[betterth]

Android is inferior to iOS. Google Android could be on par with iOS, that's exciting and I can't wait to try the Nexus 7.

But it takes only one glance at what is released under the "Android" name for me to definitively state: Android is inferior to iOS.

But that's the point of Android. There is very, very little centralized quality control so the spectrum of quality goes all the way from the Nexus 7 down to a $99 POS Walgreens Android tablet.

[bengillies]

I know I'm not supposed to feed trolls, but:

> Android is inferior to iOS. > > But that's the point of Android.

The point of Android is to be not as good as iOS? Really? That's the point of Android?

Do you make the claim that all cars are rubbish just because some companies make rubbish cars? No. Different cars are different. Obviously. So it is with Android devices.

If one Android device is on a par with the new iPad (or at least in the same ballpark according to MG Siegler) then please judge that device based solely on that device, not on other devices that are similar in OS name only (not even version).

If you're comparing iOS to the full spectrum of Android devices out there, then please compare the full spectrum of iOS devices out there as well, including the iPhone 3GS which is, in this day and age, a POS cheapo smartphone (compared to top of the range Android phones at least).

[adrianm]

I actually don't think he's trolling, or at least not in the way you're interpreting.

I could be wrong, but I think he just clumsily phrased his response. In other words, he was stating that the point of Android is to be a decentralized operating system. Individual deployments are not controlled by any one corporation, so there can be a lot of hit and misses. Therefore, I don't think he is making a general claim that the 'point of Android to be inferior to iOS'.

Disclaimer: I'm not claiming anything written above is my own opinion, I'm just attempting to clarify a possible ambiguity.

[bengillies]

You're probably correct but then, why judge the Android OS as a whole based on the fact that there are a few rubbish devices out that run it?

[Tyrannosaurs]

Because some of those devices are cheap and sell (see the Kindle Fire as one example - massive sales, really not great - and yes I know it's a fork but it's still Android at it's heart).

Does that make Android crap? Obviously not but it does mean that there a hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people who have that perception (and are right because for them it has been crap).

Excluding the crap ones is no more a representative picture of things than excluding the good ones would be. Android is the sum total of all devices running with all the good (huge numbers, some great devices out there) and bad (fragmentation and massive variation in quality) that that entails.

[betterth]

"You're probably correct but then, why judge the Android OS as a whole based on the fact that there are a few rubbish devices out that run it?"

Because this is how Brands work. You don't get to say Android-Google and Android-Samsung unless you're talking to an analyst or a geek. For most Android owners, they have an "Android" phone. What brand? Uhh I dunno Google? Android?

Android as a brand is the collection of not just the superstar devices, but the shitty POS devices as a whole.

So as a brand, iOS > Android because the average of Android is weighed down by the crappy side of Cheap Android.

That doesn't mean that any one device is superior to any other one device, but rather that as a collective brand, the iOS brand is superior to Androids, and if you blindly buy an iOS device you're more likely to get quality than if you blindly buy an Android device.