Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday November 14 2017, @10:04AM   Printer-friendly
from the if-Google-won-did-we-the-people-lose? dept.

Android is 10 years old this week. In part one of a larger story, The Register looks at the beginnings of Android, including some early competition, and a brief comparison to Microsoft.

Google was in the game, at a time when others didn't realize what the game was. Or did, and couldn't turn the ship around fast enough. Android succeeded because it was just about good enough, and its parent was prepared to cross subsidize it hugely. Android wasn't brilliant, but it was better than Bada, and uglier than WebOS. Symbian simply wasn't competitive. If you were a Samsung or Sony or HTC, then Android gave you what you needed, it gave users a better experience. Developers were happy writing for a Java OS, it was a doddle after writing for WM and Symbian.

[...] Motorola also had a significant part to play in Android's success . . . as did Verizon. Carriers like Verizon had been snubbed by Apple's carrier exclusive strategy, and Verizon was badly burned by the BlackBerry Storm. It went all in.

[...] Android is far bigger and far more invasive than a PC could ever be. Google's dominance over our personal lives is far greater than Microsoft's ever was. The clunky laptop in the corner did not track your every movement or read your emails.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 14 2017, @04:04PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 14 2017, @04:04PM (#596841)

    Microsoft's biggest problem with mobile operating systems was that they kept launching them and abandoning them. If you were a Microsoft fanatic, you had PocketPC 2000 - which they dumped. Then you had Windows Mobile 5 or 6, and they dumped those too. Windows Phone 7 received heavy promotions and investment from Microsoft, and then Windows Phone 8 came out and yet again was incompatible.

    The ironic thing is that Microsoft was once the king of compatibility; in Windows they even maintained a list of quirks from earlier version of Windows to enable for specific programs so they continue to work. And I'd say this compatibility was one of the keys to their long-time success. You simply knew that if you got a new Windows, your old programs would continue working.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 2) by lentilla on Tuesday November 14 2017, @08:38PM

    by lentilla (1770) on Tuesday November 14 2017, @08:38PM (#596970)

    You simply knew that if you got a new Windows, your old programs would continue working.

    Well, sort-of continue working.

    Programs would work (or appear to work) well-enough that you could never conclusively prove what had gone wrong without first investing significant time into resolving the issue and then you were left with a sunk cost. And thus the cycle began all over again.