Google: 'Your $1000 phone needs our permission to install apps now'". Android users are screwed - Louis Rossmann
Google: 'Your $1000 phone needs our permission to install apps now'". Android users are screwed - Louis Rossmann
You're viewing a single thread.
508 comments
-
With this shift and other control based decisions Google has been making, does Apple devices start to make more sense? Neither platform offers true control over there device you "own", but Apple at the very least isn't a marketing company.
I can't believe a company hasn't swooped in and eaten Apple and Google's lunch.
-
You need a certain critical mass to enter this market, since you need to be able to get an army of Foxconn slaves to produce the handsets.
No company is going to be and to swoop in and eat those two's lunches.
-
You also need every company to develop for a third mobile platform, where two different ones are already a big ask.
Easy solution would be to run existing apps on Linux, probably would be Android.
Another solution would we move to PWAs to have apps in the browser.
Both these things already happened on desktop Linux with Windows games using Proton and most proprietary desktop apps switching to Electron.
-
Honest question - why not fork android which already has all of the infrastructure needed for things like 5G handling, power management, and a widely supported ecosystem of components and vendors?
I would try a Linux phone, absolutely, but why not just Android instead?
The issue is current and future vendors for current and future Android phones are largely tainted and lockstep with Google.
But wouldn't developing off yesteryear Android still be leap years ahead of just reinventing the wheel around Linux? I kinda thought Android was Linux for our devices.
I'm mostly saying this just because I'm jealous to bring all of my APK's with me into that future.
I don't want to give up my reddit app and my current trio of browsers.
-
-
-
Apple isn't a marketing company? Wow, if anything I would say that singularly defines what has made them successful. They put out solidly mid hardware, but are the best marketers in tech and always were.
-
"Not a marketing company" as in their business model is not centred around shoving ads in your face for money is how I read it.
-
The hardware is absolutely not mid. It is inflexible. Compare the entry level MacBook Air to any comparable Windows laptop and you’ll be spending much more to get close to the same performance/battery/build quality. The thing that makes them successful is creating a unified ecosystem that is hard to leave. People don’t pick Apple because they are a bunch of idiot clones who are enamored with TV ads.
-
Agree to disagree on that one. At least for a big proportion of folks who are snobby about having an iPhone.
-
-
They aren't a marketing company; they're a tech company that knows how to market. Hate them all you want, and I do, but let's be honest. Also, the M series SoCs are technological amazing. They are efficient and powerful whereas in the standard PC world Intel is just pushing more electricity through their chips to try and keep up with IPC and AMD isn't far behind, plus ARM outside of Apple just isn't nearly the same.
-
Until a few months ago I was all-in the Apple ecosystem. iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple TV. Seeing them launch things like Universal Control was amazing.
Then I jumped out, got a Pixel, put Graphene on it, and started messing with Linux.
... Only to discover that Universal Control is essentially just Input Leap, which can trace its history back to 2001 and the launch of Synergy.
Apple are absolutely a marketing company. Don't get me wrong, they add some much-needed polish, but they essentially just rejig existing tech and lock it down so it only works on their devices sold in the last few years.
-
-
Android is all of the downsides of Apple now with none of the upsides. I prefer the company selling a walled garden over the one selling my internet activity.
-
508 comments