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

The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 109 posts

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#11

Post by zaphar »

grizzles wrote: post #5

Google mgmt fake releases and then subsequently cancels unlaunched products all the time. They do it to assess market viability and also to stymie competitors. Ara is notable because of the breadth of the project, but it was really just about protecting the android cash cow's flank. The strategy has worked pretty well. Android was released as open source almost 10 years ago, and you still can't run it on any semi ope…

What is really boggling to the mind are how people think they can know the motivations of people they haven't met or talked with because, "it's obvious" or something.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#12

Post by jpm_sd »

onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

Nope. Sorry. Physics. Compared to a lightweight device that fits in your pocket, an IBM PC is huge. Colossal. All the space you could possibly need for modular interconnects, sheet metal sub-chassis-es, proper fasteners, etc. etc.

A comparably-modular mobile phone cannot be anything but thick and heavy, unless you would prefer fragile and unusable.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#13

Post by smallnamespace »

onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

> Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers.

I don't quite understand this point.

PCs are inherently upgradeable, but it seems like consumers would rather treat them as disposable electronic devices, judging by the success of barely-upgradeable Macs and other laptops.

And I'm not sure I blame them either, it's not like it's easy for a consumer with no techy knowledge to know whether they should upgrade the RAM, or the SSD, or the GPU, and research which components are compatible, best bang for the buck, etc.

You're making out upgradeability to be the reason why PCs won and are super successful, but it seems more because there were a whole bunch of PC-compatible clones that could all run the same software. The hardware/peripheral compatibility between PC clones was never very particularly good until well into the 90s, well after the PC standard had already 'won', and the computers they replaced were also upgradeable.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#15

Post by contingencies »

Given that swappable storage already exists in a standardized form factor at a tiny size, what are the truly functional components of a phone that should be swappable?

All I can see are screen, memory, CPU, baseband mobile communications, wifi, bluetooth, camera, local sensors, battery.

Observations: trying to put memory and CPU across disparate modules on the same generic block-linking bus used by the other components smells like a recipe for pain. Sensors and wireless connectivity are stupid-cheap and therefore largely not module-worthy, they would probably be on the same unit as the mobile comm's baseband.

Conclusion: Maybe retry with [cpu/memory]+[camera]+[comms]+[screen]+[battery]

Gotchas: Hardware profits lower, so where's the commercial carrot? I suppose a cabal of governments (EU?) or a single big one (China) could regulate heavily against throwaway devices entering their markets, which could provide enough push, though it would be hard for China to regulate. Software experience polish would suffer. Overall bulk would likely suffer, though we've already reached too-tiny-to-hold-is-the-problem so that's less of an issue.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#16

Post by bagrow »

onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

How many smartphone users even know how much RAM they have? Smartphones are eating everything because they just work. Even more than PCs, which are also heavily commoditized these days. It seems like almost everyone thinks of upgrading computers and phones these days the way I would think of upgrading my microwave: by buying a new one.

Is this a very western-centric view? Maybe... But it seems like everyone wants things to just work and unless they are VERY price-conscious, they don't want to think about it much.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#17

Post by toast0 »

onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

The problem is connectors, there's no room in a phone to have connectors between the motherboard and smallish parts. Modular display and camera can make sense, but more as build time options.

How has google not already beaten the iPhone? They have vastly more users, and have very small margins (the end state for PCs)

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#18

Post by grizzles »

zaphar wrote: post #11
grizzles wrote: post #5

Google mgmt fake releases and then subsequently cancels unlaunched products all the time. They do it to assess market viability and also to stymie competitors. Ara is notable because of the breadth of the project, but it was really just about protecting the android cash cow's flank. The strategy has worked pretty well. Android was released as open source almost 10 years ago, and you still can't run it on any semi ope…

What is really boggling to the mind are how people think they can know the motivations of people they haven't met or talked with because, "it's obvious" or something.

I've both met and talked with Sergey Brin. It's not like it's an everyday occurrence but it's happened. So, what's your problem?

It shouldn't need to be said but this is totally OT, because the parent comment is 100% my opinion.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#19

Post by onli »

jpm_sd wrote: post #12
onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

Nope. Sorry. Physics. Compared to a lightweight device that fits in your pocket, an IBM PC is huge. Colossal. All the space you could possibly need for modular interconnects, sheet metal sub-chassis-es, proper fasteners, etc. etc. A comparably-modular mobile phone cannot be anything but thick and heavy, unless you would prefer fragile and unusable.

I don't believe that for a minute. While it won't be easy – otherwise Ara would have succeeded already – I don't think we are anywhere near a problem that physics make really infeasible. Where is the physical argument? Where is the formula that says that blocks that size can't stick? You "just" need well defined small intercommunication system for small blocks with one good system that holds it together.

If that were impossible, Ara would have not come as far as it did, and the Fairphone 2 would not be as modular as it is.

Re: The dream of Ara: Inside the rise and fall of Google’s most revolutionary phone

#20

Post by ebbv »

onli wrote: post #6

I don't get it. This is a IBM PC moment right here. Imagine you could standardize the smartphone. Really divide it into block, standardize the communication bus. Make it a PC. It would be huge, eat up the smartphone world, just like the PC ate up the homecomputers. I even think this is how Google would have beaten the iPhone. Android as the OS for an ever-evolving phone, where if a user needs more ram he would just a…

Do you realize what percent of all IBM compatibles ever had any upgrades done to them internally? Almost none. It seems like a defining feature if you're a nerd like me who did it with all your PCs but most people and most businesses bought them in a configuration and used them in that configuration until they were replaced.
Post reply on HN