>To the people talking about whiners, please chime in here. Dude, let it go.
On May 5, 1:52 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right. Google "won" that particular battle. > > To ConAim > > "Bring yourself back to reality man. Do you know why 99.9% of carrier > out there afraid to use Android OS? [yada yada]" > > Right. The phone companies want to charge as much as possible for as > long as possible. I get it. You like text messaging? Its a crappy > version of email, with archaic restrictions (160 chars). If you go > over some number, they charge for it. Verizon has all sorts of bad > limits and rules. Its crap. What's reality? The technology exists > for a pretty sweet network, yet we don't have it. I have that gripe > about a lot of the internet. Why do I have people I barely know > hitting me with movie trivia on Facebook but paying my bills is still > a haphazard, partially manual, error prone process? > > Don't look at the way things are now. Look where you want them to be. > To the people talking about whiners, please chime in here. > > You think things will be the same 10 years from now? I think you're > the one who needs to think about reality. > > > > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Anyway, I read somewhere on the news that Google lost their wireless > > > bid to ATT, Verizon ... I'm sure they was trying to get something > > > going ... > > > If you guys have some free time, look into it. > > > Their intention was not to win but to ensure that certain rules that > > would allow almost any device to run on that network would kick in if > > the bidding price got to a certain level. They raised the bidding > > price to the point that they wanted so that the new rules would kick > > in. After that they let the other guys outbid them. > > > On May 5, 11:46 am, ConAim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Sure, compare to Symbian then it's greater, I can see it as well, > > > since it's the worthiest one in the list ... lol > > > But guess what, they do have hardware to run on, don't they? > > > > ***** > > > Android will come out and be on a lot of phones. There> > will be a lot > > of innovation in that part of the phone world, which > > > > > will force the other guys to open up too. > > > > ****** > > > > Bring yourself back to reality man. Do you know why 99.9% of carrier > > > out there afraid to use Android OS? Yes, correct there is a bad side > > > of been "Open", I'm sure none of the carrier want their devices to be > > > a VoIP phone via WiFi. You have to know this is a mobile business not > > > an internet advertising business, and if you (the Google lovers) and > > > Google think that they can change the world, and then be it. > > > > Anyway, I read somewhere on the news that Google lost their wireless > > > bid to ATT, Verizon ... I'm sure they was trying to get something > > > going ... > > > If you guys have some free time, look into it. > > > > On May 5, 9:40 am, Eugene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Amen to that. > > > > > Whatever glitches and inconsistencies are out the in GUI, they most > > > > likely can be addressed within existing framework, which does seem > > > > quite flexible. > > > > > Android platform itself does seem quite bold and progressive in > > > > design. Smart application life-cycle management. Pushing some novel > > > > concepts to mainstream out of mostly research realms (e.g. Intents). > > > > Smooth integration for technologies that existed but were neglected > > > > (e.g. integrating geo/spatial data not as an afterthought). Dalvik > > > > does look like a better take on mobile Java than cvm/kvm. > > > > > It is very clear that a lot of effort by smart people went into > > > > designing that platform. People who think it's bad should go and try > > > > rewrite their submission for Symbian. > > > > > On May 4, 5:23 pm, "Kevin Galligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I'll respond to this. I think the platform itself is great. Here's > > why. > > > > > > - The iphone is polished, but Apple is like a totalitarian state. > > You > > > > > can do whatever you want, as long as Steve is OK with it. You want > > to > > > > > have an app on the iPhone? Better hope they like it. You also > > better > > > > > hope they don't decide to compete with you. Yank. Your app is out > > of > > > > > the store. Also, I believe you can't just give it away. YOu need to > > > > > charge, and they take a cut. You want to develope something open > > > > > source and give it out? Not happening (as far as I know. I could be > > > > > wrong). You want to write some in-house app for a business or > > > > > whatever? I don't think you can do that. The android platform is > > > > > nice in that it approaches the open source world, where the real > > > > > innovation happens. If the future of the internet and technology > > goes > > > > > down the apple route, we'll all be locked down again. That sucks. > > > > > > Plus, Objective C? Really? > > > > > > - So. Even if the platform is open, if it sucks, it sucks. Right? > > > > > Take a look around. JME is crap. Android is buggy, but that's > > > > > because its not release software yet. The look and feel is a little > > > > > rough, but I'd put a lot of money on that being well taken care of. > > > > > The difference betwen m3 and m5 were huge. To ding them a bit, the > > > > > docs for UI modification are terrible, and they didn't really finish > > > > > the refacing. Just try creating an app with the "Light" theme. > > > > > However, the UI is pretty good. Far better than JME. Not better > > than > > > > > the iPhone? OK. It'll be a lot better really soon. I do think > > > > > building UI's is pretty slow. There is no UI designer. True. I > > > > > would say a large percentage of UI design is done without a graphical > > > > > layout tool. As a career web guy, I'll tell you I never use a visual > > > > > tool. You know what's great about the open nature of the platform? > > > > > You can build that tool. If you did a decent job, I bet you'd get in > > > > > the top 50 for round 2. > > > > > > - "so much bug". Its not release level yet. Like all code, for all > > > > > time. Its got some bugs. > > > > > > - The emulator does take forever to start. Not sure why that is. > > > > > After its up, though, it runs pretty good. I have my asteroids clone > > > > > posted in one of the other forums. It runs fine. My app has > > > > > thousands of rows in the db, and its pretty responsive on the queries > > > > > and display. > > > > > > The summary. Android will come out and be on a lot of phones. There > > > > > will be a lot of innovation in that part of the phone world, which > > > > > will force the other guys to open up too. That's the beauty of this > > > > > particular chess move on Google's part. Android doesn't have to > > "take > > > > > over". It just has to open the door. IPhone is going to have a > > tough > > > > > time being a closed SDK platform when a major competitor isn't. > > > > > Right? Not sure if everybody remembers back when Apple had a large > > > > > part of the computing world and blew it by being closed off to > > outside > > > > > competition and innovation. Its the exact same thing they're doing > > > > > now.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Challenge" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
