Re: Motorola Droid
 

so did everyone that was talking baloney about how they cant wait for the n900 and would probably get the droid go out and get their droid today?

Re: Motorola Droid
 

talking baloney!?

Dude, if your food talks to you, you need to clean out your fridge more often.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Looking under the hood of Android, they seem to have thrown away 5-10 years of Linux development (not the kernel, but above it). Innovation in some areas, but steps backwards in others. I suspect they stripped down and (badly) rewrote so many things to be able to target lower end hardware, but hardware has advanced quickly in the last year. That decision may come back to bite them, if they can't rewrite their way out of it fast enough.

Are there any advantages to this "balance" of half-closed stuff, compared with a mostly-open system?
I can't see any advantage to having more closed things, but I'm genuinely interested in why you do.

The ability to tinker doesn't have to mean *you* tinker :-) It means others have more ability to make interesting apps and improvements (even in the main interfaces) for you to download and use.

I can see advantages in using Google's *apps* because they are good at some things, but those advantages will spread to other platforms too, partly from Google wanting to spread to other platforms like Maemo, and partly from other people writing good apps too now that the platform is available (as a phone). I'm sure I'll use some Google apps on my N900.

The N900 is the very first Maemo phone and looks a lot more advanced than the first Android phone did, which is a great sign for Maemo's future over the next year - if they can capture the imagination of good developers. It is likely to improve in the same way that Android has improved, but it is built on better technology underneath, hence my comment about Google's design may come back to bite them.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Here's my take as a developer:

- The number of Java developers these days far outweigh C/C++ developers. The 'majority' of good developers are motivated by money, they have a day job that pays very well and assuming they have a life they would more likely write iphone apps for the potential $$.
- I would trust Google developers over Nokia developers to improve any software issues. I have a very low rating of Nokia software based on the crap they've put out (Nokia email, OVI maps, OVI store, Files by OVI)
- rumours are google may create their own phone, this could cause them to keep the good stuff to themselves.
- The great advantage of Maemo is that is straight C/C++, very little learning curve.
- Maemo will need a paid APP store to gain traction in quality apps (not just small utilities). This is the only way to motivate 'large number of' developers to developer larger scale apps that require real maintainance/QA.
- For example, I intend to write some programs as I learn Maemo and those will be free. Beyond that, I would need to sell any more useful apps

Re: Motorola Droid
 

I went to the Verizon store this evening and played with the Droid for about 20 minutes. There are things I loved about it, and things I hated but in the end... I likely won't be buying it. A few bullet points:

The good:

-The screen is the the biggest, brightest, best screen I've ever seen. (How's that for alliteration?) It's vivid and very responsive. Oh and I didn't have to use my damn fingernail!

-The transitions from app to app were flawless. Smooth and fluid. (I wish the N900 looked this good.)

-The build quality felt great--metal and glass. Also, it really is amazing how thin this device is.

Now the bad:

-The keyboard is terrible. I am an average sized guy and I found it to be pretty close to unusable. Flat, crowded and very little travel. I actually found the on-screen keyboard to be better and I'm not fan of them. The D-pad takes up way too much space in addition to being gaudy.

-Sliding between home screens and utilizing the notification bar is laggy. I hate lag and was disappointed to see it with this hardware.

-Speaking of lag, the browser was pretty sluggish too. Scrolling/rendering did not rival the iPhone, Pre or N900.

-The camera is a piece of ****. I think it's likely software related, but in over 15 tries, I never got the device to autofocus properly. Not once.

Many of these issues could be fixed with a software update, but as of right now, I'm still in "wait and see" mode.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Err.. if you thought the Droid keyboard was crowded the n900 keyboard is going be even bunched closer together. The only reason why the n900 keyboard would be perceived better is that keys are raised instead of flash.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

I think the crowding feel is aggravated by the flatness of the keys. If they were domed more or larger, I honestly don't think it would be an issue. With the Droid, I found it difficult to not press more than one key.

I've heard much more positive remarks about the N900 keyboard, but I still want to try it for myself before I commit.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Also because your right thumb has to go over the overly large and poorly functioning d-pad. It get old after just a few minutes of typing.

Tried it for an hour. That and the camera were the main bad things.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Good point. I don't really understand why so much space was allocated to the D-pad. Honeslty, I don't understand why ANY space was allocated to the D-pad when such a beautiful touch screen is available to interact with.

Maybe I'm crazy, but this phone without the hardware keyboard would be an improvement.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

I tried the Droid out in the store today too and I have to agree, the keyboard sucks big time. The reviews I read that said it was bad really were being kind. Despite the keys being larger and the keyboard have a larger overall dimension than on a typical Blackberry, they were much harder to hit accurately. The keys and keyboard are so flat that it was almost impossible to hit a single key, without depressing other keys at the same time. It was really unthinkable how bad it was.

I totally don't agree that the N900 keyboard is going to feel more crowded. Because the N900 lacks a d-pad, the keyboard is larger and the keys take up more room. And I haven't seen anyone reporting that the N900 keyboard sucks (although it's not supposed to be the best), whereas pretty much all the early reviews on the Droid have complained about the keyboard.

What a waste. Motorola almost may as well not have bothered with the keyboard. I guess they're still fixated on the success that thin gave them with the Razor, as if all they have to do is make a thin phone and the masses will come. Thin has become a weird obsession and a curse for Motorola.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

I might be a little late with a reply, but anyway, thanks for reading the whole sermon. Not everyone does.


First off, Google's Android was created as an Iphone competitor in the first place - it wasn't made to be the best mobile Linux distro availible, or anything else like that for that matter. But Google had to keep a certain potential for the platform, due their later planes for the mobile market. But according to your post, Android was made as a Linux alternative in the first place, which it obviously wasn't.

I though it was kind of obvious, I mean, the 480x320 resolution cap (which "happened" to be the same as the Iphone, what a coincidence!), the Qualcomm 528 MHz CPU requirement (again, almost the same as the first Iphones) and the OS' other limitations (which all was shared with the Iphone, such as the lack of Bluetooth transfer, and so on)... all this made it obvious which market Google was targeting at. But this was only the beginning.

But you can't count a part of "the entire plan" as the reason why Android was made in the first place. Android, just like any other Google products, was made to control the entire world's information, and you can't disagree with this. No really, this should be obvious for everybody. If not, why do you think Android phones are constantly syncing with Google's servers, or with other (Google's) words "are always online". Now, who is being more honest: Google or Apple!? Decide yourself...

Google has two major projects in their sleeves right now - Android and Chrome OS - but they both have the same reason of existance (goal): to make users always connected to the web - or more specificly - to make everyone always being connected to Google's information database.


It's a different situation right now, as Android has evolved, and it isn't as limited as it was originally - but still - you can't deny the fact that Android was originally made to replace the Iphone. The later goal (after having the Iphone defeated) was to capture the entire market - worldwide. And that's probably why Google is only focusing on America right now, since the Iphone has yet to be defeated, and it can't be defeated in a region where it has never been dominant, right?

Re: Motorola Droid
 

As to Android and G1 being made to compete with the iPhone - any phone that comes out is deemed to be made to compete with the iPhone. This is merely the Steve Jobs reality distortion field extending to most blog writers. The G1 was very unlike the iPhone, it has a slide-out QWERTY, hard buttons, and wasn't a soap-bar without protrusions. Yeah, it had the same processor, but that is because manufacturers have a limited field to choose from - notice that the latest high-end smartphones out now will most-likely have the OMAP 3430.

As for Google wanting everyone to be always connected to their cloud - what company doesn't want a captive audience? The Google model is to have the information store in the cloud, which is a great idea for a lot of applications. You get the most reliable service wherever you can connect to the internet. Doesn't work for some applications, but it's a good model. Google gets to index your data in return so they can serve ads (unless you pay for Google Apps Premier Edition). That's their model. You may like the Blackberry push-email model better. Or the no-model iPhone. Your choice. Nothing evil about it.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

So I got to try out a live Droid (had looked at the store dummy last week). The keyboard isn't as bad as I thought it'd be. The keys are slightly domed. Typing is possible. Typing was as accurate as on the N900 for someone like me trying out both keyboards for the first time. The N900 was however handicapped by the weird lighting in the Chicago store, whereas the Droid has the benefit of full-power halogen vapor lamps at Best Buy. Still, the edge goes to the N900, because the fingers will have to move less, once we get used to the keyboard.

The screen is great on the Droid, but surprisingly, its capacitive nature is a drawback. It is vague, and has ghost movements because it detects finger moving around, even if you don't intend for the movement to be registered, such as when reorienting the device, etc. And the 4 soft-keys (Home, Menu, and 2 more that I forget) are a nice lifeline to get home, when the browser is locked up trying to process the ghost movements, but other times you "hit" them by mistake too, since they're right there at the edge of the screen. In addition, the phone kept going into "1X" from "3G" frequently, the rep said this was because of hands covering the antenna. In summary, the screen looked great, but its use wasn't too great. Obviously, I didn't have these issues with the N900, it didn't do anything I didn't want it to.

As for the cost, you can get it for $200 down (or $149 at Sears), and get by with a $40 voice + $30 data plan, which is quite nice. They have corporate discounts on the service, which is 18%, which takes a huge chunk off. Apparently T-Mo won't apply corporate discounts on the EM & EM+ plans (please correct me is this isn't the case).

So right now, the N900 has better and more hardware (about the only thing it doesn't have is a compass, but this seems to be unnecessary as long as you have a GPS lock). But the VZW monthly cost is lower.

Re: Motorola Droid
 

Amazing feat, considering Google started Android at least 2 years before anyone knew about the iPhone.

It wasn't made to compete with the iPhone. It was made to expand Google's sphere is influence, getting their apps (and adds) into more hands, in more places. They may have delayed it, in the last year, to make it more appropriate for the impact that the iPhone had upon the market, but that's its late phase development, not "in the first place".