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

Dell's Aero Smartphone: An Embarrassment to Android

pcworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

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

#51

Post by runjake »

dannyr wrote: post #21

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…

| But for the rest of the country, a survey of my friends suggest that most of them do not care.

They're going to care when they find out that the latest, greatest apps spammed in Android commercials don't run on their old versions of Android.

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

#52

Post by eli »

natrius wrote: post #10
eli wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telling people what hardware they can and cannot use to run your code isn't very Open.

Sure it is. You restrict the use of your brand to people who meet your restrictions, à la Firefox. Everyone else can still use the code, just not the brand.

Isn't that what they already do with the "with Google" branding and their proprietary apps? I guess they just need to wield that club a bit more aggressively.

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

#53

Post by evilduck »

michael_h wrote: post #50
flatulent1 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. 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.…

I'm not 100% sure about the dell phone, but with a few of the android phones that I've been looking at, the OS image needs to be signed. So, to upgrade your samsung galaxy s to 2.2, you need to wait for samsung to release their version of 2.2. When they decide to stop releasing updates for your model, you're out of luck (jail-breaking aside). I really, really wish it were as easy as downloading an update from android…

Or in the case of my Samsung Moment, the Radio Interface Layer is flaky and will cause random data lockups. Samsung officially stopped updating the phone back around May (yay, 8 months of support from release date!), so even if I could continue upgrading my OS without their help, nobody will ever fix the hardware driver, it will always randomly lock up.

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

#54

Post by theBobMcCormick »

thehigherlife wrote: post #49
theBobMcCormick wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, their biggest problem is having so many countries you can't buy apps in yet. I don't this does more than minor damage to the Android brand. 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 the…

Windows and Android are not the same platform and buying a computer is a difference experience than buying a mobile phone. Even if I give you that they are the same, The eMachines and Packard Bell still looked and felt the same (from an OS perspective), you could blame the performance on the crappy PC, not the software running on it.

In the Windows 3.0 and 3.1 days, they didn't. Almost all the PC manufacturers used to include extensively customized desktop UI's. And man were they awful.

Edit: Here's a link to screenshots for the custom UI shell that Packard Bell used to ship with Win3.1 and Win95. Prepare for the horror! :-) http://toastytech.com/guis/pbnav35.html

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

#55

Post by protomyth »

bmelton wrote: post #29
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…

As I understand, I don't think Google particularly cares if someone replaces their device with an iPhone -- the last I heard from Google on the subject was (paraphrasing) 'any phone with mobile web and applications is good for us', the premise being that any device capable of visiting Google's web services was all that they wanted out of consumers, so that we could keep consuming their services and being served their…

If a customer spends 90% of their time in service specific apps and iAds are the preferred ad platform for free apps, then Google is losing a chunk of their revenue stream. Heck, if a person buys the apps without advertising that further eats into revenue.

I get the feeling "there is an app for that" means that people have internalized getting an app instead of using the web for services where an app is available.

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

#56

Post by protomyth »

S_A_P wrote: post #31

I think what this really says is that Dell is happy to release average, "me too" type products that really add no value to the market segment. 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.

Dell has a big enterprise sales force. How long before they start pushing some "all-in-one" purchases that bring this phone (or the next version) to the enterprise?

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

#57

Post by brianobush »

I am still running android 1.5 on my phone (the Cliq) - since T-mobile and motorola are a bit slow to update their older platforms. However, it still does what I need - browsing, email, calling. Bleeding edge usually add much more functionality, though I would sure like to try out the new voice activation features in 2.2

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

#58

Post by nl »

michael_h wrote: post #50
flatulent1 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This comes with the territory of having an open-source OS. 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.…

I'm not 100% sure about the dell phone, but with a few of the android phones that I've been looking at, the OS image needs to be signed. So, to upgrade your samsung galaxy s to 2.2, you need to wait for samsung to release their version of 2.2. When they decide to stop releasing updates for your model, you're out of luck (jail-breaking aside). I really, really wish it were as easy as downloading an update from android…

I'm not sure what you mean by the OS image needs to be signed, but it's not true in the sense people usually mean when they talk about signed code.

Most Android phones have the bootloader locked down, but that is different to requiring signed code.

You can run 2.2 on the Samsung Galaxy S now (eg, http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/cyanogenmod-6-0, and I think there are pre-release official Samsung versions around too). You do need to root it, but on the Galaxy S that's a one-click process.

(Sorry if you knew this - it's not clear if your jail-breaking aside comment applied to the updates for phones or the upgrade)

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

#59

Post by mike-cardwell »

jsz0 wrote: post #24
dannyr wrote: post #21

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…

If they were shipping 1.6 or 2.0 I might agree but 1.5 has a ton of compatibility problems these days. You can't even run Google Navigation on it. That's something the average user might notice.

My G1 is running 1.6. I thought this excluded me from getting Google Navigation, so was intending to upgrade at the end of my contract. But then one day I got an update and navigation came with it.

I'm not entirely sure why I would upgrade now? I don't want to sign up for another 18 month contract if all I'm going to get for it is Flash, voice recognition and a shinier interface. So I've gone PAYG and saved myself about £30/month.

When the next useful feature comes along which doesn't work on 1.6, then I'll upgrade. Or if an Android phone is released with considerably improved battery life.

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

#60

Post by follower »

nl wrote: post #58
michael_h wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not 100% sure about the dell phone, but with a few of the android phones that I've been looking at, the OS image needs to be signed. So, to upgrade your samsung galaxy s to 2.2, you need to wait for samsung to release their version of 2.2. When they decide to stop releasing updates for your model, you're out of luck (jail-breaking aside). I really, really wish it were as easy as downloading an update from android…

I'm not sure what you mean by the OS image needs to be signed , but it's not true in the sense people usually mean when they talk about signed code. Most Android phones have the bootloader locked down, but that is different to requiring signed code. You can run 2.2 on the Samsung Galaxy S now (eg, http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/cyanogenmod-6-0 , and I think there are pre-release official Samsung versions around too)…

> You do need to root it, but on the Galaxy S that's a one-click process.

Does it void your warranty like it does on the Nexus One?

Post reply on HN