
Facebook HQ Urges Employees to Ditch iPhone for Android - neya
http://mashable.com/2012/11/25/facebook-iphone-android/
======
timr
Ah, irony. It's more than a little amusing that the people _writing the
software_ need to be "encouraged" to use the platform that's more popular (by
shipments).

Even in the days of Mac-vs-Windows, it wasn't really true that developers
needed to be encouraged to write code for Windows. They migrated to the more
popular platform, because that's where the action was. But these days, the
action is in iOS, and Android is a clear second-tier player (amongst
developers). The fact that Android is shipping more units is almost
incidental.

In software, this pattern is historically kind of weird, but in consumer
products, it's par for the course -- new innovations come out in high-end
products, and eventually filter down to the masses. Perhaps this is a sign
that software is finally becoming a commodity industry.

~~~
mdasen
I think there are a few reasons for this.

First, there is the question of where Android's growth is. Apple is clearly
going for the $200 price point on-contract. Yes, they sell their old models,
but Android has a more diverse ecosystem. If we limited ourselves to
equivalents (the top of the line iPhone and the several top of the line
Android devices (Nexus 4, One X, GS III, etc.)) would there be so many more
Android shipments? So, Android's shipments might be coming more on the low-
end: the end that people like us don't purchase from as much.

Second, in the Mac vs. Windows era, there was a significant price disparity.
If you're in the market for a top-of-the-line smartphone on-contract today,
you're likely paying $200 for an Android phone or iPhone. Windows computers
always had a significant price discount over equivalent Macs.

Third, in the Mac vs. Windows era, Macs often were under-spec'd. While Apple
tried to make the best of the 603-G5 processors, Intel was just on a roll.
You'd pay more and end up with less muscle. Today, the iPhone's A6 matches the
quad-cores that Americans haven't been getting since LTE took precedence over
quad-core in the GS III generation.

Fourth, in the Mac vs. PC era, Macs were technologically inferior for many
years. I'm specifically talking about the Classic Mac OS. Mac OS 8/9 was
beautiful. Windows looked like it was designed in crayon by comparison (to
me). However, its cooperative multitasking was just sad. Windows 95 really
showed that OSs could be better (even if I thought that its UI was sub-par).
When OS X and Windows XP came out, OS X was dog-slow - slow to the point of
unusable. Apple really improved it and made it into the OS that many of us
(myself included) love today. However, I remember 2001 and how envious I was
of Windows users.

Fifth, in the Mac vs. PC era, Macs were app-poor. There was just a lot of
compelling stuff that you couldn't run as a Mac user. The move toward the web
changed a lot of that and left Apple with a great way back into the market.
With the iPhone, I find that the iPhone does a better job on web pages than
Android (note, I haven't used Android 4.1 and 4.2). Stats on web usage on
mobile phones seem to bear this out as iPhone web browsing tends to dominate
Android web browsing. Likewise, the iPhone at least matches Android on apps,
but I think it could be argued to be the primary platform for apps. So, there
isn't a penalty to using an iPhone in the way that there was a penalty to
using a Mac in the Mac vs. PC era.

Basically, the iPhone isn't more expensive at the top-of-the-line, the iPhone
has specs that no one would deny are top of the line, iOS isn't an inferior OS
(personal preference about certain features aside), and there isn't a penalty
to using iOS (if anything, it could be considered the first platform). None of
this is meant to say that the iPhone is better than an Android phone. I don't
care what you enjoy using. It's meant to demonstrate that iOS doesn't have the
same cost premium, that if we limit ourselves to the devices that people like
us buy the marketshare disparity might not be there, that even if iOS is a
minority platform it still gets as good attention or better from developers,
the specs are equivalent which they weren't in computers for a long time, and
iOS and Android are both great modern OSs. If you were an early adopter, iOS
came a couple years before Android.

In the Mac vs. PC era, Windows was more popular not just because popularity
breeds popularity. It was hugely cheaper, better spec'd, and a superior OS for
a good while. If you loved computing, Apple's tidyness might have been well
out-shadowed by Windows 95's multi-tasking, app availability, price, specs,
etc. If you like iOS, why choose an Android device as your next phone? No
reason really. Similarly, there aren't compelling reasons if you like Android
to buy an iPhone - Android phones today have high-res displays, are starting
to get serious on build quality, similar specs, etc. It wasn't hard to
convince a Mac user in 2000 to switch to Windows: you got a better OS, more
apps, a faster computer, for half the price. I could convince people to switch
to Windows with good, logical arguments that really rang true. Today, how
would you convince an iPhone user to switch to Android? I'm not saying Android
is bad, just that it's a lot harder to make that argument.

~~~
aetherson
I think there's another big reason: Facebook employees tended to be early
adopters, and bought into smartphone back when iOS really was clearly the
better platform. And then either got locked in to the ecosystem, developed
brand loyalty, chose the path of least resistance, or just didn't notice when
android became a worthy competitor. There are lots of good reasons to use an
iPhone now if your first iPhone was four years ago. Fewer if your first
smartphone is this year.

------
paulgb
The headline is misleading, they're encouraging more employees to use Android,
but not encouraging everyone to switch. I'm not sure if it has changed since
2010, but when I was with the company you could choose between iPhone or
BlackBerry as a company phone. The lack of Android choices was directly
responsible IMHO for the Android app sucking.

~~~
mememememememe
I think it was intentional. "Facebook urged its employees in August to switch
from iOS devices to Android so that flaws in the company’s mobile app could be
addressed more rapidly."

That statement was ironic. Satire, anyone? Maybe that's the reason why my FB
app on Android is getting better? LOL

Google Plus' iPad app sucks to the bottom...... now I wonder what's the
correlation...

------
jedberg
Part of the problem is that there isn't just one Android, there are many, and
they all behave just slightly differently. Testing on Android is a nightmare
because of this.

I wish Google would make some efforts at fixing this problem -- it's the same
problem Microsoft had with Windows. Windows on each piece of hardware was just
slightly different and made testing just as hard.

Google, please learn Microsoft's lesson and make this easier for developers.

~~~
w1ntermute
> Part of the problem is that there isn't just one Android, there are many,
> and they all behave just slightly differently. Testing on Android is a
> nightmare because of this.

In my experience, this issue is overblown, especially with Android 4.0+.
Unless you're developing a game, the hardware differences should not be a huge
concern. The Facebook app certainly shouldn't have problems because of this.

> I wish Google would make some efforts at fixing this problem

Google has and can have no control over how Android is implemented or updated
by various OEMs, particularly when carriers are dictating terms. And when
Google tries to go around the carriers, like they did with the Nexus 4, they
get crucified for the lack of LTE. Seems to me they're between a rock and a
hard place. Hopefully their plan to launch a wireless carrier with Dish
Network will pan out and things will get better.

~~~
dubcanada
> Android 4.0+

Not sure if you know this but most apps are games. So that's a bit funny to
say "this isn't an issue unless your making a game".

And I'm also not sure what you work on, but testing on an Android is a
nightmare. Most of the issues on apps for Android are (My XYZ phone the app
doesn't work). Just go through and read them, that's mostly what the issue is.

> Google has and can have no control over how Android is implemented or
> updated by various OEMs

Yes it does, it's Google's OS it has complete control over what people do with
it.

~~~
verganileonardo
Games compose the biggest category of apps, but represent only 20%~ of total
applications.

~~~
Karunamon
One fifth of all apps on the market is nothing to sneeze at.

------
sambeau
I'm sure Mike Matas and all the other rock star & ex-Apple designers they have
hired will be cock-a-hoop about that.

------
polskibus
Android will soon be the linux of the client-side world. Ubiquitous, cheap OS.
Facebook HQ wants to get into all Android devices, not just the mobile phones,
hence the push on their employees. "eat your own dog food" is a good strategy
for any software house.

------
ChuckMcM
Given that Microsoft investment in Facebook [1] I am a bit surprised there
isn't more interplay there. Seems WinPhone could use a killer Facebook app,
kind of a win/win for the investor.

[1] [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21458486/ns/business-
us_business...](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21458486/ns/business-
us_business/t/microsoft-invests-million-facebook/#.ULKUm4fAeQA)

~~~
NameNickHN
I don't think it would be wise for Microsoft to interfere with Facebook's day-
to-day activities and Microsoft probably knows this.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Can you say a bit more about that? I am interested in how Facebook creating a
killer product for one of their strategic investors can be construed as
'interference' ?

~~~
flyt
Facebook already integrates with Microsoft products: Bing is a search option
on their site, and all of their embedded maps (Events, etc) use Bing Maps.

On the MSFT side, Windows Phone has always included deep integration with
Facebook since the start, and their most recent acquisition, Skype, is the
provider of video chat for Facebook's in-browser client.

Both companies already integrate with each other in multiple areas, and
Facebook employees almost certainly aren't discouraged from using WP7/8 on
their personal devices. The market realities (low market share, existing
integration in the OS with no standalone, third party app to support) means
that there's no need to push this on employees over iOS/Android.

------
STRiDEX
FB has many employees that are not engineers! These are the people the posters
are targeting.

------
eshvk
Are they buying people Androids a la Google style?

------
jolohaga
Inferiority complex.

