[untog]

Not really relevant in this case, though. Clearly, Google was planning to get involved in the mobile space before the iPhone. The physical form of that involvement may have changed, but that doesn't qualify Android as a "knee-jerk reaction".

In any case, since then the iPhone notification tray has clearly copied Android, etc. etc. All to the benefit of the end user, IMO.

[beatle]

>The physical form of that involvement may have changed, but that doesn't qualify Android as a "knee-jerk reaction".

Android copying the iPhone's user interface, touch screen, form factor, ecosystem, etc. is a knee-jerk reaction to iOS.

[dpritchett]

Considering the relative growth curves of RIM and Android since 2007, I think switching from "Linux/Java Blackberry clone" to "Linux/Java iPhone clone" was a solid decision.

[beatle]

doesn't change the fact that Android is an inferior product.

[untog]

Largely depends on what you want to do with it, no? Android is rougher around the edges, but lets you do more. It's matter of personal choice.

[rbarooah]

In a theoretical world you might in principle be able to do more with Android, but given the "iOS First" approach that major developers take, it's hard to argue that it lets regular users "do more" in the real world.

[untog]

I don't know about that. Can I:

- click a button on my desktop web browser and have the current page appear on my phone

- flash a totally new ROM onto my phone

- give apps root access and let them directly access hardware

etc. etc. I agree that iOS has far more app capability, but Android has far more OS-level capability to take advantage of.

[duaneb]

It may be a knee-jerk reaction, but it was also the best decision. The iPhone represented a gigantic leap in usability on phones, and if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. If Google didn't come out with Android, Apple would own even more of the market than they do today.