Spring = Fail. Proof reading ftw. But yes, Sprint is a terrible provider... I've never met anyone who had anything good to say... it's always "well when my contract is up, I plan on switching." No doubt they failed at clinching this deal, to busy dealing with all of the current issues their customers are having.
Paul Glazowski
· 1 year ago
Thanks for the catch! Typo fixed :-)
Repeatnone
· 1 year ago
I'm as excited about Android as anybody else but it's too easy to be a fanboy when there's so little history. I think Dan Hesse is simply a realist who's trying to get a read on the market. Amusing punchlines though, keep up the good work Paul.
Paul Glazowski
· 1 year ago
Well, there's really no question that mobile software is what will make handsets "sing," for lack of a better word. Developments on Symbian and Windows Mobile and Palm, etc, have shown this. The iPhone basically just brought the objective of mobile software development into the world of popular culture. Like the iPod did with portable media players. There were other inventions on the market, but none really took off. So, now we've got news of increased competition in the software field, from Nokia/Symbian, Android, RIM BlackBerry, and Apple/iPhone. That's why it's only sensible to assume that Sprint will adopt something with Android installed. It wouldn't make good business sense not to. Android can't really be considered a test case anymore. It's more or less a legitimate actor in the market now. A pretty darn good one too, if the consensus is to be trusted :-)
Political Disgust
· 1 year ago
I would be shocked if Sprint/Nextel is not purchased by AT&T or Verizon in the near future. the customer service sucks. The phone selection for Nextel sucks and their coverage seems to be getting worse and worse. They suck.
girish133
· 1 year ago
I have been a Sprint customer since I first bought a cell phone in 2000. I stay with them because my plan is pretty much unbeatable because I've asked for features for free and have gotten them. I was seriously tempted to leave them when the G1 was announced. If Sprint doesn't release any good Android phones, which I'm pretty sure they will, I will probably leave Sprint and send a message to them with the reason why... their CEO.
MukMan
· 1 year ago
I'm not sure what Hesse's thinking, but his meaning is clear. The Android OS is in its infant stages but, not unlike the ubiquitous Google, it will eventually play a sizable role on multiple wireless networks.
I've been a longtime Verizon subscriber and am old enough to have been around for multiple predecessors of Verizon, AT&T, etc. before they were consolidated into the behemoths they are today. One thing is VERY clear - if your goal is to have the best possible voice or data network COVERAGE, you've got to have Verizon.
However, on the flip side, the iPhone was a game-changer and Verizon - the company given the first nod by Apple because of the Verizon Network - made a mistake by not working harder to play ball with Jobs & co.
Now we have T-Mobile, an enterprising innovator and strong customer service presence in the industry - well beyond Sprint's capabilities - coming in with the Google powerhouse. That's got to sting for what's left of the Sprint-Nextel footprint.
Because I'm not someone to be seduced by the 'cool' factor of an iPhone - not to dismiss Apple's elegant design and ability to write code for its many sleek products, I am also not dense enough to think that T-Mobile's G1 isn't the kind of innovation that changes the wireless game once again.
I am seriously considering getting this first Android-capable OS phone. I'll probably keep my Verizon phone for business purposes for now, but T-Mobile has made a compelling enough case for me to purchase a G1. Sprint, unfortunately, would need to be completely retooled for me to ever consider going on their network and accepting what is universally considered subpar service.
Anderson
· 1 year ago
Finally someone with some brains.
Android is an OS in its earliest stages, with no clear advantages over Openmoko, Symbian, OSX iphone, or just Windows mobile. There is no edge. It has plenty of security flaws, a small developer base and is backed by the company with the worst record. Google has run many of it services into the ground. It just probes things, and then usually walks away.
There is nothing innovative about Android that is worth the risk of having to issue constant security and stability patches.
Paul Glazowski
· 1 year ago
I assume you mean no clear technical advantages over those systems you list. (Though in that sense, I'm sure there are plenty of developers who would argue otherwise.)
I must say the disadvantage with those systems are pretty plain. That's why Android has been delivered. Openmoko has little to no chance at meaningful success because no major manufacturer has chosen to adopt it. It's a lovely concept, but execution is everything.
Apple's iPhone is pretty much the benchmark now. Android isn't very far behind. Symbian works with lots and lots of phones, but it's still a pretty rough cut. It will advance, yes, but I think Android could really give it some competition, at least in terms of technological prowess. Market share is a whole other ball of wax where Symbian simply dominates.
Windows Mobile? There are far too many complaints about it. There's nothing super easy about it. You might say it's a little too powerful and a little too complicated for handhelds. It's literally like a computer in your pocket, which, despite people's tendency to demand, doesn't work well when you're trying to do simple things. That's the philosophical side of the argument, anyway. We'll see how Microsoft behaves in the coming months.
Anderson
· 1 year ago
Dear Paul, you have no idea what you are talking about, do you ? I mean, like really, truly the meaning of the words you said there. You haven't code for any of those OSes.
"Apple’s iPhone is pretty much the benchmark now. Android isn’t very far behind. "
1) Benchmark of what ? Where ? IPhone can be implemented in ANY operating system. It's a piece of hardware. Android is an operating system. 2) If you are referring to the OS, then it's not a benchmark of ANYTHING. IPhone's OS can't be, because it is designed for a certain hardware. It can't be a benchmark by the very design of it.
Android is a Linux based operating system for mobile phones, which I happen to have running here, with an emulator and have the SDK installed and a nice Eclipse IDE plugin. I actually play with it. You sir, on the other hand, are not a tech-savvy person, but are simply talking out of your ass, just like in that "Hackers" post.
Paul Glazowski
· 1 year ago
"Benchmark of what?" Please don't play ignorant. The iPhone is a piece of hardware, yes, and it is also the software which runs on said hardware. It's iPhone 2.1, to be technical about it. As I'm sure you know.
Meanwhile, the designation of iPhone as a benchmark is entirely valid. It's a subjective view, held by myself. But the term sticks. The fact that Apple does not distribute the iPhone software to be used with any other hardware design is irrelevant. To argue against that would be somewhat like arguing Mac OS X "can't be a benchmark by the very design of it."
And it's absolutely wonderful that you can play with the Android SDK. I mean it. Just please don't insult my intelligence. You can disagree with my views, absolutely, but to intimate that I exercise no sense or logic is really just a waste of your time.
Loren
· 1 year ago
I don't understand Anderson's point. There have been several updates and patches for the iPhone. Many people complain about the iPhone performance and stability with multiple apps downloaded. But, so what? These things are to be expected when your phone becomes a computer, and the level of sophistication has risen. If Anderson thinks that any phone OS as sophisticated as Android or the iPhone will never need patches or updates, he is clearly smoking crack. Or at least he knows nothing about software development. :-)
I didn't insult your intelligence, I just said that you don't know/understand/use technology. It might simply not be the field you are in, and there is nothing wrong with it, because I know plenty of PhDs that haven't even heard of RS232. And there's nothing wonderful in playing with SDK, anyone can do it. It just happens to be in my field, so I do it. It happens to not be in yours, so you don't.
It's just silly that a person that writes about technology, is barely a user. That's like reviewing cars without being a car enthusiast. Android is just an OS. If I show you two identical hardware pieces one based on Symbian and one on Android, you wouldn't even know the difference. You can develop two identical applications, interfaces, "phones" (for you) , and you wouldn't even notice the difference. (until you install additional applications of course)
I don't know what bubble you are in, but iPhone OS is still a sub 1% market share OS, it is closed as an OS, it is closed as an Application platform, and is closed for a single hardware setup. And despite all this, has problems. That's not a benchmark, and if it is, you are very welcome to point out the advantages of iPhone's OS and SDK over others.
And it's just a shame that people write about iPhone without even understanding how the capacitive touchscreen works. I understand that Mashable is far from being a tech blog, but when the subject of the post is tech, the actual OS, going after a CEO of Sprint without actually having the slightest understanding of the technology that your are posting about, is just not professional.
Jared S
· 1 year ago
I use Sprint service, and have used VZ, TMobile, and AT&T products in the last 3 years thanks to my job.
I'll be keeping Sprint becuase I don't like overpaying, and I hate dropped calls. My sprint phone works fantastically and I've NEVER had a single issue with their service.
Customer Service, NOT!
· 1 year ago
Most likely Google tried calling Sprint to talk with their Execs, but Sprint's Customer Service department, transferred the call, about 15 times... after 2 hours, no one in Sprint's Customer Service department was ever actually found who had the non-restricted authority to transfer the call to the Exec's secretary, or knew the number even... Oh, you want to use Google maps on your new Sprint-Google phone? That'll be $2.99 for 90 days usage. And don't forget you can easily reach Google maps after first waiting 90 seconds for the Sprint Portal to pop open to display the link to the service you paid for. AND forget about using any of those MP3's you've uploaded to your phone as ringtones... that would make too much sense, and Sprint wouldn't get any money...
Brett
· 1 year ago
Paul, interesting article. However, I didn't enjoy the article as much as I enjoy your feud with Anderson. I love following an article up with reading what people thought about it, and over time I've noticed a trend in what different types of people say in response. I felt the need to point out that Anderson is without a doubt attacking you and trying to be coy about insulting your intelligence...which is completely unnecessary. Anyway, all this is to say, good job keeping your cool in your responses. Don't let the crazies boil your blood.
Paul Glazowski
· 1 year ago
No problemo. I welcome such disputes :-)
Anderson
· 1 year ago
Dear Brett, it's not about intelligence, but profession. A person might be a lawyer, accountant, a Doctor, a Biochemistry teacher, it doesn't matter. Not everyone deal with tech. There's absolutely nothing insulting in being a professional in any other field.
John Rollins
· 1 year ago
Android could cook me breakfast in the morning and IPhone would still kick it to the curb!
I have Verizon and I was looking forward to getting the G-Phone but Tmobile has it and Cingular has Iphone....when will Verizon ever get a good phone like those two!?....I mean come on.....I got the Voyager on launch....and....IT SUCKS...compared to those two.....but hey if Sprint comes out with something cool I might switch over..
Well, the Blackberry Storm is the only true competitor Verizon will have in the near future. The company is allowing other devices on its network in the near future, BUT the iPhone can't be one of them because of the deal AT&T has with Apple. The G1 and its offspring eventually can go on the Verizon Network.
I would guess it will be second quarter of next year before Verizon has a phone that uses Google's Android OS. I did check out a G1 - the phone itself is 'utilitarian' when put up against the iPhone. But it offers some great potential. I'm still thinking about my next move and I may wait a month or two. . .
Vatroslav Mihalj
· 1 year ago
If mobile operators let Google spread their platforms through the mobile world, it will eventually become mega-operator, squeezing out. It would start with some services that Google can easily provide (messaging - text and picture, ringtones), continuing with universal Google-based framework for operators (comparable to Vodafone Live! concept and Microsoft Connected Services Framework). This will enable smaller resselers to compete with those dinosaurs, who won't be able to extra monetize on users (can't use your mp3 as ringtones, you have to pay and donwload them, can't user full Bluetooth for file sharing, limited connectivity via WiFi etc.). In the end, they might turn into Google service resellers.
rowanrook
· 1 year ago
Hesse may have had a valid point... except for the fact that Sprint already carries so many crappy phones. However, what a very very stupid thing for Hesse to say out loud. Last time I checked, Sprint was hemorrhaging subscribers every quarter. Seriously, when was the last time Sprint was first to market with anything cool? I can't remember, and I'm a Sprint subscriber. Not for long though... when my contract is up, I'm out.
Peebee Baynut
· 1 year ago
Sprint loses the ability to pay for Cogent's bandwidth. When two tier-1 providers peer, the one with the most data sources and the fewest data consumers costs the other tier-1 provider more money since data is flowing out of Cogent and into Sprint, Sprint must pay.
To "fix" this Sprint disconnected from Cogent. Now all Sprint customers lose access to data sources hosted inside Cogent including http://archive.org/ with The Wayback Machine archive of older versions of existing (and previously existing) web sites. It's like a time machine for the Internet and Sprint can't afford to pay to allow Sprint customers to access it any more which is a sign of them collapsing.
Loren
· 11 months ago
Sprint and CEO Dan Hesse eat their words less than two months later. Not soon enough to keep me as a customer though.
All Comments
I've been a longtime Verizon subscriber and am old enough to have been around for multiple predecessors of Verizon, AT&T, etc. before they were consolidated into the behemoths they are today. One thing is VERY clear - if your goal is to have the best possible voice or data network COVERAGE, you've got to have Verizon.
However, on the flip side, the iPhone was a game-changer and Verizon - the company given the first nod by Apple because of the Verizon Network - made a mistake by not working harder to play ball with Jobs & co.
Now we have T-Mobile, an enterprising innovator and strong customer service presence in the industry - well beyond Sprint's capabilities - coming in with the Google powerhouse. That's got to sting for what's left of the Sprint-Nextel footprint.
Because I'm not someone to be seduced by the 'cool' factor of an iPhone - not to dismiss Apple's elegant design and ability to write code for its many sleek products, I am also not dense enough to think that T-Mobile's G1 isn't the kind of innovation that changes the wireless game once again.
I am seriously considering getting this first Android-capable OS phone. I'll probably keep my Verizon phone for business purposes for now, but T-Mobile has made a compelling enough case for me to purchase a G1. Sprint, unfortunately, would need to be completely retooled for me to ever consider going on their network and accepting what is universally considered subpar service.
Android is an OS in its earliest stages, with no clear advantages over Openmoko, Symbian, OSX iphone, or just Windows mobile.
There is no edge. It has plenty of security flaws, a small developer base and is backed by the company with the worst record. Google has run many of it services into the ground. It just probes things, and then usually walks away.
There is nothing innovative about Android that is worth the risk of having to issue constant security and stability patches.
I assume you mean no clear technical advantages over those systems you list. (Though in that sense, I'm sure there are plenty of developers who would argue otherwise.)
I must say the disadvantage with those systems are pretty plain. That's why Android has been delivered. Openmoko has little to no chance at meaningful success because no major manufacturer has chosen to adopt it. It's a lovely concept, but execution is everything.
Apple's iPhone is pretty much the benchmark now. Android isn't very far behind. Symbian works with lots and lots of phones, but it's still a pretty rough cut. It will advance, yes, but I think Android could really give it some competition, at least in terms of technological prowess. Market share is a whole other ball of wax where Symbian simply dominates.
Windows Mobile? There are far too many complaints about it. There's nothing super easy about it. You might say it's a little too powerful and a little too complicated for handhelds. It's literally like a computer in your pocket, which, despite people's tendency to demand, doesn't work well when you're trying to do simple things. That's the philosophical side of the argument, anyway. We'll see how Microsoft behaves in the coming months.
I mean, like really, truly the meaning of the words you said there. You haven't code for any of those OSes.
"Apple’s iPhone is pretty much the benchmark now. Android isn’t very far behind. "
1) Benchmark of what ? Where ? IPhone can be implemented in ANY operating system. It's a piece of hardware. Android is an operating system.
2) If you are referring to the OS, then it's not a benchmark of ANYTHING. IPhone's OS can't be, because it is designed for a certain hardware. It can't be a benchmark by the very design of it.
Android is a Linux based operating system for mobile phones, which I happen to have running here, with an emulator and have the SDK installed and a nice Eclipse IDE plugin. I actually play with it.
You sir, on the other hand, are not a tech-savvy person, but are simply talking out of your ass, just like in that "Hackers" post.
Meanwhile, the designation of iPhone as a benchmark is entirely valid. It's a subjective view, held by myself. But the term sticks. The fact that Apple does not distribute the iPhone software to be used with any other hardware design is irrelevant. To argue against that would be somewhat like arguing Mac OS X "can't be a benchmark by the very design of it."
And it's absolutely wonderful that you can play with the Android SDK. I mean it. Just please don't insult my intelligence. You can disagree with my views, absolutely, but to intimate that I exercise no sense or logic is really just a waste of your time.
:-)
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2008/10/op...
And there's nothing wonderful in playing with SDK, anyone can do it. It just happens to be in my field, so I do it. It happens to not be in yours, so you don't.
It's just silly that a person that writes about technology, is barely a user. That's like reviewing cars without being a car enthusiast.
Android is just an OS. If I show you two identical hardware pieces one based on Symbian and one on Android, you wouldn't even know the difference. You can develop two identical applications, interfaces, "phones" (for you) , and you wouldn't even notice the difference. (until you install additional applications of course)
I don't know what bubble you are in, but iPhone OS is still a sub 1% market share OS, it is closed as an OS, it is closed as an Application platform, and is closed for a single hardware setup. And despite all this, has problems.
That's not a benchmark, and if it is, you are very welcome to point out the advantages of iPhone's OS and SDK over others.
And it's just a shame that people write about iPhone without even understanding how the capacitive touchscreen works. I understand that Mashable is far from being a tech blog, but when the subject of the post is tech, the actual OS, going after a CEO of Sprint without actually having the slightest understanding of the technology that your are posting about, is just not professional.
I'll be keeping Sprint becuase I don't like overpaying, and I hate dropped calls. My sprint phone works fantastically and I've NEVER had a single issue with their service.
Oh, you want to use Google maps on your new Sprint-Google phone? That'll be $2.99 for 90 days usage. And don't forget you can easily reach Google maps after first waiting 90 seconds for the Sprint Portal to pop open to display the link to the service you paid for. AND forget about using any of those MP3's you've uploaded to your phone as ringtones... that would make too much sense, and Sprint wouldn't get any money...
Jiff
www.anonymity.pro.tc
Tre
President
http://www.truckmountforums.com
I would guess it will be second quarter of next year before Verizon has a phone that uses Google's Android OS. I did check out a G1 - the phone itself is 'utilitarian' when put up against the iPhone. But it offers some great potential. I'm still thinking about my next move and I may wait a month or two. . .
To "fix" this Sprint disconnected from Cogent. Now all Sprint customers lose access to data sources hosted inside Cogent including http://archive.org/ with The Wayback Machine archive of older versions of existing (and previously existing) web sites. It's like a time machine for the Internet and Sprint can't afford to pay to allow Sprint customers to access it any more which is a sign of them collapsing.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/391591_s...