Android Phones Delayed 167
CommanderData writes "PC World reports that Google's Android phone rollout is facing delays. Originally expected to have handsets on the market and in consumers' hands this summer, it appears that Q4 2008 or even sometime in 2009 is more likely. Software developers are also complaining that programming is difficult on the Android platform due to regular changes being made by Google." Update 21:14 GMT by SM: Google has (via Google Watch) refuted widespread claims that Android will be late, so I guess only time will tell.
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.
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]
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
If it results in getting good phones into American hands, I'm all for this kind of cutthroat competition. If not Google or Apple, someone else will release an open platform with reasonable data rates and top-tier features.
Re: (Score:2)
In other news (Score:2)
All major software projects miss their deadline due to unrealistic expectations.
More at 8
Seriously, I had high expectations of android when it was announced but then, after downloading the SDK I discovered that its JAVA only.
Wtf is the point of having linux running on its core if you can't use C/C++ for native applications?
Re: (Score:2)
Because you need something running in the CPU's language, and Linux is the best option out there.
Java was chosen because it is easier for developing and maintaining applications that don't need to care about the OS or hardware.
Rats! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Huge shocker (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Which strangely, does not affect the fact that they work pretty well and rarely cost anything.
Yeah, but they're damn frustrating, because they are so often damn near perfect, but the lack of a few trivial features puts them just short of the "killer app". And I can't think for the life of me, why they don't just add those trivial features. Google Maps and Google Earth are prime examples of this (and I pay for Google Earth, unlike other Google products). They have all kinds of cool features which I don't really need, but lack the ones I really want. Yet the "needful" features are far more trivial t
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe I want to use my own god damned mp3s as ringtones, or install my own video games?
There have been entirely too many of these phones who have supported all of this, but the telcoms HAVE locked down so that you had to purchase it through them.
So no, magical banana phones need not apply. I'd rather just get the phone I paid for as the phone developer created, not that the telecomms got their fucking mitts on, raped, ravaged, and destroyed all semblance of reasonability.
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do these companies shut down for a month in the middle of the year?
Re: (Score:2)
Do these companies shut down for a month in the middle of the year?
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh...
*LARTs Vancorps* It's only 2008 for Chrissakes! How can you have forgotten Y2K already?!
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.
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.
Excellent.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Excellent.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You say innovation, I say evolution!
Re: (Score:2)
Now, all we need to do is to use the remaining developers for breeding a new generation of Android developers with very stable legs.
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there's already one book out on Android development [commonsware.com] and 3-4 others in progress by various authors.
And, in the interests of full disclosure, I wrote the book I linked to above.
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)
This also answers the reply of iznogud below.
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)
Agreed. I think Google did the "release early release often" on purpose. They are new to the OS/API platform building game and probably wanted as much community feedback as possible before v1.0.
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sprint stops you by being a CDMA network: no SIMs.
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! :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You say that like it's a novel feature... Have you ever used any BSD variant? Or Linux, for that matter?
Regardless, that matters less and less as more applications run in virtual runtime environments like a JVM, or in a scripted environment like PHP, Python, or Ruby... and has been true for a long time with Perl.
More and more applications are web-based or browser based. Most of these applications run on non-windows based platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
How very convenient: everyone agrees with you, except for some who don't, but they must be trolls anyway. Must make me a troll too, then - I did development on both Windows and Linux, and the former still wins both by documentation availability and maturity of development tools (I dare you find a better C++ IDE than Visual Studio). One thing that comes closest in the OSS world is Qt, which also has excellent docs, and pr
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? So I can pull pretty much any binary from 5 years ago off a CD and it'll just work on a modern machine?
I don't think so. While I don't use gnome gui libraries in my applications, I do use libxml2 in almost all of my applications, and there is pretty much no way any of them would work if dynamically linked to a libxml2 from 4 years ago.
Since libxml2 is used all over Gnome, I can safely call bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
there is pretty much no way any of them would work if dynamically linked to a libxml2 from 4 years ago.
Conversely, your libxml2 application from years ago could work against a modern libxml2, unless you had been relying on some buggy or underspecified behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
We developed a PoC on Silverlight in January on version 1.0. It's now June, and the Silverlight SDK has seen four revisions, each revision being completely backwards-incompatible with the previous.
What's worse, last week Microsoft quietly pulled the rug on earlier versions (1.1 alpha in particular); all our previously developed apps suddenly stopped working. Whether this was built into the original redistributable or whether a Windows Update did it, is something we'll never know; the fact was that all our
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.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but how do I put it:- the American market simply does not count, when it comes to mobiles. As much as I don't mind cheering US to win in other respects, you folks have an aging infrastructure and have a very very small footprint in terms of actual growth metrics.
Look at it this way. Nokia now sells fourteen mobiles every minute worldwide. Most of Africa's new boom is because of mobile-commerce; people barter talk-time for actual commodities. In comparison, in the US, you still pay for text messa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Whats it like to feel oppressed by entities that aren't really oppressing you?
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO, if someone, anyone decided to actually put their effort into the browser like apple has, they would actually be able to compete against the iPhone. Like you said every single browser stinks on cell phones except safari. if I could get a phone similar to the iphone but with a real browser I'd go towards that instead of AT&T any day of the week.
You'll love the Qtopia phones once they start rolling out; Qtopia 4.4+ includes a very nice and cleaned version of webkit, so the built-in web browser will be virtually identical (in terms of HTML/JS/etc rendering). The big difference is that since webkit is an integral part of Qt, you'll see HTML-enrichened widgets and views all over the place rather than just the browser and a few custom applications. Using webkit in Qt apps is as trivial as using a text box.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't say a thing about Nokia phones, but Motorola phones? Talk about utter trash. Q. Razr. Shudder.
Those phones are an abomination upon mankind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google already tries to re-invent wheel since there is J2ME, everyone including their Youtube can ship successfully in J2ME to huge number of devices. Yahoo themselves gave up the native C++ (on S60) for J2ME on "Yahoo Go!" 2.x+ . Why? Well, it seems it serves them what they need.
The biggest problem of J2ME is the very advanced coding needed for the UI. SonyEricsson seems to have a solution: http://developer.sonyericsson.com/site/global/newsandevents/latestnews/newsapr08/p_project_capuchin_announcement.jsp [sonyericsson.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I don't know...supposedly certain properties of Symbian make phones as cheap as E50 possible.
So perhaps - S40 for lowend, S60 in the middle and Qtopia for highend?
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
Re: (Score:2)
Well I think we'll have to wait and see how much of a problem that becomes, I personally don't think carriers will lock down too many things or else they can't take advantage of the fullest range of software. Carriers will be carriers though...
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on their accounting, "fourth quarter" could mean 4th quarter fiscal 2009, which is Jan-March 2009 at my company. Something to do with taxes and where you make your money during the fiscal year.
Re: (Score:2)
Google is not Toyota (Score:2)
Google is not going to finish consumer appliances. They can tinker & experiment with unrelated pieces of software & release software betas. They got the search & Adsense finished. A finished consumer gadget with all the hardware & software functionality debugged & perfected is a different story. They couldn't possibly finish it without outsourcing a lot of it.
Psst ... Openmoko FreeRunner looking better... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(Well, no, that's not true. I would care. Just not enough to make a difference.)
I'm working (Score:2)
I keep seeing prototype systems running android in videos from conventions, I've been assuming they were modded in (after just working with the Symbian API an overlay seems possible).
Can anyone fill me in on purchasing from Google or the hacker's guide to Android?
Disclaimer: IWOT (I want one too). - Z
bad strategy (Score:2, Insightful)
I think Google should have focused first on getting something out quickly: partner with just HTC and T-Mobile, for example, and get a single model out. That would have built buzz and given developers something to work with.
Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Because Apple's products always ship on time, and developers have no complaints whatsoever about the iPhone API.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, Google, Nokia, Sun (J2ME) aren't Apple. They can't take ridicilous decisions like "one store, we will review code, no multi tasking, no background running for you!".
If they had such luxuries, Android would release with a comical EULA like iPhone. They miss "apple apologists" feature :)
Even J2ME phones started to multitask, e.g. Sony Ericsson sub $100 ones.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter. User has freedom to multitask and pick their applications to multitask. SE gives them the option, it is their choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like someone needs to learn the lesson that some freedoms are more restricting than the highest security prisons.
Re: (Score:2)
It is free market with the restrictions of OS/Framework at critical decisions just like it should be in 2008. Someone tries to create Lisa on mobile space.
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Why is it "worth it"? A similar situation for Windows and Linux hasn't resulted in much consumer satisfaction. The "hardware innovation" has left us with a maze of befuddlement and bugs, not a better user experience.
Re:Counting your blessings (Score:4, Funny)
Anyone can download the iPhone SDK today.
Re: (Score:2)
Not my fault you bought the wrong hardware for your Linux box, or are inept enough not to be able to run the hacked OS X to run the dev kit on.
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple isn't doing much better with their SDK.
You mean the one that's scheduled to go out of beta in under a month?
If you say so.
Of course it's hard to compare the two situations since essentially, the iPhone SDK has been under development since before the launch of the iPhone - it's just that we get access to it after it's more polished. Google started later but is letting people in much earlier, which is cool but means developers are facing more API churn (not that iPhone SDK developers have not also seen
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia, Linux runs Android (SDK)!
Possibly. Frankly, I don't know what they're doing in Russia. You know, I'm ashamed of my self for even getting into this. Never mind.