Android • Hacker News Board

Re: Android

#31

Post by Zak » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 6:57 PM UTC

jawngee wrote: post #18

Windows lacked the fit and finish of the Macintosh. But it didn't matter. Because there were hundreds of Windows machines whereas there was only a few variations of Macintosh, all controlled by the same company and priced at a premium. Windows is priced at a premium, you just don't feel it because the cost is rolled into the cost of whatever piece of kit you just bought. Is our memory so shallow as to forget the anti…

Windows is priced at a premium, you just don't feel it because the cost is rolled into the cost of whatever piece of kit you just bought.

As I understand it, OEM costs for Windows are a small fraction of retail. Computers offered with no OS, FreeDOS or Linux rarely cost less than the same machine with Windows. This holds true both with major manufacturers offering a choice of OS on their products and with generic laptops sold under several brand names (compare System76, which sells laptops with Linux to Sager, which sells some of the same machines with Windows). In most cases, the cost is offset by bundling trialware, so you don't actually pay for Windows at all.

Re: Android

#32

Post by pavlov » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 6:59 PM UTC

zzzmarcus wrote: post #15

nkurz wrote: post #8

I've heard the "fit and finish" argument frequently, both in print and in person as the owner of an HTC Incredible. I don't really see it myself, though. Sure there are a lot of junky looking 3rd party apps, but this is true of iPhone as well. Unlike early Windows vs Mac, I don't have this reaction to the base system. What are people reacting to when they say this? Or is it just a canned response?

I'm a full-time Android developer. I alternate between using a Nexus One and an iPhone 4 as my main phones. One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference. Other "fit and finish" advantages that the iPhon…

One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference.

It's weird that Android still doesn't have this. Even tired old Symbian is now using GPU acceleration for display compositing...

Re: Android

#33

Post by wallflower » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:01 PM UTC

moondistance wrote: post #19

Mongoose wrote: post #6

One thing I'd like to see is Android have more of a presence in universities. It'd give CS students useful exposure to mobile development and allow them to put all of the Java that gets crammed down their throats to good use.

I teach the intro. to HCI course at a Canadian university. The course project includes the design and implementation of a mobile app. I'll be using this article as evidence that my students should develop for Android rather than the iPhone. Most would prefer to develop for the iPhone, and are taking steps to gain access to Macs and developer accounts for that purpose. This will be a nice push in the other direction.

From talking with other developers, developing a good interface for Android is much more painful and costly than developing one in iPhone. I caution you that you might get poor course evaluations because it might be more of a struggle to get something implemented in Android vs iPhone.

Re: Android

#34

Post by jwr » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:01 PM UTC

I find it interesting that most people who like Android like it in the future tense.

Android is always great, but in that next version, that is just around the corner. That upcoming tablet, that upcoming phone, that upcoming software.

Re: Android

#35

Post by tomerico » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:03 PM UTC

mahmud wrote: post #20

endtime wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen the Android docs, but for building an app with a GUI I genuinely can't think of anything better than the WinPhone7 SDK.

What do you think makes WP7 superior to Android? Please be as detailed as you can; this is not an argument, it's a feature request :-) A million lurking volunteers, bored but capable as they are, will take it upon themselves to improve Android before Google gets around to it (it's a vicious race for good hacks.)

I can share my experience from developing with Silverlight and c# for a few years (Though for the past year I've developed exclusively in java).

First of all the language. c#, especially in the latest iterations has become incredible. Featuring the goodness of both statically and dynamically typed languages. It has become very elegant and powerful.

Sadly, I can't say anything similar on Java. Is has been very slow to advance, very conservative when advancing, and the tools are still so slow (At least eclipse).

Regarding GUI development on Silverlight. Microsoft has done many things right with it. It has the best separation of UI and logic that I have seen built right into it. They have xml files to represent the UI (In the same way web has HTML), and the framework is as flexibly as could be (e.g. it wouldn't take you more than a minute to create a scrollbar that looks like a clock for example (If you have the graphics ready).

And the most important of all - they have a UI editor built for DESIGNERS. It encourages you to worry about the UI look and feel, and not on the logic behind it. It has tools in it from the designers world, and encapsulate a lot of headaches (E.g. setting a gradient direction is done by dragging a line over the area, and not by setting some numbers).

In addition, Silverlight has the advantage of being a second generation after WPF. Microsoft has learned from its mistakes with WPF, and simplified Silverlight dramatically. They could do that because Silverlight was a new technology which didn't have the requirement to be backward compatible.

Re: Android

#36

Post by moultano » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:06 PM UTC

It's already massively outselling the iPhone. Do we even need to speculate that it's going to be an important platform for a long time?

Re: Android

#37

Post by num1 » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:10 PM UTC

pavlov wrote: post #32

zzzmarcus wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a full-time Android developer. I alternate between using a Nexus One and an iPhone 4 as my main phones. One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference. Other "fit and finish" advantages that the iPhon…

One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference. It's weird that Android still doesn't have this. Even tired old Symbian is now using GPU acceleration for display compositing...

There's a bug in the tracker but it's been shut down for now. The google rep's answer was "This is something we've investigated a couple of years ago already and that we revisit regularly. Of course we thought of using the GPU, but there are non-trivial issues on many Android devices (a G1-class device for instance supports only one OpenGL context at a time, which would prevent you from using any OpenGL based app like games or augmented reality apps.) In our past experiments we even found many cases in which using the GPU was slower than normal rendering. New devices might allow us to overcome the past limitations that made GPU support a not-so-good solution. The "choppiness" and "lagginess" you are mentioning are more often related to heavy garbage collection than drawing performance"

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=6914

Re: Android

#38

Post by mahmud » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:10 PM UTC

YooLi wrote: post #30

mahmud wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. And private gardens are superior to public parks. Android at least has garbage collection .. native C interface, and it's open to you as your mother's arms. If Android lacks anything, it's only a matter of time before it's fixed. The cat is out of the bag, and the OS of the mobile future is Google's as much as it's yours and mine. For every polished iPhone handset sold, there are three crappy but wide-open andr…

In all fairness you are lumping a whole bunch of devices together. I have no doubt that Android will find its way into all sorts of products, much like other flavors of Linux already have. Most people have no idea that Linux is powering their network gear, web cams, etc., but they don't need to. No one thinks to themselves "wow, my microwave is using embedded Linux, I'm going to get a Linux notebook." Apple is making…

You are looking at people who buy mobile devices as accessories or luxury items. I, on the other hand, want to develop tablets for medical assistance, mostly diagnosis, translation and record keeping, and deploy them in my home country of Somalia, and the refugee camps in Kenya.

Whether Apple sells X units or makes Y dollars is immaterial to me. All I care about is that every Android source file begins with a preamble that's sweeter than Aretha and Whitney to my ears: it promises me Freedom. Freedom to share, copy, clone, sell, give away. And from my experience, Dan Bornstein and the gang, bless their hacking souls, are here to assist me.

My "users" might never care what powers their doctors' tablets (they don't even know what an OS is, in fact, most of them can't read) but I do. I know I can fly back to ShenZhen and shop for boards, case, power chords, and save money. And in the end, have a Free, world-class operating system waiting for me.

To me Android is not a privilege, it's a right. It's what I will use to help my people. And there are millions like me who outnumber luxury mobile users by a huge margin.

This is where my heart is at:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1726986

Re: Android

#39

Post by CitizenKane » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:11 PM UTC

pavlov wrote: post #32

zzzmarcus wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a full-time Android developer. I alternate between using a Nexus One and an iPhone 4 as my main phones. One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference. Other "fit and finish" advantages that the iPhon…

One of the big differences is that iOS devices have hardware accelerated graphics. You don't really notice how weak transitions and animations are on Android until you get used to using an iPhone. It's a subtle difference, but it's real and it makes a difference. It's weird that Android still doesn't have this. Even tired old Symbian is now using GPU acceleration for display compositing...

This is something that is actually pretty tricky. The GPUs on many devices don't allow multiple OpenGL contexts to be created. So in the case of Android, the animations are done in software and the currently running application can create an OpenGL context. This generally makes for slow animations (and unfortunately worse battery life).

What can be done is that the system can create an OpenGL context, and then proxy all other calls (from other apps) through that context with a minor performance hit. This is something that the original iPhone had actually done. However, I think this might be somewhat challenging when working with different mobile GPUs and their quirks.

So while on the surface it's a very simple problem, in practice it can be very hard.

Re: Android

#40

Post by pkaler » Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 7:12 PM UTC

I know of no Android tablet available in the $199 price range. Someone please point one out if one exists.

The argument that Windows won because Macintosh was priced at a premium is a dubious argument.

Apple is able to purchase flash memory, processors, and touch screens in bulk. They own Intrinisty and PA Semiconductor.

Apple looks like Walmart on their supply side and looks like Barney's on the retail side. There is no price pressure. They could slash their margins but they don't have to. It's still difficult to find an iPad and iPhone 4. They can't make enough of them.

Secondly, 95% market share is unnatural. It doesn't happen often. Markets look more like GM/Chrysler/Ford or XBox/PlayStation/Wii. I suspect the smartphone market will develop similarly.

And if you want to say that the iPhone will be crushed like the Macintosh was crushed by Windows then it is just as easy to say that Android will be crushed the same way Sun Microsystems and Novell were crushed when Eric Schmidt was there.