans. It only makes sense for expensive stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
i'm not sure...
I once went on a photo scavenger hunt....one of the things I needed a photo of was in target. I (like an idiot) had a Nikon D40 with a massive freaking external flash mounted on the top.
I thought I was going to get thrown out or arrested, instead the store employees thought it was funny/a neat idea (the scavenger hunt, i mean).
So you never know. Keep in mind that most fo the clerks you encounter are, in fact, 17 year old kids.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends if it's a random clerk or a manager that sees you. Clerks usually don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought I was going to get thrown out or arrested
I don't understand your fear. Why would anyone even care that you're taking a photo in the shop in the first place? Is this an American thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Paranoia? Yeah - that's a pretty big deal here in America ;-) Seriously though, I really don't understand this fear/concern at all. Nobody's going to arrest you for taking a picture of a lightsaber in the Target toy department. I've taken literally HUNDREDS of photos of products and price labels at big box stores, over the past few years, and nobody cares.
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:4, Insightful)
Pricing isn't necessarily the killer app though.
it's reviews of products. There is a lot of stuff I see, and would buy at a store, but can't tell if it sucks or not.
Often times the instant gratification out-weighs the price savings of online. But rarely does it out-weigh the risk of crap.
I would probably spend more at retail stores with this device.
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely, while I could probably find a given item for less somewhere else, often times that would require another stop. Which usually renders the savings moot after time and energy.
But being able to pull up reviews of the item would indeed be useful.
That being said, it's sort of questionable whether an owner would bother to do it or not. I suspect it would depend upon the return policies at the store. Any store with a decent return policy should be fine with it, and probably would benefit from people doin
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, like if I want a review of a product, all I need to do is type the model number into google search and I'll go straight to a review... not ten pages of shopping comparison sites.
Re: (Score:1)
(disclaimer: I work on a price-comparison / info / review site called ewelike [ewelike.com])
I've looked up reviews and done price-comparisons on the spot for years now. I've even been the ass at PC World asking them to match online-prices by showing them a website on my phone (it works.) - and (more disappointingly) I've been the uber-ass at HMV trying to get them to sell CDs at the same price they sell them on their own website.
Looking up product-reviews on the spot is great. I'm a big horror-film fan, and used to e
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently, whatever application supports scan-barcode-and-show-comparison-pricing needs to also take into account:
Ideally, it'd also warn you of the time involved, especially with an on-line order that needs 2-3 weeks to get to you, but even for just driving across town (which can be hours for large towns, especially during rush hour(s)).
Kinda like the idiots that drive all over the place looking to save a few cents per litre (or worse, per gallon) when filling up. Seriously, folks, saving an entire cent per litre, in my 60L tank, means I'm saving an entire 60 cents. At current prices, that's about half a litre of fuel. At my current fuel economy, that's approximately 5km of driving. Yours won't be significantly different. Same comparison has to be made about saving $1 on your DVD, or $250 on a couch (much more worth it). e.g., I saved about $300 on my last computer by driving to the other side of town (approx 30km each way). That was worth it. But most day-to-day purchases won't be worth it. Any app that fails to remind math-challenged users about this fact will be doing their users a huge disservice.
Stock availability (Score:1)
Local (GPS-based) price-comparison also needs to take stock availability into account.
What if your local store already sold-out of something?
What if the product sells-out by the time you've hiked across town?
How much work is it going to be to hook into every stores stock-control system and implement "Reserve this item"?
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Freedom is the killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't like the boundaries of what's considered acceptable behavior, behave exceptionally and let the boundaries catch up.
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
If you don't like the boundaries of what's considered acceptable behavior, behave exceptionally and let the boundaries catch up.
That's the kind of thinking that proves hope for humanity.
So thanks again!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Stores already fuck it up by putting their own stickers over the barcode (see Borders), or using display cases without barcodes on 'em at all (e.g. console games.)
In those cases, you need to fall back to standard type and search. CDs often have the barcode number printed on the spine too - and sometimes it's the same as the catalogue number. Books have ISBNs and/or you can search by banging in the book and author name.
Want to use barcodes for price-comparison now? Try summat like http://ewelike.com/ and
Re: (Score:2)
Stores can try to screw it up by sticking their own codes over the UPC codes but all that need happen is a store code to UPC code database and you're back in business.
Store codes (Score:2, Insightful)
Two basic problems trying to scan store codes and convert to UPC
1) the store's internal numbers may not be unique (may clash with another store, of they may re-use a number again and again as stock comes in and out.)
2) The barcode will need different decoding software. Taking Borders as an example again, their barcodes contain far more stripes than a standard UPC barcode. More stripes require greater phone resolution and clarity to accurately scan. And different decoding algorithms (the barcode could be
Re: (Score:2)
The cameras are an obvious place for "my dick is bigger than yours" competition. The resolution will come up in time and so the internal bar code schemes will eventually be resolvable. Smart programmers will set their software up so that adding schemes will be easy and require minimal recoding. Your point on reusing internal numbers is more difficult to overcome.
Eventually, those who make their stores more of a pain than necessary will lose business and ultimately become a problem that solves itself.
Re: (Score:2)
I can see the camera resolution being a possible issue for right now*, but currently there are only a tiny handful of standard linear encodings; support the Big Four (UPC/EAN, Code 2 of 5, Code 3 of 9, and Code 128) and you decode 99.9% of linear codes. A de-facto standard(s) for 2-D codes hasn't yet emerged, but it will be some years yet before those become common.
* although in two years' time of cellphone manufacturers comparing dicks, you'll have 12MPx on your phone ;-) For now photo stitching should wor
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. I've already been told by a Best Buy that they'd throw me out if I continued taking pictures in their store. I took 1 picture of the box of a game I knew my friend was looking forward to, and suddenly there's a crowd of employees staring at me, and then a manager coming to talk to me.
At first, I apologized and said I'd stop. Then I realized that I wasn't in the wrong and it pissed me off, so I went and found that manager, handed him everything I was going to buy (that I already had in my hands) an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because it's the rule of the store doesn't make it _right_.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
you're missing the point. even if google and her telco partners screw it up, you can still make a google g1 appstore app and a website and everytime people scan an item with the g1 they give a location and price, and in return they get a list of locations and prices near them.
even if google screws it up, anyone willing to becoem an android developer can fix it. except for 1 thing. the cost of using all the bandwidth this is going to take...
well, you don't have to send the photo, so what you send is a 10 d
Babylon 5 and the ringtone model. (Score:4, Interesting)
Let's hope they don't. But really, that's the nice thing about an open platform. unless they absolutely decide to kill it, it'll fly because the consumers want it to. And that's different from any other platform -- American cell phone systems have tried desperately (and largely succeeded) in absolutely killing anything the customer might want, because they see everything as a revenue stream ala ring-tones.
It's bizarre. If the customer wants it, the telcos gleefully KILL IT and give them a crippled, pay-as-you-go version. This when the cell phone manufacturers are begging them to take phone with features, so the manufacturers can get some market cred/traction. But no, the cell phone carriers demand that features in phones be killed.
Sigh. It's been embarrassing. You go to just about any other country and they've got better phones than use. Why? Because the telcos have the American consumer by the balls, thanks to a hefty lobbyist (read as "bribery") budget.
But unless I'm missing something, here, if a telco supports an Android based phone, the consumer gets control and whistles and bells. Period.
Hence, either telcos accept android based phones, or ...
They SAY they will and phone manufacturers make 18 models of android phone, and then the telcos say, "GREAT! We love it! Just disable this and this and this." The phone manufacturers say "Sure!" and the phones go out, and we fix them. This happens for one year, and the telcos start telling the manufacturers to drop Android, or they won't buy their cheaper, crappier phones in bulk. And the manufacturers will get very, very afraid, and mysteriously stop supporting Android.
We'll see. I hope this represents a real change.
---
It's not the acting. When just one actor stinks, that's acting. When they all stink, that's writing and directing. Mostly directing. And it's not that you get inured to it, Straczynski and his helpers got better at it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, I've witnessed this trend, and I wasn't sure what to make of it, but it is happening. I had a Motorola SLVR -- kind of an underpowered phone, but an attractive candybar style phone nevertheless. One feature it had which I liked was the ability to use voice dialing with a bluetooth headset.
When I upgraded to a Samsung A737, I got a phone which was much more capable in some ways (faster processor and more memory, thus faster at running Java apps and so forth), but I noticed that voice dialing was