By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
disolitude on 31 October 2012
Edit Thread
superchunk said:
disolitude said:
michael_stutzer said:
One of them is so much better than the others it is painful to look at it :).


The one with Office and live tiles or the one with the best apps? :)

Seriously though, whats with you people and specs? Its the same mentality that took us to the current sad state of the gaming industry where 90% of the budget is spent on graphics and 10% on figuring out fun and engaging gameplay. 

I have Android 4.0 and Windows 8 dual booting on my Acer W500 tablet and honestly... you could put Android on a tablet with i7 running overclocked at 5 Ghz with a 4K display, it really won't change the fact that I find the Windows 8 interface, layout and design ideology more enjoyable to use.

Other people feel differently and prefer Android...no big deal. But since we cant quantify and measure preferences, we cling on to trivial things like resolution and CPU/GPU specs.

The specs are important though. While people will definitely align themselves more with a particular experience the OS gives you, the hardware is a very significant part of that equation.

This is even more true with people who have not used any of the devices or OSs. They are more than likely going to go with what appears to be the best value when everything else is considered equal. Frankly, the OS differences really are equal in almost any way. The only real difference comes to user experiences on the very little things.

You prefer tiles and probably tied to Live.
Others prefer iTunes and are tied to it.
I prefer widgets, flexibility, and openness and I a tied to Google's services.

However, I think the facts are, Google is now leading this mobile industry. From Phones to tablets, they are now the innovators (in terms of hardware and software) and their OEMs provide the most selection. 4.x Android is miles better than 2.x which was miles better than 1.x. Apps have always gotten better over time on Android and this will continue to expand in tablet specific experiences.

Win8 appears to have given MS a solid base to have its full ecosystem and will certainly provide a good third competitor.
Apple will remain there as well as their ecosystem is a tough one to break from and they are continuously seen as the "cool" device.

I don't think I agree with the 'Google leading the mobile industry' statemen.

Google is doing most things but I am not sure everything is sticking. the only reason they are having large success with Android is price and lack of competition at low price points. Most north american stores will have 20 low end android phones vs what, 2-3 low end Nokia Windows phones, if that. In Europe and Asia it's even worse... Just came back from Serbia and they've never even seen a Windows Phone overthere and iPhone is waaay too expensive for them (1000 euros). 

Apple is undisputetly the leader on the mobile industry IMO.

Lets compare the mobile strategy of the 3 companies with baseball...

Apple essentially are able to hit a home run every 4 years and then just talk about that home run and collect royalties.

Google has to bunt, do singles, doubles, steal bases, pinch hit and everything else in between just to compete with Apple.

And thus far, Microsoft has been hitting 1 double every inning and stranding the runner on second