Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android • Hacker News Board

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#11

Post by glhaynes » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:34 PM UTC

nkassis wrote: post #8

glhaynes wrote: post #3

I understand handset makers not providing timely upgrades (who wants to spend engineering/support $s on software upgrades for a sale you already made to a customer [really, a customer of your customer] who probably won't hold any loyalty to your brand either way), but why are so many new devices coming out with really old versions of Android? I've never really seen anything like that before... PC makers are ready to…

Because they spend a ton of money on crap "enhancements" to the original UI (except for HTC sense which I don't really care about, all others I've seen are crap). If they just released plain Android they wouldn't have anything to differentiate themselves. The problem with their plan is that they suck at software development and their enhancements make the phones worse and outdated.

I suppose you're right. Seems strange for those things to apparently be so badly broken by OS upgrades that they need months/years to fix. You'd think the savings on support costs alone would be substantial from not having to support older, presumably buggier, versions of the OS. Though I suppose most of the support for these devices comes from the telcos not from the handset makers.

Anyway, here's a radical and not necessarily good idea: what if the base "Android" release didn't have a launcher/etc at all, leaving what's commonly called "the UI" entirely up to handset makers. Sure, spin off the existing launcher as a separate open source project, but make it just one competitor among many. If diversity in this area is good and manufacturers really do want to differentiate themselves, make that a core part of the platform. It's not like it's that expensive to write a launcher.

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#12

Post by draebek » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:35 PM UTC

Are there many new applications that require the use of Android 2.x? It seems to me that could be a serious problem for "Android": consumer buys new Dell phone running "Android," finds they can't run half the cool apps their friends' EVOs can because they've got some old version of Android, consumer now hates Android.

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#13

Post by mike-cardwell » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:40 PM UTC

draebek wrote: post #12

Are there many new applications that require the use of Android 2.x? It seems to me that could be a serious problem for "Android": consumer buys new Dell phone running "Android," finds they can't run half the cool apps their friends' EVOs can because they've got some old version of Android, consumer now hates Android.

Flash requires 2.2 iirc.

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#14

Post by SandB0x » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:43 PM UTC

nkassis wrote: post #7

raganwald wrote: post #5

I was going to write that Android needs a Dictator that lays down the law with minions and partners alike, especially to enforce a "No Devices That Suck" policy. But honestly, does Google care? If Dell wants to ship a device that sucks, let HTC prove this is a terrible idea by eating Dell's lunch. If Android 2.2 is better than Android 1.5, let customers vote for 2.2 with their wallets. Of course, there is always the…

Well, the largest problem I can see is that it's hard for customers to know what version of the OS comes in the phone they want. Google owns the Android trademark, they could just prevent anyone who isn't complying with certain guidelines from advertising the name Android. They could call it whatever they want, just not Android.

Exactly.

Just as raganwald suggests on his last line - people will be stung by their experience and simply buy an iPhone next time.

Crap like this damages the whole Android brand. Nobody wants to hear "Oh, well you bought this specific instance X of Android on phone Y. That particular one is no good, but it's your fault because you didn't spend a week reading detailed product reviews on Ars Technica before buying your phone."

It's entirely possible that sales will nosedive after the current round of phone contracts/plans are up, as most Android owners are on their first model.

(an Android user)

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#15

Post by napierzaza » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:47 PM UTC

Whoa, I thought there were issues with the sprawl of hardware that has come out, and the phones which can't upgrade to new OSes. But now we find out that you can't even trust a NEW phone to have the newest OS?

This is as bad or worse than the PC industry.

But is this because of Google? Are they manufacturers starting projects for ver x.x and then only to find out after 6 months of work that the new OS is not compatible with the software/hardware they've developed?

Is there information on the road-map to the development of specifications? Or are these companies just aiming low?

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#16

Post by tvon » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:48 PM UTC

nkassis wrote: post #8

glhaynes wrote: post #3

I understand handset makers not providing timely upgrades (who wants to spend engineering/support $s on software upgrades for a sale you already made to a customer [really, a customer of your customer] who probably won't hold any loyalty to your brand either way), but why are so many new devices coming out with really old versions of Android? I've never really seen anything like that before... PC makers are ready to…

Because they spend a ton of money on crap "enhancements" to the original UI (except for HTC sense which I don't really care about, all others I've seen are crap). If they just released plain Android they wouldn't have anything to differentiate themselves. The problem with their plan is that they suck at software development and their enhancements make the phones worse and outdated.

Hardware manufacturers don't see themselves as Android distributors, they don't want to compete to see who can make the best home for vanilla Android. They see Android as a jumping off point, not a final product.

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#17

Post by aamar » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:50 PM UTC

nkassis wrote: post #7

raganwald wrote: post #5

I was going to write that Android needs a Dictator that lays down the law with minions and partners alike, especially to enforce a "No Devices That Suck" policy. But honestly, does Google care? If Dell wants to ship a device that sucks, let HTC prove this is a terrible idea by eating Dell's lunch. If Android 2.2 is better than Android 1.5, let customers vote for 2.2 with their wallets. Of course, there is always the…

Well, the largest problem I can see is that it's hard for customers to know what version of the OS comes in the phone they want. Google owns the Android trademark, they could just prevent anyone who isn't complying with certain guidelines from advertising the name Android. They could call it whatever they want, just not Android.

A half-measure would be to brand the versions with something more distinctive and memorable than a number, e.g. 2.3 = "Android Ginger".

Maybe Google is shooting for where Apple is -- frequent, free updates compatible with the vast majority of active hardware. If they could get there, it wouldn't make sense to invest in branded updates. But what do they need to do with (or to) the carriers/manufacturers to achieve that?

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#18

Post by ydant » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 5:53 PM UTC

draebek wrote: post #12

Are there many new applications that require the use of Android 2.x? It seems to me that could be a serious problem for "Android": consumer buys new Dell phone running "Android," finds they can't run half the cool apps their friends' EVOs can because they've got some old version of Android, consumer now hates Android.

My understanding is that the difference between 1.5 and 1.6 was huge in terms of what it provides in API/functionality and a lot of apps target 1.6 as a minimum as a result. Probably a lot more than target 2.1 or 2.2. 2.0 almost doesn't exist, it was upgraded so quickly on the devices that had it.

My experience is that if you're on 2.1 you can run most of what's on the market. I haven't used 1.5 or 1.6 enough to know about them (other than technically), but I wouldn't be surprised if 1.5 can't run a large chunk of the market and 1.6 probably gets excluded from a lot of cool stuff, too.

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#19

Post by BrandonDC » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 6:02 PM UTC

I find this type of corporate cluelessness fascinating. When a product like this is released, it feels as though the company ignored everything; the market, the competing products and the customers. How does this happen? Is it Dell's lacklustre R&D funding? Poor leadership? Is the team who developed this product made up of soccer moms who don't know anything about smartphones? All of the above?

Re: Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

#20

Post by sprout » Mon, Aug 30, 2010, 6:09 PM UTC

SandB0x wrote: post #14

nkassis wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the largest problem I can see is that it's hard for customers to know what version of the OS comes in the phone they want. Google owns the Android trademark, they could just prevent anyone who isn't complying with certain guidelines from advertising the name Android. They could call it whatever they want, just not Android.

Exactly. Just as raganwald suggests on his last line - people will be stung by their experience and simply buy an iPhone next time. Crap like this damages the whole Android brand. Nobody wants to hear "Oh, well you bought this specific instance X of Android on phone Y. That particular one is no good, but it's your fault because you didn't spend a week reading detailed product reviews on Ars Technica before buying you…

People aren't stupid. They can distinguish between Froyo and Cupcake.

It's even got a clear analogue in the XP/Vista/7 debacle.

Or for those who lived through it, Cupcake is the Windows 3.11 to Froyo's Windows XP, or something like that. People do in fact get that there are different versions of software. If you're aiming at people who don't... they aren't going to know an iPhone from a Nexus One anyway.