Android/Linux Arrives on Most Smart Phones in USA

A survey of smart phone subscribers over 13 up to July 11 has some interesting numbers. It gives total numbers of smart phones, growth rate of smart phones and shares. If I express the shares as millions of smart phones I can calculate the growth rate of the installed base by platform. Android/Linux is growing at nearly twice the rate of iOS and pulling far ahead. The numbers of new Android/Linux subscriptions can almost account for all the increase in smart phones, indicating that many who already own a smart phone will replace it. Presumably Android/Linux is replacing phones and arriving on new phones while everyone else is replacing and being cast off. The others includes Phoney7 which is not only losing share but numbers of units in service. At this rate Android/linux will have a majority by the end of 2011.

Platform

Smart Phones in USA (millions)

Growth
(%/year)

3 mo to
2011-4-11

3 mo to
2011-7-11

74.7

82.2

40.0

Android

27.2

34.4

105.2

iOS

19.4

22.2

56.8

others

28.1

25.6

-34.8

see comScore Reports July 2011 U.S. Mobile Subscriber Market Share

This shows what x/Linux can do in fair competition with a good channel to retail shelves. There’s no reason fair competition should not exist in personal computers of all kinds. Use GNU/Linux.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Android/Linux Arrives on Most Smart Phones in USA

  1. oiaohm says:

    oldman not releasing emails is normal operation.

    The big thing here oldman DOJ normally does release smoking guns either directly or in leaks. Sorry to say the DOJ is not the most secure place for information.

    Intel vs DOJ case smoking guns of the emails with dell and the like were released.

    There are DOJ recommendation to all on-line advertises that came out after the Google case pointing out the flaw you could walk into with safe harbor.

    DOJ has release document covering sets of loop holes in the safe harbor that fairly much explains what Google did wrong. Google did not attempt to suppress the charges either. Of course without saying the world Google.

    Now if Google had allowed Federal law to override something that was protect under safe harbor they would have been in the wrong as well.

    Sometimes you get caught between a rock and a hard place.

    Suppressing emails where you are talking working out if you are or are not in the wrong is not a major issue. Since if they are read out of context they can appear to be smoking guns when they are not.

    Its normal that prosecutor to defense and reverse to be never released to the public.

    Oldman what you are asking for is Google to be treated special because they are Google. This is really undermining civil rights.

    Beware Google can only release half of the documents as well the ones they are a author of at most unless the agreement reads they cannot release ever. So this could cause a context problem.

    Most cases in fact the defendant does not ask for the communication to be suppressed. But is the prosecutor who asks for it to be suppressed. So that the prosecutor cannot not be questioned over giving such a light deal instead of going to court.

    Like really a person with 1 murder charge on their record is not really going to care about the charge for slugging a guy. Yet when that is settled out of court everything is suppressed.

    oldman you idea about who would be asking for it to be suppressed is backwards basically. You want to settle out of court stats quo is closed records and for the prosecutor to insist on it.

    Yes this is why people take some things to court under insanely rare conditions does a prosecutor allow publication of even a public statement explaining the crime. If you want public records you have to face court. Yep it suxs that court time is wasted simply because someone wants to release a statement about the crime.

    You jumped at a shadow here oldman.

  2. oldman says:

    “Please note Google did not fight the charge. Settled once they worked out where they had made a mistake with the safe harbor accord. Lot of the emails backwards and forward will be dry and people like you oldman may try to make out that google was stone walling with them.”

    Then there should be no reason for google not to release them, should there?

  3. oiaohm says:

    oldman this is another thing. Microsoft own https://adcenter.microsoft.com/ was advertising prescription medicines drugs at the same time as Google.

    Google did in fact respond to the cease and desist removed the reported advertisements. Google thought they were protected by the safe harbor accord over this. Safe harbor accord you only have to fix what you are informed of don’t have to go looking.

    Turns out suspect medical is not protected by safe harbor accord internationally this way. So once reported about a suspect medical issue a harbor /dock is required to do a full search looking for more. Step Google had failed todo so no safe harbor protection.

    Shipping illegal drugs is covered by the safe harbor accord but shipping prescription medications is not. Yes warped. So if google had been display ads for crack or other illegal drugs what they did would have been fine and protected. Yes the term that the law is a ass this is one of those cases. Drugs are not Drugs.

    Yes safe harbor accord trumps most countries laws. The order is.
    International accords that the country as signed(ie safe harbor one of many that do apply to the USA).
    Federal Law
    State Law
    So Google messed up what they had to obey due to missing a fine print in the safe harbor accord. So applied the safe harbor accord incorrectly.

    Microsoft adcenter was still doing prescription drugs after google had paid fine. Then eventionally they cleaned there act up so they would not get fined.

    Yes Microsoft did since a Google is doing it why do we have todo anything defense.

    This is evidence of double standards in the USA system to Microsoft. So both Microsoft and Google should have faced court over this.

    Oldman I warned you check your timeline and context. If google had done absolutely nothing then you would have found a smoking gun. This was a case of Google not doing enough due to thinking the international accord applied what required them to do less.

    Yes it was not state that Google thought they had on their side.

    Just because you are a law following company does not mean you cannot screw it up from time to time. Particularly with some of the warped loop holes in safe harbor accord.

    Please note Google did not fight the charge. Settled once they worked out where they had made a mistake with the safe harbor accord. Lot of the emails backwards and forward will be dry and people like you oldman may try to make out that google was stone walling with them.

    Evil question at times is what law applies to this case. You can have state federal and accords all in dispute with each other.

  4. Quick! What products does every supplier you use produce? If you don’t know you could be breaking a law by buying from them.

    Even being informed of the law does not help Google identify which companies and ads are to be banned. Ads are like malware. Google may spot some but not all. Then they have broken a law. This is a reflection of the sorry state of justice in the law. The fine Google paid was more or less equal to the total revenue Google received from the advertisers in the matter, so Google was not punished as much as the government assumed the role of “partner” with the illegal operation… Google now gets to filter some list of advertisers, new advertisers emerge and it will all happen over again because there is no way for Google to do manually what their hundreds of thousands of servers do. For example, I could create “ABC Diapers”, get an account relationship with Google and sooner or later slip in an ad for generic ASA made in Canada. How the Hell can Google stop that? Why should they?

    Sheesh! The USA seems to want to maximize the inefficiency of business by imposing bureaucratic rules to solve social problems. If the USA produced cheap generic medicines, residents would shop at home and all this would disappear. Cross-border shipping would be less profitable. Similarly the USA and Canada could agree on common standards for medicines and the problem would go away.

  5. oldman wrote of Pogson, “someone who does not believe in it for software”.

    Hey! Free Software is about free markets. M$, that other OS and Wintel are all about closed markets. Pay attention… I do believe competition is good. It motivates everyone to do their best and makes good things happen. The closed market that M$ set up two decades ago was designed to prevent all those good things like OEMs actually installing software for the benefit of their customers instead of M$.

  6. oldman says:

    “Do you know every law in the USA at the federal, state, and local level? No.”

    I do know that according to our constitution Federal Law trumps state law. Google broke federal law, the continued to do so after being told to cease and decist. They were then prosecuted and had to settle with a hefty fine.

    “A free-market society should endorse competition amongst pharmacies.”

    I find it ironic to have the free market brought up by someone who does not believe in it for software, but whatever.

  7. Do you know every law in the USA at the federal, state, and local level? No. No one does except for the Ten Commandments. The USA goes so far as to regulate international trade in bizarre/non-intuitive ways. A free-market society should endorse competition amongst pharmacies. The USA does not, prohibiting competition. That’s bizarre.

  8. oldman says:

    “Should Google ban every ad from every firearms business because Google might be aiding and abetting an illegal transaction? No. That would be silly but that’s what the USA has gone after Google about prescription medicines.”

    Google should comply with the law of the land, pog. And making excuses for them IMHO smacks of hypocrisy.

  9. I read about that drug advertising thing. I really doubt an ISP or anyone else should be legally responsible for the contents of ads except the advertiser. Has any magazine ever been prosecuted for the ads on their pages? I haven’t heard of any. Google and the Internet are global. I cannot imagine Google or any search engine or ISP knowing every law relevant to every product on the planet. For example, in Canada, selling a firearm to anyone but a licensed firearms buyer is illegal. Should Google ban every ad from every firearms business because Google might be aiding and abetting an illegal transaction? No. That would be silly but that’s what the USA has gone after Google about prescription medicines.

  10. oldman says:

    “Simple fact if Microsoft and Google are equal in the current time oldman should should be able to find guns now.”

    THe drug advertisment problems arent enough. Google apparently continued to break the law even after being advised it was doing so./ The emails surpressed were alleged to have had some smoking guns, but we will never know their content because google was able to negotiate as pert of its settlement that they stay private.

    TO me this sounds too familiar, hence my cynicism.

  11. oldman says:

    “Current is the only thing I can work with. Change of CEO or other major personal could ruin Google. This is really the only thing I am crossing my fingers about.”

    THis smells of a double standard Mr oiaohm, but again:

    Whatever.

  12. oiaohm says:

    oldman remember FOSS world gives and takes trust quickly.

    oldman remember I can find the smoking guns for Microsoft. That is why Google and Microsoft cannot be classed as equal at this time.

    As long as Google keeps on doing things the same way they are. The Smoking guns most likely will never come. oldman.

    As long as Microsoft does not change there way they will remain a bad company.

    I am not zealot when it comes to look at companies. I understand business and law.

    Simple fact if Microsoft and Google are equal in the current time oldman should should be able to find guns now.

    All companies have the possibility of changing there path. Like 10 years time MS might have pulled a IBM after its anti-trust and reformed to a law following company.

    Current is the only thing I can work with. Change of CEO or other major personal could ruin Google. This is really the only thing I am crossing my fingers about.

  13. oldman says:

    “Basically oldman you can change my mind about google really simply find a true smoking gun. That does not have a valid explain from time line.”

    Then we shall see, won’t we.

  14. oiaohm says:

    Oldman You are the one with blinders on go read the USA and EU anti-trust case documents against Microsoft and see the list of illegal methods MS was found using.

    In fact Microsoft gets caught using the same methods in third world countries today. So Microsoft has not changed there ways.

    Actions that MS is doing no other IT company have ever done to get market share. Microsoft is an abnormal compared to almost every other company making money out of IT. This is the problem I can compare Google to IBM Oracle HP…. Note these companies are not 100 percent angels. All of them have done some evil at some time.

    None of them these days take part in any actions that fall under criminal in any country.

    Microsoft on the other hand actions keep on turning up that could be criminal.

    Basically oldman you can change my mind about google really simply find a true smoking gun. That does not have a valid explain from time line.

  15. oldman says:

    “Dominate is not part of google nature. Google dominate by providing products people want to use. Not by providing products people have to use because they are incompatible other wise like Microsoft.”

    As far as I am concerned the only real difference between Google and microsoft as far as I can see is they use technology that you like.

    Beyond this it is it is pointless to argue with a zealot with blinders on Mr oiaohm.

    Only time will tell which of us is right.

  16. oiaohm says:

    oldman Google does not take part in many actions that are pure illegal.

    Microsoft even today from time to time gets caught taking part in illegal actions such as fraud.

    Yes Google is going to be hard competition.

    oldman Microsoft MS Dos product is based on fraud. They were selling to to IBM at the Same time they were saying the coder that made it that it was worthless so they could pay nothing for it.

    Oldman find me where Google has in business dealing intentionally deceived any party. You can look but they never have.

    Find me where Google has taken a standard and extended it and not documented what they have done. Again this is another thing Google has never done.

    Early Microsoft took IBM SMB protocol and extended it in undocumented ways.

    Of course Google is a Business first and foremost. There is no requirement to be in business and to illegal actions like fraud like Microsoft has done.

    Really its not hope oldman. Google acts like IBM and Oracle. Not always the most Open Source Friendly companies either of them. But neither is a major threat to me making a competitor product to them.

    Basically Microsoft does not treat other companies around them well.

    Issue here oldman you don’t want to see that MS thinks its fine todo criminal class actions to get what it wants. Google policy of “do no evil”(ok they don’t away have successes at this. Large company its a little hard) mostly means Google does avoid doing most vendor lock in stunts and criminal actions.

    Google is a better company than Microsoft because Google is more law obeying.

    Yes a bit smarter would be the word. Its stupid to break the law and expect it will not come back and bite you at some point. Google being better than Microsoft has nothing todo with luck. Its more being smarter and implementing law following conditions.

    MS has tried a few times to get Google on anti-trust over search engines. Result was funny. Google has done nothing to prevent an competitor from having a chance.

    Of course beating Google is not easy.

    Android scorched earth. Since Linux was already in the mobile phone market. All google did was make it area of scorched earth larger. Again avoids anti-trust.

    Google is smarter. Google could be a more lethal competitor than Microsoft. Since they focus on results not bribing people off. But at least it will be a fair fight. Open Source and Closed Source will have the same job. Be better than what Google Offers if they can.

    Oldman why did I describe Microsoft and Google as the same creature. Just one has a better personality. So is smarter. Being smarter mutual benefit options are possible. Microsoft being a wild out of control creature doing stupid things to attempt to escape and dominate its handler. Makes them dangerous and very non productive to work with.

    Dominate is not part of google nature. Google dominate by providing products people want to use. Not by providing products people have to use because they are incompatible other wise like Microsoft.

    Two different models at work here oldman. Any company following Microsoft way normally dies out. Historically dies out. Microsoft seams to have gone against its peers. But time will catch up with them at some point.

  17. oldman says:

    “Google is a upgrade from Microsoft even if they are not ideal they are still better.”

    Mr oiaohm when all else is said and done, your position, all the vigorous handwaving aside IMHO comes down to hope. You hope Google isnt as bad as microsoft.

    This is crap.

    Google is a bu$ine$$ first and foremost. Their moves are very reminiscent of microsoft. They may be a bit smarter and luckier but IMHO thats it.

    Were you not so enamored of the technology that they are basing their nascent empire on, you would see it.

  18. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson it did make it into final product for the first version some of files did. So android 2.x is not effected particular ones of android 1.x are.

    The past ruling on headers covered copied headers not generated headers. Basically this court case we will find out if google legal advice is right.

    Result if google legal advice is right reversing interfaces will be so many times simpler. Since you will now be able to run a program to generate stubbed code of fill in the blanks. Compared to manually go through and code each one.

    This is important for Oracle to know just as much as google. Wine project is self is watching this as well. Currently some third party program has to use the interface so exposing it existence. You cannot send a program hunting for the existence due to the undefined legal status of doing this.

    Yes the google case will define something that could speed up wine development rate massively.

  19. “That is the legal copyright issue with Google vs Oracle. So its a interesting watch there is no ruling in any court globally on this.”

    That may be an issue but it is a tiny portion. The files in question were for testing and did not end up in the final product on handsets. The issue about file headers was settled long ago but Oracle ignores that. The judge has been informed that Oracle refers to rulings that were overturned.

  20. Read the patents and the court filings. Oracle is trying to be SCOG. Fortunately the judges are working quickly and we won’t have to wait 8 years for the case to die.

  21. oiaohm says:

    oldman there is major difference between Google and Microsoft.

    Microsoft acquires companies that don’t do anything offensive in there direction. Just because the patents and tech look interesting that could be used to destroy there competition.

    Google is more likely todo a joint partnership with a non hostile company that leads to the partner growing. Like Google was doing with Motorola and others.

    Yet for some reason Microsoft does a partnership with most companies those companies lose value or otherwise suffer. Mostly tracing to highly restrictive conditions in Microsoft favor in the partnership agreement.

    If Google takes offense to your actions for stepping on there IP they come to you and tell you so it can be sorted out at source.

    If Microsoft takes offense to your actions they sue who ever is making hardware for you. Hmm. Why do this. Reason Microsoft believes it can extract more profit this way also they will make the hardware company sign a non disclose agreement so the hardware cannot tell you want is wrong in you code that is causing them to have to pay Microsoft. This is evil.

    Motorola threaten to attacked Android. Google responded with a hostile take over bid. Prevoked action.

    Robert Pogson
    “Google cannot force anyone to sell what they don’t want to sell.” Yep you can still offer enough that its not wise not to take the offer.

    Problem here oldman there is no evidence that backs that Google is worse than Microsoft.

    Google does not take part in knowingly deceptive actions.

    Microsoft has been caught impersonating business groups and so on.

    Yes Google lack of deceptive actions is why Oracle has so much evidence on the possible copyright infringement include the exact method google coders had used. Issue is the method has never been tested in a court of law to see if its legal.

    Is is legal to computer generate code from another parties binary then use that code even if it just headers descriptions that would not be covered by copyright normally? That is the legal copyright issue with Google vs Oracle. So its a interesting watch there is no ruling in any court globally on this.

    Even if Oracle loses. Knowing the legal state is worth every cent Oracle is spending on the court case to find out.

    Of course Google is no angel. oldman. Worse than Microsoft is very hard to do.

    Also Microsoft have been caught paying people cash bribes to sell product.

    List of things Microsoft does wrong is long many and you wonder why they get left in business.

    Google bad issues list is very short.
    1) Not always using legally tested methods of code development. But the methods are legally solid in theory.(yes this is risky behavior)
    2) Likes to have some code secret. Yes Google will never share some of the key code their search engine depends on.
    3) When attacked Google. Google might lose cool and do something rash appearing and scare the crud out of everyone who does not know what is going.
    That is it. Yes Google needs to work out how they respond to being attacked a little more openly so people are not like what in heck just happened.
    4) Is really the worry. Google does store a huge amount of information on everyone. This has been forced to be shared with the USA government.

    But really Google is not like Microsoft. Microsoft has given the NSA keys that they can put up a fake Windows update server and nuke your computer when you update from it. Yes the USA government contains the means to off switch Windows Computers. As well as the information they store.

    Notice Android devices only Google main company holds the keys to off switch them. Where windows machines NSA and Microsoft both have an active set of keys that could be used.

    Google is a upgrade from Microsoft even if they are not ideal they are still better.

    Really oldman most actions like Microsoft you see from Google are prevoked actions. Basically google is a bear that is well trained and is basically harmless to humans unless you are dumb enough to go up and poke it with a sharp stick or equal.

    Microsoft is more that wild bear that is hunting down humans that will hurt you just because you stupidly crossed the path were it is going.

    Yes they both kill. But its why they kill that is important.

  22. oldman says:

    “All the rest is just hot air.”

    Pog, Personally, I think anough evidence exists that google is actually worse than microsoft and not worthy of anyone in the community pinning its hopes on.

    If you wish to give them passes for acts that you would never give microsoft passes for, knock your socks off. Let us hope, however, for your sake that this is not another case of the sad triumph of hope over experience.

  23. Google’s “correspondence” was not a smoking gun but a description of the process they went through in switching to Dalvik. They could not come to terms with Sun/Oracle to use Java which was their first choice. Dalvik does not use Java so Oracle should mind its own business. They backtracked on promises made by Sun. The reason Google wanted the correspondence excluded was that it was triggered by an inquiry by the lawyers, “What happened?”. If the e-mail was addressed directly to the lawyer in that conversation it should have been considered private. The material is mostly irrelevant to the issues of the case and just a waste of time. Oracle’s case is falling apart with most of their patents being shot down and copyright being a non-starter since Google copied nothing. Google pointed out to the judge that Oracle had claimed legal precedents that did not exist… Rulings they cited were overturned by higher courts. Oracle has a very weak case if their lawyers are trying to slide stuff like that past the judge. He will not be amused. The judge has already limited potential damages to pocket change for Google. All the rest is just hot air.

  24. oldman says:

    ““This should send a clear warning to smaller companies Google might not license from you but might just buy you out instead if your patents are quality.””

    Sound familiar Pog? it should. This is precisely the kind of behavior that Microsoft engaged in and engages in to this day. WHen you add in the fact that that the portion of Android 3.x that counts has been closed by Google and add in the terms of the recent settlement that allow Googles correspondence to remain closed, you really begin to get what sure looks like a company that is nothing more than microsoft in open source drag.

    Remember Pog, bu$ine$$ is bu$ine$$.

  25. oiaohm wrote, “This should send a clear warning to smaller companies Google might not license from you but might just buy you out instead if your patents are quality.”

    Why is this a warning? Why is there any danger in being bought out? Smaller businesses are bought out by larger businesses everyday. It’s one way smaller businesses grow/evolve. Google cannot force anyone to sell what they don’t want to sell.

  26. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian really its not if you go back and look at the time line.

    Google had zero bids to acquire Motorola until Motorola threatened to use its patents against other Android Makers.

    In side 48 hours Google and the bid on the table to buy them out. Motorola was in fact expecting a licensing deal not a buyout. Motorola board was shocked by Google actions. Also what has shocked Motorola is Google had run the acquire past all its other Android partners first. So at no time was Google in fact operating alone.

    Also Google had been looking to buy Patents from other companies without any thing else to build a patent pool to defend android before that. Google has aquired some patents from IBM for that pool.

    So that Motorola produces something is not the reason it got aquired was not even crossing Google mind other than it could be a problem and better ask the other Android Partners first for approval. Not like Motorola has been going great against HTC and others.

    Yes Google aquired Motorola for the patents. The production side acquire was not ideal.

    Sorry Contrarian history agrees with my statements.

    Google could have aquired Motorola last year for less if they had wanted it for its production. What was the trigger Motorola threatening Android. If Motorola had not done that it would still be a independent company now and being asked to be part of the patent pool.

    This should send a clear warning to smaller companies Google might not license from you but might just buy you out instead if your patents are quality.

    Contrarian even if you dig far enough you can get statements out of Google that prove that its scorched earth defense. That at no point is google thinking Android=profit. Google is thinking Android=MS and Apple unable to do a Netscape to them. Bundle and lock them out.

    Please note ipad and iphone apple include the right to remove any program that interfaces with a product that competes with a Apple product or Apple sponsors product. WP7 and prior Windows CE also hidden away in the appstore conditions hides the same thing.

    So yes Google was facing possible scorched earth from Apple and Microsoft. So is responding to it with Android and Chromeos. This is a preemptive strike. War costs that simple.

    Yes the risks to Google main market is high. Little cost of Android to defend that is nothing. If it happens to scorch earth the mobile phone OS market so be it. Basically its not an option for Google to let Apple or MS win.

    This is also why Google has put out Chromeos as well as Android. Google cannot afford to lose this time. So 2 options had a better chance than 1.

  27. Contrarian says:

    “Motorola is about defending Android”

    That is a singularly stupid notion, even for you, #oiaohm!

  28. oiaohm says:

    oldman notice lot of the other companies making android devices are very happy about the google aquirement of Motorola.

    Think very carefully how did MS use full control of the destkop against Netscape. This is what google fears. There search engine and advertising revenue could dry up against that same abuse of power.

    Now Microsoft and Apple has been attacking hardware companies with patents. Avoiding attacking the android core project. Motorola is about defending Android.

    Also Motorola to pay there patent bills was serous-ally looking at use other patents they hold against other android members.

    Basically the scorched earth defense is to protect the search and advertising market of Google from being destroyed. Letting it be shield to be destroyed by patents was not an option.

    The acquirement of Motorola is a sign that Google is considering moving to a war footing to force fair competition.

    I expect both Microsoft and Apple to attempt to run to USA anti-trust to protect self from Motorola patents. But to be truthfully Motorola patents should be allowed to destroy both of them. They both have been using patents offensively to try to block competition products.

    Basically why was MS and Apple so stupid to attack Motorola. That right we cannot have a free operating system in the market maintained by hardware makers to ship product.

    Yes android is not the first Linux phone. Complete history of Linux phones is patent issues. Leading to more to be paid in patents than what it is to by MS phone OS’s. Yes more in MS patents than what MS sells there own OS for using those Patents. Anti-trust really should have stepped in on this racket a long time ago.

    Maybe google will at long last end this racket.

  29. oldman says:

    “Android is scorched earth defense. Google does not care about profit of android. Android exists for 1 reason and 1 reason only. So MS and Apple cannot have exclusive market control.”

    A intriguing analysis Mr. oiaohm. But how do you account for the acquisition of Motorola wireless?

  30. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian

    “Google makes nothing from Android apps” This is false. Ok does not make a lot but it does make some.

    Remember Microsoft threaten to kill Google by OS dominance in early 2000.

    Android is scorched earth defense. Google does not care about profit of android. Android exists for 1 reason and 1 reason only. So MS and Apple cannot have exclusive market control.

    Not every business operation has to be profitable.

    Phenom closed in the incorrect word. Untaged. You need to talk to the lead maintainer at google. Everything in the 3 series is in fact out there for download. The issue you are just not told what patches exactly make it up.

    Phenom the bing issue is in fact part of why Google got Motorola Mobile. Most phones with bing on are also paying MS for patents. Ie part of patent deal is bing. Microsoft is also in Google gun sites with the acquirement of Motorola.

    Googles partners want Google to go after Microsoft and Apple over their patent aggressive actions.

    Most FOSS proponent are more educated on what is going on than what you are Phenom.

    We are seeing a battle MS started when they threaten Google. Coming to a head 10 years latter. Problem is currently Google is holding the best cards.

  31. Android 4/Ice-cream Sandwich will be open. For whatever reasons, Google did not imagine a single OS working on smart phones and tablets so they have two trees that will merge. It’s not the end of the world, just a bump in the road to world domination/ubiquity. People are liking 2.x on tablets. I expect they will be in Apple-like ecstasy with 3.x and when 4.x arrives shortly. With 4.x more developers will find a better return on investment in Android/Linux.

  32. Phenom says:

    I think Google keep pushing Android as an attempt to enforce their searching and ad services, and possibly their cloud services on smart phones and tablets.

    At a point, however, the openness of Android played them a trick and we saw phones with Bing installed.

    Now Android is closed and I see no reason why a FOSS proponent would cheer the current popularity of Android.

  33. Contrarian says:

    “You would be the first one to exclaim that Android/Linux was a loser if it had a tiny share”

    No, I would not.

    “Do you think Google is doing this as a mental exercise?”

    Google makes nothing from Android apps. Google’s sales of cloud services and advertising have nothing to do with Android use. Google has no operative business plan involving Android and have been floundering to find one. “Build it and they shall come!” is the only thought, the same thing that propelled the .COM bubble. GOOG itself came up with a great way to monetize their search leadership and it has paid off, but nothing they say so far makes any sense vis-a-vis Android. They are trying to buy Motorola’s mobile biz to have a sort of stake in the race, but that is not so clear of a winning strategy either, even for Android as a money maker. Thinking that their “partners” are going to welcome them as a competitor is extremely wishful thinking, IMO.

    Bottom line, I have no idea why Google is pushing this. It is sort of like Scott McNealy in the Sun days taking potshots at Microsoft for no real good reason. We all know how that came out.

  34. You would be the first one to exclaim that Android/Linux was a loser if it had a tiny share.

    Google is a competitor and is using Android/Linux to make money in several ways: sales of apps, advertising and cloud services. It is a great idea to have an IT platform friendly to your main business. Do you think Google is doing this as a mental exercise?

  35. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian you have a short memory.

    Microsoft vs Apple. Apple was making a better machine still did not stop apple from losing.

    In fact Android as a project get coders from Samsung HTC Sony so on. Linked to how well android is selling for them. The does not benefit is not exactly true. Does not benefit in direct cash. But that is not the only traded item. Developer time is valuable.

    So yes losing sales or winning sales does have a effect on android.

  36. Contrarian says:

    I don’t deny that the Evo and others are possible technically superior to the iPhone, fellas. That was not the point, just as it is not particularly pertinent whether or not Linux is a better or worse OS than Windows or if LibreOffice can do all the things that MS Office can do and for free as in beer.

    My thesis is that the Apple products are setting the standard of comparison in the market and that their message has been sent to and received by just about every potential buyer in the world.

    “Android/Linux wins a big share that way.”

    Android is not a competitor and does not benefit from making a sale or suffer from losing one. Rather Samsung, HTC, Sony, et al, win or lose versus Apple (and RIM).

  37. oiaohm says:

    Contrarian I know a lot who had a iphone and now have android reason motorala and htc screen don’t shatter when you drop them. Iphones need to work on there strength of screen. Most common reason why people stop using them. 2 to 3 screen replaces latter the logic steps in why am I using this.

    Cheap clones of HTC and Motorala what ever you do don’t drop them most have Iphone like screens.

    Basically hardware quality is the reason why some Androids are selling ahead of iphones. In fact the best selling androids are normally the brands with the most tolerance to bad treatment.

    Also Androids have decent number of applications compare to Windows Phone 7.

    Motorola might not be releasing a Windows Phone 7 yet. Google acquire was just before the deal todo that was to be signed.

    Motorola was only considering it in 2009.

  38. I did not write that they chose the OS but that they choose the product in a competitive environment. Android/Linux wins a big share that way.

  39. I prefer this one, a side-by-side test of hardware and software.

    iPhone v HTC Evo

  40. Contrarian says:

    “This shows what x/Linux can do in fair competition with a good channel to retail shelves.”

    It doesn’t show that at all, #pogson. Your FOSS blinders are preventing you from seeing the broader picture. Do people choose a phone based on the OS? No.

    The first decision that they make is whether or not they must have an iPhone. A cute example, if you do not mind a bit of vulgarity, is here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg

    There is a band of the faithful who demand their BlackBerry, too. I think Barak Obama is in that number.

    What is left is a free for all between Samsung, HTC, Sony, Motorola, and even Nokia and some lesser names. Nokia, as we know, has MOL tossed their hat into the WP7 ring and we await some sort of result by the end of this year. The rest are mostly dabbling with one version of Android or another. People make decisions, not on Android, but on which brand offers what they want in terms of functions and style. Not much to choose from, but that is what is called a “shopping goods market”, like choosing Bulova or Hamilton watches when you cannot afford a Rolex.

    People are not choosing Android, #pogson, they are stopping short of iPhones and iPads.

Leave a Reply