| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| 'Google's Nexus 4, 7, 10 strategy: openness at all costs' |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-10-30 19:15:56 |
| "We know what Nexus means now. There can no longer be any doubt: a Nexus device is about openness first and foremost. That does not mean Google won't make compromises with the Nexus program. It simply means that Google will only make compromises when it comes to increasing openness. Why? Because Google benefits from open devices as much, or more than you do. Last year the technology sphere was busily discussing whether or not the Verizon Galaxy Nexus was a 'true' Nexus device. This year we have an answer: a Nexus controlled by a carrier is no Nexus. Rather than get in bed with Verizon, Sprint, or AT&T to produce an LTE version of the Nexus 4, we have HSPA+ only. Even the new Nexus 7 with mobile data is limited to this enhanced 3G standard." Interesting take on the whole thing - reeks a bit of finding a reason for a feature deficiency, but it does fit into the available facts. |
|
| The 400 lb gorilla for me... |
| By kevmoos on 2012-10-30 22:08:14 |
| ...is the artificial restriction placed on memory. Memory is cheap as dirt and with MicroSDHC you can hotswap 32GB cards if you were to reach that large capacity. I see a usage case where I install a music card with all my music apps and use the phone when I go jogging, then sub it out for productivity apps when I go to work. Weekend gets the movie/augmented reality, social apps...you get the picture. Why have the companies chosen such ridiculously low sizes for their storage capacities? Can anyone explain it beyond just pure greed? |
 - Score: 10 |
| Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-30 22:40:09 |
|
on products with margins this thin, the extra cost of LTE will significantly change the final price and ruin the whole idea. The reason there are no $350 LTE phones is not because the carriers are closed, but because that would be a stupid money-wasting product. An LTE phone is a different product. It takes thousands of people to make a different product. And for what? Has anyone paid attention to how expensive, rare, and unpopular LTE phones are? Apple makes the most expensive premium electronics, and they could have done LTE from day one. Their opinion on LTE has been correct. LTE is the most fringe of fringe phone features. It exists for carriers to extract cash from customers. It is not because people need the speed upgrade, despite what huge nerds think. Eventually the 700mhz band will provide better service, but not yet. Edited 2012-10-30 22:41 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: Comment by Luminair |
| By tankist on 2012-10-30 23:47:57 |
| iPhone 5 is LTE: http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/2... |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: Yeah, right |
| By Morgan on 2012-10-31 00:11:19 |
|
The thing is, they are investing in backbone connections, at least they are trying to here in the US. They've rolled out fiber in select cities but it's far less than 1% penetration right now. And as fast and cheap as it is, and despite the fact that it's expected in my area within two years, I doubt I'll be on board. Believe it or not Comcast has actually started getting more consumer friendly over the past year. This past April they completely removed their already generous bandwidth cap, which opened the gate for us to start using Netflix and other streaming media exclusively and allowed my fiancée to cut her satellite service off for good. That alone gave us a $50/month net savings. No, I'd rather have Comcast's ambiguous but improving stance on consumer privacy and friendliness than Google's "we give you cheap ungodly speeds, you give us your complete Internet history end-to-end". I'd rather not sell my soul just yet. As for wireless backbone, well they didn't win their wireless spectrum auction but their actions made the process and results more open. They have also purchased the most aggressively marketed Android phone manufacturer in the US, and it just happens to be the biggest Android OEM for Verizon as well. I wouldn't be surprised if we see pressure from Google on the big V to start phasing out data caps. With LTE the caps are a joke anyway. I'm on Sprint so for me a data cap doesn't exist, but I'd like to think such a move would push AT&T back into the capless era. T-Mobile has already begun to remove caps for new accounts here as well. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, Google remains a US-centric company. Most of the changes they will bring about will not make a dent outside our borders, and that's too bad. Then again, perhaps the world is better off if Google stays on a leash... |
| - Score: 6 |
| RE: Why 4G LTE means very little |
| By Morgan on 2012-10-31 00:22:12 |
|
Indeed, when I was testing a Nexus S 4G on Sprint I never got better than 8Mbps on 4G (granted, that is WiMAX and not LTE). Prior to that when I was on T-Mobile with a Nokia N900, I was regularly seeing 20-25Mbps, which rivaled my cable connection at home. Sadly, T-Mobile inexplicably permanently capped my account at 300Kbps just one month after getting that phone, even though I had an unlimited data account and never went over 2GB/month bandwidth (at that time, they would only slow an account down after 5GB/month and would reset the soft cap every billing cycle). When I "upgraded" to a MyTouch 4G (and sold the N900 to finance it), my artificial cap soon disappeared. That was the move that eventually pushed me to Sprint. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Morgan on 2012-10-31 00:32:19 |
|
And as always, Apple is late to the party. They have a habit of waiting to see whether a new technology will take off before jumping in, with a few specific exceptions*. Just look at their stance on Blu-Ray; it remains a niche on PCs but is gaining ground on the consumer front, and so Apple has chosen to move away from optical media altogether. Personally I can't fault them for it; while I think they should have embraced Blu-Ray I doubt their stance has had a negative effect on sales of Macs. * USB, FireWire and now Thunderbolt are a few examples where Apple is the leader on a technology, rather than a follower. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[3]: Yeah, right |
| By gan17 on 2012-10-31 02:20:01 |
|
> Unfortunately for the rest of the world, Google remains a US-centric company. Most of the changes they will bring about will not make a dent outside our borders, and that's too bad. Then again, perhaps the world is better off if Google stays on a leash... Would you mind enlightening me on this bit? I'm not all that familiar with what Google's providing aside from the high-speed broadband to certain states. If anything, I would've imagined Google be more rest-of-world-centric than most US tech companies. With regards to this article at least, and the Nexus 4 in particular, one would think they're giving the ROW more preference over the US this time round by making it a pentaband only device, and lowering the cost to about (a bit more than) half what you'd usually pay for a similarly spec'd unlocked Android halo handset. I realize some of Google's services are US only, but that's more to do with bureaucratic/legislative/li censing issues in other countries that prevent them (which might or might not be a good thing). Google Voice would be one example, I suppose. |
| - Score: 5 |
| RE[4]: Yeah, right |
| By Morgan on 2012-10-31 02:26:26 |
|
Sorry, I should have clarified that that is speculation on my part; I thought it was clear from the context. To me it would fit with their current patterns, but I could of course be way off. And I do believe Google has their collective heart set on being the biggest worldwide player in their markets. I think you're right though; the current focus they have on the US is likely forced due to bureaucratic reasons. I think they also want to try to bring the US up to the level of Europe when it comes to landline and cellular broadband access before focusing on the rest of the world. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-31 04:54:17 |
|
yeah that's my point. it took them all this time to make an LTE phone, and now look at the price. and really, they still couldn't make one phone: there are at least 3 different iphone 5 models, and each costs almost 2-3x the price of nexus 4. are you beginning to see what I'm saying. google had an LTE phone. verizon galaxy nexus sucked AND didnt sell well AND cost more. now is that why they'd skip making an lte phone, or is it because verizon is a hassle to deal with. come on. you can't tick the LTE checkbox that nobody cares about anyway, on a phone you're almost giving away. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Drivers, android source, ... |
| By _xmv on 2012-10-31 07:37:02 |
|
As long as drivers are closed source and as long as Google does not push source code live (heck, 4.2 source code is still not there. How's that for a device ALL ABOUT OPENNESS?!) Sounds like a marketing trick to me, which just means "we don't wanna be bound to carriers", but has nothing to do with openness. Just carrier freedom. Or something. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |