Android vrs Apple, popcorn time :)

I bought my G1 phone last October and have not regretted the choice at all. All the media hype, from CNET to Tech Cruch have done nothing but hype the IPhone. Best I Phone apps of the week are on CNET every week. That is fine, and for those who have an IPhone..hope you are enjoying it.

Going to make a statement though about the G1..apps are great..clunky phone because of keyboard I must admit, but use virtual keyboard now. Have Google Voice..not only the account, but the application. My gmail has always been pushed...along with company email. Work around to get gmail accounts pushed on Iphone I read.

Anyway, those who like I tunes,understand. I understand the love for the Iphone also. But for those who are looking for an alternative, look for the android based phones.

I had a G1 for about a month. Before that I had a Blackberry Pearl. My main complaint then was the battery life, but I heard they've since addressed the problem and/or came out with aftermarket batteries that are superior. I also never appreciated the slide out keyboard. Like Monsoon said, it made the phone clunky and twice as thick as I wanted it to be. And the plastic housing with the chin is totally against my design sensibility. This was also before the Android Market hit its full stride, so the selection was sparse. Mind you, the phone worked fine, does txt msg, email, web surfing, youtube, etc.

When it comes down to it, everything that the G1 does well just aren't that important to me personally, ie. keyboard, push mail, MMS, background apps, google voice, easy hacking, VNC stuff, etc., while Apple was able to provide me, a non-technophile, a product that was gift-wrapped in useful apps right out of the box and superior industrial design. After playing with both, the iPhone was the better choice for me.

Edit: Just re-read my post, to put it in fighting words, iPhone FTW its got apps and looks cool

trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other.

Well, the fuss is not over what is more useful to the end-user, but whether or not Apple is being anti-competitive by denying the app.

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The fuss, triplex, is that Google Voice offers VOIP, which allows you to place free calls, instead of paying for expensive minutes. It also renders the iPhone no longer the center of your communication network, which Apple apparently fears. The iPhone becomes an extension of your Google Voice number, which makes it much easier to switch carriers or -- gasp -- to other phones.

Additional fuss is due to the fact that Apple lied their heads off to the FCC about their rejection of the program.

Personally, the biggest thing I don't like about the G1 is the same problem with the iPhone -- you have to get married to Google instead of Apple, but you still have to get married if you want to use the built-in apps. I'm very interested in the N900 because of that; it sounds like a simple, standards-compliant computing platform that happens to also be a handheld phone. It appears you can trivially use any service provider you wish for any of your programs.

It's the very first phone that seems to be entirely, 100% oriented toward my benefit, instead of the carriers or the phone manufacturer. The G1 is better than the iPhone in that regard, but there's still a lot of flogging of the various Google services.

My wife and I have had our original flavor iPhones for almost 2 years now (we purchased in Dec. 2007). Our contract is due to expire in December of 2009 and I've been contemplating moving to an Android phone.

I recently migrated all of my email accounts to Gmail, use GReader for RSS, use Google Calendar, and even Google Docs. I'm a Google-head so it kind of makes sense to use a Google phone. I also like that Android is a much more "open" platform than Apple.

The pros from moving FROM an iPhone?
-I don't know if it's just me but the iPhone's battery life is dismal. What's the use of having apps if after playing 15 minutes of Tradewinds 2, the 20% battery notification displays (coming off a full charge)?
-No MMS. As I said, I have an original iPhone which Apple refuses to enable MMS on. My wife and I text a lot - it's our primary means of communication at work. And with our sons' Daycare in the same building as where my wife works, she makes frequent trips to breast-feed and we would like an easy way for her to take photos of him to send to me during the day. Sure she could snap the picture and send it off in an email from the phone but it's not exactly the speediest process in the world where just putting in a text message and sending it off would be much easier. Our only option with Apple and AT&T for MMS, while still staying with an iPhone type device, is to spend hundreds to upgrade to a 3G or 3GS. And we spent $1,000 together for the original iPhones. I refuse to spend another couple hundred to upgrade.
-We would be divorcing AT&T which is a good thing in my opinion.
-No more iTunes!

The cons for moving FROM an iPhone
-We may have to make a considerable initial investment in another carrier and for new phones. It is possible that we may be able to sell our old iPhones as I know they are desirable for purposes I cannot comprehend. Hackers or whatever.
-If we move from an iPhone, we lose out on the money we've spent on apps.

Needless to say, I have some thinking to do. I'm going to try calling up AT&T and telling them that I am giving serious consideration to canceling our account which expires soon if they cannot come up with something better for $299 eligible upgrade price for a 32GB 3GS. They may tell me where to stick it but at least they know the reason I'm leaving.

trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

Only recently Google provided PUSH for gmail on the iPhone but to do it, you have to setup your gmail account as a Microsoft Exchange account. And since iPhones only allow 1 Exchange account, you can forget it if you also have a corporate Exchange account.

So while you can receive push on other email providers on the iPhone, it's not native with Gmail and that annoys me.

trip1eX wrote:

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

MMS is only available on the 3G and 3GS. Apple specifically barred MMS from the original iPhone 2G, which both my wife and I have. Apple said the 2G hardware was incapable of MMS but there are numerous sites with instructions on how to enable MMS on the 2G but it requires jailbreaking and then performing another hack on top of that and I'd rather not get involved.

It's obvious by this that Apple barred MMS from the 2G just to get people to purchase the 3G and 3GS and that pisses me off too. It's a slap in the face to those of us who paid a premium for original iPhones that those who purchased the subsidized 3G and 3GS iPhones are getting all the bells and whistles.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The difference between a native app and accessing a resource through Safari is the difference between night and day. Especially on a 2G iPhone where it takes forever just to open Safari and navigate to a website. And then there's the reasons that Malor spoke of.

*squints at thread*

What makes push email so important? My blackberry had it and I can't say I really miss it.
When I'm in the office, my Entourage (yes, I'm on a mac) fetches every 5 minutes and my iPhone does the fetching, set on 15 min interval.

What do you all do that a few minutes of email lag makes such a difference?

The fuss, triplex, is that Google Voice offers VOIP, which allows you to place free calls, instead of paying for expensive minutes. It also renders the iPhone no longer the center of your communication network, which Apple apparently fears. The iPhone becomes an extension of your Google Voice number, which makes it much easier to switch carriers or -- gasp -- to other phones.

I don't think Google Voice actually has a VOIP offering. I know it offers to consolidate all of your numbers to one phone number. Ultimately though, if someone calls your Google Voice number and it redirects it to your iPhone, you're still using AT&T minutes.

AT&T has reason to dislike this service only because someone might want to call your iPhone, but Google Voice could re-direct it to your land line based on however you set it up, which could "steal" the usage of minutes from AT&T.

FSeven wrote:
trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

Only recently Google provided PUSH for gmail on the iPhone but to do it, you have to setup your gmail account as a Microsoft Exchange account. And since iPhones only allow 1 Exchange account, you can forget it if you also have a corporate Exchange account.

So while you can receive push on other email providers on the iPhone, it's not native with Gmail and that annoys me.

trip1eX wrote:

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

MMS is only available on the 3G and 3GS. Apple specifically barred MMS from the original iPhone 2G, which both my wife and I have. Apple said the 2G hardware was incapable of MMS but there are numerous sites with instructions on how to enable MMS on the 2G but it requires jailbreaking and then performing another hack on top of that and I'd rather not get involved.

It's obvious by this that Apple barred MMS from the 2G just to get people to purchase the 3G and 3GS and that pisses me off too. It's a slap in the face to those of us who paid a premium for original iPhones that those who purchased the subsidized 3G and 3GS iPhones are getting all the bells and whistles.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The difference between a native app and accessing a resource through Safari is the difference between night and day. Especially on a 2G iPhone where it takes forever just to open Safari and navigate to a website. And then there's the reasons that Malor spoke of.

What you say is all true, conspiracy theories aside. Of course what I said was all true too.

The real fuss with Google Voice is not about voice. It's that you can send and receive text messages entirely through your data connection.

It eliminates the need to pay for a text messaging plan from your provider.

And thus, it does away with the biggest rip-off racket in wireless. They no longer get to charge $1000 per MB of SMS data traffic.

It's little wonder why AT&T (through Apple) is throwing a fit.

It's little wonder why AT&T (through Apple) is throwing a completely unjustified, and maniacally evil fit.

FTFY

*Legion* wrote:

The real fuss with Google Voice is not about voice. It's that you can send and receive text messages entirely through your data connection.

T-Mobile was prepared for this in advance. I'm not sure if it is still true, but when I bought my G1, the cheapest (mabe the only?) data plan was more expensive than their data plans for other phones, but included unlimited text messages. I assume few to no people bought the G1 and chose to not go with a data plan.

trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The mobile website is ASS. Voice gets integrated into every fact of the Android and Blackberry OS. I wrote a big thing about it comparing the two.

absurddoctor wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

The real fuss with Google Voice is not about voice. It's that you can send and receive text messages entirely through your data connection.

T-Mobile was prepared for this in advance. I'm not sure if it is still true, but when I bought my G1, the cheapest (mabe the only?) data plan was more expensive than their data plans for other phones, but included unlimited text messages. I assume few to no people bought the G1 and chose to not go with a data plan.

Yeah it's not like other wireless companies besides ATT are saying oh, Google Voice, sweet, it gives our customers free text messages and now we don't have to charge them $20 for unlimited text messages. Let's make sure all customers can use it as soon as possible. If only it let them make free phone calls too.

Edwin wrote:
trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The mobile website is ASS. Voice gets integrated into every fact of the Android and Blackberry OS. I wrote a big thing about it comparing the two.

I read it. But what can you do on the other phones that you can't do on the iPhone with GV?

Is just the free text messages? CAn you freely send and receive text message other phones with GV using an Android etc?

I understand it ain't quite as slick to use a mobile website, but I also don't think you'll be constantly fiddling with the application either. I set up my Google Voice number. I set up the order in which my phones ring or which phone rings first. I get voicemails sent to email and SMS. I don't need to conference call with GV. That works just fine on the iPhone.

It's more of a pain to record calls or transfer my office call to my phone if I'm about to go out of the building, but those don't sound like "must-have" features. And well it's not like you can't call someone back right away using your iPhone. I'd probably trust that over a service that is going to transfer my call.

And you can use your computer to manage it to.

Last you're assuming this app will never make it to the iPhone which seems like a big assumption to me.

trip1eX wrote:

Yeah it's not like other wireless companies besides ATT are saying oh, Google Voice, sweet, it gives our customers free text messages and now we don't have to charge them $20 for unlimited text messages. Let's make sure all customers can use it as soon as possible. If only it let them make free phone calls too. :)

T-Mobile has two plans for the G1: a $25 plan with limited text messaging (400 messages), and a $35 plan with unlimited text.

AT&T's cheapest data plan is $30 with no messaging at all.

I can get a G1 on T-Mobile, spend $25 on data, and use Google Voice to get unlimited SMS.

On AT&T, I can get an iPhone, spend $30 on data, and spend money on top of that for SMS because I can't use GV.

No, nobody's waving a flag saying, "come here, get free SMS!". But there's a huge difference between blocking and not blocking.

trip1eX wrote:
Edwin wrote:
trip1eX wrote:

Pretty sure mail is pushed on the iPhone including gmail.

MMS is also here now or in a few days in the US. Other countries have had it for months.

Google Voice was "rejected," but I thought you could just manage that through a webpage so I don't understand the fuss exactly. I'd be surprised if it doesn't rear its head in some form or other. Sounds like the issue is Google included a dialer with it and Apple doesn't want that.

The mobile website is ASS. Voice gets integrated into every fact of the Android and Blackberry OS. I wrote a big thing about it comparing the two.

I read it. But what can you do on the other phones that you can't do on the iPhone with GV?

Is just the free text messages? CAn you freely send and receive text message other phones with GV using an Android etc?

I understand it ain't quite as slick to use a mobile website, but I also don't think you'll be constantly fiddling with the application either. I set up my Google Voice number. I set up the order in which my phones ring or which phone rings first. I get voicemails sent to email and SMS. I don't need to conference call with GV. That works just fine on the iPhone.

It's more of a pain to record calls or transfer my office call to my phone if I'm about to go out of the building, but those don't sound like "must-have" features. And well it's not like you can't call someone back right away using your iPhone. I'd probably trust that over a service that is going to transfer my call.

And you can use your computer to manage it to.

Last you're assuming this app will never make it to the iPhone which seems like a big assumption to me.

The integration is key. Think of it like an ergonomics issue with a physical object. One competitor has better ergonomics than the other making it much more enjoyable experience. Maybe a better comparison would be the old Windows Mobile GUI with the iPhone GUI.

*Legion* wrote:
trip1eX wrote:

Yeah it's not like other wireless companies besides ATT are saying oh, Google Voice, sweet, it gives our customers free text messages and now we don't have to charge them $20 for unlimited text messages. Let's make sure all customers can use it as soon as possible. If only it let them make free phone calls too. :)

T-Mobile has two plans for the G1: a $25 plan with limited text messaging (400 messages), and a $35 plan with unlimited text.

AT&T's cheapest data plan is $30 with no messaging at all.

I can get a G1 on T-Mobile, spend $25 on data, and use Google Voice to get unlimited SMS.

On AT&T, I can get an iPhone, spend $30 on data, and spend money on top of that for SMS because I can't use GV.

No, nobody's waving a flag saying, "come here, get free SMS!". But there's a huge difference between blocking and not blocking.

Yeah it's the same difference between pcgaming and console gaming.

Each platform has its advantages and disadvantages.

Why pretend like one is such a bad guy over the other?

And the pricepoints don't show much. TMobile is cheaper than both ATT and Verizon. For voice or data. They've always been cheaper. Not sure why. Do they have a more efficient operation? Do they think they have to charge less to attract customers? ....

But the point that was brought up stated that TMobile raised their own rates just for the G1. Maybe GV had something to do with it. Maybe not.

Anyway I just thought it illustrated what I was thinking. That the notion everyone will be sending out free text messages and making free phone calls and getting unlimited data and you won't see any prices increases in data plans is shortsighted.

Cellphone companies need to make money and you don't know how much text messaging is subsidizing the rest of the business.

Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

Why pretend like one is such a bad guy over the other?

There are no "good guys" in the wireless carrier business. But there should be a separation between AT&T the carrier and the iPhone platform. But there isn't. The latter is being compromised to prevent anything that would "compete" with the former. This is not the case with T-Mobile and the Android platform, or any of the other carriers & platforms that I know of.

But the point that was brought up stated that TMobile raised their own rates just for the G1. Maybe GV had something to do with it. Maybe not.

That's pretty thin. More along the lines with reality would be that T-Mobile raised their rates for the G1, what with it being their flagship 3G handset for the new 3G network they were rolling out, just like every other carrier did in transitioning to 3G. AT&T raised rates in transitioning from EDGE to 3G, and it had nothing to do with Google Voice. I see no evidence that T-Mobile's rate raise had anything to do with GV (especially given the timeline between the G1 debut and GV, the latter of which happened only recently), and the fact that the 3G rollout was right next to it makes this a pretty simply Occam's Razor situation, I think...

Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

It's "ongoing" because the FCC got involved. There was no "ongoing" until the federal government decided to investigate.

*Legion* wrote:
Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

It's "ongoing" because the FCC got involved. There was no "ongoing" until the federal government decided to investigate.

There are other examples of apps that were "rejected" at first only to appear later in the app store. So I would say your statement is innaccurate.

*Legion* wrote:
Why pretend like one is such a bad guy over the other?

There are no "good guys" in the wireless carrier business. But there should be a separation between AT&T the carrier and the iPhone platform. But there isn't. The latter is being compromised to prevent anything that would "compete" with the former. This is not the case with T-Mobile and the Android platform, or any of the other carriers & platforms that I know of.

Like I said - pcgaming vs console gaming. No console gaming is what it sounds like you're saying to me. Console gaming -bad. Pcgaming - good.

trip1eX wrote:
*Legion* wrote:
Why pretend like one is such a bad guy over the other?

There are no "good guys" in the wireless carrier business. But there should be a separation between AT&T the carrier and the iPhone platform. But there isn't. The latter is being compromised to prevent anything that would "compete" with the former. This is not the case with T-Mobile and the Android platform, or any of the other carriers & platforms that I know of.

Like I said - pcgaming vs console gaming. No console gaming is what it sounds like you're saying to me. Console gaming -bad. Pcgaming - good.

You're talking apples and oranges.

It would be more like if someone built something using the Little Big Planet content generation that is awesome beyond belief but would fundamentally hurt Playstation 3 sales or DLC, and Sony made LBP reject it/disallow it's procurement and use.

In that case, the content is Good, Sony is bad, much like we're saying GV is good and AT&T is bad.

None of those other apps threatened revenue of their partner. It's a different class in itself.

kaostheory wrote:
trip1eX wrote:

Like I said - pcgaming vs console gaming. No console gaming is what it sounds like you're saying to me. Console gaming -bad. Pcgaming - good.

You're talking apples and oranges.

Well it's very apples to apples.

It's like XbMC only working on a hacked Xbox. Or not being able to use a 3rd party hard drive on the 360 unless you hack it. Or not being able to use a browser on the 360 unless you hack it. Or not being able to use the DVD player app on the Wii unless you hack it. It's not being able to online game on the 360 without using Xbox Live and paying for it. etc.

MS, Nintendo and Sony all say what apps can go on their system. I know MS sets the release schedule for XBLA games. Nintendo does the same for the Wii and WiiWare. And all have requirements/standards games have to meet in order to work on the system.

While on pcgaming anything goes baby!!! I can play with whatever controller I want. At whatever resolution. Buy hardware when I want to. Run the game how I want to. Use whatever hardware I want to. Anyone can make any app. And you make your app however you want. I can run 10 apps at once or 1 at once. Very open platform. Yada yada yada. Sound familiar?

Apple manages their platform like Nintendo, Sony and MS manage theirs. Same difference.

Android sounds like pcgaming to me.

Both for better and worse.

trip1eX wrote:
*Legion* wrote:
Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

It's "ongoing" because the FCC got involved. There was no "ongoing" until the federal government decided to investigate.

There are other examples of apps that were "rejected" at first only to appear later in the app store. So I would say your statement is innaccurate.

Edwin already pointed out the flaw in that logic. The FCC didn't get involved with those other apps because it's a completely different situation.

The console vs. PC gaming analogy is deeply flawed. I think you need to slow down and consider your arguments a bit more before posting them.

If I bought a PS3 and Sony started rejecting 3rd party games because they competed with in-house Sony titles, then we'd have a situation analogous to the iPhone. Obviously, every console manufacturer chooses not to certify certain titles because of quality concerns, as happens on the iPhone store, but that's not what we're talking about. This rejection is anti-competitive, and Apple has been guarded and outright untruthful about it.

I tried several times to hash out a broadside about network economics and why GV is such a great example of a disruptive technology.

I didn't make much sense. But then a brief essay by Yochai Benkler (Wealth of Networks author, co-director of the Berkman Center) cuts to the heart of it: http://publius.cc/capital_power_and_next_step_decentralization/091609

Benkler is directly speaking to the GV issue, but he does talk about the economics of the network in a way that gets at the central issues.

*Legion* wrote:
trip1eX wrote:
*Legion* wrote:
Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

It's "ongoing" because the FCC got involved. There was no "ongoing" until the federal government decided to investigate.

There are other examples of apps that were "rejected" at first only to appear later in the app store. So I would say your statement is innaccurate.

Edwin already pointed out the flaw in that logic. The FCC didn't get involved with those other apps because it's a completely different situation.

The console vs. PC gaming analogy is deeply flawed. I think you need to slow down and consider your arguments a bit more before posting them.

If I bought a PS3 and Sony started rejecting 3rd party games because they competed with in-house Sony titles, then we'd have a situation analogous to the iPhone. Obviously, every console manufacturer chooses not to certify certain titles because of quality concerns, as happens on the iPhone store, but that's not what we're talking about. This rejection is anti-competitive, and Apple has been guarded and outright untruthful about it.

I'll believe Apple starts rejecting based on quality when I see it. As it is, a over whelming majority of the app store is pure crap.

Edwin wrote:

I'll believe Apple starts rejecting based on quality when I see it. As it is, a over whelming majority of the app store is pure crap.

Heh. OK, I was being charitable.

There definitely has been a lot of, uhm, questionable rejections from the App Store. Made most frustrating by Apple's amazing ability to be uncommunicative.

*Legion* wrote:
trip1eX wrote:
*Legion* wrote:
Also let's not forget the GV Iphone story is ongoing. And that GV is just an app in a sea of apps on the iPHone.

It's "ongoing" because the FCC got involved. There was no "ongoing" until the federal government decided to investigate.

There are other examples of apps that were "rejected" at first only to appear later in the app store. So I would say your statement is innaccurate.

Edwin already pointed out the flaw in that logic. The FCC didn't get involved with those other apps because it's a completely different situation.

No flaw. If "rejected" apps can make their way back without the FCC then obviously it doesn't necessarily take the FCC for an app to come back from a rejection notice.

Your assuming Google has a case and was acting rationally and you're assuming Apple doesn't and wasn't.

If Apple rejects my app I can sue them the next day. It doesn't mean Apple is wrong or bad.

*Legion* wrote:

The console vs. PC gaming analogy is deeply flawed. I think you need to slow down and consider your arguments a bit more before posting them.

If I bought a PS3 and Sony started rejecting 3rd party games because they competed with in-house Sony titles, then we'd have a situation analogous to the iPhone. Obviously, every console manufacturer chooses not to certify certain titles because of quality concerns, as happens on the iPhone store, but that's not what we're talking about. This rejection is anti-competitive, and Apple has been guarded and outright untruthful about it.

We have plenty of those examples on consoles.

Can anyone make an online service for the 360 that competes with Live? Nope. MS would kill it and laugh in the person's face.

SAme thing with a browser.

Same thing with a Mac-media center app.

Can Blockbuster make an app on the 360 to let you stream some of their movies? Nope.

Do you you think Apple could set up iTunes on the 360 if they wanted to?

Can someone make a DVD app for the Wii and release it at retail?

None of these things can be done without the permission of the gatekeeper. Sound familiar? I hope so.