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

Updates to our Google Voice apps

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 364 posts

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#311

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

ramses0 wrote: post #276
em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This: "they release two products that should be one instead (Android & ChromeOS)"... I've been thinking the same exact thing. Google basically split the ecosystem in half...devs have to unnecessary build seperate apps for each (unless they are using a cross platform engine).

Not really... chromeos is the bare minimum linux environment to run a chrome browser on laptop hardware. Android is some frankenstein of java IDE to develop phone software. They might-should-be the same, but they're fundamentally very different roots.

I'm going to take a slightly controversial point of view and say: Android should have been ported to chromeos.

Newer phones should've shipped with the ping-pong update system, and the secure permissions system that permeates Linux.

Instead we're left with, what is really 75% a hack, Android. The update system sucks. The "recompiling" of app sucks. The permissions system sucks. The bloat really sucks. I am pretty sure my Nexus One was more responsive than my last Nexus phone, or any of the competition (which also, despite Google's best (awful) efforts have deviated in user experience greatly).

Google, once a golden god of the entire computer/software industry has fallen so far. It's really depressing. I wonder if it is even possible for a business to succeed the way Google used to and be profitable.

It's only a matter of time before someone eats their lunch, just the same as Microsoft. In 15 years $COMPANY will dominate and we'll be in the same spot.

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#312

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

rdnt01 wrote: post #300
ramses0 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really... chromeos is the bare minimum linux environment to run a chrome browser on laptop hardware. Android is some frankenstein of java IDE to develop phone software. They might-should-be the same, but they're fundamentally very different roots.

If chromeOS is the native eco, why is everyone talking about rolling chrome into Android and not the other way around?

Because Android is the big dog. Android can and very well may eat the world. It's a very easy distro to abuse.

Chromeos on the other hand is a very well-thought-out distro that is extremely simple and low-level, enough that it could easily form the basis of a great OS like Android

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#314

Post by dnr »

EvanDotPro wrote: post #295
dnr wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little strange to read accounts like this. I've been using Voice continuously for years now, and ported my old number into it. There were a few years when it kinda sucked (yes, I also lost group/mms messages with no warning), but since the integration with Hangouts (2014? 2015?), I've been quite happy with it again: group messages work, pictures in messages work, etc. Hangouts isn't perfect and still has lots…

I'm in a very similar situation, and overall have found GV to be a net positive despite the imperfections. The only additional caveat I've found is that the proper carrier-level call forwarding to GV voicemail doesn't work with the $30 T-Mobile plan.

Right, as far as I understand it, several features are unavailable on T-Mobile pre-paid plans, including proper call forwarding, some voicemail things, and their cheap international roaming. It doesn't really bother me since I only ever give out my GV number. The only calls I get to my "real" number are wrong-numbers.

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#315

Post by will_pseudonym »

fh973 wrote: post #161
nextos wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I can't understand how Google is so chaotic. Perhaps it's the organization, which looks more like a conglomerate than a cohesive corporation with a clear vision. They release products, only to abandon many of them without a clear reason (like Google Talk). Or they release two products that should be one instead (Android & ChromeOS, or Allo & Duo). The Google Talk fiasco got me particularly disenchanted. A be…

It's the promotion system. People are incentivized to work 2y on a project, launch, get promoted, move on. Coupled with no clear strategy other than "we need the next toothbrush" you get what you see.

"I think we could get them to brush their tongues."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brU_Pp-20g0

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#316

Post by spost »

tw04 wrote: post #283
djsumdog wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, sure not off direct licensing of the OS. But total revenues are $31 billion. That's a significant number on their balance sheet. http://www.androidauthority.com/how-does-google-make-money-f... The Pixel doesn't have an sdcard slot, which is a deal breaker for me. (I don't rent my music, so I have a 200GB micosd card with my collection on it). Even their 128GB model simply won't cut it.

You're now making a completely different argument. You started out claiming they intentionally break android to force you to upgrade every 2 years. Now you're pointing out they make a ton of money off android from revenues and search... which is exactly what I said. And not at all what you said. I'm not sure what to tell you on the sdcard slot or how it applies to the discussion. I simply said the Pixel is a clear ex…

> Of course, google will let you upload 50,000 songs for free over google music, so even that excuse doesn't hold water, but I'm sure you'll find another reason to complain.

I mean, not OP here, but my music library is ~140 GB, and I don't think it's unreasonable to want to have that available without internet access. I run with a 64gb iPhone, so I'm definitely not the guy arguing for massive SD cards on everything, but I don't think you can say it's totally ridiculous to have a use case for that much storage.

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#317

Post by deftturtle »

jitl wrote: post #14

I used to use my Google Voice number as my primary contact number, but when development of the product seemingly died for three years without addressing outstanding issues with group MMS or picture messages, I migrated back to my regular cell number. I've already told all my friends to forget my Google Voice number. I've changed my preferences in every service I use to contact my regular cell number. Now Google is so…

As far as I know, you can't call landlines with WhatsApp, iMessage, or FB Messenger. There's value in having a second number that is treated like a cell phone. I can register for accounts with it (Signal, Twitter, etc), and my real phone number stays private. During college, I gave out my GV number for privacy, but it didn't support MMS at the time. Couldn't get photos, and then they wanted me to use Hangouts & claimed voice would be phased out. It was a real bummer, and the Hangouts experience was strange, as mentioned elsewhere in the thread.

I'm glad this is being updated, because it provides value to me and definitely other people, too. If WhatsApp can connect you to landlines or function as an actual phone, then that's excellent news. Even so, I would still appreciate having more options.

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#318

Post by djsumdog »

jansenv wrote: post #288
djsumdog wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Hangouts app fixed the missing MMS/threading issues. So if we've switch from Voice to Hangouts ... do we have to switch back now? It's pretty confusing and there are so many services that won't take either of my Google Voice numbers.

Hangouts API is discontinuing, and the app is buggy as heck. We've already moved away from it and are experimenting with in-house solutions or looking for alternatives. Slack is too pricey, everything else seems shite.

You mean Google is discontinuing the API? (They had an API? They removed XMPP federation and eventually support, if that's what you mean).

The libpurple/Hangups projects for chat clients is the work of reverse engineering the existing Hangouts protocol (which apparently heavily relies on protocol buffers).

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#319

Post by detaro »

djsumdog wrote: post #318
jansenv wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hangouts API is discontinuing, and the app is buggy as heck. We've already moved away from it and are experimenting with in-house solutions or looking for alternatives. Slack is too pricey, everything else seems shite.

You mean Google is discontinuing the API? (They had an API? They removed XMPP federation and eventually support, if that's what you mean). The libpurple/Hangups projects for chat clients is the work of reverse engineering the existing Hangouts protocol (which apparently heavily relies on protocol buffers).

Yes, they had an API which could control and customize Hangouts https://developers.google.com/+/hangouts/

Re: Updates to our Google Voice apps

#320

Post by prostoalex »

nextos wrote: post #106
baggachipz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a die-hard Google user/fanboy until about a year and a half ago. I was a Fi user, Voice user (before Fi), Hangouts, Nexus buyer, you name it (I even had a Google TV and almost bought an OnHub). I bailed on it all when I realized that Google has absolutely no long-term vision or desire to support what they produce. I went to an iPhone and despite Apple's warts, it's a night-and-day experience. I'll never again t…

Frankly, I can't understand how Google is so chaotic. Perhaps it's the organization, which looks more like a conglomerate than a cohesive corporation with a clear vision. They release products, only to abandon many of them without a clear reason (like Google Talk). Or they release two products that should be one instead (Android & ChromeOS, or Allo & Duo). The Google Talk fiasco got me particularly disenchanted. A be…

That is the bane of a large company. A product that would've been successful user-count-wise and revenue-wise for a smallish startup starts looking like a failure when you operate in billions of users and tens of billions of revenue.

It's not that someone internally calls it out as a failure, but the constant pressure to compete for scarce resources (department budgets and developers in Google's case) encourages the internal politicking and resource wars. If YouTube or Search or Android is considered top priority at the moment, it's very unlikely some project like Google Voice or Google Talk have any kind of leverage in defending their budgets and/or teams.

Post reply on HN