SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the avoided-Betteridge's-Law-of-Headlines dept.
I've been an Android user since Froyo, over several devices. I'm beginning to think that there must be a better way.
First, although I liked Android, especially the part that was Open Source, I'll suggest that the whole Android ecosystem represents a dead end.
At a minimum, it seems like madness to rely on two or more layers of outside partners to deliver software patches and updates. It's just not reasonable or safe for end users to wait for months or years until device makers and wireless carriers deliver patches from Google - if they ever do.
That there's no way a user can update their system without their cooperation is just not acceptable today.
Second, even if an update or patch does arrive, it brings with it the likelihood that some feature or application that you have been using will be hobbled, eliminated, or just plain be made unusable by Google. Services provided by Google are subject to changes that, depending on your circumstances, make them significantly less usable. (Gmail being a prime example) Standalone apps like Reader or MyTracks may just stop working one day if Google loses interest.
Finally, there's the Play store, and the millions of apps available to users. I think that most people would agree that trying to find a usable app for a specific purpose is an exercise in frustration.
[Continues...]
The current system pretty much requires you to guess on a search term to find an app, then wade through dozens or hundreds of possible results.
App ratings are filled with obvious astroturf, or one word disses - neither of these help you tell if an app actually works. Without someone actually moderating the ratings system it is pretty much of no value.
There's no practical way to tell if an app is a finished product, or an abandoned half-baked pastime. Our only option, even with paid apps, is to install it and find out if it works.
There is speculation that Google may be preparing to abandon Android, but will a new Google OS really be any better for end users?
The problem is that Android has more or less become the only game in town, so what alternative will we see emerge?
Obvious notes:
a) Cyanogenmod - been there, done that. Not a realistic option for the vast majority of end users. And honestly, I just don't have the time and inclination to root and install it these days.
b) iPhone - actually owned a Powerbook for three years as my primary machine. Gave it my best go, but just don't like the way Apple machines do things. YMMV.
c) BlackBerry - actually really loved the BlackBerry, except that it REALLY didn't play well with Google contacts, and they refuse to support either Linux, or individual end users.
c) Linux - yup. Guess I'm spoiled. Stuff generally doesn't break, and if I need a specific tool or function — someone, somewhere has almost always created it.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AndyTheAbsurd on Monday September 12 2016, @12:15PM
Finally, there's the Play store, and the millions of apps available to users. I think that most people would agree that trying to find a usable app for a specific purpose is an exercise in frustration.
The current system pretty much requires you to guess on a search term to find an app, then wade through dozens or hundreds of possible results.
This problem, at least, is not unique to Android - it's exactly the experience that someone new to ANY operating system will have searching for any sort of software that's not bundled with the OS. (And bundling software with the OS leads to the same kind of crap we saw with IE in the late 1990s.)
I "like" Android mostly in that I dislike it less than I dislike Apple products (and their ridiculous locked-down-ness and even more ridiculous prices).
Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Monday September 12 2016, @07:31PM
I "like" Android mostly in that I dislike it less than I dislike Apple products (and their ridiculous locked-down-ness and even more ridiculous prices).
It's not just that: Apple products are *objectively* inferior. The new iPhone 7 still comes with a crappy LCD screen, for instance, rather than the brighter and more vivid and more power-efficient SuperAMOLED screens that Samsung phones have had for years. And the screen size is smaller, and the resolution is FAR lower on the iPhone 7 than on the Galaxy S7 (its direct competitor). The Samsung also has a smaller bezel (meaning the ratio of the phone size to the screen size is lower for Samsung than for Apple: less wasted space). Add to that the lack of a user-replaceable battery, inferior waterproofing, and lack of a standardized power jack (so you can't use your friend's microUSB cable to recharge), and the Apple phone is worse in every way, and a LOT more expensive to boot.
The only thing the Apple is better at is being thin, which is a pretty stupid metric; everyone these days keeps their phone in some kind of case anyway, and thinner phones are more easily damaged by twisting.
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Tuesday September 13 2016, @07:21AM
Apple's lighting connector is objectively better than mictoUSB on all dimensions expext ubiquity/openness. On all devices I've seen (in my possession or other people's/company's) microUSB has a short halflife followed by an interminable amount of "hold it perfectly" time. The 30-pin and lightning connectors from Apple sumpoly don't have that.
I like a bezel, but that's certainly an artistic decision. The dumb curved edge is retarded.
I agree on the amoled screens as a tech, but low resolution is a feature. There's no point on burning processing power rendering pixels I can only see if I hold the device up to my eyes.
As for the removable battery, I totally think that's a great feature. Of course. Galaxy S7 batteries explode, which is even worse than being non removable.
(Score: 2) by joshuajon on Tuesday September 13 2016, @03:37PM
Good thing USB-C is replacing MicroUSB which is better than either that, or Lightning.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday September 13 2016, @04:25PM
No, the lightning connector is objectively inferior because of ubiquity and openness. Those two things completely trump every other consideration. It's like having a car that seems great, except you can only drive it on a few particular roads that aren't usefully located for you, and it costs $10M. I don't care how great the connector supposedly is, if the cable for one costs $30, I'm not going to buy it, no matter what. I can get microUSB cables on Amazon for next to nothing. And I don't have big problems with those, except on really really cheap cables (the Aukey cables seem to work really well for me, and a 5-pack of them costs about $10). And finally, as the other poster noted, we're now moving to USB-c which is still open and better than Lightning.
The bezel isn't an "artistic decision". Maybe I wasn't clear: the Samsung makes more efficient use of space. That's objective, not artistic or subjective. The screen on the S7 is larger, but the overall size of the phone is only slightly larger, than the iPhone7. Why would I want a phone that's only barely smaller in physical dimensions, but has a significantly smaller screen? If it was an artistic decision to make it that way, then they were stupid.
Low resolution is a "feature"? That's some serious Apple Kool-Aid there. From everything I've read, the S7's battery life is at least as good. If you were really saving battery life with a lower-resolution screen, then that would be a good argument, but I have not seen any such evidence. Aside from this, there's nothing stopping Apple from adopting a lower-resolution SuperAMOLED display if they really wanted. The screens in the S4 and S5 had this technology and were fantastic, but likely had lower resolution than the newest versions.
As for exploding batteries, I haven't heard that at all. The new Galaxy Note 7 has exploding batteries, so definitely avoid those. I did see some links about the S7 Edge having problems too. Here's a link [pocket-lint.com] that shows the 3 devices side-by-side. The Note7 is a huge device, really a "phablet". The Edge is also quite large. The S7 is the smallest, and is a more traditional slate-type smartphone, and is the one which directly competes with the iPhone7. I didn't see anything in a quick Google search about the S7 batteries exploding. The Note7 is not a competitor to the iPhone 7; AFAIK, Apple doesn't make any phablets.
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Wednesday September 14 2016, @05:58AM
Lightning is better than USB because its a solid core in a slot. YOu can swing the phone by the cord and it won't disconnect. It's also why I like 3.5mm headphone/line plugs. USB have thing pieces in the middle of the connector that break off. It's not that the cables go bad, it's the connectors on the devices. miniUSB was fine, it was pretty secure because its center piece had enough thickness for structural stability. microUSB has too many thin parts that break. And USB-C is based on microUSB, so I assume will have the same issues.. You're right that open is good. And ubiquitous is good. But Apple is big enough that any adapter they choose is/becomes ubiquitous. I do wish they would open it up. But anyone can make the vable. And a cable is a cable. They're the same price as USB cables (cheaper if you factor in lifetime)
It most certainly is, or at least a matter of taste. I like a large bezel. When the screen goes to (or wraps around) the edge, it feels worse to me. I understand that the tradeoff is either a bigger phone or a smaller screen. Frankly, since I like a big phone, adding a bezel around a screen not a cost for me. What I hear is "the battery will be larger and the phone bigger, also the phone less ugly." What you hear is "the screen will be smaller". I have a hard time thinking your point of view is correct, but it could be.
Once I can no longer see the pixels, yes. More pixels incur more cost, and unless you're strapping it to your head as a cheap VR solution (and probably even then) the iPhones already have a pixel density that may as well be infinite for all the extra resolution you can perceive..
The cost isn't entirely financial/battery. There is a limited amount of GPU cycles. Producing more pixels lowers the average number of cycels per pixel. This can mean worse graphics per pixel (or lower framerate). Sometimes, it's clearly worth that to up the resolution. But I would argue that improving beyond the iPhone is most certainly not
Again, I would want AMOLED screens.
Maybe I was wrong about which model. Certainly, I bucket (esp. for this conversation) Samsung built Android devices and Apple built iOS devices. I don't really care which one we're talking about, because we're talking about design philosophies. But I will say when a line has issues, it casts a pall over the whole similar product lines - esp. unless it can be shown why those phones won't suffer the same fate.
Random aside, of the devices I have used today, there have been an equal number of iOS/Android/Windows/Other machines (discounting work machines). I'm not in love with Apple. I always assumed I would like an open-source solution. But I'm constantly disappointed with Android devices.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Tuesday September 13 2016, @01:17AM
The biggest problem I have with Google Play Store is that recently virtually all apps in it require access to my phone's images, camera, and contacts. Even when there is no reason other than data-mining for the requirement in order for the apps to work.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Tuesday September 13 2016, @05:57PM
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday September 14 2016, @12:37AM
Yeah...that's great, but my old phone is still on 4.4.2. If/when it breaks I'll get a new one with the latest version. Unless someone comes out with an open OS phone. ;-)
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--