Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 143

Thread: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

  1. #81
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In alt.cellular.attws nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
    >
    > speaking of which, there's no flash on windows phone 7 either.
    > microsoft has their own clone called silverlight, even more proprietary
    > than what adobe is doing. where's the bitching about that?
    >


    FYI ... Silverlight is DEFINITELY NO CLONE of Flash in either function or
    implementation.

    >
    > based on what? that's quite an assumption. they're not being bought by
    > exclusively apple fanatics, you know.


    I bought two iPod Touch devices [sold the first one to upgrade to the second
    one] and I DO WANT FLASH. I wouldn't mind Silverlight either as far as that
    goes, but isn't that widespread [yet].

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse

    Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.

  2. #82
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In alt.cellular.attws Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
    >
    > Please review what you wrote. In no way does it logically follow the
    > post you replied to.
    >
    > My question stands: What could possibly justify very, very few 3 year
    > old i* devices being still in use? If true, that's not good for
    > anyone, including Apple.
    >


    It's good if people are buying from the iTunes store. It is good if people
    are getting attached to the Apple branded products and will buy future
    products. It is good, because they maintain marketshare (due to the owners of
    these devices not buying from a competitor). Do you need more reasons why it
    is good for Apple? True, ideally, they would love for you to upgrade, but
    also ideally, they want you to keep the Apple device you upgraded from in
    service either personally or with somebody else.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse

    Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.

  3. #83
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm1dg$i1d$4@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > > 30-40% is not what i'd call 'ubiquitous'.

    >
    > Is that weighted by popularity if the sites? There are millions of small
    > flat sites out there that are blogs etc. that skew those numbers.


    it doesn't skew the numbers. if there are millions of small sites
    without flash, they count too. what makes you think an iphone user
    won't visit any of them?

    > I don't want native app games, I want the flash games that will never
    > be ported to native apps.


    such as? and how do you know they won't ever be ported? and what makes
    you think they'll work well on a touch device when they're designed for
    a mouse/keyboard and larger screen?

    > I want to be able to use restaurant websites that are flash based
    > Hint: That's a lot of sites.


    actually it isn't, and the number is dropping.

    > >> And many more than "a lot" don't. What's your point?

    > >
    > > that not everyone wants flash.

    >
    > Or people use those blockers to block the unwanted flash


    if people block it, they don't want it.

    > > because having to toggle flash on/off all the time is a royal pain.

    >
    > No, it's not. The Firefox flashblock extension shows a little play button
    > where the flash is embedded, when you want to run that item just hit play


    that's not part of flash. that's yet *another* piece.

  4. #84
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm118$i1d$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > > right. android 2.2 is going to be vapor for a lot longer and for a lot
    > > more users than iphone os 4.

    >
    > 2.2 has been released to end users, it's not vaporware. I know it's hard
    > to understand simple concepts like that, but it's a fact.


    except, it isn't a fact.

    the simple concept, is that so far, it's only available for the nexus
    one, a phone that sold in very small numbers, and that's via manual
    update. it's not available yet for the motorola droid, htc evo (the
    phone google gave out), droid incredible and other android phones. it
    won't be available for a lot of android phones including ones still
    being sold new, today.

    <http://www.pcworld.com/article/19699...droid_line_up_
    for_android_22_update.html>

    Motorola Droid users should get treated to Android 2.2 "in the near
    future" as well...

    The HTC Desire, Droid Incredible and EVO 4G are set to go Android 2.2
    "in the second half of the year...

    <http://android-developers.blogspot.c...-and-developer
    s-goodies.html>

    Developers can now download the Android 2.2 SDK and Android NDK,
    Revision 4 from the Android developer site.

    As I said at the beginning, Android 2.2 will be here soon, and some
    devices will get the update in the coming weeks.

    developer sdk (sounds familiar), 'soon' and 'coming weeks' = not
    released yet.

    in a couple of weeks, iphone os 4 will be out, while android 2.2 will
    still be 'soon' for most of its user base.

  5. #85
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm15p$i1d$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > Of course, 3-10% is far from very very few.
    > Very very few is under 1%


    it's not enough to bother, especially when most of them will probably
    want to upgrade anyway, whether or not it was supported.

    > But, since APple is famous for orphaning products that are only a couple
    > of years old, it's not unexpected.


    but it's perfectly ok for google to orphan the t-mobile g1, a phone
    that's just 18 months old and *still being sold* today, or for htc to
    orphan anything sold prior to 2010, less than six months ago.

  6. #86
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In alt.cellular.attws John Navas <jnspam1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    > On 26 May 2010 21:40:58 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>
    > wrote in <865iraF4vaU4@mid.individual.net>:
    >
    >>In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <jnspam1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    >>> On 26 May 2010 18:57:09 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>
    >>> wrote in <865985FubgU6@mid.individual.net>:
    >>>
    >>>>In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <jnspam1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    >>>>> On 26 May 2010 14:17:04 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>
    >>>>
    >>>>Have we all had enough fun with the triviality of stupid semantics? The whole
    >>>>point is that a comparison between 2.2 and the iPod OS needs to include OS
    >>>>4.0. Who gives a crap what you call it ... semantics aside, my point is made.
    >>>
    >>> You declare victory just like Dubya, and with just as much validity. :D

    >>
    >>I didn't declare any victory. I said simply that android 2.2 will be compared
    >>to apple's OS 4.0 and historically that will be the only comparison of meaning
    >>[any comparison to 3.1 is pretty much pointless]. If you call that victory,
    >>then I guess so. I call it getting back on point.

    >
    > I call this a disingenuous scramble.
    >


    You would. What will you call it in June when OS 4.0 comes out and 2.2 is
    essentially unreleased for all intents and purposes [NexusOne sales have been
    pulled by Google]. OS 4.0 will be market dominant compared to 2.2 the day
    after the release. What I have said all along, is that Apple OS 4.0 should be
    compared to Google's 2.2 [which will release someday for some platform other
    than the minute NexusOne]. These will be what is compared for the next long
    while [and OS 4.1 will likely follow before 2.2 is actually broadly available
    if Apple's history of minor upgrades remains the same].

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse

    Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.

  7. #87
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In alt.cellular.attws Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
    > On 26 May 2010 18:57:09 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <jnspam1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    >>> On 26 May 2010 14:17:04 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>

    >>
    >>Have we all had enough fun with the triviality of stupid semantics? The whole
    >>point is that a comparison between 2.2 and the iPod OS needs to include OS
    >>4.0. Who gives a crap what you call it ... semantics aside, my point is made.

    >
    > Yes, but for the record, your point was thoroughly discredited.
    >


    Which point is that, the use of the term "vaporware"? That wasn't my point to
    begin with, that was a semantic diversion by another to divert the thread from
    the point I actually made and that is that OS 4.0 will be compared to Google's
    2.2 (primarily).

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse

    Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.

  8. #88
    Paul Miner
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    On 27 May 2010 15:50:12 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    >In alt.cellular.attws Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
    >>
    >> Please review what you wrote. In no way does it logically follow the
    >> post you replied to.
    >>
    >> My question stands: What could possibly justify very, very few 3 year
    >> old i* devices being still in use? If true, that's not good for
    >> anyone, including Apple.
    >>

    >
    >It's good if people are buying from the iTunes store. It is good if people
    >are getting attached to the Apple branded products and will buy future
    >products. It is good, because they maintain marketshare (due to the owners of
    >these devices not buying from a competitor). Do you need more reasons why it
    >is good for Apple? True, ideally, they would love for you to upgrade, but
    >also ideally, they want you to keep the Apple device you upgraded from in
    >service either personally or with somebody else.


    I guess I'm just wired to think differently. To me, when I see a group
    of products with "very, very few" still in use after just 3 years, I
    congratulate myself for not owning anything from that group. I think
    it's extremely shortsighted for a manufacturer to be comfortable with
    such a short lifespan of their products, as well. Sure, the high
    turnover helps the revenue, but at some point it seems like people
    would wake up and realize what they're buying and what a poor value it
    is.

    Then again, these are Apple products we're talking about, and Apple
    customers seem to be 'different'.

    --
    Paul Miner

  9. #89
    Paul Miner
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    On Thu, 27 May 2010 08:56:45 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
    wrote:

    >In article <htm118$i1d$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    ><nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> > right. android 2.2 is going to be vapor for a lot longer and for a lot
    >> > more users than iphone os 4.

    >>
    >> 2.2 has been released to end users, it's not vaporware. I know it's hard
    >> to understand simple concepts like that, but it's a fact.

    >
    >except, it isn't a fact.


    Apparently it *is* a fact, as you go on to say in the very next
    paragraph.

    >the simple concept, is that so far, it's only available for the nexus
    >one, a phone that sold in very small numbers, and that's via manual
    >update. it's not available yet for the motorola droid, htc evo (the
    >phone google gave out), droid incredible and other android phones. it
    >won't be available for a lot of android phones including ones still
    >being sold new, today.


    Assuming you're right that 2.2 is available for the Nexus One, then
    it's obviously not vaporware.

    The yes/no dividing line between vapor or not is availability to end
    users, whoever they may be. Limited availability versus widespread
    availability, small numbers versus large numbers, announcements versus
    no announcements, rumors versus no rumors, all of those have nothing
    to do with it.

    --
    Paul Miner

  10. #90
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <ai8tv5lluofgcvi4r9jjfiql1r7n6rlh52@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
    <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:

    > Assuming you're right that 2.2 is available for the Nexus One, then
    > it's obviously not vaporware.


    it's not vaporware only to a tiny subset of android users.

    > The yes/no dividing line between vapor or not is availability to end
    > users, whoever they may be. Limited availability versus widespread
    > availability, small numbers versus large numbers, announcements versus
    > no announcements, rumors versus no rumors, all of those have nothing
    > to do with it.


    define it any way you want, the fact remains that android 2.2 is only
    available for one model phone that didn't sell very well and by manual
    installation.

    as far as most people are concerned, 2.2 is not available yet, not even
    to google i/o attendees with their htc evo!

    in any event this entire conversation is moot in a couple of weeks when
    iphone os 4 ships to everyone, none of this 'soon' on the droid or 'end
    of the year' with htc products.

  11. #91
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    nospam wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 08:56:48 -0700]:
    > In article <htm15p$i1d$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    > <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> Of course, 3-10% is far from very very few.
    >> Very very few is under 1%

    >
    > it's not enough to bother, especially when most of them will probably
    > want to upgrade anyway, whether or not it was supported.
    >
    >> But, since APple is famous for orphaning products that are only a couple
    >> of years old, it's not unexpected.

    >
    > but it's perfectly ok for google to orphan the t-mobile g1, a phone
    > that's just 18 months old and *still being sold* today, or for htc to
    > orphan anything sold prior to 2010, less than six months ago.


    They are not mutually exclusive items. They are both wrong.

  12. #92
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    nospam wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 08:56:35 -0700]:
    > In article <htm1dg$i1d$4@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    > <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> > 30-40% is not what i'd call 'ubiquitous'.

    >>
    >> Is that weighted by popularity if the sites? There are millions of small
    >> flat sites out there that are blogs etc. that skew those numbers.

    >
    > it doesn't skew the numbers. if there are millions of small sites
    > without flash, they count too. what makes you think an iphone user
    > won't visit any of them?


    Who cares if an iDevice user that can't run flash wants to visit them.
    That doesn't matter. What matters are all the sites that they can't
    use properly due to no Flash support. The number of sites that run Flash
    is irrelevant, it's the number of popular sites that matters.

    >> I don't want native app games, I want the flash games that will never
    >> be ported to native apps.

    >
    > such as? and how do you know they won't ever be ported? and what makes


    Visit a lot of the flash game sites, there are thousands of these games
    out there

    >> I want to be able to use restaurant websites that are flash based
    >> Hint: That's a lot of sites.

    >
    > actually it isn't, and the number is dropping.


    Prove it? I don't see that at all

    >> >> And many more than "a lot" don't. What's your point?
    >> >
    >> > that not everyone wants flash.

    >>
    >> Or people use those blockers to block the unwanted flash

    >
    > if people block it, they don't want it.


    They don't want certain flash.

    >> > because having to toggle flash on/off all the time is a royal pain.

    >>
    >> No, it's not. The Firefox flashblock extension shows a little play button
    >> where the flash is embedded, when you want to run that item just hit play

    >
    > that's not part of flash. that's yet *another* piece.


    Yes, a browser piece, it's pretty damn simple. Just like browing with images turned off in the 90s

  13. #93
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    nospam wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 08:56:45 -0700]:
    > In article <htm118$i1d$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    > <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> > right. android 2.2 is going to be vapor for a lot longer and for a lot
    >> > more users than iphone os 4.

    >>
    >> 2.2 has been released to end users, it's not vaporware. I know it's hard
    >> to understand simple concepts like that, but it's a fact.

    >
    > except, it isn't a fact.
    >
    > the simple concept, is that so far, it's only available for the nexus
    > one, a phone that sold in very small numbers, and that's via manual
    > update. it's not available yet for the motorola droid, htc evo (the


    Yet, it's available. What a hard concept to understand

    > As I said at the beginning, Android 2.2 will be here soon, and some
    > devices will get the update in the coming weeks.


    And some have it, so IT IS RELEASED TO CONSUMERS
    I know, it's hard to wrap your mind around this FACT.

    > developer sdk (sounds familiar), 'soon' and 'coming weeks' = not
    > released yet.


    Huh, I have the developer SDK already, so soon is long past


  14. #94
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    nospam wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 10:03:54 -0700]:
    > In article <ai8tv5lluofgcvi4r9jjfiql1r7n6rlh52@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
    > <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
    >
    >> Assuming you're right that 2.2 is available for the Nexus One, then
    >> it's obviously not vaporware.

    >
    > it's not vaporware only to a tiny subset of android users.


    So, it's not vaporware then.
    Simple, you lose

    > define it any way you want, the fact remains that android 2.2 is only
    > available for one model phone that didn't sell very well and by manual
    > installation.


    Yes, it's available.


  15. #95
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm9vo$33b$4@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > >> Assuming you're right that 2.2 is available for the Nexus One, then
    > >> it's obviously not vaporware.

    > >
    > > it's not vaporware only to a tiny subset of android users.

    >
    > So, it's not vaporware then.


    iphone os 4 is available to a subset of users too and probably to more
    users than nexus one owners.

    > Simple, you lose


    nope.

    > > define it any way you want, the fact remains that android 2.2 is only
    > > available for one model phone that didn't sell very well and by manual
    > > installation.

    >
    > Yes, it's available.


    so is iphone os 4.

  16. #96
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm9bf$33b$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > > but it's perfectly ok for google to orphan the t-mobile g1, a phone
    > > that's just 18 months old and *still being sold* today, or for htc to
    > > orphan anything sold prior to 2010, less than six months ago.

    >
    > They are not mutually exclusive items. They are both wrong.


    neither is wrong.

    here's the g1, still available at t-mobile, and no mention that it's a
    dead end. only $99 with a contract. what a deal.
    <http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/phones/...?cell-phone=T-
    Mobile-G1-with-Google-White>

  17. #97
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm9k2$33b$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > Who cares if an iDevice user that can't run flash wants to visit them.


    web site owners will want their site to be usable by 100 million users
    who represent over 2/3rds of mobile web traffic. in other words, the
    majority of mobile users *don't* have flash.

    > That doesn't matter. What matters are all the sites that they can't
    > use properly due to no Flash support. The number of sites that run Flash
    > is irrelevant, it's the number of popular sites that matters.


    again, it's not that many sites and a lot work without needing flash,
    including youtube.

    > >> I don't want native app games, I want the flash games that will never
    > >> be ported to native apps.

    > >
    > > such as? and how do you know they won't ever be ported? and what makes

    >
    > Visit a lot of the flash game sites, there are thousands of these games
    > out there


    only thousands? there are tens of thousands of games at the apps store,
    but i asked specifically *which ones* will never be ported? i bet some
    of them already have been ported.

    > >> I want to be able to use restaurant websites that are flash based
    > >> Hint: That's a lot of sites.

    > >
    > > actually it isn't, and the number is dropping.

    >
    > Prove it? I don't see that at all


    more and more web sites announce html5 support. that means they'll work
    on the iphone, no flash needed.

  18. #98
    nospam
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In article <htm9p0$33b$3@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:

    > > the simple concept, is that so far, it's only available for the nexus
    > > one, a phone that sold in very small numbers, and that's via manual
    > > update. it's not available yet for the motorola droid, htc evo (the

    >
    > Yet, it's available. What a hard concept to understand


    only to nexus one owners.

    > > As I said at the beginning, Android 2.2 will be here soon, and some
    > > devices will get the update in the coming weeks.

    >
    > And some have it, so IT IS RELEASED TO CONSUMERS
    > I know, it's hard to wrap your mind around this FACT.


    it has not been released to consumers who bought phones *other* than
    the nexus one and it may never be, depending on the phone and the
    manufacturer's decision to support it. i keep posting links that
    explain this very clearly, have you not read any of them?

    > > developer sdk (sounds familiar), 'soon' and 'coming weeks' = not
    > > released yet.

    >
    > Huh, I have the developer SDK already, so soon is long past


    soon is for the end user release. do keep up.

    developers have had iphone os 4 for nearly two months now.

  19. #99
    Justin
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    nospam wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 10:47:30 -0700]:
    > In article <htm9bf$33b$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    > <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> > but it's perfectly ok for google to orphan the t-mobile g1, a phone
    >> > that's just 18 months old and *still being sold* today, or for htc to
    >> > orphan anything sold prior to 2010, less than six months ago.

    >>
    >> They are not mutually exclusive items. They are both wrong.

    >
    > neither is wrong.


    Perhaps your reading comprehension is faulty.



  20. #100
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: 7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone

    In alt.cellular.verizon nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
    > In article <htm1dg$i1d$4@news.eternal-september.org>, Justin
    > <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
    >
    >> > 30-40% is not what i'd call 'ubiquitous'.

    >>
    >> Is that weighted by popularity if the sites? There are millions of small
    >> flat sites out there that are blogs etc. that skew those numbers.

    >
    > it doesn't skew the numbers. if there are millions of small sites
    > without flash, they count too. what makes you think an iphone user
    > won't visit any of them?


    What matters is what percentage of hits are hits to pages that contain Flash.
    I think that was the point.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse

    Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •