Re: Sour Grapes: Missing the Point About Google Android and the G1

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Ted Nelson" <tandm () xanadu net>
Date: October 7, 2008 12:05:51 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Cc: "Ted Nelson" <tandm () xanadu net>
Subject: Re: [IP] Sour Grapes: Missing the Point About Google Android  
and the G1
Reply-To: tandm () xanadu net

Dave,

What we're seeing here is a market division
 we've seen before.  Iphone versus Android
 looks like PC versus Linux all over again.
 Those who haven't time or savvy for the inside stuff
 naturally turn to the the commercial package;
 the smart insiders jeer and build their own worlds.

I think the most important thing is to keep the sides
 civil to each other.

Cheers,Ted



On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:26 PM, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:


Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: October 6, 2008 8:11:34 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Cc: lauren () vortex com
Subject: Sour Grapes: Missing the Point About Google Android and the G1


    Sour Grapes: Missing the Point About Google Android and the G1

             http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000439.html


Greetings.  I've recently written a number of items related to
Google Android and the first Android phone, the HTC G1, due to hit
the streets in a couple of weeks or so.  I've suggested that Android
is a "game changer" in terms of mobile applications, and despite an
inability to be used in 3G mode on other than the T-Mobile network
(even if unlocked), I've been impressed with what I've seen of the
G1 (my current phone is an HTC WM5-based PDA, so I have some
experience with HTC products).

Despite my debunking of Google Android conspiracy theories
( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000437.html ), I continue to receive
e-mail from iPhone diehards who still seem to be (either purposely
or innocently) missing the key points of why Android is potentially
such a positive development in the mobile communications industry.

Folks have been sending me excerpts from various "G1 vs. iPhone"
articles around the Web that do their best to tear down the G1 and
Android.  Typical talking points from such articles and messages:

- The G1 is bulkier than the iPhone
- The G1 doesn't have the same beautiful industrial design as the iPhone
- The G1 doesn't have a "multitouch" screen (you can't "pinch" images)
- Android is dangerous since there is no central control over  
applications

The physical differences between this first Android phone and iPhone
strike me as not a big deal.  OK, the G1 is bigger and perhaps not
as pretty -- but golly Mr. Wizard it has a real keyboard!  The lack
of such a keyboard on the iPhone always relegated it -- for my usage
patterns at least -- into the "toy" category.  To me, the lack of a
multitouch screen on the G1 is virtually meaningless.  There are an
almost unlimited number of other methods that can be implemented to
perform the same functions via the touchscreen.  What's more, the G1
has a trackball so that it can be used one-handed, or conveniently
when wearing gloves.

And unlike the iPhone, the G1 has -- like virtually every other
battery-operated consumer electronics device except many from
Apple -- a replaceable battery.  The design arrogance of the Apple
"don't replace the battery yourself nor carry a spare battery"  
philosophy
always struck me as incredibly bizarre and anti-consumer.

But the "Android is dangerous" argument is the one that almost
causes uncontrollable chuckling.

Apparently simply because we're talking about a phone, not a desktop
PC, some observers can't seem to accept the open source concepts of
user choice and associated responsibility for applications.  But an
iPhone or the G1 are essentially just computers -- nowadays more
powerful in most respects than desktops of a relatively few years
ago -- with cellular air links.

Nobody in their right mind would suggest that we should need central
approval to run applications on our PCs -- despite the risks of
viruses that comes along with such free choice.  Nor does it make
sense that the only distribution point for applications should be a
single entity -- who even takes a significant percentage fee from
each non-free application sold (as is the case for the Apple iPhone
model).  Expensive required development environments don't make
sense either anymore.

The Android model simply says that you can run and develop whatever
you want on your Android phones like the G1, that the development
environment is free, and that there is no central control over the
distribution of applications.

This reminds me of the early ARPANET and Internet environments,
where we were similarly free to create and distribute software
applications, in a manner that greatly sped the development of the
networks through which you're reading these words right now.  Even
in the earliest Defense Department ARPANET days, there was no
central point through which all software had to be approved and
distributed.

Android detractors seem to be blinding themselves to the immense
power of open source development, using freely available tools, for
mobile platforms.  This isn't just a matter of being able to run
applications developed by other parties, but it means that you can
run applications on your phone that *you write yourself*.
Individuals, organizations, and businesses will be free to create
and deploy a vast range of applications -- even if just for their
own internal use -- without the need for outside approval and with
full control over the security and privacy aspects embedded in those
applications (a crucial point).

The ability to run your own apps is fundamental, as is the right to
run applications from other parties without the approval of a
software politburo.  Does this mean that you're taking on additional
responsibility when it comes to the potential for misbehaving
software?  Indeed, but just as with PCs this is a matter of
individual responsibility and using good judgment in your selection
of applications. Already, the Android security model provides more
installation-time checks on device capabilities access than is
present in the standard desktop PC environment.

Whether or not the G1 hardware, as the first phone to run Google
Android, is as physically appealing to the eyes as the iPhone is
arguably an interesting short-term marketing question.  But in the
longer run, this is largely an irrelevant issue in comparison to the
vastly superior applications development and deployment environment
represented by the open source, open distribution Google Android
philosophy.

Watch and see.

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren () vortex com or lauren () pfir org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
 - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, NNSquad
 - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com



--
- Theodor Holm Nelson
 Founder, Project Xanadu
 Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute
 Visiting Professor, University of Southampton

MY SPECIAL LECTURE on 14 non-computer topics--
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/podcasts/video.php?id=76

MY OXFORD VALEDICTORY LECTURE--
http://webcast.oii.ox.ac.uk/?view=Webcast&ID=20080317_236





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com