iPhone vs. Motorola Droid comparisons: why does the iPhone seem to win all of them?

[ImaG]

The 3GS has great hardware, and its SDK makes way for some very impressive applications. The Android OS is already better than the iPhone OS IMO. Check out some of the videos on Google detailing the new API's introduced in 2.0. Those, plus the new hardware from the Droid, and HTC's latest Android devices should make way to some very impressive software as well. Look at how fast PicSay was able to add multi-touch to their application. I imagine the creators of "Steel" could do the same for their browser if they chose to.

Those are having babies over the lack of multi touch in the Droid should just rest easy. I'm willing to bet money that when the Milestone is released, someone will do a software dump, and adding that browser will be no harder than installing an .apk from your SD card.

[djunio]

IMO Android is better than iPhone now, have you not seen the iDon't which is all true about whats lacking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoYr8...layer_embedded and furthermore, although most of these are at&t problems someone finally had the guts to call the iPhone what it really is http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune....-worlds-worst/ this series of phone is the biggest rip off ever, the 3GS should've been the first iPhone then I would've been comfortable with giving the iPhone props.

[Hands0n]

I maintain my stance: Android 2.0 is every bit as good as iPhone OS and in many respect it's massively better. It's different to use and iPhone OS is more novice-oriented but Android is definitely not worse.

Please do not make the same mistake as the manufacturers in consiering the iPhone's UI "novice-oriented". It is anything but, and has been very carefully and intentionally designed. There is nothing about the iPhone that Apple did not intend it to be. That is why the design has not changed through three full versions of OS and hardware.

The iPhone UI is designed to be completely intuitive - and in that it succeeds. What other handset on the planet comes without a manual? Nor needs one? It really is "pick up and go". I've seen the uninitiated pick one up and start using it within moments, making calls, reviewing contacts, sending messages, playing music and video, the full 9 yards.

All of that is not to be underestimated.

That the technically minded of us, usually us lot who hang around forums , might find the UI less challenging does not diminish the iPhone. That we may prefer Android's UI being much more akin to a computer desktop says more about us than Android itself.

Having both, I like both technologies. But to be honest, when it comes to practical daily use, I find that the iPhone suits better. Android being just a little be more raw around the edges, less performant, technically more involving whereas the iPhone behaves like an appliance.

And that is where, I think, the iPhone scores for the masses. As an appliance it pretty much just does stuff. The vast majority don't care that it does not multi-task as Android may. They can still do exactly what they need to and get on with their day!

[qItor]

Please do not make the same mistake as the manufacturers in consiering the iPhone's UI "novice-oriented".

A phone that can hardly be customized and is overly simplistic in many ways is clearly not targeted at mobile professionals but rather at the technically impaired general population. It attracted a huge crowd of tech-savvy people as well - I salute Apple for pulling this off. That doesn't change however, that the more tech-savvy will flock to the alternatives as soon as they are ready (and now they are).

[Hands0n]

A phone that can hardly be customized and is overly simplistic in many ways is clearly not targeted at mobile professionals but rather at the technically impaired general population.

I'll have to disagree with you, a will the market itself. Mobile "professionals" need appliances that work and do exactly what they want and need it to. They do not have the time nor the inclination to fiddle around with customisations, jaibreaks, unlocks et. al. The iPhone very capably delivers on that score.

It is interesting that the argument against iPhone has been a steadily shifting sand. As each of the devices cited "deficiencies" was addressed in subsequent OS releases the argument against has narrowed as people tried their damnedest to convince that it was a seriously deficient in some way. That conversation has now found a resting place that really does not hold very much water at all.

Make no mistake, the iPhone paradigm has yet to be bettered. That Android delivers a more complex UI and and OS that allows greater access to Developers does not make it "better" than the iPhone. It certainly makes it more flexible to those that require that flexibility. Being open(ish) Android allows for all manner of customisations, including very different ROMs to be installed. But, and this is the really important bit, that is not what Enterprise, Business and the mass buyers of iPhone want. Nor, I would argue, do the general masses out there.

Most people who buy Android will use it as it comes out of the box. Us lot on these forums who may try out different ROMs and generally hack around with our Android are in a very tiny minority. The the manufacturers we are insignificant. Android is not targeted at us at all - but the masses.

None of that makes Android "better", its just different.

[kitsunisan]

And lets not forget that Apple has been refining the iphone's firmware for about three years now. The android platform is a year old, but for every device, there is a new learning curve to it to get the hardware and software in sync, unless I'm very much mistaken. Minor tweaks that needs to be worked out. Give Android another two years, it'll have a much improved os and many more apps on the marketplace.

Please excuse my ignorance - but I fail to see what a version number says about the quality of the OS? Some companies get it right the first time, you know. Saying that Android is worse than iPhone OS just because Android is at version 2.0 and iPhone OS at version 3.x is absurd.

While I agree with part of the sentiment there, and am fully with you in believing Android is a great platform, its a fact that, over time, a good os can be added to, trimmed down and otherwise refined into a better one. I like what Android does, but some areas could use a great deal of improvement. You look at what works, what doesn't, and what people want, then make tweaks to improve it.

I maintain my stance: Android 2.0 is every bit as good as iPhone OS and in many respect it's massively better. It's different to use and iPhone OS is more novice-oriented but Android is definitely not worse.

Agreed. The latest iphone revision was basically just to let it catch up to what Android had. Cut and paste becomes a "revolutionary feature" when Jobs allows it to appear on his device.

[Hands0n]

There is a very real chance that, for the sake of this particular discussion, Android could become its own worst enemy. It could turn out to be a modern day re-enactment of the Tower of Babel.

Up until recently Android has been running on a relatively pure environment, that being HTC product - and for the longest time that being the G1. No more. Now we are seeing Android on different HTC hardware, and more significantly, different manufacturers hardware. And that is where the analogy to the Tower begins.

Already I am reading at how Android is being implemented such as to cause variations in design and capability - something that does not exist in the iPhone world (yet). These variations are introducing "differences" within the Android universe that we have not had to deal with so far.

An example might be the Samsung Galaxy i7500. Differences are showing up already. Instead of OTA the user seems to have to use a specific tool called NPS?

Then there is the T-Mobile Pulse - a remarkable budget Android that, it is said, will not update beyond Donut, if at all, because of its own memory size limitations.

And so, as the 52-odd new Androids appear in 2010 we will start to see people comparing Android against Android. The comparison against the iPhone will become more difficult - or at least will not be as simple as Android vs iPhone or OS X.

[qItor]

There is a very real chance that, for the sake of this particular discussion, Android could become its own worst enemy. It could turn out to be a modern day re-enactment of the Tower of Babel.

Apple will soon have to start diversifying, should they want to increase the market share of the iPhone. Also, it's more than likely that the 1st gen iPhone won't be upgradeable beyond 3.x - so very soon we'll see the same thing happen as with Android 1.6 and 2.0.
From the customers' point of view, this is confusing and generally not a good thing. However, Windows Mobile has been available on a plethora of different devices, screen sizes etc., yet most software works flawlessly on almost all devices. Yes, some devices will remain stuck on 1.6 because their hardware makers choose not to provide upgrades. That sucks. But it's hardly anything new that device manufactures eventually force their users to upgrade. I think the whole thing is going to be a non-issue. There'll be some limited incompatibility (which could be avoided by more careful screening of the apps that are allowed into the Market - hardly going to happen, but possible) app-wise. Nothing more.

[Hands0n]

Agreed, we may well see that very thing happen with Apple in time to come. I think it will be to a much lesser degree than the with WinMo and Android across a plethora of handset manufacturers.

You're absolutely right about what has happened with WinMo to date. But is it desirable to happen with Android? Especially as there is such a ready route to updating the OS in Android that simply does not exist in WinMo and, more importantly, Microsoft.

Will the buying public understand and gladly accept that their device has no, or limited, upgrade potential? I'm thinking the likes of the Huawei-made T-Mobile Pulse, or the Samsung Galaxy i7500 as mentioned earlier.

If, and this is a big if, Apple can stay on track across all of their future iPhone iterations then they'll have succeeded where all of the others have not.

[Shootingstars]

I've looked at quite a few reviews that compare the Droid / Milestone to the iPhone 3Gs. Apparently, nearly all of them declare the iPhone 3Gs the winner. I find this somewhat strange - because I really don't see why. And neither do most of the reviewers - the points they cite to justify the iPhone 3Gs' win are either dubious at best or plain out non-existent).

Here are a couple of facts:

- The Droid / Milestone has a screen that's beyond any doubt superior to the iPhone's

- The Droid does multi-tasking without impairing on battery-life or speed

- Both the Droid and the Milestone come with turn-by-turn navigation
(Google maps and Motonav). So while the phone costs the same as the iPhone, for the latter you'll have to shed another 100 something $ on navigation. Therefore (unless you don't need navigation), the Droid is actually quite a bit cheaper than the iPhone. If you're already in a contract, the price difference is massive. Here in Switzerland, the 16gb iPhone 3Gs costs around 1000$ without a contract. The Milestone is 700$.

- The Droid has a physical keyboard, the iPhone doesn't

- Both phones are equally snappy. The iPhone 3Gs is probably slightly faster (about 10% when looking at the raw processing speed). But declaring the iPhone 3Gs to be superior solely based on this is a bit far-fetched

- The Droid has a much better camera. The camera on the iPhone has always sucked and the 3Gs' is only a minor improvement

- The Droid doesn't have pinch-to-zoom. Now that's an annoyance to some degree. The Milestone does have that feature, though.

- The Android Market "only" has 12'000 apps compared to 100'000+ for the iPhone. Again, raw numbers would make it seem the app situation for the Android Market is dire compared to the iPhone's. However - 12'000 apps are already a crapload. Apps also tend to be cheaper on Android Market. Apple counts each book that's for sale in the App Store a whole app of its own - so while there probably are more apps on the iPhone's App Store, the way you count does apps does matter - and so far, I don't think any of the reviews have taken this into account. I somewhat doubt that the number of usable apps is that much higher in the App Store. I know Apple's App Store quite well and still think that the number of usable apps is in the 100s, not 1000s. The rest is crap that nobody wants or uses.


Now this is all coming from an iPhone 3Gs user. I'm considering switching to the Motorola Milestone once it's out here in Europe..

The Droid is new and in time all the problems shall be fixed, including the camera which sucks. I just spoke to the Motorola rep and was told a firmware update will be released in the beginning of 2010.