Top Bananas | Tag Archives: Android

Apple Ads Target Android Users

Posted on May 23, 2017 by admin Posted in Business, Marketing, Software Leave a comment

What it is: Apple recently released a series of ads explaining how to switch from an Android phone to an iPhone.

Back in 2008, Apple released a series of ads called “I’m a PC” where an actor portraying a PC would comically fail comparing himself against another actor portraying a Macintosh. Those ads highlighted the differences between the Macintosh and a Windows PC to convince people to switch to a Mac.

Many people have switched to a Mac while many others still use Windows. Since the number of new computer users isn’t growing fast enough, the Macintosh growth rate often comes at the expense of people switching from a Windows PC or buying a Macintosh instead of another Windows PC.

Now Apple is targeting the much larger world of Android smartphone users. The number of new mobile phone users keeps shrinking all the time so the best way to keep selling iPhones is to sell them to people switching form Android. While some people switch from an iPhone to an Android phone, most people go the other way. That means steady growth for the iPhone and a slow trickle of defections from Android to the iPhone.

It’s unlikely that Apple will ever get everyone to switch from Android to an iPhone just like they could never get everyone to switch from a Windows PC to a Macintosh. However, the goal is simply to convince more people to switch even faster than before. If more people switch to Apple products than switch away from Apple products, that represents steady growth.

The latest Apple switcher ads highlight different concerns people might have in switching to an iPhone such as moving their music, photos, or other data to an iPhone. Rather than make fun of Android like their previous ads made fun of Windows, these latest Apple ads simply highlight how easy it can be to switch. In general, most people tolerate Windows where some dislike it, so Apple’s old ads poking fun at Windows appealed to many people.

Not as many people feel as much frustration towards Android as they do towards Windows. That’s probably why Apple’s latest ads don’t poke fun at Android but simply state facts for how to switch to an iPhone.

Over time, more people are switching to an iPhone than leaving it. This suggests steady growth for the iPhone over time with steady defections from Android over the same time period. Android will never go away, but it will serve as an introduction to smartphones so people can eventually compare their smartphones to an iPhone.

Visual Studio for the Mac

Posted on May 13, 2017 by admin Posted in Programming Leave a comment

What it is: Microsoft acquired Xamarin and released their cross-platform development tool as Visual Studio for the Mac.

Xamarin once developed a compiler that would let you use Microsoft’s C# programming language to develop Android and iOS apps. Xamarin proved so popular that Microsoft acquired them and rebranded Xamarin as Visual Studio for the Mac. Now Macintosh programmers can use C# to create Windows, Android, and iOS programs.

While this is great for C# programmers, it does highlight one huge issue. There’s no Visual Basic support. When Microsoft first created their .NET programming initiative, they insisted that C# and Visual Basic would be equally supported. Most programmers didn’t believe this and gravitated towards C# as Microsoft’s unofficial, official programming language.

Over time, Microsoft gradually lost interest in Visual Basic, which was no surprise because Visual Basic.NET was essentially C# with BASIC syntax so it made little sense to learn Visual Basic when you could just learn C# instead. By not supporting Visual Basic (which most programmers didn’t care about anyway), Visual Studio for the Mac simply confirms Visual Basic’s second class status. If you’re going to learn any programming language, the choices really boil down to C# or Swift.

C# is Microsoft’s real official language and now Visual Studio for the Mac lets you use C# to create macOS and iOS apps as well as Android and Windows programs. For maximum flexibility, you’ll probably want to learn C#.

The main reason to learn Swift is because it’s Apple’s official language. Just as Microsoft gradually lost interest in Visual Basic, you can expect Apple to gradually lose interest in Objective-C, their previous official language. Swift has been made open source so it’s gravitated towards Windows and Linux as well and will likely be ported to create Android apps eventually.

The big difference between C# and Swift is that C# is currently cross-platform while Swift is not quite there yet. If you already know C#, Visual Studio for the Mac is Microsoft’s way to keep you using C#. If you don’t know any programming language, then the choice between C# and Swift is a bit harder. For anyone who wants to focus exclusively on Apple products, Swift makes sense since Apple will always provide the latest features for Swift. If you want to create cross-platform apps, then C# and Visual Studio for the Mac is currently the better choice.

The ultimate goal of every cross-platform programming language is to let you write a program once and run it on multiple platforms. The reality is that this never works (think of Java). Instead, you have to tweak each program for a particular platform, but this is still far easier than rewriting an entire program from scratch.

Swift isn’t quite a cross-platform language yet, but its open source nature means somebody will create a similar program like Xamarin. Until then, C# gives Windows programmers a chance to tap into the lucrative Android, iOS, and macOS market without learning a new language like Swift.

Unless you have a really good reason to learn something else, C# and Swift are the two languages to focus on for iOS and macOS development. Don’t waste your time learning Visual Basic. Even Microsoft no longer cares about Visual Basic any longer so why should you?

To learn more about Visual Studio for the Mac, click here.

Google’s New Operating System

Posted on May 9, 2017 by admin Posted in Software, User Interface Leave a comment

What it is: Fuchsia is Google’s latest operating system designed for smartphones and personal computers.

Operating systems form the heart of any hardware. Microsoft is clinging to keep Windows relevant in the mobile computer market while Google has both Android and ChromeOS. Meanwhile Apple has macOS for personal computers and iOS for mobile computers. While Windows continues to dominate the personal computer market, it’s being challenged by ChromeOS. While Android dominates the mobile market, it was originally a Blackberry clone that was quickly redesigned to look like an iOS clone. The end result is that Android wasn’t designed from scratch for smartphones and personal computers.

That’s why Google is developing Fuchsia, a new operating system that avoids using Linux as its kernel. The main reason for this is to get greater control over the operating system. The big question is what will Google hope Fuchsia will do for them?

Since Fuchsia is designed for both smartphones and personal computers, it immediately competes with Google’s own Android and ChromeOS. The advantages of Fuchsia is that Google can start from scratch and design an optimized operating system capable of using a minimal amount of resources while scaling up. The huge disadvantages is that there’s little reason for anyone to suddenly dump Android and ChromeOS to suddenly switch to Fuchsia.

If Fuchsia offers an Android compatibility layer, that immediately destroys any benefits of optimized software. Users have no reason to switch form Android to Fuchsia and developers have no reason to switch until the market is flooded with Fuchsia users. Of course, users won’t buy Fuchsia devices until there are plenty of apps available for it, so the idea of starting a new operating system might make sense from a technical standpoint but from a practical point of view, there’s little reason for users to switch.

Consider a company making a new desktop operating system to compete against Windows, Linux, and macOS. If a startup tried to raise funding by claiming they were going to target the desktop operating system market, they would never get a penny because there’s little reason for people to switch form Windows, Linux, or macOS to use an entirely new operating system with little software to go along with it.

Likewise, there’s little reason for any Android or iOS user to switch to Fuchsia and almost no reason for Windows, Linux, or macOS users to switch to Fuchsia either. For a new operating system like Fuchsia to succeed, it needs to target a new market, not try to take over an existing one.

Most people use Windows because so many companies use Windows. Linux is arguably faster, more secure, and more reliable (while being free), yet even these crucial differences can’t make people switch en masse. How will Fuchsia attract users?

The idea of creating a new operating system makes sense form a technical point of view, but technology never advances solely for technical reasons. Technology only advances due to public acceptance. If the public finds a reason to adopt a particular technology, then they will. If they don’t have a reason, then the greatest technology in the world will lie unused in a dusty corner despite its great technological achievements. It took over a century for people to adopt fax machines and people still haven’t adopted the Segway to the extent that its inventors had hoped.

Unless Google plans to use Fuchsia has a science experiment or the basis of a new product, Fuchsia’s chances of displacing Android, ChromeOS, Windows, and iOS remain dim at best. Most likely Fuchsia can help improve Android rather than replace it altogether. Google will likely get stuck supporting Android and ChromeOS for a long time just like Microsoft keeps supporting Windows and Apple keeps supporting macOS. In the current computing world, there’s little room for a new operating system like Fuchsia. Fuchsia needs to take on a new market, and then that will force Google to support Android, ChromeOS, and Fuchsia.

Fuchsia isn’t going to conquer the operating system market, but it might still be interesting to see how it evolves anyway.

To read more about Fuchsia, click here.

The Pointlessness of Technical Specifications

Posted on April 18, 2017 by admin Posted in Hardware, Software Leave a comment

What it is: In the latest benchmark speed tests, the iPhone beat all Android competitors despite having lower technical specifications.

This is the way marketers try to promote the superiority of their products. They parade a laundry list of technical specifications so if you compare the two, you’ll obviously think a faster processor and more RAM would mean a better and faster product. Unfortunately for Android device manufacturers, higher technical specifications don’t result in better performance over an iPhone with a slower processor and less RAM. IN fact the opposite occurs where an iPhone with a slower processor and less RAM proves much faster than an Android device with a faster processor and more RAM.

The difference is optimization. Apple can optimize both the hardware and software components of the iPhone for maximum efficiency. Android device manufacturers slap together off-the-shelf components along with the standard Android operating system and try to get faster performance by simply cramming more RAM and a faster processor into their products. The end result is a technically superior device based on technical specifications alone, but an inferior device when it comes to actual use.

By parading a laundry list of technical specifications that imply superiority to the iPhone’s slower processor and lower RAM, Android device manufacturers are simply embarrassing themselves further when benchmarks show that the iPhone is still faster. That speed difference highlights the vast difference in quality between an Android device and an iPhone.

Android is fine is you want an inexpensive device and that’s your primary goal. If you want the best user experience, then you need to buy an iPhone. Surprisingly, some Android smartphones cost just as much or even more than an iPhone. To spend more money to get less performance makes no sense whatsoever. To spend less money and get less performance makes sense if you’re focused on price alone. Spending less money while expecting better performance will never happen, and yet that’s the pipe dream Android device manufacturers keep trying to promote in their advertising.

Android device manufacturers should simply focus on cheap products because that’s their only competitive advantage. Even then, a refurbished or used iPhone is still a better deal than a similarly priced Android smartphone. If you don’t want an iPhone, then you have to settle for an inferior smartphone from another company. If you’re fine with that, then there’s no point in comparing Android to the iPhone. If you’re not happy with owning an inferior smartphone despite paying less, then you’ll never be happy no matter what. That’s because the choice will always be to get an iPhone or get a cheaper, slower Android smartphone.

If you’re really motivated, you an always get a Windows Phone smartphone, but good luck finding any apps that will work on it. If that’s not an option for you, then choose between an Android smartphone or an iPhone and be happy with your decision.

For people who want the best performing smartphone on the market, the iPhone is the clear winner despite lower technical specifications. For people who want the cheapest smartphone on the market, Android smartphones are the clear winner. For people who want an Android smartphone that outperforms the iPhone and costs less, keep dreaming. It will never happen.

Apple Pay vs. Australian Banks

Posted on February 12, 2017 by admin Posted in Business, Software Leave a comment

What it is: Australia’s banks want access to the NFC chip involved in securing Apple Pay.

Australia’s banks have a problem. They know that contactless payment systems such as Apple Pay and Android Pay are the future because they’re far more secure than handing a credit card number over to a retailer. Yet Australian banks want access to the NFC (Near Field Communications) chip that makes contactless payments possible. Allowing third-parties access to data in the NFC chip essentially means Apple Pay would risk giving up credit card numbers to retailers all over again, making it as insecure as using a regular credit card.

Australian banks want access to the NFC data simply to access customer information. This won’t help the customers in anyway and actually decreases security for the customer. The Australian banks want NFC chip access for their own reasons to snare customer data that’s currently locked out from them.

Any time a company wants something that doesn’t help its customers and actually makes its customer experience worse, that’s a clear warning sign that the company is completely wrong. That’s why Apple has resisted the Australian banks’ demands. Allowing access to the NFC chip data to Australian banks would mean opening that data to other banks as well around the world, and that would undermine the security of Apple Pay.

Right now, Apple Pay is the most secure form of payment available. Android and Samsung Pay are competing against each other so the gains of one will work against the other. It’s unlikely someone would want to choose both Android Pay and Samsung Pay, and if you wanted to switch to a different Android phone, you’d probably want to choose Android Pay instead of getting locked into a Samsung smartphone by using Samsung Pay.

Just as Samsung hopes to lock in customers who prefer Samsung Pay, so does Apple hope people will get locked into the iPhone and other Apple products by relying on Apple Pay. As long as Apple Pay remains secure, it will always be a far more attractive alternative than giving credit card numbers to a retailer so hackers can break into the retailer’s network and steal thousands of customer credit card numbers.

Once someone uses Apple Pay, Android Pay, or Samsung Pay, they’ll have less of a reason to switch to a rival phone. All of these contactless payment systems offer convenience to customers but also a subtle way to lock-in customers at the same time.

When Apple Pay first appeared, few people called it an innovation, yet that’s exactly what it is. Apple earns a percentage of all Apple Pay payments, which means Apple Pay will grow into a huge billion dollar industry alone. When that happens, you can expect people too suddenly recognize the innovation that Apple Pay is after the fact. In the meantime, Apple Pay must still struggle against banks like those in Australia that want to weaken the security of Apple Pay for their own benefit and the detriment of the safety of customers’ credit card numbers.

Apple Pay still has an uphill struggle, but it’s going to be a huge success. It already is a huge success but most people just don’t recognize it yet.

Nintendo Coming to the iPhone

Posted on February 10, 2017 by admin Posted in Business, Software Leave a comment

What it is: For the longest time, Nintendo restricted their content to Nintendo devices, but now they’re bringing them to other platforms.

In the game console wars, each side (Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo) tried to create unique content that could only be played on their devices. If you wanted to play a Nintendo game, you had to play it on Nintendo hardware. For years, that strategy worked until it didn’t. Instead of buying dedicated Nintendo consoles or handheld devices, people were relying more on smartphones and tablets.

As Nintendo hardware sales steadily fell, the company recognized the obvious. Unique content could no longer sell hardware. One option was to continue this losing strategy anyway and hope that it would magically turn around. A second and much better option was to port proprietary content to other platforms and take advantage of these other platforms’ widespread availability. That means Nintendo has to port their games to iOS and later to Android.

Initially this might seem to undercut Nintendo’s hardware sales, but game sales will likely make up for this loss and provide added revenue as well. Nintendo’s “Super Mario Run” garnered 78 million downloads on iOS alone and brought in more than $53 million for the company. Without this release, it’s highly unlikely Nintendo would have made that same amount of money selling hardware that fewer people want any more.

Nintendo knows the future is iOS and Android, but they haven’t yet figured out the best way to monetize their games. The typical solution is to offer a free game with in-app purchases, but that might not work for Nintendo. Whatever Nintendo decides to do in the future, they already know that their future rests on selling more of their games on other people’s hardware.

The future is never hardware because hardware can be easily copied. Although the iPhone revolutionized the smartphone industry with a touch screen interface, Android manufacturers had little trouble mimicking the iPhone shortly after it appeared. When Apple introduces a new hardware feature in the iPhone, Samsung and other Android device manufacturers easily copy that same feature or offer something else that Apple eventually copies in a newer iPhone model. Hoping to differentiate your products through hardware alone is a losing game.

That’s why Nintendo’s strategy of releasing their games for other platforms will likely be successful. Nintendo hardware sales can never compete against the total number of devices people already own form Apple and other companies like Samsung. In the mobile world, iOS and Android dominate and show no signs of losing their lead (unlike Blackberry and Nokia).

The fact that Nintendo is seeing growing success bye offering their games on other platforms is proof that iOS and Android and here to stay (at least for the immediate future), and that Nintendo’s hardware strategy will likely wither over time. If you want to play a Nintendo game, you can still buy Nintendo hardware, but you’ll probably be more likely to buy a Nintendo game to play on your existing devices.

Few people playing “Super Mario Run” on their iPhone or iPad would likely buy a Nintendo handheld device just to play that same game. Nintendo knows that hardware is not the future but software is. When Nintendo succeeds on iOS and Android, that means iOS and Android also succeed by cementing their dominance in the mobile computer market as well. (Notice Nintendo has no plans to port their games to Windows Phone?)

Nintendo, like many other companies, is simply following where the money is and that’s where iOS and Android are. Just like people made MS-DOS and later Windows the dominant standard because that’s where the software was, so are people now making iOS and Android the mobile standard because that’s where the software is. Nintendo will likely reap huge profits from selling more of their games on other people’s platforms. It might not be the ideal situation as selling both hardware and software, but it’s far better than going out of business altogether.

AAPL


ADI


AMD


AVGO


GLW


LQMT


INTC


LPL


NVDA


OLED


QCOM


SNDK


SNE


SWKS


TSM


WATT