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

We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 117 posts

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#21

Post by jarcane »

V-2 wrote: post #20
jarcane wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WinPhone8.x is a fantastic mobile OS. The interface is great. I've dealt with some bugs since switching to the developer preview, but that's to be expected, and my experience running production code was always rock solid. But the app situation is abominable, and getting worse. The Xbox program seems to have been all but abandoned. Microsoft seems to have largely given up even monitoring the app store; half the top/ne…

If they cared to see their app ecosystem grow, they wouldn't charge developers 100$ (which is actually 1$ more than this greedy evil empire of Apple does :)) for a licence you need even to install your app on your own darn phone

I was really aggravated by this. You can't even test shit locally without the license, VS throws a fit and demands you buy one, and then even if you cancel it it flags your install to nag you relentlessly to buy the bloody thing over and over again forevermore.

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#22

Post by s_kilk »

msturgill wrote: post #4

Windows Phone is not that bad. Google has done a good job trying to starve WP users of their services, but I think we can all survive without Hangouts (Telegram, etc) and Google Voice (who cares anymore) at this point.

It's not the worst certainly, but after a few months of daily use I concluded that the OS was mostly tuned for the show-room (read mobile-phone store) rather than actual use. It was slick, with really pleasing touches all over the place, but I felt the core functionality was lacking.

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#23

Post by V-2 »

jarcane wrote: post #21
V-2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they cared to see their app ecosystem grow, they wouldn't charge developers 100$ (which is actually 1$ more than this greedy evil empire of Apple does :)) for a licence you need even to install your app on your own darn phone

I was really aggravated by this. You can't even test shit locally without the license, VS throws a fit and demands you buy one, and then even if you cancel it it flags your install to nag you relentlessly to buy the bloody thing over and over again forevermore.

Remember "Developers! Developers! Developers!"? :)) Whatever happened to it

This uninviting attitude of theirs was one of the reasons why I ultimately became an Android dev (once I decided to move into mobile apps), even though I had C# / WPF background so picking up Windows Phone would be the most natural next step... And Java admittedly sucks in compare to C#

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#24

Post by V-2 »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #2

I'm not sure what the article is asking for exactly, we've had a third OS for quite some time. We had Blackberry, iOS, and Android; now we have legitimate Windows Phone adoption, iOS, and Android; and if one of those three should die, we have FirefoxOS to fill in the gap.

It seems to be asking for the third OS to play any significant role, so as to exert competitive pressure on the Big Two. I also don't think that Windows Phone is giving them a run for they money just yet.

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#25

Post by pjmlp »

jarcane wrote: post #17
pjmlp wrote: post #8

We already have a 3rd mobile OS, it is called Windows Phone and is doing quite well (actually more than iOS) in a few European countries.

Pretty much only Finland, really, and that's because of the local Nokia brand loyalty and aggressive local pricing. With MS axing the Nokia brand, I see Samsung picking up the slack easily if they dare to compete on price like they do in other countries rather than trying to angle as a luxury brand. I'm already starting to see a lot more Galaxies and iPhones on the street in Helsinki and Tampere these days.

No, unless it changed the southern countries have a lot of them.

Windows Phone are the only alternative to Android, when you are buying pre-paid phones and not willing to shell out more then 500 euros for a mobile phone, when earning 400 euros on average.

Even the contracts are not an option for such users.

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#27

Post by withdavidli »

Does this argument parellel Linux vs Windows vs OSX to anyone else?

I think the main problem is going to be getting people to develop for an alternative OS. MS had a paid developer per unique app program, which was called desparate by some. Comments here state that license to develop for the WP is a $100??? Jeez, I wonder what their growth team is thinking.

Developers are highly sought after, experimenting is fun, but a lot of people are looking for stable jobs either from the beginning or they want to try a start up / own their own business first. This is also a common problem with trying new programming languages, why choose a new one when established languages have large user base, jobs are plentiful, and not much worry it's going to be abandoned 2 years down the line?

There has to be incentives to overcome these barriers to gain large spread adoption. At the end of the day a lot of it comes down to livelyhood. Will a person risk time devoting on something new? If a person starts a company on this new OS, will other developers take that risk to join? Will the clients/customers be willing to make that switch?

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#28

Post by raphman »

emsy wrote: post #6
lovelearning wrote: post #3

Tizen, Firefox OS and Ubuntu are probably the candidates, but I think Tizen has a combination of things going for it: 1) It's not based on AOSP (unlike Firefox OS) 2) Supports both native and HTML5 apps (Firefox OS apps are limited to HTML5) 3) Backed by Samsung, still a powerful hardware player in most markets. Both Firefox OS and Ubuntu [have had/will have] a tough time getting device manufacturers to adopt their O…

There's also Salifish OS ( https://sailfishos.org/ ). AFAIK, it's open source except the UI. Personally, I'd love to see a true open source OS succeed, but I don't believe it will happen.

There is still a little bit more closed source than only the UI [1]. However, the folks at Jolla are quite committed to open-sourcing as much as possible.

[1] http://jollafr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/oss-vs-nonoss....

[2] http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2014/mer-meeting....

Re: We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

#30

Post by throwawaymsft »

franciscop wrote: post #18

> "For OEMs/handset makers, choice means the ability to do more with software" Please no, this would only yield to more bloatware. The move of Google is smart, moving the OS away from OEMs. [Most] manufacturers have demonstrated again and again that they cannot be trusted with software, since they only care about profit and putting more and more useless apps into the OS. We might need more mobile OS, but not for this…

Yep. The thesis of this essay is that choice is unequivocally good for users, handset makers, everyone. Experience doesn't play that out. The experience of a curated, pruned garden vs. a wild west scammy bazaar isn't a good one for users.

Here's what happens when you search facebook on Windows Store:

http://imgur.com/QDHcpG0

Choice is great! You can "choose" to install a scam app or the official one. Incompetent OEMs can "choose" to override system behavior. After all, Dell, HP & friends were known for really improving the PC software experience.

Post reply on HN