The difference between iPhone + Android: Great since day one

The hatred of linux on the desktop is terribly cliche, especially on a site targeted towards hackers. Linux on my desktop is the greatest development environment I've ever used, having played extensively with OSX and Windows as well. I can easily install new libraries and "apt-get source" allows me to tinker with existing software easily and immediately build and execute the results. All of the development environment is thoroughly documented.<p>But now, some influential people start saying how much better their version is. Specifically their closed, sealed-off, experience-driven version. Arguing "ease of use" and "shiny end user experience" rings really hollow to me. I use vim -- think I care about easy to use or shiny user experiences? -- and I use it because it's a powerful tool for its job. I just don't get it when hackers start telling other hackers that they should use a more restrictive environment because it'll make them feel better or is easier to use. Instead, ask yourself: is it the most powerful tool for the job?<p>So sure, tell your parents and siblings to buy an iPhone. Hell, use your iPhone for anything you can -- it's a fantastic device. But stop telling future developers that it's worth giving up control for rounded corners and subtle shadows. And stop comparing its competition negatively to an environment that I, and others, find superior to any other.

Apple is great on day one since it doesn't actually have many features.<p>I'm loving my Nexus One here, which has just been updated to 2.2 :) Different ringtones (Anything you like) for sms/email/facebook, tethering, portable hotspot! Flash? Simply in a different league than iPhone. The early Android hardware sucked, but the N1 is pretty solid.<p>&#62;&#62; The Android ecosystem doesn’t seem capable of producing devices that are great on day one. Yet Apple consistently pulls it off.<p>IDK, I've heard some things about the iPhone 4...<p>I had an iPhone for 3 years or so. It was a great device for what it did, but the whole hassle of having to use iTunes. No removable storage. Can't just stuff mp3's on it and use as ringtones. Can't just copy photos off it unless you go through the right software. It's just a PITA. Not to mention the mass of features that are just lacking on the iPhone but you take for granted on Android.

I've always admired some of the things marco writes about, this is not one of them.<p>While article is a depressingly one-sided article (marco's prerogative, totally fine with me), he misses a very big point, that for the sake of full disclosure should at least be expounded upon beyond a dry-wit analogy to Desktop Linux.<p>Android and iOS are moving in two different directions, and have benefits for two different crowds. While they both enjoy their share of people who play by the party lines, and will gladly pull out their iPhone or Android Phone the minute the opportunity to use an application presents itself, it doesn't stray away from the fact that the two platforms should not be compared to one another.<p>Where the iPhone shines in brilliance, quality, and polish, Android reigns supreme when it comes down to making the phone do what you want to the core. <i>That is not, however in the least bit to say that hacking the Android platform is inherent to its very existence</i>. I'm not going to beat the "one is open the other is not" horse, because it's already dead, but it's very hard to ignore the obvious that Android is a pragmatic platform that prides itself on the berth of UX centric platform evolution where the iPhone gives users features, and expects them to work with those features withdrawn from the scope of downloading Apps.

The iPhone was a poor device on day one. Limited to a poor carrier, it was a poor phone, with only a handful of built-in apps, no GPS, etc.<p>The Nexus One was a quite a nice device from day one, and in my opinion better than the iPhone 3GS.<p>But this is apples to oranges. The way a device is from day one is less relevant when the race is long. What was important in competing with Apple's first move was being first to a viable second place, which then iterates rapidly in a "aim, fire, ready" style. If Google had waited until they had a perfect second place, they'd still be starting with a tiny marketshare (hence lack of apps etc.), and perhaps Palm wouldn't have failed as it did. But Google didn't wait, and they're solidly in second place, and gaining.

<i>lots of why-is-this-here moments (the Droid’s keyboard, the Nexus One’s trackball)</i><p>I see this sort of thing from reviews a lot. The Droid's keyboard is there because there are customers who want it. There are plenty of Android phones without them as well. It's perfectly reasonable that some people want a smaller and more sturdy phone, but I won't buy a smartphone without a real keyboard. The trackball is good for positioning the cursor when editing text. It's faster than arrow keys and much more precise than the touch screen. I am disappointed that they are rapidly disappearing, sometimes replaced by an optical trackpad.<p>Android is about power and choice. The iPhone is about a great implementation of a specific vision. Both are doing very well in the marketplace. The idea that one is wrong and the other right is almost certainly mistaken.

While the article is correct that the iPhone was good on day one (not sure I'd say great) and Android was seriously lacking. I think it's fair to say now that Android and iPhone are running neck and neck. iPhone 4 leapfrogged Android, but note, they actually had to leapfrog Android.<p>The new Android devices (EVO and Samsung Galaxy in particular) are just as good, if not better in some respects than the iPhone. Froyo as an OS is better and worse than iOS4. And from what I've heard about Gingerbread,I think Android will again take a lead against the iPhone.<p>I think the real difference between Android and Apple is that Apple is good at finding a market and coming out with a compelling product. That's in their DNA. But what is also in their DNA is their ability to lose that market due to slow innovation after day one. The only real exception here is the iPod. And they won that battle on fashion as much as technology and UX.<p>If I were Apple I'd be really worried about Android. I think it's conceivable that iPhone sales could plummet in a given year. I plan on getting a Galaxy phone as my next one.

Seems to me Android <i>is</i> "Linux on the desktop". It's a user facing Linux-derived operating system, and seems well on track to become the most widely used OS in a few years.<p>Pure desktop Linux never took off, for various reasons (at least some of them non-software related at all). It doesn't matter, the desktop is no longer the main way we use an OS.

Desktop Linux <i>has</i> been getting better each year, though (at least on average). If it still hasn't crossed the threshold of being good enough for the mainstream, it's because their standards have also been increasing.

Just because iPhone doesn't have a physical keyboard - doesn't make physical keyboards evil. Similar logic for trackball.<p>I have tried using physical keyboard on Blackberry and I felt pretty comfortable. I bet other manufacturers would come out with better physical keyboards. My flatmate has a Thinkpad with a trackball. Initially it was pretty tough to control it. Trackball and physical keyboard isn't bad just because I think it's bad.<p>So much from a Tumblr lead dev! I expected better.

That is a retarded argument, and I expect better from marco.<p>It should be obvious that shipping with a broken copy-past is miles better than shipping with none at all.<p>The iPhone wasn't good, because it only shipped with great features - it was medicore, because it shipped without many of the features (flash, copy-past, the ability to run multiple programs at the same time) that are needed.<p>It is much like homework - if you give a great title and fantastic abstract, but zero content you should not get an A.

It's a bad call to compare to Desktop Linux. A better comparison is looking at "iOS vs. Android" as "Mac OS vs. Windows" - - The strategy for iOS is very similar to the strategy of Mac OS and the strategy of Android is similar to the strategy of Windows.<p>Longer down the road I think Android will have a much larger market share (just like Windows) - - while iOS will provide a better and more streamlined experience (just like Mac OS).

It is silly to try and frame a comparison between iPhone and Android in 1-dimension. We could equally write an article criticizing the App Store and say the difference is about freedom of expression. Or about quality of apps. Or about power and flexibility. Or availability of media. Or hardware. Or half a dozen other things.<p>Guess what folks, there are many various differences! Personally I choose Android because I value the various dimensions on which it scores highly over those where the iPhone scores highly. But don't try and pretend there is only one dimension to this.

A friend of mine lend me is iPod Touch. To get it working with Wifi or connect it to iTunes running on windows is a very painful process.<p>I didn't had these problems (No need using the iTunes in the first place)with the G1, Motorola Droid, even my old N95.<p>So what is so great?

You know why people make stuff like this? <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg</a><p>Because you can't just get an Android phone and use it and be happy with it. There's always some hipster or yuppie or desperate-to-be-cool nerd that'll start going on and on and on about how amazingly great their iPhone is, was and always will be and how they have <i>taste</i> which you, as a non-Jobs product buyer, obviously don't. A lot of people like me <i>switched</i> from the iPhone to Android because we like it better, get over it. Also, there'll be more people that like and use Android than iOS, get over that as well.<p>And since we're reaching for snarky old jokes (ie desktop linux), how about this one: What can Android users do that iPhone users can't? Shut the fuck up.

I'm not an Apple fanboy by any means or measure, but I can't help but agree with this post.<p>I had the original iPhone and every feature just worked from day one; I didn't need any updates or anything. And yes, I could live without cut and paste.<p>I now have Nexus One, and although I love and do not plan on going back to an iPhone at any point, I still think the iPhone is just a more complete, more polished phone. It's a perfect mass market device because 99% of the consumers do not care about tweaking their device or changing ROMs.<p>I had Ubuntu on my Dell Inspiron, but I have gotten my MBP back from a friend. MBP is better. Things work together better, and I don't need to tweak a million things or change themes. I just want to do my work.

I imagine a world where everybody would be forced to use a Newton, an Apple TV, a Mighty Mouse and an Apple keyboard...<p>Apple makes great phones and great computers but saying that everything they create is great from day one has gone too far on the fanboy dark side.

I don't think android is like the desktop linux situation. My mom &#38; dad are happily using android phones, paying for all these wonderful apps and enjoying the phone. They would not really have the same experience with any linux installation.

The problem with Apple is that if you use an iPhone, you are a smarmy cunt; if you don't use one, your a hater and a conformist.

Linux is getting better each year, Android is getting better each year.<p>But MS is getting better each year too, like Apple.<p>The main difference is that MS and Apple improve he overall user experience while Linux and Android center themselves on geeks. Witch is great, for geeks, but not as good for other people.<p>On Linux I can easily record any sound-video a program plays-displays , I can't do it on windows or Mac because of DRM. It's great for me, normal people don't care.<p>People care about being able to easily classify their weeding photos using face recognition tech like iphoto does. Linux could do it in complex( and more powerful) ways that my mom can't use.

Re: the iphone and android points, i completely agree. Android will get there in time and it's a great alternative (before android it was BBos or symbian, yuck).<p>As far as linux desktop goes, it's more of an OEM problem. Ubuntu is getting really close to being consumer friendly. Even if it WERE 110% consumer friendly, there isn't even one OEM who produces a great linux machine. I'm not talking Dell loading it on one random machine or other guys like system76. Someone needs to step up and be the "apple of ubuntu/linux" (don't charge the high high premium though).

It depends on what criteria is used to judge greatness of course. By my evaluation, the iPhone's notifications and multitasking UI have been horrible since day one. That hasn't stopped Apple from oveloading push and local notifications with third-party multitasking, all without much change to the fundamental problems, making the experience worse over time. Marco's focus on the simple and shiny, at the expense of the functional and robust, indicates that we have different standards for greatness.

The Linux on the desktop comparison feels right to me for a variety of reasons but there are two important differences that create a more level playing field: 1) Android comes preinstalled on the devices 2) People don't expect 10-15 years of legacy compatibility from SmartPhones. When you erase those two barriers there's a lot more room for choice.

I wonder whether Marco used OS X 10.0 (or 10.1)…

I disagree with his assertion that 'great since day one' is unequivocally better than the other - if I can get something earlier, but it's a little rougher around the edges, that's often better - particularly since having something out in the wild where people use it early means you can get good feedback to help you improve the product and avoid horrible untested issues slipping through (a certain antennae issue springs to mind).<p>Other than that though, his use of 'copy and paste' as an example is something that really depends on perspective. He argues that 'copy and paste' is a single isolated feature, and that Apple waited until they could make it great since day one. However, if you looked at 'copy and paste' as merely an element of a larger system, then launching that system without one of it's key features makes it not so 'great since day one'.

I need more data. What else was, "Great since day one?" In particular, is there anything that's not Apple that fits this? Toyota and Honda, maybe? My Sennheiser wireless mics? The PS2? I'm looking around my apartment and I'm having a hard time finding non-Apple stuff that fits that description. My Gerber Suspension pocket tool fits the bill, I think. The Logitech VX Revolution mouse does as well. I think about half of the "Great since day one" stuff is made by Apple! Most everything else required tinkering. The BenQ 520MP projector just worked and was great. Ah, my old GE 2 alarm AM/FM clock radio. That thing was cheap as hell, it's as solidly built as something can be from plastic, and it just works great. Oh, and of course, my Nintendo DS! My apartment is full of stuff that takes tinkering!

<i>The OS needs to be updated over the air</i><p>Not true. I did all my updates with my computer.

I strongly believe that desktop Linux is just waiting for a paid, commercially supported variant that comes with limited, supported hardware options.<p>That is, like Apple. Vertical integration.

I can agree that Apple does great things from Day One like the Macintosh and the iPhone. But Apple also has a tendency to be complacent and allow the competition to catch up. That's what's going to happen with the iPhone and Android, like it did with the Macintosh and Windows.<p>Great at Day One or not, the customer will eventually select freedom of choice and this is where Apple will lose.

I totally despise this article. It contradicts open-source philosophy completely. It falsely and stupidly implicates Linux. It compares two very different kinds of things. And I know lots of people who thought their Android phone was great on day one -- including myself. So what's the deal here? This is frustrating, horrible low-brow fanboyism

Perhaps a longer blog post needs to be dedicated to this, but I feel like much of the debate between iOS and Android focuses on the "fundamental differences" between Apple's particular approach (or call it philosophy) to mobile computing, and Google's. This might be a bit controversial, but I find it NOT an open and shut case that an "open, customizable" platform is an advantage.<p>Throughout history we've been struggling with the Google/iOS problem, but the debate took on different forms: totalitarian versus democratic government, planned economy versus "free" economy, big government versus small government. The question is: should certain kinds of decisions affecting a state be centralized or dispersed? In theory, dispersed power (among citizens, or users) should win the day, IF NOT for inevitable market inefficiencies (information asymmetries, NOISE, emotional human irrationality) and malicious private agents who prey on the uninformed. There is an argument to be made that computing platforms fall under this debate. I would argue that Google's open platform also makes it vulnerable to far too many exploits: viruses, buggy, crashing, battery-draining software, and adware that might indiscriminately display pornography. All for certain powers of customizability that I (and many others) find trivial. Like choosing system fonts and having video wallpaper.<p>If everybody in the world had the means to discriminate between spam software and non, then I would think that a system under which anybody could post software targeting any part of the system would be an excellent thing. But they can't. WE, as hackers can. Maybe. But for a majority of the people, they must enter into a "social contract" with a curator wherein decisions of quality and security are made for them in exchange for a price premium equal to or less than the value of time saved in "not worrying" about malicious code. Beautifully, this space is evolving to a cycle of two year hardware refreshes (less than that for hardcore users), and these serve as market voting mechanisms for the job or efficacy of the curator (in this case, Apple and Google).<p>In the United States (which some would argue is the apotheosis of enlightenment thinking of the government problem) we have deferred legislative power to a body that we pay to do the thinking for us. We cycle through this body periodically democratically (as we can in mobile). We certainly don't have time to ponder over the minutiae of certain articles of legislation. In the same way, I would argue, I don't have time to discriminate between one piece of software for compatibility, reliability, security and quality, and another making nearly identical claims to functionality. Maybe you do, and that's why you choose Android. Meanwhile, I'll trade certain features for peace of mind.

I have a macbook pro and an iPhone and neither has been great since day one. How do you explain that?

Another sucker on the Apple teet

Sorry but the comment thread started with: "The hatred of linux on the desktop is terribly cliche..." has nothing to do with the actual content in question. Warning for all the HN Noobs. Comments beware!

TLDR: Marco is not a big fan of choice in the market place.

I haven't bought either Android or Iphone.<p>I lean towards Android when I think about how cool it is to modify the OS to make it do cool things.<p>But when I think about what product I would recommend to family, I have to recommend the iPhone over Android.<p>They don't care if its open. They care that someone is ultimately responsible for making sure that its going to work now and that it has a future.<p>The choices they need to make when they buy an Apple product are few and clear. When I've had problems with an Apple product, Apple Care takes care it.<p>If there were an Android store, it would be on the back of a semi and would move to a different mall parking lot each week.

How can you claim to create the worlds best devices, yet cannot pull off copy/paste. Its not exactly the traveling salesman problem...

pace of development and somewhat closed development make android different then desktop Linux.  <p>iPhone's big plus is providing value for long period of time. Still today original iPhone is useful device and except 3d games most of new apps can be used too. Which is great in fast changing market. 

I'm happy with my x10 mini from day 1.

Please go away

To each their own. "Great" is subjective.

can we get by a week in HN without fanboy posts?

Apple fanboi.

Someone is channeling their inner-John Gruber, apparently.<p>The original iPhone had a mediocre display, a forgettable design, zero apps (and, contrary to the revisionism that is now the rage, had zero plans on every having apps at inception. Apple and AT&#38;T saw apps as a unnecessary risk, and web apps were the only solution), a terrible back-facing camera (and no front facing camera, which in those early days was considered an egregious oversight), and it was strangely 2G in a world that had already moved to 3G.<p>It succeeded because it was Apple. To say that it was "Great since day one" should embarrass the speaker, and if Nokia, or Motorola, or anyone else released that phone it would have been panned.<p>The latest iPhone needs to be cocooned inside a case lest you shatter the good-looking-but-bad-engineering glass back or touch the untouchable antenna. Great since day one?<p>It has a video chat application that inexplicably only works between iPhone 4 users on WiFi, which to most other companies wouldn't even classify as "beta". Great since day one?<p>It has a notification system that is horribly crippled by the most generous evaluation. Great since day one?<p>The iPhone is a gorgeous, gorgeous phone. It is the new trendsetter. It is not without many flaws however, though it sits in that remarkable favored area where flaws are glossed over. Indeed, it's telling that Apple's flaws only become obvious to the faithful once the replacement is available. Suddenly, you'll note, every Apple-head is talking about how the iPhone 3GS is dated, feels plasticy and cheap, etc (Hey, I was saying that since it came out, but of course as the deliverance from Apple it was impossible that could be true, until the next deliverance).<p>These sorts of cult-religious screeds are an embarrassment to technology.<p>I mentioned Gruber earlier because this Marco guy is stealing his schtick.