I?m sharing my observations over the past 3 years. I?m writing everything from the top of my head, so if anything I?m saying is incorrect or misinterpreted I have no problem being corrected. I will be mentioning devices and manufacturers only for reference (not to criticise).
THEN
As I?ve said in the past, my first smartphone was the EVO3D. At that time I thought the iPhone was the phone to have due to it?s popularity, build quality, screen, camera, battery life, responsiveness, and iTunes integration. I?ll admit I?ve had many debates with people who owned iPhones to try and show them how my EVO3D was better. My only comeback demonstrations were the larger display, 3D video playback, and the fact that I could expand the storage using an SD card. I remember also showing how I could replace my battery, but I was mocked when they said I needed that option because the battery life of Android devices ?suck?.
I had concluded that iPhone users viewed Android devices as cheap, slow devices with inferior displays and battery life. Remember the comments when Instagram was ported to Android? I was sure that things would change and that the stigma (I had conjured in my brain) about Androids would be changed. I think the OG EVO and Galaxy S2 were the 2 major devices in my opinion, that had functionality and specs that could rival the iPhone. I saw the original Galaxy Note as a device that grabbed people?s attention based on it?s looks/size alone.
NOW
Early this year, the first crop of devices from Android OEMS that I viewed as the ones to finally give the iPhone a challenge were the: EVO4GLTE, HOX, HOS, and SGS3. The EVO4GLTE and HOX had a display that looked better than the iPhone. They both had good build quality, an amazing display, camera, and could do both calls and data at the same time (EVO4GLTE). The HTC One S had the unique manufacturing process for it?s unibody shell. The Samsung Galaxy S3 brought a refreshed design, excellent camera, solid construction, vibrant user interface, software features that were in a league of their own, and one of the best AMOLED displays on the market.
By now I thought the Android devices were aiming towards quality and efficiently rather than relying solely on superior hardware specs to get the same performance and efficiency of the iPhone (I believe from a technical standpoint that the iOS operating system has an advantage that allows for great performance without the need for higher hardware specs). I also noticed that HTC for example was going for the unibody approach, non-removable battery, and in most cases non-expandable storage. I saw no difference between this and the iPhone with regards to hardware configuration (it also didn?t seem to have a negative impact on the iPhone?s sales nor tarnish its image). The Nexus devices also seemed to be following this same approach. Other manufactures were now using very good camera sensors and software (Samsung) and continued the tradition of giving the user the option to expand device storage and a removable battery (which could be replaced with a larger capacity or spare battery). OEMs that had skinned UIs, now had improved performance but kept the user customization factor .
As the year went on I began to notice that a certain disposition began developing in the Android community. I remember iPhone users I knew were proudly announcing that they had the best smartphone on the market based on the aspects mentioned above, along with the sales numbers and popularity. Now it seems that the same mindset has found its way into the Android Community. I?ve even seen comments were users claimed that their device?s manufacturer represented Android.
My only evidence to support my view is what I?ve seen in the comments section for an article reviewing or comparing Android devices. I?m sure various editors have devoted time and effort presenting a well structured and granular review. Many aspects of a device and methods for testing and reviewing were performed. Picture galleries, videos, opinions (objective and subjective), and closing arguments were covered in most cases. However, in the comments section I see more mention of batteries and SD cards, than the topics that were covered in the review (if that device lacks either of those features). Also I see arguments about the lack of on-screen buttons and skinned UIs from time to time. It?s as if there was no point in writing reviews covering any aspect of a device other than its battery capacity, removable battery capability, and storage capacity.
If I were to look at the Android user community and make an observation, I?d say that there are some who prefer an Android device to have a removable battery and SD slot. If not it is an inferior device. Some prefer that OEMs improve their build quality and hardware/software efficiency to consider a device superior. I can understand a person having a preference, but the tone of the comments appears to draw a line that separates the criteria that must be met. What I find even more disturbing are the suggestions that an everyday user actually considers those factors as a mandate for purchasing. I?ve read statements that suggest if a manufacturer would ?listen to its users and offer a removable battery and SD slot?, they would sell more devices, but that would contradict the iPhone?s success. In the same vein some say users don?t care about build quality and efficiency (again how was the iPhone?s successful?).
I never thought I?d see Android users arguing with and mocking each other in the same manner that iPhone users used to do to Android owners. Maybe it?s just me, but I was glad to see the S3 have the sales success it did for the sake of an Android device being a top seller. But I saw that lead to the ?my device is better than anything else on the market? and ?anything that doesn?t have SD and removable battery sucks? type comments. I personally feel that without a removable battery (or high capacity battery) and an SD card, an Android phone is viewed as a failure? If a device doesn?t have great build quality, efficient engineering, and non-expandable storage, then it?s moving away from Google?s initiative and vision (based on what I?ve seen in the latest Nexus line of devices). Me personally I love devices with high quality engineering. At the same time I feel that if a device doesn?t have an SD card slot, it should have sufficient on-board storage for the high-quality media it produces and uses. As for the battery, if it will be non-removable, the highest capacity possible should be used. The Droid DNA is prime example of efficient engineering being used to maximize the use of a small capacity battery (for it?s size). Imagine it running on a 2500 - 3000 mAh battery given it?s current runtime optimization.
I?m curious if anyone else has the same observation (Android OEMs and users heading in opposite directions) or something totally different. If you think I need to take it easy on the sherm, I won?t take offense
. At the very least I hope that I?ve entertained your boredom. Thanks for reading.
THEN
As I?ve said in the past, my first smartphone was the EVO3D. At that time I thought the iPhone was the phone to have due to it?s popularity, build quality, screen, camera, battery life, responsiveness, and iTunes integration. I?ll admit I?ve had many debates with people who owned iPhones to try and show them how my EVO3D was better. My only comeback demonstrations were the larger display, 3D video playback, and the fact that I could expand the storage using an SD card. I remember also showing how I could replace my battery, but I was mocked when they said I needed that option because the battery life of Android devices ?suck?.
I had concluded that iPhone users viewed Android devices as cheap, slow devices with inferior displays and battery life. Remember the comments when Instagram was ported to Android? I was sure that things would change and that the stigma (I had conjured in my brain) about Androids would be changed. I think the OG EVO and Galaxy S2 were the 2 major devices in my opinion, that had functionality and specs that could rival the iPhone. I saw the original Galaxy Note as a device that grabbed people?s attention based on it?s looks/size alone.
NOW
Early this year, the first crop of devices from Android OEMS that I viewed as the ones to finally give the iPhone a challenge were the: EVO4GLTE, HOX, HOS, and SGS3. The EVO4GLTE and HOX had a display that looked better than the iPhone. They both had good build quality, an amazing display, camera, and could do both calls and data at the same time (EVO4GLTE). The HTC One S had the unique manufacturing process for it?s unibody shell. The Samsung Galaxy S3 brought a refreshed design, excellent camera, solid construction, vibrant user interface, software features that were in a league of their own, and one of the best AMOLED displays on the market.
By now I thought the Android devices were aiming towards quality and efficiently rather than relying solely on superior hardware specs to get the same performance and efficiency of the iPhone (I believe from a technical standpoint that the iOS operating system has an advantage that allows for great performance without the need for higher hardware specs). I also noticed that HTC for example was going for the unibody approach, non-removable battery, and in most cases non-expandable storage. I saw no difference between this and the iPhone with regards to hardware configuration (it also didn?t seem to have a negative impact on the iPhone?s sales nor tarnish its image). The Nexus devices also seemed to be following this same approach. Other manufactures were now using very good camera sensors and software (Samsung) and continued the tradition of giving the user the option to expand device storage and a removable battery (which could be replaced with a larger capacity or spare battery). OEMs that had skinned UIs, now had improved performance but kept the user customization factor .
As the year went on I began to notice that a certain disposition began developing in the Android community. I remember iPhone users I knew were proudly announcing that they had the best smartphone on the market based on the aspects mentioned above, along with the sales numbers and popularity. Now it seems that the same mindset has found its way into the Android Community. I?ve even seen comments were users claimed that their device?s manufacturer represented Android.
My only evidence to support my view is what I?ve seen in the comments section for an article reviewing or comparing Android devices. I?m sure various editors have devoted time and effort presenting a well structured and granular review. Many aspects of a device and methods for testing and reviewing were performed. Picture galleries, videos, opinions (objective and subjective), and closing arguments were covered in most cases. However, in the comments section I see more mention of batteries and SD cards, than the topics that were covered in the review (if that device lacks either of those features). Also I see arguments about the lack of on-screen buttons and skinned UIs from time to time. It?s as if there was no point in writing reviews covering any aspect of a device other than its battery capacity, removable battery capability, and storage capacity.
If I were to look at the Android user community and make an observation, I?d say that there are some who prefer an Android device to have a removable battery and SD slot. If not it is an inferior device. Some prefer that OEMs improve their build quality and hardware/software efficiency to consider a device superior. I can understand a person having a preference, but the tone of the comments appears to draw a line that separates the criteria that must be met. What I find even more disturbing are the suggestions that an everyday user actually considers those factors as a mandate for purchasing. I?ve read statements that suggest if a manufacturer would ?listen to its users and offer a removable battery and SD slot?, they would sell more devices, but that would contradict the iPhone?s success. In the same vein some say users don?t care about build quality and efficiency (again how was the iPhone?s successful?).
I never thought I?d see Android users arguing with and mocking each other in the same manner that iPhone users used to do to Android owners. Maybe it?s just me, but I was glad to see the S3 have the sales success it did for the sake of an Android device being a top seller. But I saw that lead to the ?my device is better than anything else on the market? and ?anything that doesn?t have SD and removable battery sucks? type comments. I personally feel that without a removable battery (or high capacity battery) and an SD card, an Android phone is viewed as a failure? If a device doesn?t have great build quality, efficient engineering, and non-expandable storage, then it?s moving away from Google?s initiative and vision (based on what I?ve seen in the latest Nexus line of devices). Me personally I love devices with high quality engineering. At the same time I feel that if a device doesn?t have an SD card slot, it should have sufficient on-board storage for the high-quality media it produces and uses. As for the battery, if it will be non-removable, the highest capacity possible should be used. The Droid DNA is prime example of efficient engineering being used to maximize the use of a small capacity battery (for it?s size). Imagine it running on a 2500 - 3000 mAh battery given it?s current runtime optimization.
I?m curious if anyone else has the same observation (Android OEMs and users heading in opposite directions) or something totally different. If you think I need to take it easy on the sherm, I won?t take offense
. At the very least I hope that I?ve entertained your boredom. Thanks for reading.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram