Android doesn't give you as much choice as the author implies. OS updates are handled by the carrier/handset maker so you don't really have much choice there. I'm stuck on 1.5 with no options to upgrade unless I want to root the device, install a third party ROM, and unfortunately lose GPS & Camera functionality because there are no drives to make them work in 2.x yet. The OS update I get from my carrier may or may not include multi-touch support in the third party apps. This is a choice the carrier/handset maker impose on me. They will also bundle carrier specific applications that I have no choice in. For Sprint, with the HTC Hero, I cannot remove these applications without rooting the phone. (I can delete the shortcut and pretend they're not there but I can't remove the binaries) I can't do wifi tethering on Android without rooting the device because Google blocks those apps in the Android Market. Android presently offers more choice by default but still imposes a lot of restrictions. So if we're ultimately comparing Android and iPhone on the basis of needing to jailbreak/root the devices there isn't a whole lot of difference.
"I'm not the administrator on my own hardware (without jailbreaking)"
I'm an android user and definitely think Android is the better and more open choice, but this point is just as true on Android as it is on an iPhone. Getting root may be easier than jailbreaking; I've never jailbroken an iPhone, but the point is that even on Android hardware which you purchase directly (not subsidized by carriers), you're not the administrator on your own hardware.
I looked into getting root on the G1 - it appeared to be hugely more complicated than the pretty simple jailbreaking process, involving downgrading the OS to find a local root exploit. I didn't bother, it looked like far too much bother for too little reward.
Interestingly, the Nexus One from Google allows users access to the engineering bootloader (allowing re-flashing with a rooted image) with a simple command sent over USB ("fastboot oem unlock"). There's even a friendly "third-party images are not officially supported" confirmation screen built in.
I think that's actually why there's not a click-and-it-does-it solution for the G1 - because there's far less restrictions on what apps you can install on the device there's much less incentive for people to 'risk' fiddling with it.
Tethering is probably the 'killer app' for jailbreaking/rooting on both platforms for most people, but there's a lot more to be gained by jailbreaking your iPhone.
Having said that - I haven't bothered to re-jailbreak mine after the last few updates since I realised I never used the jailbroken features.
So Android won't be any better, I was hoping for a less supervised computing experience. Something as simple as copying files to and from the device, or installing/compiling software on it is not the default approved behavior.
Well it's not that bad on android. You don't have root but everything you mentioned is "allowed."
Although not having access to root annoys me in principle, I haven't needed root for anything, so I haven't bothere rooting the phone even though it's fairly trivial.
Fair enough, you don't have to push updates. My wording should have been more precise. Apple can pull or disable apps. Not sure about direct OS pushes. But they can at least soft force you get an update by bundling desired features with undesired features.
You don't have to jailbreak to avoid updates - neither Apple nor app developers have the ability to force updates upon your phone. Both iTunes and the App Store ask for permission before updating your device and apps.
There is the remote app killswitch functionality, but Android has that as well.
I don't believe iPhone or Android devices have a user-facing toggle... there might be some way to hack it out, but I'm not sure.
I don't think it's ever been used on either device, so it hasn't exactly been a burning issue yet; the stated purpose is only in the event of a highly malicious application.
This faux disgruntled move from Apple to Android trend is kind of sad. They're showing it off and blogging it like it makes them a 'maverick' when in fact it's just a "Grass Greener" situation.
There are advantages and disadvantages to either platform, but don't pretend Android is a panacea of freedom. My friend has a t-mo MyTouch and it STILL doesn't have Android 2.0 available. The carrier/manufacturer refuse to put in the effort to deploy it for his handset.
He's completely fucked and if he wants the new OS he has to buy a new phone.
If Apple forced people to buy a new phone to upgrade their OS (with all the benefits thereof) they'd file a class action lawsuit.
But as soon as it's Google/Carrier-Not-AT&T/manufacturer with them waving the "FREEDOM" flag next to a sign that says, "Don't be evil", they get a free pass.
Give me a break. This whole post was poorly written, sophomoric and not thought out at all. He's making a buying decision based on pure conjecture based upon the "FREEDOM" advertising Google has been doing.
Personally, as someone who is planning to begin deploying mobile apps soon, I'll be deploying to Apple.
Maverick, haha, I'm far from it. Just tired of the restrictions on computing devices I buy. If what you say is true, than I'll have the same woes with Android. In that case it's a shame there's not really an open mobile hardware device out there.
I liken the Apple version of the net to AOL. It's a fully controlled interface with one corporate interest at heart. If Google's no better that doesn't mean I should be stuck with Apple.
What I want is a framework where I don't need approval to copy files to and from my device. That's it.
"This whole post was poorly written, sophomoric and not thought out at all." I challenge you to do better (I'm serious I get a lot out of well written conflicting views).
I admit to being a very challenged writer. It takes hours of effort for me to write something that comes across as coherent, but it's good practice.
>Maverick, haha, I'm far from it. Just tired of the restrictions on computing devices I buy.
Me too, I dream of computers that are designed from the ground up to be accessible to the curious (in the vein of the PCs from the 80s).
I am however, extremely pragmatic.
>If what you say is true, than I'll have the same woes with Android. In that case it's a shame there's not really an open mobile hardware device out there.
OpenMoko. Too bad it sucked as a product.
>I liken the Apple version of the net to AOL. It's a fully controlled interface with one corporate interest at heart. If Google's no better that doesn't mean I should be stuck with Apple.
Ah, Google is better, but they're annoying in less visible ways. Apple doesn't control the net, their browsers support open standards several orders of magnitude better than everyone but Chrome.
>What I want is a framework where I don't need approval to copy files to and from my device. That's it.
You still need to pay money to get an API key for Android. As for copying files to and fro, I know nothing of that.
>"This whole post was poorly written, sophomoric and not thought out at all." I challenge you to do better (I'm serious I get a lot out of well written conflicting views).
I don't care enough about the subject. Ask me about something else. I'm only replying out of respect.
>I admit to being a very challenged writer. It takes hours of effort for me to write something that comes across as coherent, but it's good practice.
Writing is good, but don't make disingenuous posts that look past the faults of the alternative.
I think that android offers opportunities but still you are locking yourself in another vendor. What I plan to do to develop for mobiles is to have a common web interface accessible to all phones. Then you develop an app that is more enhanced that loads the site but also persists data using HTML5 and AJAX.
PS.I really hope that the Author doesn't clutter your android apps like your website.
Choice isn't (necessarily) beauty. It's one more engineering tradeoff among others, with its own upsides and its own downsides. Giving up choice in favor of the benefits gained from doing so can be pragmatic, rational, and lead to more beautiful results.
I guess I'm just saying: don't fetishize choice. Assign it a value like the one parameter among hundreds which it actually is.
The comparison would be apt, except for the fact that Apple has taste, whereas Microsoft does not.
Seriously though, it's great that we live at a point in time where it's possible to have a choice between two damn good mobile computing platforms.
As a developer and content producer though, I'm more focused on Apple than I am on Android because that audience has a demonstrated willingness to spend money on software.
