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

Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

play.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 277 posts

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#201

Post by reddit_clone »

will_work4tears wrote: post #190
endemic wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand where you're coming from, but customers who want/need to swap out batteries themselves are too small of a market for Apple to care about. Unfortunately for you, the trend of ever-tighter industrial design (which means integrated batteries) only looks like it will continue.

"only looks like it will continue" This is probably true, but hopefully battery technology gets better and electronics require less and less power. Charging every day is a hassle. Especially since you supposedly shouldn't charge until it's entirely drained.

>Especially since you supposedly shouldn't charge until it's entirely drained.

Is this true? I thought it was an old wives tale.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#202

Post by jamesaguilar »

marekmroz wrote: post #197
jamesaguilar wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't really care. It is Google branded, was developed primarily by Google, was marketed as "Google Android" and/or "Android by Google" at various times, has Google apps, has a store run by Google where I get more apps, and has Google's name associated with it in every news article I find about it online. It's a Google device to me, Joe Average Consumer. Your technicalities don't mean jack to me. Also, everyt…

Your Windows OEM analogy does not hold since the OEM does not develop nor integrate their own version of Windows. More importantly, Microsoft has full control over update channel. Not so with Android. > Would you like to address that or are you going to concede it? It is not a sword duel you know? Between this and throwing "I don't care's" around you really come off argumentative

> Your Windows OEM analogy does not hold since the OEM does not develop nor integrate their own version of Windows.

For the most part, the extent of this with Android is providing drivers and firmware for an individual phone's hardware, plus a few crapware apps to run on the desktop. This happens all the time in the Windows ecosystem too. I think the analogy is holding up just fine.

I am argumentative, so it is reasonable for me to come off this way, although you're right that I should chill a little. I dislike the double standards that people have with respect to Google and other companies on this subject.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#203

Post by wvenable »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #198
wvenable wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see your point (you edited it in) Yes, I am prepared to argue that you have no direct business relationship with Microsoft when you purchase a PC. In fact, if you read your license agreement you will see that -- the first line in fact reads: "These license terms are an agreement between you and the computer manufacturer that distributes the software with the computer". According to the license the manufactur…

This is not the question I asked. I asked you if you thought it would be wrong to consider Microsoft responsible for Windows failing to update on a recently acquired laptop. I am slightly curious as to your personal opinion, but in the main it simply doesn't matter what an individual hacker knowledgable about the business aspects of the ecosystem thinks. I'd be willing to stake up to a hundred dollars that if you fin…

> be wrong to consider Microsoft responsible for Windows failing to update on a recently acquired laptop.

Is it wrong that Microsoft doesn't provide free versions of Windows 8 to everyone who bought a Windows 7 PC? Because that's what you're comparing it to. Obviously nobody on the street would think that's reasonable.

> If Windows stopped updating on your machine, would you consider Microsoft responsible for that?

Microsoft has no moral obligation to provide updates and updates are really a relatively new invention. They do, in fact, stop providing updates to their software all the time.

> What matters is the expectations created by marketing, branding, and UI.

So what really matters is a bunch of subjective crap? Honestly? No where does Google say they'll update your device. Not in the marketing, not the branding, not even really in the UI.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#204

Post by CraigRood »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #17

Looks like even Google is afraid to directly take on the 800lb. gorilla that is the 10" iPad at the $500 price point. Xoom, Touchpad, Playbook(7") and countless others seem to have bit the dust trying. HTC and LG have even temporarily quit the tablet market to stem the bleeding. Wonder if ASUS is seeing volume on its Transformer line. Also, does anyone know how the Galaxy Tab is doing? Even Kindle Fire's sales are sl…

I fail to see how a 10" iPad is a compelling device. Theres one sitting here in my household and it barely gets used. It's far too locked down to be of any use at that size. Far too close to an actual laptop than a phone in reality.

Where these new range of devices excel is their ability to be used single handed. Physically and Psychologically it becomes a small device similarly to your phone.

Y'know, maybe Google is afraid to take on the iPad at $500, but thats such a waste of money and such a big risk. The market has proven theres a demand for cheap and small tablets.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#205

Post by wvenable »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #202
marekmroz wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your Windows OEM analogy does not hold since the OEM does not develop nor integrate their own version of Windows. More importantly, Microsoft has full control over update channel. Not so with Android. > Would you like to address that or are you going to concede it? It is not a sword duel you know? Between this and throwing "I don't care's" around you really come off argumentative

> Your Windows OEM analogy does not hold since the OEM does not develop nor integrate their own version of Windows. For the most part, the extent of this with Android is providing drivers and firmware for an individual phone's hardware, plus a few crapware apps to run on the desktop. This happens all the time in the Windows ecosystem too. I think the analogy is holding up just fine. I am argumentative, so it is reaso…

But, of course, you're wrong since there is no double-standard. Microsoft is no more responsible than Google is with regards to their software installed on hardware you buy from a manufacturer.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#206

Post by jamesaguilar »

wvenable wrote: post #203
jamesaguilar wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the question I asked. I asked you if you thought it would be wrong to consider Microsoft responsible for Windows failing to update on a recently acquired laptop. I am slightly curious as to your personal opinion, but in the main it simply doesn't matter what an individual hacker knowledgable about the business aspects of the ecosystem thinks. I'd be willing to stake up to a hundred dollars that if you fin…

> be wrong to consider Microsoft responsible for Windows failing to update on a recently acquired laptop. Is it wrong that Microsoft doesn't provide free versions of Windows 8 to everyone who bought a Windows 7 PC? Because that's what you're comparing it to. Obviously nobody on the street would think that's reasonable. > If Windows stopped updating on your machine, would you consider Microsoft responsible for that? M…

> Is it wrong that Microsoft doesn't provide free versions . . .

More like, "Would it be wrong if Windows 8 would not install on a computer I bought this year?"

> So what really matters is a bunch of subjective crap?

Yes. I'm human. "Subjective crap" and the expectations created by it matter to me, as they do to most of us.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#207

Post by CraigRood »

earl wrote: post #75
MartinCron wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Google tablet is half the price of an iPad. If that's not competing on price, I don't know what is.

it's also crap compared to the ipad. Smaller, lower resolution screen. Less storage. No ability to directly access wireless networks. Crappier apps. Fewer apps. Crappy entertainment ecosystem compared to itunes. Most likely Google will dick you on OS updates just like the nexus phone that waited months and months. No genius bar to send your mom to. etc etc etc.

Can't believe i'm even replying to this but here goes.

Your'e exactly whats wrong with Apple, instead of looking and hoping for innovation and risks your essentially saying don't bother, it's been done before. Maybe this device will be 'crap' but who knows? Maybe this device becomes the best selling 'tablet' over the next 12 months and Apple changes their game.

This is a fantastic, cheap piece of hardware with an elegant ecosystem, with lots of potential might I add. If you don't find that exciting - I feel bad for you.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#208

Post by wvenable »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #206
wvenable wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> be wrong to consider Microsoft responsible for Windows failing to update on a recently acquired laptop. Is it wrong that Microsoft doesn't provide free versions of Windows 8 to everyone who bought a Windows 7 PC? Because that's what you're comparing it to. Obviously nobody on the street would think that's reasonable. > If Windows stopped updating on your machine, would you consider Microsoft responsible for that? M…

> Is it wrong that Microsoft doesn't provide free versions . . . More like, "Would it be wrong if Windows 8 would not install on a computer I bought this year?" > So what really matters is a bunch of subjective crap? Yes. I'm human. "Subjective crap" and the expectations created by it matter to me, as they do to most of us.

> Would it be wrong if Windows 8 would not run on a computer I bought this year.

So now you think Microsoft is morally obligated to design their software so that it runs on older hardware? Your expectations are clearly pretty extreme.

The interesting point here is that Google's software does work on the hardware we're talking about. So is Google or Microsoft obligated to give you software for free? Obviously they are not. But even more interesting, Google's software is already free and available! So the question then becomes are the manufacturers obligated to modify it to run on your hardware and give it to you? Well are they? If they are, take it up with them. I'm not sure what Google has to do with it.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#209

Post by jamesaguilar »

wvenable wrote: post #205
jamesaguilar wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your Windows OEM analogy does not hold since the OEM does not develop nor integrate their own version of Windows. For the most part, the extent of this with Android is providing drivers and firmware for an individual phone's hardware, plus a few crapware apps to run on the desktop. This happens all the time in the Windows ecosystem too. I think the analogy is holding up just fine. I am argumentative, so it is reaso…

But, of course, you're wrong since there is no double-standard. Microsoft is no more responsible than Google is with regards to their software installed on hardware you buy from a manufacturer.

I would be very surprised if the average Joe feels this way. To double check my theories, I just asked three engineers where I work and they all seem to believe that Microsoft has an obligation to support new, high-end laptops in a near-term OS bump.

Re: Nexus 7, Made for Google Play

#210

Post by CraigRood »

greedo wrote: post #191
gvnonor wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never say never. If someone had told me that i'd be able to buy a high-end(processor and brand) tablet for $200, I would've laughed in their face.

Sure. Care to specify the "high-end" tablet you're buying for $200? I'm a bit skeptical. If you're claiming the Nexus 7, that's not in the class of the iPad nor the proposed Surface.

Not really sure what you mean by "not in the class of the iPad".

For less than half the price you get more than half the performance. I don't think theres benchmarks out there yet but I don't think its fair to say that a Tegra 3 Quadcore is 'low-end'. It's on par with the A5& A5X technically.

Post reply on HN