Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

joshondesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 177 posts

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#161

Post by dmd »

hrrsn wrote: post #130
CmonDev wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"they are moving the world along with them" You tried iOS 7, didn't you? I sure hope they are not using "Apple Maps" to move themselves and the world.

Apple Maps has come a long way since the iOS 6 launch. Google Maps is still undoubtedly better, but Apple have been working hard on it. iOS 7 is not bad. People are still afraid of change (look at what they said about the original iPhone, now look where we are) but ultimately it was in need of a refresh.

> Google Maps is still undoubtedly better, but Apple have been working hard on it.

The big difference is that Apple only allows Apple to make things better, where Google allows the world to do its work for it.

Example: The URL for the Boston subway system (the T) is "mbta.com". Nearly every single T stop showed up as "mTBa.com" in Apple Maps when it was released.

In the intervening time, they've fixed maybe 1/3 of the stops to be the correct URL - and almost all of that 1/3 in the last two months. (I've been watching, because I thought it was interesting.)

First of all, you'd think if they fixed one, they'd fix all of them.

Second, this is the sort of thing that when you report it to Google Maps team gets fixed within DAYS.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#162

Post by tehwalrus »

> Carriers request features, change specs, and pick winners.

I'm not sure this is true outside of America, where we have less of a carrier mono/duopoly. Certainly here in the UK - carriers are required to unlock phones if you ask nicely, >6 months after purchase, and most smartphones can be bought unlocked (I've bought my last 3 smartphones this way.)

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#163

Post by moron4hire »

hrrsn wrote: post #139
CmonDev wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they are not "moving the world" in any way except for hardware. iOS 7 is derivative.

True, even the hardware iterations aren't exciting. Rebranding the 5 as the 5C is disappointing. Where Apple do lead is in software, Android is getting better for the regular user but it's still not even close. Vertical integration works.

for varying definitions of "regular users" and "works"

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#164

Post by gwu78 »

collyw wrote: post #134
gwu78 wrote: post #93

I don't want a "smartphone". I want a handheld computer, the size of a "smartphone", with a cool form factor like a "smartphone". But, it needs to have Ethernet ports, USB ports, SD card slots, CF card slot, etc. An RS232 serial port would be nice too. I want versatility: inputs and outputs. I do not need to connect to any cellular networks. I do not want a closed source baseband operating system, SIM cards, etc. I w…

Rasberry Pi sounds pretty like what you are describing. Just doesn't come with a display as far as I can tell.

Perhaps we eventually see generic Retina displays with open standards ports.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#165

Post by TheLegace »

S4M wrote: post #44
TheLegace wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly rather than focusing why a smartphone can't succeed, I'd like to see how and why a phone can succeed. If anyone thinks that the mess in the Play Store and the development environment of Android doesn't leave a bad taste in your mouth they should really re-consider thinking that Android is going to be around forever. I would like to ditch this platform the first moment I get. There are a lot niches that are no…

What you describe seems exactly like the target of Firefox OS.

I actually hate the developing for the web, so FirefoxOS has no real interest for me. I'm grateful for the work those guys are doing, but I will never create HTML5 apps. I'm more of a systems, and robotics programmer and I love it but somehow these interests can never overlap with the way FirefoxOS functions.

So there isn't much of a value proposition for me.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#166

Post by walshemj »

avmich wrote: post #4

With a bit of tongue-in-cheek... 1. Data networks It's an open question of using WiFi as the universal carrier - we're not at that point yet; but it's not a question of using existing GSM networks. It's going to be hard for carriers to deny, after some point, minutes to paying customers. 2. The cost of entry - OS, cloud store, apps This happened time and again. Remember when Linux has appeared on the stage? Seen port…

wifi is not designed or has the bandwidth to support the density of devices that the mobile phone network needs

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#167

Post by gress »

CmonDev wrote: post #131
hrrsn wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Maps has come a long way since the iOS 6 launch. Google Maps is still undoubtedly better, but Apple have been working hard on it. iOS 7 is not bad. People are still afraid of change (look at what they said about the original iPhone, now look where we are) but ultimately it was in need of a refresh.

But they are not "moving the world" in any way except for hardware. iOS 7 is derivative.

iOS7 is more like iOS6 than any it is anything else.

iOS has certainly adopted features from other platforms over time. But what has been adopted in the other direction is far greater.

If you are referring to the removal of skeuomorphic style elements, then it's true that android and windows phone were always less skeuomorphic than iOS, but that's irrelevant to the technology.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#168

Post by [deleted] »

willvarfar wrote: post #15

I was at UIQ back when the iPhone "happened". It really was as pivotal for the industry as he says. I quipped that the iPhone made us irrelevant and Android made us redundant. I was surrounded by people with strong ambition and vision, at UIQ, Symbian, at our owners Motorola and Sony Ericsson, who wanted to build the iPhone and knew how to build the iPhone long before the iPhone was announced and before they knew any…

[deleted]

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#169

Post by Pxtl »

TillE wrote: post #101
salient wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moto G 2/3 of the price? Nexus 5 for $50 more? It doesn't have to be a "music player" of sorts, when the iPod touch is an iPhone without the phone part. So as long as there are decent Android phones out there with the same specs, that's the alternative. You could buy a Moto G and never use it as a phone if you don't want to.

How's the headphone jack on those devices? I've had terrible experiences with Android devices in that respect, including the Galaxy Nexus. Unusable in a matter of weeks, whereas my iPods have always had rock solid connections even after years of abuse.

I've a Samsung-based phone where the headset-jack (it has a mic, it's a headset-jack not headphone-jack) has taken years of abuse and still going strong. Jogging with an armband and using it in bed and getting snagged and clipping it to the jogging stroller and subsequently forgetting I was tethered when I step away.... none of that did damage.

My phone is a Samsung Focus, which came out a year before the G-Nex. I'm surprised the G-Nex gave you so much trouble.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#170

Post by Joeri »

antimagic wrote: post #149
jon-wood wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering. The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.

The thing is that people had been building smartphones since before the iPhone, and none of them looked anything like that. Buttons. Everywhere. The fact that the iPhone form factor is now considered self-evident is a demonstration of Apple's design strength, not of how obvious the form factor is. Don't forget that to make that form factor work, you need a whole software stack that is able to replace the physical but…

I don't think it's fair to say the iphone form factor wasn't out there. There was a rich variety of full-screen touch or pen phones (palm, pocket pc, some one-off designs like the lg prada), and there were models designed with a capacitive screen. A lot of people were trying to corner the smartphone market by foregoing a physical keyboard. I still think palm's graffiti was a better way of inputing complex text than any smartphone on-screen keyboard.

It's not that nobody was trying to figure out how to build a smartphone with a big touchscreen, just that they were approaching it from the enterprise space. Usability wasn't important because it wasn't an enterprise selling point. Pen input was important because signature input was key for enterprise. Apple ignored enterprise at first and designed for the consumer market, which allowed for blasphemies like throwing out pen support. The big change was making smartphones a consumer product instead of an enterprise product.

Post reply on HN