31–40 of 74 posts
I dont see that the major PC vendors carry alot of weight in this segment anyway, so why the mediocre device? Seems to me that Dell has been caught completely off guard by mobile devices and still really doesnt have an answer.
This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. I don't like what Dell is doing but they are damaging their own brand more than they are damaging Android. But before we get too hung up on having the latest version of Android running on our phones, let us put things in perspective. I do care a lot about having the latest version of Android. But I'm like you guys, we're plugged in to the tech scene. We love…
I'm not sure that's the case.
I'm not sure it's not, either...
How much users think of their Dell Android-running phone as "my Android phone" versus "my Dell phone" versus just "my phone" isn't really clear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Most people probably don't know there are Android versions, the rest will assume there's Android 1.x and Android 2.x, and a mere minority will know that the 2.1→2.2 is greater than 2.0→2.1 partly because in 2.2 Dalvik has a JIT compiler.
This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. I don't like what Dell is doing but they are damaging their own brand more than they are damaging Android. But before we get too hung up on having the latest version of Android running on our phones, let us put things in perspective. I do care a lot about having the latest version of Android. But I'm like you guys, we're plugged in to the tech scene. We love…
Ten years ago, a computer was a computer. For mainstream buyers there was this thing called a Mac but only your brother's kid, who wanted to be a designer, used one and it seemed kind of expensive.
Today, the tide is shifting and people expect more and more out of their bit crunchers, whether they're in your pocket or on your desktop. Smartphones, of course, are extra competitive because a lot of manufacturers are duking it out to be the best. Between Apple, HTC and Motorola especially, the bar gets set higher and higher each quarter. Who can jam in the most useful hardware widgets? Who can accomplish the tightest software/hardware integrations so features feel great to use? Whoever it is, they gain a bit more mindshare, a few more sales, a few more solid reviews.
And here comes bumbling ol' Dell, treating the smartphone like it's a commodified piece of tech and all they have to do is build it cheap and somewhat good enough.
Regardless of whether we're in the mainstream or not, the mainstream isn't stupid. $99 buys you a lot of (subsidized) phone these days -- whether it's an iPhone 3GS or one of the many solid, 2.x Android phones. Either option is just obviously, demonstrably better than Dell's little turd RIGHT THERE IN THE CELL PHONE STORE.
Dell took their eye off the ball and they think they can apply the lessons of commodity PCs to smartphones. Just like they did with MP3 players, they will find they're well out of their depth.
I think in the end this won't affect Android fragmentation by much for the simple reason that they're not going to sell many of them.
What do decisions and devices like this one do for the Andriod brand? not a lot of good I would immediately think. This is probably google's biggest problem.
Companies like Packard Bell and eMachines make nothing but low quality shitty Windows computers for decades and they didn't really damage the Windows brand. Not saying that Windows has a sparkling reputation mind you, but the things that have damaged their brand have been their own fault really. And in the end, everyone still ends up buying a Windows PC because they're everywhere, at every price point and every form factor.
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…
Google seem to be taking the opposite approach to solving this problem. Rumours are that the next major release is set to include significant UI enhancements.
If the UI is good enough, manufacturers won't bother rolling their own. Well that's the theory, but they still need to differentiate somehow...
This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. I don't like what Dell is doing but they are damaging their own brand more than they are damaging Android. But before we get too hung up on having the latest version of Android running on our phones, let us put things in perspective. I do care a lot about having the latest version of Android. But I'm like you guys, we're plugged in to the tech scene. We love…
Differentiation through user experience is becoming more and more important to success in the computer hardware business. Ten years ago, a computer was a computer. For mainstream buyers there was this thing called a Mac but only your brother's kid, who wanted to be a designer, used one and it seemed kind of expensive. Today, the tide is shifting and people expect more and more out of their bit crunchers, whether they…
Are you talking about subsidized price? I wouldn't talk about "buying" for $99 in that case, because there are strings attached. If not, please link to solid 2.x Android phones for $99, I could use one.
This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. I don't like what Dell is doing but they are damaging their own brand more than they are damaging Android. But before we get too hung up on having the latest version of Android running on our phones, let us put things in perspective. I do care a lot about having the latest version of Android. But I'm like you guys, we're plugged in to the tech scene. We love…
Huh? If Dell shipped a PC with an old version of Ubuntu, would anyone really have a problem getting up to date? If Dell hasn't added anything compelling to Android, what is stopping people from getting the latest vanilla version from someplace besides Dell?
I thought the openness and freedom from restrictions were supposed to be the strong points of Android. If you don't like one fork, can't you just load another?
Maybe I've missed something big. (I'm not an Android user and don't claim to be an expert) I am puzzled that a forum with so many developers has most acting like users are helpless in this matter. What's the dang deal??
Hopefully most phones aren't stale out of the box, but without updates all would become that way. Other than seeming old already, isn't the Dell really like the rest?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Differentiation through user experience is becoming more and more important to success in the computer hardware business. Ten years ago, a computer was a computer. For mainstream buyers there was this thing called a Mac but only your brother's kid, who wanted to be a designer, used one and it seemed kind of expensive. Today, the tide is shifting and people expect more and more out of their bit crunchers, whether they…
> $99 buys you a lot of phone these days Are you talking about subsidized price? I wouldn't talk about "buying" for $99 in that case, because there are strings attached. If not, please link to solid 2.x Android phones for $99, I could use one.