[untog]

Call/SMS integration is great. It's worth noting that Google had absolutely everything they needed to do this years ago, and just... didn't. Hangouts is still inferior to iMessage today. It's a real shame.

Edit: this extensibility stuff might be enough to tempt me back to Apple from Android, at last. Third party keyboards, too (I've gotten quite attached to the Android swiping stuff). Honestly, at this point, I'm not sure what keeps me on Android. I confidently predict that iOS Active Notification usage will be far higher than on Android, even though Android has had it for years.

[bane]

Google's ability to "release and stagnate" is one of the hallmarks of the company's rather prolific product output. I honestly don't know how products are run at Google, but from the outside it seems that most of them are built and then just kicked off the back of a truck into a waiting crowd. If you hear any news later about a product it seems like it's news about a shutdown.

[yaeger]

It sounds like the real "nerdy" way to do things. Start with an exiting product, everybody is psyched cause it is new and everyone is giving 100%. First version is out and now, somehow the hype and enthusiasm is gone cause it is no long the "new thing". Refining it seems rather tedious and boring compared to just starting with a new and exciting product.

God knows I suffer from that. The beginning of something new is always awesome but as time progresses and the "new" feeling vanishes I find it harder and harder to keep working on it.

[TillE]

Yeah, it's really weird to see this pattern repeat again and again. Google has a few flagship products that get proper attention, but everything else...I just don't understand how it even gets developed in the first place, if they don't have a small team to continue working on it post-release.

[nobbyclark]

> I just don't understand how it even gets developed in the first place, if they don't have a small team to continue working on it post-release.

From talking to PMs at Google, they have exactly this problem. Engineers are free to pick and choose what they work on.As soon as a product is released, hits "1.0", and the engineers have claimed whatever kudos they can, they move on to the "next big thing", leaving the PM alone with the product. That leads to situations where PMs can't even get basics like localizations to specifics countries / languages.

[kingkawn]

This sounds like a microcosm of the market. Engineers/investors want the largest possible returns on their capital, so they chase projects with the largest potential. This makes for big splashes and little follow through, even on things that the customer population has as core needs for the overall company. Welcome to capitalism.

[freyr]

They're throwing spaghetti against the wall.

They don't want to waste engineering talent on a product that doesn't even register on their bottom line, and shows no promise of explosive growth. But on the other hand, they want to build the next big thing in-house, rather than having to acquire it for billions or letting it grow into a competitor.

It's really tough predicting what the next big thing is, so they throw spaghetti at the wall.

[mgkimsal]

the "next big thing" is an ecosystem that works well together. by neglecting all these individual systems, and not having them work together well, they're ensuring they're not the 'next big thing' and never will have it.

[simonh]

> Yeah, it's really weird to see this pattern repeat again and again.

If you think through the logic on 20% time and deliberately developing as many different crazy projects as possible in the hope that a few of them pan out and hit the big time, this is the inevitable outcome.

[georgemcbay]

"It's worth noting that Google had absolutely everything they needed to do this years ago, and just... didn't."

This is so true and so sad. Google Voice, why are you so almost great and so neglected?

I have to say though that my disappointment in Google Voice is quickly being matched by my disappointment in Google Maps which actually was great but continually gets less so with each release.

[bane]

I would have agreed with you except I'm actually liking the very latest bump. Telling me which lanes to get into to make an exit? Brilliant. I think it's also taking traffic into account now.

[greggman]

Telling you which lane to get in is like a 12 year old feature of car navigation systems isn't it? I certainly remember the car navigation systems in rental cars from 12 years ago having that feature.

Same with taking traffic into account, especially in Japanese systems which have done that since like 2004.

If Google finally got around to adding those features that's great but hardly worthy of "brilliant" praise for something that's been around for years.

[_pmf_]

> If Google finally got around to adding those features that's great but hardly worthy of "brilliant" praise for something that's been around for years.

We only do that if it's Apple, right?

[natevancouver]

In my town Google Maps has traffic “data” for every side street and it’s usually wrong or irrelevant. A red light at an intersection will show up as a traffic jam and then I’ll get weird routes trying to go around it.

Traffic for freeways, on the other hand, is amazing.

This likely has to do with the quality of traffic data provided by the municipality. But Apple Maps doesn’t have the same problem. Their side-street traffic data is reliable around here – very surprising.

[IanCal]

I'm pretty sure maps uses data from a few sources, one being how fast android devices are moving near there.

[thebokehwokeh2]

Traffic integration is most probably Google's acquisition of Waze. It'll probably only get better.

[dragonwriter]

Google Maps definitely made traffic-based time estimates for routes and (AFAICT) also made route choices based on traffic before the Waze acquisition, though its traffic data has gotten better since the Waze acquisition (particularly, it extends to more non-freeway routes) and it has more information on the source of traffic problems (which appears to be largely directly because of Waze, since it credits information to its source and "reported by Waze" seems to be by far the most common source of most kinds of reports).

[georgemcbay]

This is true, Google Maps definitely has done traffic avoidance for years, even before the Waze acquisition. I think prior to Waze it was a completely self-contained reporting system though (other people using Google Nav on Android were automatically/anonymously feeding their speed/route back to the homebase and that was used to detect traffic anomalies). Presumably they now have more data to work from.

[chemmail]

I've been an embedded user of google voice since it was grand central and tried to move over to android, but that OS seems to be a bigger mess than Windows Mobile phone. It's a bit ironic that the people who love it don't really do anything on their phone, they don't use the "openness" android supposedly gives. With Jailbreak, IOS is pretty amazing.

[alexqgb]

UX on the turn by turn directions is peerless. But the original promise (a search box for the real world) keeps coming up short. Indeed, the results seem to be getting more unfocused and incomplete as time goes by.

[boobsbr]

I used to be able to easily find the street names, now they're crowded with POIs and I have to zoom in and out and pan around to find the street name.

[the_watcher]

Yea, what's going on with Maps? It used to almost always get me to the right place when I searched, now, half the time it tries to send me to Bangalore or across the country until I add a city parameter.

[arethuza]

It does seem to have got a bit silly - I searched recently for directions from Edinburgh to Falkland (a village less than an hour away, but a fairly popular tourist destination) and it thought I wanted to go from Edinburgh to the Falkland Islands....

I'm pretty sure Maps didn't used to do dumb things like that.

[mentat]

I have to agree with Maps issues as well. Latest release was the worst directions I've ever received electronically which is saying something...

[toyg]

>Google Voice, why are you so almost great and so neglected?

Because it pisses off carriers (big telcos), and Android vendors (unlike Apple) really need carriers.

[kmfrk]

I think Apple were still a little afraid of pissing off carriers, when they didn't make a big deal out of FaceTime Audio calls.

[mirsadm]

At this point both devices do the core functionality just as well as each other (email, browsing and maps). Android still has better "Google" integration which is important for me. Also I have gotten use to paying $350 for a Nexus device + $18/mo for my plan. I have no intention of ever buying another $800+ device or spending upwards of $100/mo for something which is about the same experience as I have now.

[italophil]

What is you $18/month plan? I am still looking for a reasonable one in the US.

[mirsadm]

I'm from Australia. There are a couple of low cost alternatives here for the moment. The plan I am on gives me 1.5gb/mo and pretty much unlimited talk/text for my use.

When I was in Canada/US I couldn't really find any low cost options without a contract.

[mkaziz]

If you're in the US, check out Black Wireless (GSM, ATT network), or Republic Wireless.

[piyush_soni]

I use 'Straight talk' (with AT&T based sim) in the US. It is not a lot, but still is cheaper than just being with AT&T and also gives me much more high speed data per month. Problems? The high speed internet might not be as reliable as AT&Ts (I feel I get 2G at more places when compared to AT&T), but mostly it is good.

US is really costly when it comes to phone bills. One of the most advanced countries in the world, and can't give cheap internet.

[chrisBob]

I have been very happy with Republic Wireless, but I am considering Ting because I am an Apple Fanboy. Black wireless looks very good. I am not sure I how I missed them before now.

[jonny_eh]

I never heard of Black Wireless, but the fact that they're selling a bogus "radiation blocker" thing makes me instantly dislike them.

[Evan-Purkhiser]

T-Mobiles $30/month plan is also worth checking out.

[nextweek2]

You are probably Generation X. They were less susceptible to advertising.

People that pay more for a similar product are not just buying the product, they are also buying style and the ability to set themselves apart from their peers.

[unfamiliar]

> Generation X. They were less susceptible to advertising.

Hah!

[justinator]

I used to be able to do this with my first color screen'd Sony/Erickson phone and OS X like, 10 years ago via Bluetooth. It was great to work with my Addressbook on the Mac, pick a contact and SMS/Call them. I could also use the phone as a remote control for iTunes, as well.

[gurkendoktor]

Same here! SMS'ing from the 10.4 Dashboard was fantastic. I even had a second Nokia with a GPRS flatrate in my backpack and could use it as an occasional hotspot throughout the week, then charge it on the weekends.

Turning on the iOS hotspot from OS X 10.10 even works exactly like tethering via Bluetooth used to work, from the menu bar.

[jfb]

Yeah, there was a little package called "Bluephone Elite", IIRC, that did this.

[robmcm]

Yup, was great. Let you reply to messages, run apple scripts on proximity, answer and dial the phone...

Not sure why it took apple soooooo long to implement?

[X-Istence]

I used to do this with my Sony Erricson phone as well in 10.2 and 10.3 from Address Book/iSync.

[justinator]

If I also remember correctly, I was able to use this same phone (first phone I had with a camera, I believe - T610?) to snap a shot, and then email it to an address that piped that to a Perl script. That Perl script, then posted the photo to a very simple blog-like app I had written (also in Perl). I handed the site in as an art project I did, after a week road trip.

And then, Instagram happened. Seemed novel at the time - something I made 3 hours before hittin' the road.

[donniezazen]

You are right. Google has completely fractured message on Android. You have to install 10 different messengers to be able to talk to different factions of people. Also since they want to push Google Hangouts' online feature their messaging app is quite confusing.

I stick to Anroid for innovations like LastPass's 'fill into applications', link browser, Pocket, etc. They are so tightly integrated with Android that it is very pleasurable to use.

[gotschi]

I love Notification Center with its extensions! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umZCjMduuUY

before 8 I always disabled it because I litterally had no use for it...

[dirkgently]

> this extensibility stuff might be enough to tempt me back to Apple from Android, at last.

I am not sure if you are serious or not.

[untog]

Why? The intends system of Android is amazing, and I use it heavily. It was absolutely a blocker for me switching to iOS.

[criley2]

Because third party iOS developers are still second class citizens compared to Apple in-house developers.

Google doesn't make third party developers second class citizens: it makes apps using the same tools and apis as available to everyone, and distributes them the same way that everyone else distributes their apps.

This is a step forward for Apple, but for example: Safari will remain the only browser available on iOS, and Apple's version of Safari will remain versions ahead of UIWebView meaning that any non-Safari browser will remain inferior by intentional design. True competition is prevented by design, and it takes 5 years to open up something as basic as the keyboard. How many more years until browser is opened up? 5 more?

It's an interesting move as far as platforms go, but I know that it's no where near what I want from a platform. It's still locked down, under featured and heavily controlled. For a non-tech user or someone who wants a dead simple phone, it seems great. But for those of us who love our devices, love customizing them in and out, and love trying to create the best experiences, Apple still is not a choice: we can't compete with Apple apps, we can't use their in-house APIs, and they still offer us inferior versions of the software/APIs that they use inhouse.

[interpol_p]

> Google doesn't make third party developers second class citizens: it makes apps using the same tools and apis as available to everyone, and distributes them the same way that everyone else distributes their apps.

This is exactly my problem with Google. They seem to prioritise developers over users. Apple does the opposite. As a developer I prefer this — I've been rejected many times, and many times it was because I failed to do something for my users.

I don't trust most developers to do right by their users. I don't trust them to respect user privacy, store data securely, ensure decent battery life, not be lazy, and so on. Developers don't have the right to develop for and sell on whatever store they want; they should follow the rules if they want their software on someone else's store.

The Safari UIWebView thing relates to memory protection. And really, there's not that much of a difference (I use JavaScriptCore pretty heavily at times).

Which Apple APIs, specifically, are you complaining about? As far as I see, the vast majority of what we use, Apple uses. Their APIs are often elegant and very well thought out. Also powerful.

[devcpp]

What's so awesome about Android is that Google can't reject you, since you can just install any APKs you want. If you can't appreciate that (among all the other freedom features, like root, ADB, customization, etc), you don't really get Android's philosophy.

[interpol_p]

That's true — I'd acknowledge that as a nice aspect of Android from a developer or enthusiast user point of view.

I believe that iOS would be less successful if it had similar capability, though. (I'm also the kind of person that doesn't really mind spending $100/year on a Dev account to install what I want.)

The point is that for the vast majority, and for developers looking to make a living, the play store can reject you. So for my purposes Google is pretty much in full control here.

[threeseed]

> True competition is prevented by design.

You really think Apple is threatened by the competition posed by an alternative keyboard or browser ? Pretty sure they care far more about maintaining their "99% of malware" exists on Android record.

[bicubic]

Regarding alternative browsers, yeah I think they might be. Safari and UIWebView intentionally disable webgl (http://atnan.com/blog/2011/11/03/enabling-and-using-webgl-on...).

The official reason is security but given that webgl has been running on Android and desktop browsers without incident and that its present in Safari Mobile and merely disabled, its more likely that Apple doesn't want to have webgl based apps taking from app store sales. A true alternative browser would open the doors to breaking the app store monopoly on games.

[wildpeaks]

WebGL works in iOS8, no longer disabled :)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7837899

[criley2]

Please look past the hype, malware on phones is a near non-issue.

Need I remind you that it was iOS devices being hijacked by hackers, not Android devices?

Claims like "99% of malware exist on Android" didn't prevent Apple users across the west from having their devices hijacked for ransom.

And no, Apple isn't threatened by the "competition".

I'm just saying: from the perspective of a tech-forward developer who spends a lot of time on their mobile computing device, the locked down reality of iOS, while marginally improving, is still leagues away from a platform that gives developers a deep and powerful ability to create wonderful mobile experiences that transcend the concept of "sandboxed app".

Sure iOS apps have some great modern flat-ui navigation, but how many iOS developers are trying to re-imagine what mobile means, how we use phones? How many iOS developers are capable of adjusting how we use the phone, the screens and service we see the most?

On Android: most developers can. I have a list of a dozen apps that improve on Google's core functions, and I'm sure hundreds more amazing apps exist. On iOS: None can and none are, outside of the small jailbreak scene. Everyone uses stock everything because that's all that's allowed. #innovation

[ceejayoz]

> Claims like "99% of malware exist on Android" didn't prevent Apple users across the west from having their devices hijacked for ransom.

The feature used for this - remote locking of a stolen/lost phone - is present on both Android and iOS, as are weak passwords. That you're acting like that's an issue with the hardware/software involved is a good indication that you're trolling or fanboying.

[BugBrother]

I reluctantly don't jailbreak my iPhone/iPad despite that I of course want shell, emacs, Perl, etc on all my devices.

This is because I want to feel safe with my i.* things while using my bank applications and buying stuff from iTunes.

[the_watcher]

>> Apple's version of Safari will remain versions ahead of UIWebView meaning that any non-Safari browser will remain inferior by intentional design.

My hope is that deep-linking can make this somewhat irrelevant. If you can deep link to Safari from where you'd otherwise use UIWebView, and design a system that allows you to return to the app you were in when you finish (an easy one, like letting the back button take you back to the previous app), then a lot of these issues are somewhat solved.

[wrboyce]

> Safari will remain the only browser available on iOS

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/chrome-web-browser-by-google...

> ...meaning that any non-Safari browser will remain inferior by intentional design

But you just said Safari is the only browser?

[dragonwriter]

More accurately, Safari is (and presumably will remain) the only browser engine, but its possible for third party apps to reskin the engine and provide certain limited differences in non-core functionality and call it a different "browser".

[criley2]

wrboyce, you linked me Chrome for iOS.

I covered that in my post, please keep up: Chrome for iOS is powered by Safari on iOS, because Apple refuses to allow any other developer use the developers own code and libraries. Chrome is prevented from using Google's inhouse Blink rendering engine and the majority of the rest of the Chrome code and features we know and love on every other platform including Android.

Chrome is forced to use UIWebView, which is an OUTDATED and OLDER version of Safari than Safari.

If you use Chrome on iOS, you are getting an INFERIOR browser because Apple dictated that all other browsers must A) use Safari as their internal and B) must use outdated and old versions of Safari so they don't and can't compete with Safari fairly.

Which is MY WHOLE POINT, really, that Apple holds back innovation.

[0x0]

Do you have a source for UIWebView being an older version of safari than MobileSafari? I thought they were the same except for the Nitro (JIT) stuff, and even that seems to be changing for iOS8, especially with the Modern Webkit thing that's been showing up in webkit git commits.

[dirkgently]

Yes, Android intends are great, and that's why I was surprised when I read "this extensibility stuff might be enough to tempt me back to Apple from Android".

What I meant to ask was, what do you mean by "enough"? Does this mean that:

1. iphone/ios/Apple suddenly provides better extendibility?

2. Would you be able to, say, open a link to any browser of your choice in iphone?

If any of the above answers is "no", then, yes, I am not sure if you were serious or not. Hence my comment.

(Edited for clarity)

[jasonpbecker]

On 1, better than iOS was. Not sure if you mean better than Android, in which case, that remains to be seen. But the target should be "good enough".

On 2, third-party apps have long supported opening in a different app. Of course, it's up to that developer to include the x-callback-url and Apple apps won't use that preference.

[threeseed]

It came across as being sarcastic hence the down votes.

And yes iOS8 does provide better extensibility than it did before and yes you would be able to open content in alternative browsers. Not sure about apps like Mail however.

[dirkgently]

I am fine with the downvotes. It's pretty easy on any Apple/Android/iOS/Google thread.

> And yes iOS8 does provide better extensibility than it did before

That wasn't my point. I asked specifically if iOS provides better extendibility than _Android_ (as the OP seemed to infer by stating his move back to iOS for that reason alone).

> not sure about apps like Mail however.

That's the point. Browser was just an example. Extendibility of a system does not mean in one or two places.

[clarky07]

it doesn't have to better, it has to be good enough, which is the point the OP was trying to make. There are some things about Android that are better and there are some things about iOS that are better. Intents were a thing that has been better in the past on Android (by virtue of not existing on iOS), and a reason that some people have stuck with Android even though they might prefer iOS for a lot of things.

If the extensions stuff is "good enough" for the reasons people like intents, then that could easily be enough for people to switch from Android to iOS assuming they like iOS better overall.