

iPhone 4 Is Nice, But It's Not Enough to Slow Android - instcode
http://blog.louisgray.com/2010/06/iphone-4-is-nice-but-its-not-enough-to.html

======
gmlk
Why is it so hard to understand?

Apple's objective isn't to become the largest. Apple does not see this as a
winner-take-all platform war. Apple's core values are all about it's ability
to change things, it's ability to think different, it's ability to move
forward without obstacles.

Apple wants to make, and sell, the best and most beautiful devices they can
imagine. For that they don't need to "own the market", their platform doesn't
even need to "win". Whenever Apple thought that their platform was limiting
their ability to innovate they have dumped the platform and build a better
one. That's the kind of business Apple is.

Apple doesn't compete with Nokia for the €40 phone market, Nokia does a great
job already in that market. Apple is competing in the high-end smart phone
market and only in this small market does it want to "win" in any sense.

Apple sometimes finds itself in a situation where there is not competition,
that's fine too. Just don't expect Apple to make something cheap for the
lower-end of the market. More often then not, someone else will fill that
niche soon enough.

Apple only needs two things: (one) An open market of multiple competing
platforms with shared open standards and protocols so that devices can work
together. (two) Something special to differentiate itself by, often a level of
quality and total integration, the realization of a coherent idea.

About the only thing Apple can't accept is a market where someone else
controls an essential part of the market, may it be either some piece of
hardware, or software, a protocol, or even the structure of the market itself.

To have someone else control the market would mean that someone else controls
the speed of change. It would severely limit Apple's ability to innovate. And
it's ability to innovate is the heart and soul of Apple.

~~~
Lewisham
I think the thing you are missing is not that Apple are happy or contented
with low market share/high profit margins (which they are), but usually that
they achieve that by succeeding in customer satisfaction.

In the US (not everywhere), they aren't hitting that note because they
continue to be weighed down by AT&T. All those awesome features don't mean
anything if you spend all your time bitching to your friends about dropped
calls (which is all I hear from my non-techie friends here).

AT&T were shamed at the last WWDC over tethering and such, and they've been
shamed again over new price plans which aren't necessarily consumer friendly,
over continued awful service, over what Jobs himself said was "things have to
get worse to get better... which means things will get really great soon." It
used to be that Jobs would cancel a supplier to spite anyone who dared
accidentally unveil a release before Apple did, and now it's a company that
will let its brand get tarnished by having consumers kicked in the balls for
five years straight.

Apple's exclusivity deal is anything but friendly to their customer base, and
that is the key difference between the Apple of old and the Apple of new.
People are upset not because the iPhone isn't great, but because Apple are
acting like pricks, like they have done with Google and Google Voice, like
they have with other App Store rejections (I find the "replicating iPhone
features" particularly rich in comparison with all the spam apps on the App
Store), like they have done about saying nothing to the consumer about why
AT&T is sucking and why Apple appear to be doing nothing about it.

The Apple of old wouldn't have hamstrung their customers the same way Apple is
now doing. Putting the user first was their mission. In the US, on the iPhone
(less so the iPad), that is starkly not the case.

~~~
gmlk
You are correct, I think. I'm not in the USA, I'm in europe? AT&T wows isn't
an issue over here, though there are problems here as well, take T-mobile in
the Netherlands.

I do think however that if Apple thought that there was a viable superior
alternative then they would have taken it, which they have done in a few
countries, I believe? Any operator would have difficulty supporting the
iPhone, that's the whole point: The iPhone changes the game.

Maybe more competition would have been better? But then again, it might not.
Data infrastructure is weird: The network is most valuable if it's cheap and
stupid, all the value is added at its edges. <http://www.worldofends.com/>
This however means, as Davis Isenberg and others already understood many years
ago, that the best network is the worst to make profitable. I would not want
to be AT&T.

------
hinting
How does this stuff get to the top of list? It's 700+ words that ignores
basically anything shown today by Apple and instead says only "AT&T sucks!"

More generally, flamebait articles that paint this as the great Android vs
Apple war are maddening. They are pieces of software, not wrestlers. One does
not have to fail for the other to succeed.

~~~
tomerico
People may have strong feelings on the subject (iPhone vs Android). This may
lead to upvoting based on title instead of content.

When this happens, I usually flag the article.

~~~
louismg
This happens on practically all social networks. Had I been told in advance
that it would be submitted for a Hacker News crowd, I would have made some
changes. :)

------
credo
imo the "Code for Android first, and iPhone/iPad second" suggestion to "Apple
developers" has very little merit for most Apple developers

For developers, it will make more sense to distinguish between
ideology/opinions of bloggers and cold market realities.

For starters, revenue returns of Android apps are generally a small fraction
of revenue returns for identical iPhone apps in spite of the fact that iPhone
owners have a lot more apps to choose from. For another, the Android
fragmentation problem makes life even more difficult for developers. As an
example, when Twitter released their official Android Twitter app, only 27.3%
of Android owners could even consider downloading it. The app wouldn't run on
82.7 of devices because of the fragmentation problem.

Now it does make sense for some apps to be released only on Android. For
instance, if you think that your app may be rejected by Apple, it will make
more sense to just create an Android app. If you're not comfortable with
Objective-C, it makes sense to go with Android because Android apps are a lot
easier to develop.

Btw If first-mover advantage is really the goal, Windows Phone 7 will be a
much better option. However, many Android enthusiasts don't like Microsoft. So
I suspect that they won't concede this as a great reason for Android
developers to do Windows Phone 7 development first and the do Android second
:)

~~~
pyre
> _As an example, when Twitter released their official Android Twitter app,
> only 27.3% of Android owners could even consider downloading it. The app
> wouldn't run on 82.7 of devices because of the fragmentation problem._

Hopefully Twitter will get motivated enough to support Android 110%!

~~~
SkyMarshal
Hopefully Google and the Android kit makers will get motivated enough to
standardize Android a bit more, enough to at least provide platform
consistency across brand implementations.

Also, hopefully they do it in collaboration with the hardware manufacturers,
instead of in spite of them.

~~~
dagw
I doubt it will happen. One of Android's big selling points for phone
manufacturers was that they could use Android as a free and solid base to add
their own unique additions to. There really is little interest from them to
make Android phones generic and interchangeable. If the platforms are too
consistent then there is no reason people won't replace their Samsung Android
phone with an HTC Android phone next time they upgrade, and Samsung certainly
doesn't want that.

~~~
SkyMarshal
All true, but it's also true that it's ultimately in all their best interests
to build a strong app ecosystem for the platform as a necessary but not
sufficient requisite for competing with Apple.

The individual hardware makers may not think that way, but Google certainly
should be, and is in a position to frame that problem and take the lead in
solving it.

------
Osiris
I think it's great that Apple puts so much effort into usability and
aesthetics. They put a lot of polish onto their devices and apps that put
almost everyone else to shame.

It's true that the iPhone was a game changer. It's not surprising to see other
companies stepping up to the challenge.

As an Android user (myTouch, 128MB RAM sucks), I often wish for the polish of
the iPhone and for access to some much better apps, but in the end I can do
things that the iPhone could never do.

I can tether via USB or WiFi, install apps from websites without using the
Market and use free turn-by-turn navigation all while while taking a phone
call. With Android I feel like I have freedom to do what I want with my
pocket-sided computer without being treated like a baby and told what I can
and cannot do with my own personal computing device. I have the freedom to
choose phones with keyboards or without, with more RAM or less, from any
carrier that I want. For me, that freedom is worth a lot.

I think the iPhone 4 is a great device from what I can see and certainly
outshines most Android phones, but not by as much as the iPhone outshined
BlackBerry at the time. If Google can take time for the next OS to work on the
polish, I think they have a chance to really be a solid competitor. Heck, the
Droid outsold the iPhone 3G in the first 30 days of sales. That says
something.

~~~
masklinn
> I can tether via USB or WiFi

USB and Bluetooth tethering available on the iPhone

> install apps from websites without using the Market

True.

> and use free turn-by-turn navigation all while while taking a phone call

Always been available on the iPhone, you can do whatever you want while taking
a call. With iOS 4, users will be able to do even more.

> With Android I feel like I have freedom to do what I want

Yeah especially when you don't know what you can do on an iPhone, I find that
interesting.

~~~
vetinari
> Always been available on the iPhone, you can do whatever you want while
> taking a call. With iOS 4, users will be able to do even more.

"Taking a call" is an example, an placeholder for X. You can say "use free
turn-by-turn navigation all while chatting through Talk" or "use free turn-by-
turn navigation all while tracking my progress using My Tracks" or "use free
turn-by-turn navigation all while staring at Google Sky". The X is anything,
not just specific vendor supplied apps (or in OS4, vendor approved
activities).

~~~
masklinn
> "Taking a call" is an example, an placeholder for X.

Then it's a stupid example, because it's not a placeholder. It's a very
specific action and one important for a phone. Important enough that it's
always been possible to take a call while doing something else on an iphone.

------
brc
There's a massive market of people out there whose iPhones will never talk to
AT&T ; the rest of the world. I think drilling down on the US carrier is a bit
shortsighted in a proper review.

~~~
louismg
There are many sites that cover gadgets and their global hit. What I was doing
here was talking about my own personal experience, which I believe is fair.
Not everyone shares the same experience, and there are many outlets to share
those viewpoints. But here in the US, AT&T is a major problem, and it has been
such a bad problem, it has contributed greatly to my looking for an
alternative.

------
bdr
I'd rather have speed and battery life than tethering. If "speed and battery
life measures are subjective" is all you have to say, that sounds like
intentional ignorance.

~~~
lpolovets
Fully agree that both sides of the coin are important. However, of the
following potential developments:

1) New Android phones become much faster and/or have longer battery lives 2)
New iPhones become much more open and less locked-down

I think #1 is much more likely.

~~~
louismg
Agreed on this comment 100%.

I think Android is going to have more handsets, manufacturers, carriers, and
eventually users. Their products are going to continually improve. The recent
past has shown momentum on the innovation side that is lapping iPhone, I
believe. I don't think iPhone is going to open up at quite a rate.

~~~
bruceboughton
Everyone seems to think that Android will eventually dominate the market
because "the products are going to continually improve". Guess what, so is
iPhone. Apple have made it clear that this is their primary business. They're
in it to win it. This is not Google's primary business--it is a loss leader to
support that business. I think it's far from inevitable that Android will win
out (pettiness of the Apple vs. Google battle aside).

~~~
louismg
I look forward to iPhone getting better. I understand your viewpoints as well.
I hope the original article did not sound petty. That was not the intent.

------
dieterrams
How knee-deep in a silly Android vs iPhone fanboy war do you have to be to
write a long post addressing the supposed presumption that iPhone 4 was going
to slow Android down? What sensible person is even constructing thoughts along
these lines?

Many kinds of critiques, positive and negative, of both platforms are welcome.
But this sort of fanboy service horse race punditry is not.

At this stage, the smartphone market is not a zero sum game. Nobody has to
slow anybody down. Stop polarizing this space.

~~~
swannodette
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. I've noticed that the Hacker News
trolls really come out of the woodwork on Apple related submissions: in terms
of the submission, senseless upvoting/downvoting and gradeschool level
utterances. I suppose the general quality of the thoughtful
submission/discussion on HN has to be offset by _something_.

~~~
louismg
I don't even see the option to downvote. Maybe I have to be more of a vet to
get that privilege. I appreciate all discussion here, especially that which
challenges my assumptions.

~~~
runevault
Downvote requires ~200 karma, or did when I got it a month or so ago.

------
Tycho
I think it's important not to forget the iPod effect... ie. people saw other
folk with a shiny new iPod, coveted it, then bought one without seriously
considering the many other equally-capable alternatives (although arguably the
iPod was always technically the best available).

The iPhone was originally so ahead of the competition (well, so was the iPod I
guess) that its features were the 'wow' factor. It was a sleek, well designed
object but I think its functionality overshadowed its beauty. Now that other
phones have similar features, the time is right for Apple to revamp the design
for aesthetic/form-factor reasons. Think about it: lots of people on the
subway with these gorgeous, scratch-proof, slightly retro-looking, ultra-crisp
smartphones shimmering beneath layers of glass on both sides, vs. a whole
motley crew of less beautiful Android models rarely seen together. Which phone
will people _want_?

Also: they compared the new glass to sapphire crystal, which in my experience
NEVER gets scratches (its on my wrist watch cover). Does anyone know enough
about the hardness of this material Apple are using to assert how scratch-
resistant they'll really be?

~~~
gmlk
It's aluminosilicate glass or Al₂SiO₅ with a hardness of about 7 (Mohs scale)
at best.

Sapphire crystal is Al₂O₃, which has a hardness of 9. So it's hard, but not
that hard.

------
Xixi
To summarize: AT&T sucks. Well, the good news is that a majority of iPhone
users are not using AT&T.

Anyway, if I were to develop mobile apps instead of web apps, I would still go
with iPhone first : much less splintering. But maybe I'm overestimating this
issue ?

------
jsz0
Apple is focusing on the things they think are most important for their
customers. Wireless tethering via SmartPhone is a new feature for people so
the demand is pretty low right now. It's not clear that it's the ideal way to
deliver tethering due to the battery overhead. If you start with 5-6 hours of
continuos 3G usage adding wireless tethering is going to bring you down to the
<4 hour mark. That badly breaks the sunrise-to-sunset usage most people
demand. I think we'll continue to see standalone mifi style devices with their
own battery be a preferred solution.

~~~
masklinn
> Wireless tethering via SmartPhone is a new feature for people so the demand
> is pretty low right now

it's also something the iPhone has had since iPhoneOS 3.0 a year ago, via
bluetooth...

------
rebelvc
Why Verizon Don't Have the iPhone:
[http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/28/technology/verizon_iphone/in...](http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/28/technology/verizon_iphone/index.htm)

New standards are coming in next year. Makes little sense for Apple to make a
CDMA phone now.

~~~
chrisbolt
It's not like they can sell a Verizon iPhone without CDMA right after Verizon
launches a 4G network. Without backwards compatibility there would be no
coverage, it would be worse than AT&T.

------
vijaydev
Liked the finishing touch: "A smartphone can't be smart if it's married to a
company as dumb as AT&T."

~~~
alttab
Things like "making phone calls" and "sending text messages" is nearly
impossible in the Austin area.

AT&T tells me its the phone. I go to New York City, it works fine. I guess
they actually have a good network there. Go figure.

Apple tells me its the network, and I actually believe them. AT&T - if you are
reading this - I'm not going to give you my money after you've hiked up your
early cancellation fees, but you bet your ass me and everyone in my family
will be on a different carrier in less than 2 years.

You guys must forget that families listen to their "computer guy" family
members. Losing votes like mine is more akin to losing 10. Remember that.

------
10ren
Do android phones have multi-touch, or do apple patents prevent this?

I'm working on UI trees that can be rearranged with the mouse. It works OK,
though a little awkward. I think with a touch screen, it would be incredibly
intutive - like rearranging physical blocks.

~~~
louismg
Android did not initially support multi-touch. It does now.

~~~
10ren
thanks

------
ugh
AT&T matters only in the US.

------
draper
Android is the Windows of Mobile. ugly, cheap and clunky.

~~~
louismg
I would argue Windows Mobile is the Windows of Mobile.

~~~
hboon
That's giving Windows Mobile too much credibility.

~~~
bobbyi
Blackberry is actually the Windows of mobile

~~~
louismg
Now now, BlackBerry is actually pretty good at e-mail. That's something.

~~~
bruceboughton
For a device designed almost exclusively for email, I'd say BlackBerry is
astoundingly poor at email.

