Technology Android

[dilla]

It's a 100$ phone, at least it works! That's literally the price of a potato feature-phone a few years ago.
The iPhone SE costs over four times as much and is priced like an upper mid-range Android phone, and there's plenty of very decent Android phones in that price range.




Android is infinitely more open to Indie Developers. You know, those who really love the craft and do a lot of things just for the cause. iOS is where the money's at for the big devs who actually want to sell their apps for profit. Apple is also a big nazi enforcing gazillions of rules on the devs before their app can go live or become featured. That sometimes requires substantial investment just to make it to the App store. At the same time, a lot of bullshit apps from shitty devs using generic app-makers go through because they pass a generic Apple check-list and don't do anything important, so they are not scrutinized as much as more advanced apps.
At Google everything goes, and the Play Store regulates itself. The apps are auto-verified for security, while their efficiency and stability affect how they rank at the store, but all apps are welcome.

Personally, I much prefer Google's approach, but I wish the penalties for lower quality were larger though. Something is happening in that direction, as last year Google significantly increased the importance of stability and performance in relation to how the app ranks at the Play Store. It's still not where it should be though, as you can overcome that with sheer amounts of downloads and marketing budgets to rank higher anyway, so I hope things will improve.

For Apple it doubles up as quality control. You don't see too many shit apps doing malicious things from the App Store. And having used a lot of the third party options for Android, different devices have different results with an app and it takes a long time, sometimes, to figure it out. I do appreciate the options of Android. But iOS seems to get it right the first time and if the dev doesn't, there's pressure and consequences for not getting a fix out in time.


Switching gears to CPUs, did you hear about the i9 in the MBPs throttling after just five minutes of a heavy load? It struggles to even hit its base 2.9 Ghz speed and has been benchmarked as slower than its 2017 counterparts.

So far it has been one YouTuber with one unit that got these results. I'm not sure if there are others but it is concerning if it's not just a one-off. https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...p-up-with-intel-core-i9-chips-thermal-demands

Also, it shows Adobe hasn't been optimized for macOS as a Windows machine did a render in 7 minutes compared to 35 mins.

I didn't buy in to Apple's drop in quality until recently but it seems like every new product the past few years has had some glaring issues. 2016/17 MacBooks having the keyboard issue, the iPhone 6 issue, the rare iPhone 7 speaker blow out, the iMac Pro screen fucking up and requiring a whole new system because the screen is so fragile and integrated that you can't replace it easily, or at all.

I love macOS and I hope my 2017 lasts me at least another 3-4 years but I'm not sure Apple will have its reputation in-tact by then if things keep going the way they are.

 

[dilla]

Google hit with that fine.

Someone said this could affect Android in the EU.

 

[masta247]

For Apple it doubles up as quality control. You don't see too many shit apps doing malicious things from the App Store. And having used a lot of the third party options for Android, different devices have different results with an app and it takes a long time, sometimes, to figure it out. I do appreciate the options of Android. But iOS seems to get it right the first time and if the dev doesn't, there's pressure and consequences for not getting a fix out in time.


Switching gears to CPUs, did you hear about the i9 in the MBPs throttling after just five minutes of a heavy load? It struggles to even hit its base 2.9 Ghz speed and has been benchmarked as slower than its 2017 counterparts.

So far it has been one YouTuber with one unit that got these results. I'm not sure if there are others but it is concerning if it's not just a one-off. https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...p-up-with-intel-core-i9-chips-thermal-demands

Also, it shows Adobe hasn't been optimized for macOS as a Windows machine did a render in 7 minutes compared to 35 mins.

I didn't buy in to Apple's drop in quality until recently but it seems like every new product the past few years has had some glaring issues. 2016/17 MacBooks having the keyboard issue, the iPhone 6 issue, the rare iPhone 7 speaker blow out, the iMac Pro screen fucking up and requiring a whole new system because the screen is so fragile and integrated that you can't replace it easily, or at all.

I love macOS and I hope my 2017 lasts me at least another 3-4 years but I'm not sure Apple will have its reputation in-tact by then if things keep going the way they are.

There are many shitty apps on iOS, and many are not updated. I bought games that no longer work due to the 64-bit update, and didn't get any refunds. There's not much quality control for shitty apps. There is "quality control" in big-name apps or apps that do advanced things, or apps that compete with anything Apple already has. I think it's a mix of greed and security-theatre and forcing popular apps to work on iOS well to keep up the reputation. There aren't really any malicious apps on the Play Store, as Google Play automatically verifies apps for security, and you can see all the permissions that the apps ask you for. I think more control is on the user's side. You are also more likely to find apps that do exactly what you want on Google Play than Apple's App store. That said, I also have some apps installed that work better on the iPad than Android. Especially from US devs who prioritize iOS app quality, as they think it's a more common focus. There are many other devs who focus on Android or don't make iOS apps at all, which is especially common for utilities.

And regarding the i9, having 6 fast cores on a laptop will do that. It's very difficult to maintain 3ghz on 6 cores on a laptop at the current processes. The mobile i9 is a weird product, Intel needed it to show that it has SOMETHING to offer over AMD, and Apple had to use it to show that they have a product with such processor too, because they can't be too much behind the competition in their Pro lines. If it really throttles so badly, I'm surprised they still released it as is, but they'd have to redesign the chassis to facilitate better cooling (the chip is 50% hotter after all), which they probably didn't want to bother with.

Google hit with that fine.

Someone said this could affect Android in the EU.

It surely will. Likely Android devices won't come with Google's package of apps pre-installed, just the Play Store, with ability to download Google's apps like Chrome, Gmail etc. I think it's reasonable and I agree with EU's decision. OEMs were forced to pre-install the Google suite if they wanted to also have the Play Store. That's not cool. I'm all for anti-bloatware anyway.

 

[ARon]

I've had an S9 for around a month and just now was the first time I've gotten a warning that my battery was at 15%. New phones are nice. One cool thing is it tells me exactly what time it expects my phone to die

 

[masta247]

One cool thing is it tells me exactly what time it expects my phone to die

Ericsson phones of back in the day would do that. They had a "status" button that upon pressing at any time would show you the phone settings and how much longer the batter has to go (in estimated standby hours based on current usage, and continuous screen-on minutes, respectively). I thought it was brilliant, and 15 years later I am still missing that feature. While it wasn't always 100% accurate, it provided much more useful information and planning possibilities. Knowing that I have 35% of battery left isn't telling me as much as that I have 50 minutes of screen-on time or 5 hours standby.
I have no idea why it didn't catch up, with some makers even scrapping battery percentage (stock Android until the recent versions). I'm glad some makers are reverting this trend.

 

[dilla]

There are many shitty apps on iOS, and many are not updated. I bought games that no longer work due to the 64-bit update, and didn't get any refunds. There's not much quality control for shitty apps. There is "quality control" in big-name apps or apps that do advanced things, or apps that compete with anything Apple already has. I think it's a mix of greed and security-theatre and forcing popular apps to work on iOS well to keep up the reputation. There aren't really any malicious apps on the Play Store, as Google Play automatically verifies apps for security, and you can see all the permissions that the apps ask you for. I think more control is on the user's side. You are also more likely to find apps that do exactly what you want on Google Play than Apple's App store. That said, I also have some apps installed that work better on the iPad than Android. Especially from US devs who prioritize iOS app quality, as they think it's a more common focus. There are many other devs who focus on Android or don't make iOS apps at all, which is especially common for utilities.

And regarding the i9, having 6 fast cores on a laptop will do that. It's very difficult to maintain 3ghz on 6 cores on a laptop at the current processes. The mobile i9 is a weird product, Intel needed it to show that it has SOMETHING to offer over AMD, and Apple had to use it to show that they have a product with such processor too, because they can't be too much behind the competition in their Pro lines. If it really throttles so badly, I'm surprised they still released it as is, but they'd have to redesign the chassis to facilitate better cooling (the chip is 50% hotter after all), which they probably didn't want to bother with.



It surely will. Likely Android devices won't come with Google's package of apps pre-installed, just the Play Store, with ability to download Google's apps like Chrome, Gmail etc. I think it's reasonable and I agree with EU's decision. OEMs were forced to pre-install the Google suite if they wanted to also have the Play Store. That's not cool. I'm all for anti-bloatware anyway.

That’s what I felt about the i9 choice by Apple, too. That Intel was shitting themselves, like you said a year ago, about Ryzen and it’s performance with like 30% more efficiency. And the chassis of the MBP has been under fire too, where users complain that Apple is obsessed with making the MBP as small and thin as possible and it fucked the keyboard up and now the i9 fiasco.

I felt some buyers remorse with the announcement of the i9 and missing out on that but after reading these throttling issues, I’m ok. It will take another cycle or two before Apple tries to make improvements in the heat issue, much like it took two plus years for them to properly address the the keyboard issues.

 

[ARon]

Ericsson phones of back in the day would do that. They had a "status" button that upon pressing at any time would show you the phone settings and how much longer the batter has to go (in estimated standby hours based on current usage, and continuous screen-on minutes, respectively). I thought it was brilliant, and 15 years later I am still missing that feature. While it wasn't always 100% accurate, it provided much more useful information and planning possibilities. Knowing that I have 35% of battery left isn't telling me as much as that I have 50 minutes of screen-on time or 5 hours standby.
I have no idea why it didn't catch up, with some makers even scrapping battery percentage (stock Android until the recent versions). I'm glad some makers are reverting this trend.

Yeah I like it, seems like a useful feature. Then Samsung has so much other shit I hate. I wish they'd let us pick and choose what to install

 

[dilla]

Boy, the Tab 4 seems really underwhelming. 835 and 4 GB of RAM.

Might this be the last android tablet we see from a major OEM? I know the. Chinese companies will always make some no name tablet on the cheap but Samsung has to feel real shitty putting this crap on the market for $650.

 

[dilla]

Has anyone tried Googe Podcasts? Anything different from well known podcast apps like Pocket Casts?

I read it was getting Auto support soon but wasn't sure if it offered anything more than the established apps.

I also started using Google News a month ago. Pretty nice.

 

[dilla]

Evleaks said Android P comes out August 20

 

[masta247]

Boy, the Tab 4 seems really underwhelming. 835 and 4 GB of RAM.

Might this be the last android tablet we see from a major OEM? I know the. Chinese companies will always make some no name tablet on the cheap but Samsung has to feel real shitty putting this crap on the market for $650.

See, to me this is incredibly confusing. There isn't even much market for a tablet that's slower than your phone, that's also priced like a faster high-end phone or almost as high as a really properly high-end tablet (the iPad Pros). Not only is this a stupid product in terms of technology, but also it's a stupid product from the business perspective.
Samsung isn't competing in the high-end tablet market at this point, the only thing they are successfully competing with are premium portable displays (which are cheaper and you can connect those to faster phones though!).

It also continues to paints a really grim picture of the Android tablet landscape, as this is still the best Android tablet..

Evleaks said Android P comes out August 20

I think I lost interest in new software updates until proven otherwise. There hasn't been anything new that's worth mentioning in Android for a few years now. Surely nothing justified a whole number release. If you patch a couple things and readjust some elements in the UI, that's a minor (decimal) update. Case in point, 4.0 to 4.1, to 4.2 and then 4.3 were MUCH bigger updates - each of those decimal updates did more than 5.0 to 6.0, then to 7.0 and 8.0.
Hyping up Marshmallow, Nougat or Oreo like it's a new full release undermines the value of your major updates and shows that you don't have anything new to offer. Since both Google and Apple did exactly that the last couple of times in a row now, I'm not going to think about Android P much. Most users wouldn't even notice much of a difference if they were still on Lollipop, because there weren't any substantial improvements ever since. Heck, I would be equally fine running Lollipop, and I would be even happier still running iOS 10.

 

[dilla]

See, to me this is incredibly confusing. There isn't even much market for a tablet that's slower than your phone, that's also priced like a faster high-end phone or almost as high as a really properly high-end tablet (the iPad Pros). Not only is this a stupid product in terms of technology, but also it's a stupid product from the business perspective.
Samsung isn't competing in the high-end tablet market at this point, the only thing they are successfully competing with are premium portable displays (which are cheaper and you can connect to faster phones though!).

It also paints a really grim picture of the Android tablet landscape, as this is still the best Android tablet..




I think I lost interest in new software updates until proven otherwise. There hasn't been anything new that's worth mentioning in Android for a few years now. Surely nothing justified a whole number release. If you patch a couple things and readjust some things in the UI, that's a minor update. Hyping it up like a new release undermines the value of major updates and show that you don't have anything new to offer. Since both Apple and Google did that the last couple of times in a row now, I'm not going to think about Android P much.

This is true. I wasn't up in arms about a delayed Oreo release for my phone, unlike many people on the S7 forums that were in tears saying this was their last Samsung phone because the update to Oreo took so long. I noticed nothing different in Oreo, aside from some minor tweaks. Other users say their battery life has gone up or down, considerably. And there's reports of odd bugs here and there. I wonder if they still think it was worth waiting and complaining all that time about Samsung releasing Oreo. For a 2.5 year old phone.

The first tablet I ever wanted was an Android tablet. When Honeycomb was released concurrently with the XOOM in 2011, I thought tablets were the future. That was also around the time when there was a weird fascination with netbooks, and those were supposed to be the future, too, at the time.

My dad has an XPS 11 that he bought years ago and still uses occasionally so that's my experience with 2 in 1 notebooks (which, ten years ago, were originally called "tablet PCs") and while it's nice, I haven't used one on the go. I don't think it would be fun to use if you travel a lot with your notebook. Maybe newer 2 in 1s, like the Lenovo Yoga, are more ergonomic and Win10 might have made some UI tweaks to make the touch screen more user friendly when used in tablet mode, but I still see iPads being used almost exclusively by the business world.

I've mentioned pharm reps that come in to promote new drugs and everything is done on an iPad. Signing for receipt of drugs, showing websites and PowerPoints, etc. is all done that way. People have been saying that the tablet market has been dying for the last several years but unless something new comes out that is more convenient that the tablet form factor, I still see them being used for everyday tasks. Business or casual. Or academic, for students that are now going paperless with the iPad Pro.

I wonder what tech savvy folks that are looking to go paperless think when they see something like the iPad Pro and then the Surface Book. The Book is almost triple the cost of an iPad, double the iPad Pro, but it is definitely more powerful than even the Pro. But do people need that kind of power on the go and do people prefer mobile Ops (Android or iOS) over desktop OSs, now? Because iPad sales may be down, but they're still selling. The hype around the next Pro and its rumors is just like the hype around a new flagship phone. Could be the Apple Effect too, but I don't think Apple would be this invested in the iPad if the future of tablets looked bleak.

What does Google do if the Tab 4 sucks ass, which it most likely will? Any OEM can still port Android to a tablet, right? But can Google throw some weight around and require big OEMs to start producing flagship tablets to compete with the iPad, lest the Android tablet market really just shits itself and dies in a corner alone? Google has to be worried about a lack of Android tablets stepping in to the ring with the iPad. And aside from making their own branded tablet, like the N7/10, they're still heavily reliant on other OEMs like Moto and Samsung and LG to put out quality hardware for a tablet and getting it to play nice with their custom UI and deliver an experience that can compete with iOS. But Google seems very aloof about it.

 

[masta247]

I wonder what tech savvy folks that are looking to go paperless think when they see something like the iPad Pro and then the Surface Book. The Book is almost triple the cost of an iPad, double the iPad Pro, but it is definitely more powerful than even the Pro. But do people need that kind of power on the go and do people prefer mobile Ops (Android or iOS) over desktop OSs, now?

I see them as completely different devices. I like my iPad for simple media or information consumption. I use it in bed, sometimes I bring it with me to read outside. It's not a work device other than for simple data presentation purposes.

The Surface devices are not only faster, they have a full desktop OS (which isn't at all comparable to mobile ones), the connectivity and peripherals that all work with it, and actual serious games. They are still completely distinct classes of products, except for people who have really simple requirements. The Surface devices aren't as good for quick and simple usage (the touch input is useless on Windows), while the iPads aren't useful for any serious work other than at the very best being a support device. I bought the Surface Pro hoping it will also replace my iPad, but it didn't do that at all. They can look similar, but they serve completely different purposes.

I think the gap will only go away after the mobile OS and desktop OSes merge and run the same software while being as convenient to use for basic tasks. Apple has it easier, as the competition is either mobile only (Google) or full-on productivity and gaming only (Microsoft). Apple is fully mobile AND has a basic productivity OS, so they will likely be the first ones to attempt to close the gap. Realistically, an iPad that could run the simple Safari and Apple Store apps, but also allow you to run MacOS programs well (full-fledged Adobe suite, coding, and serious productivity work) in one would be a winner. They do need MacOs and iOS unified for that to happen though.

Then it's Microsoft who could compete if they managed to redefine Windows. They tried that with Windows 8 but failed, so a new attempt would have to be absolutely different and better, but they could pull it off best due to having by far the greatest software base. A Surface device that could play Windows games and have full access to all productivity tools, if also given an actually convenient mobile layer would be a winner, except they are completely missing the mobile layer at the moment, and have so far seriously failed at making it happen.
Android would have no way to compete then, as they rely solely on simple mobile apps, and they wouldn't be able to compete with the immense productivity, gaming and legacy software ecosystem of Windows if Microsoft were to succeed at making their OS mobile friendly too. Both Microsoft and Google are confused companies at the moment, so I assume Apple might be first to pull that off, with Microsoft to follow again, and Google trying to catch up by porting as many tools and games as possible into their mobile apps format.

I wonder if, when and how this would unfold.

What does Google do if the Tab 4 sucks ass, which it most likely will? Any OEM can still port Android to a tablet, right? But can Google throw some weight around and require big OEMs to start producing flagship tablets to compete with the iPad, lest the Android tablet market really just shits itself and dies in a corner alone? Google has to be worried about a lack of Android tablets stepping in to the ring with the iPad. And aside from making their own branded tablet, like the N7/10, they're still heavily reliant on other OEMs like Moto and Samsung and LG to put out quality hardware for a tablet and getting it to play nice with their custom UI and deliver an experience that can compete with iOS. But Google seems very aloof about it.

Apple is invested in tablets because there is still a market, and they are now the only ones making decent ones. The competition is way too weak now. It's not like the Nexus 7 vs iPad when both were great, comparable devices, both had stores with tablet apps in their infancy and the Nexus came with a ground-breaking price of 199$. Those were the tablet golden days, no wonder sales were much higher.
Now the situation is like Windows Phone vs everything else, with Android tablets being the Windows phone. Nobody cares about tablet apps in the Android ecosystem, the tablets suck, and less makers care about making them any better.

I think Google is a confused company at this point. They also grew overconfident due to their legacy - their best products are still the ones that started during their golden age. The way they react to changes now isn't really great. They might actually believe that tablets are a lost cause and a niche market not worth bothering with, but I think that's wrong. I think tablets will stay alive. After their golden age, people weren't replacing their tablets as frequently as other devices, but I think lots of people use them and will continue to do so until something similar (like a real 2-in-1 successfully merging mobile and destkop OSes) replaces them.

 

[dilla]

I see them as completely different devices. I like my iPad for simple media or information consumption. I use it in bed, sometimes I bring it with me to read outside. It's not a work device other than for simple data presentation purposes.

The Surface devices are not only faster, they have a full desktop OS (which isn't at all comparable to mobile ones), the connectivity and peripherals that all work with it, and actual serious games. They are still completely distinct classes of products, except for people who have really simple requirements. The Surface devices aren't as good for quick and simple usage (the touch input is useless on Windows), while the iPads aren't useful for any serious work other than at the very best being a support device. I bought the Surface Pro hoping it will also replace my iPad, but it didn't do that at all. They can look similar, but they serve completely different purposes.

I think the gap will only go away after the mobile OS and desktop OSes merge and run the same software while being as convenient to use for basic tasks. Apple has it easier, as the competition is either mobile only (Google) or full-on productivity and gaming only (Microsoft). Apple is fully mobile AND has a basic productivity OS, so they will likely be the first ones to attempt to close the gap. Realistically, an iPad that could run the simple Safari and Apple Store apps, but also allow you to run MacOS programs well (full-fledged Adobe suite, coding, and serious productivity work) in one would be a winner. They do need MacOs and iOS unified for that to happen though.

Then it's Microsoft who could compete if they managed to redefine Windows. They tried that with Windows 8 but failed, so a new attempt would have to be absolutely different and better, but they could pull it off best due to having by far the greatest software base. A Surface device that could play Windows games and have full access to all productivity tools, if also given an actually convenient mobile layer would be a winner, except they are completely missing the mobile layer at the moment, and have so far seriously failed at making it happen.
Android would have no way to compete then, as they rely solely on simple mobile apps, and they wouldn't be able to compete with the immense productivity, gaming and legacy software ecosystem of Windows if Microsoft were to succeed at making their OS mobile friendly too. Both Microsoft and Google are confused companies at the moment, so I assume Apple might be first to pull that off, with Microsoft to follow again, and Google trying to catch up by porting as many tools and games as possible into their mobile apps format.

I wonder if, when and how this would unfold.




Apple is invested in tablets because there is still a market, and they are now the only ones making decent ones. The competition is way too weak now. It's not like the Nexus 7 vs iPad when both were great, comparable devices, both had stores with tablet apps in their infancy and the Nexus came with a ground-breaking price of 199$. Those were the tablet golden days, no wonder sales were much higher.
Now the situation is like Windows Phone vs everything else, with Android tablets being the Windows phone. Nobody cares about tablet apps in the Android ecosystem, the tablets suck, and less makers care about making them any better.

I think Google is a confused company at this point. They also grew overconfident due to their legacy - their best products are still the ones that started during their golden age. The way they react to changes now isn't really great. They might actually believe that tablets are a lost cause and a niche market not worth bothering with, but I think that's wrong. I think tablets will stay alive. After their golden age, people weren't replacing their tablets as frequently as other devices, but I think lots of people use them and will continue to do so until something similar (like a real 2-in-1 successfully merging mobile and destkop OSes) replaces them.

I think I've read some rumors for some time now that say that iOS and macOS may be merging soon. But I think it was the other way around, where macOS could run iOS apps. I think that's what I read, but I could be wrong. But it is also possible that Apple masters getting iOS on macOS first and then just flips it over and gets iOS to get macOS stuff. I'm no engineer so I don't know how easy or hard that it is, but considering Apple is doing it with two OSs that are theirs, I imagine it to be faster than others. Actually, Google and MS don't have both anymore, unless you count Chrome OS and Android, but the former is still so niche outside education users/student with Chromebooks.

So Apple does have plans to do this but I feel like the mobile OSs of today need an overhaul before we start bringing desktop apps in to play. I don't know how exactly, but it needs the simplicity of just tapping an app to open and the ability to multi task easily, while having a UI that makes it easier to do so. On Android, switching between apps is OK; I just double tap the menu button quickly and it brings up the app that was open before the one I'm currently on. But I think it needs to go beyond that, maybe with a gesture, like in macOS. And some sort of taskbar to easily move between apps. But then I feel like we're coming full-circle back to a desktop UI on a mobile device, and we already have those. The art in doing all of this would be preventing it from simply being a spruced-up desktop OS.

 

[masta247]

^Yup, pretty much that's the problem that Microsoft couldn't get right. To be fair, their attempts were horribly stupid.

Yeah, Google and Microsoft don't have both, that's why I think Apple might be the first one. Microsoft has a big winning card in their hands in form of supporting every software in existence, except they don't know how to use it to its full advantage in the mobile world, because they can't get the 'mobile' aspect right. It's quite sad to see, really.

Windows 8 was such a failure, even though surely in its infancy someone there had the perfect idea. They just messed it up beyond words in its implementation. It's also weird how they tried to make a brand new, parallel Windows Mobile OS. I'm glad they killed it, as I hope they will just figure out how to make their main OS mobile instead, by adding the simplicity that you described. I hope Apple also merges the two Oses - simplicity of iOS, that also runs the MacOS software. That would be the next worthy progression and the next big thing imho.

When Windows 8 came up, I saw some leaked mock-ups for several alternative user interface options that were ultimately rejected in favor of tiles, and I was really frustrated, as some were really brilliant, and the Windows tile UI was by far the worst idea. I know that it is possible to make it right, and it's rather a matter of time and business decisions. It is surely possible at least for tablets, as phone screens might be too small for most desktop programs as they are. Imagine an iPad, with its simplicity, capable of also running all the software and games. I think Microsoft is trying to go in that direction with their Surface line, but it's been a while and it's still incredibly far from what they aimed for. It's more of a tablet awkwardly running a 100% desktop OS when in tablet mode. In laptop mode, it's just a weird, good quality laptop.

 

[dilla]

^Yup, pretty much that's the problem that Microsoft couldn't get right. To be fair, their attempts were horribly stupid.

Yeah, Google and Microsoft don't have both, that's why I think Apple might be the first one. Microsoft has a big winning card in their hands in form of supporting every software in existence, except they don't know how to use it to its full advantage in the mobile world, because they can't get the 'mobile' aspect right. It's quite sad to see, really.

Windows 8 was such a failure, even though surely in its infancy someone there had the perfect idea. They just messed it up beyond words in its implementation. It's also weird how they tried to make a brand new, parallel Windows Mobile OS. I'm glad they killed it, as I hope they will just figure out how to make their main OS mobile instead, by adding the simplicity that you described. I hope Apple also merges the two Oses - simplicity of iOS, that also runs the MacOS software. That would be the next worthy progression and the next big thing imho.

When Windows 8 came up, I saw some leaked mock-ups for several alternative user interface options that were ultimately rejected in favor of tiles, and I was really frustrated, as some were really brilliant, and the Windows tile UI was by far the worst idea. I know that it is possible to make it right, and it's rather a matter of time and business decisions. It is surely possible at least for tablets, as phone screens might be too small for most desktop programs as they are. Imagine an iPad, with its simplicity, capable of also running all the software and games. I think Microsoft is trying to go in that direction with their Surface line, but it's been a while and it's still incredibly far from what they aimed for. It's more of a tablet awkwardly running a 100% desktop OS when in tablet mode. In laptop mode, it's just a weird, good quality laptop.

Oh man, I totally forgot about the tiles in Win8. They were god awful. I remember when I had to install/upgrade several computers at work to Win 8 and instantly realized how great 7 was on its own. The upgrade to 10 was much better and I like 10 when I use it.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

Has anyone tried Googe Podcasts? Anything different from well known podcast apps like Pocket Casts?

I read it was getting Auto support soon but wasn't sure if it offered anything more than the established apps.

I also started using Google News a month ago. Pretty nice.

Yeah, both are really nice. Not sure if the other cast apps offer smart speaker compatibility/functionality. But this is similar to YouTube/Google Play Movies & TV, Google Play Books etc where you can pick up where you left off from another device (e.g. stop listening on your phone and then continue on your Google Home).

 

[dilla]

Yeah, both are really nice. Not sure if the other cast apps offer smart speaker compatibility/functionality. But this is similar to YouTube/Google Play Movies & TV, Google Play Books etc where you can pick up where you left off from another device (e.g. stop listening on your phone and then continue on your Google Home).

Nice, I might have to go this route in the future after my favorite sports radio station became exclusive to the Radio app and took themselves off of TuneIn Radio.

 

[dilla]

Maybe I was too high on getting Chinese OEMs to sell more phones in the US

https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-chinese-phone-zte-huawei-spying-2018-8

I think it was discovered a year or two ago but not much was made about it until Trump lifted the ban on ZTE phones. Now it seems people take that intel more seriously now. Especially the DNC lol

 

[masta247]

Maybe I was too high on getting Chinese OEMs to sell more phones in the US

https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-chinese-phone-zte-huawei-spying-2018-8

I think it was discovered a year or two ago but not much was made about it until Trump lifted the ban on ZTE phones. Now it seems people take that intel more seriously now. Especially the DNC lol

If you're a politician or deal with company secrets, you're going to be potentially spied on. The difference is you're going to leak info to China as opposed to American or other security agencies. I don't think there's much of a difference, but at least the Chinese are unlikely to act against you for what you keep on your phone. If anything, they might just use the information for political intel about your country at worst.

I'm surprised they have to warn anyone though. For a normal, private person, ZTE and Huaweii are going to be as secure or even more secure than any other flagship, as you or me are not worth anyone's resources. All phone software has backdoors with the potential to be accessed by national security agencies and others. We know that from the NSA leaks by now.