Yes, we're an Android site. Yes, there was an Apple event today. We're gonna talk about it. As the newly-recast Rhodey said in Iron Man 2, "It's me. I'm here. Get used to it." Because the new iPhone raises a lot of questions: Didn't I see an Android phone with [some feature] before? Is the new iPhone really the thinnest smartphone around? Why in the world would apps need to be letterboxed?
Today, something happened that has not happened in an age: I actually got excited while watching a Motorola event. Don't get me wrong, the devices were still middling at best (though the RAZR M does seem kind of snazzy). What happened wasn't that Motorola announces some earth-shattering devices. No, this was more important: Motorola got its groove back. Or, perhaps more accurately, Motorola started syncing its old groove up with Google's current one.
The US Department of Justice approved a sale of unused wireless spectrum to Verizon today, marking one of the largest spectrum sales to a single corporate entity in history. The unused portion of the AWS spectrum is owned by a number of cable companies (known collectively as "SpectrumCo") that bought it during the FCC AWS auction back in 2008.
Of course, back in the old spectrum heydays of, uh, four very long years ago, those megahertz were a lot cheaper.
I know I'm starting off with a question here that most Android fans are going to have a knee-jerk reaction to - "absolutely not, the more Android-powered smart-stuff out there the better." After all, we want to live in a world where our refrigerators know what's inside them, where our laundry lets us know on our phones when it's done, and our cars' infotainment systems aren't so god-effing-awful (even the best ones really are terrible).
Back in February of 2011, Eric Schmidt took the stage at MWC to announce Google's latest tablet-oriented app: Movie Studio. It was a rather exciting new addition to Google's first foray into the tablet world. This made it possible for tablet users to not just view content, but to create it as well. This was a big deal. At the time, Apple already had a year-long head start on tablets. Not only would Android need a lot of third-party app support, but first-party apps would be essential to the platform's success.
Manufacturers, you're awful at naming things. Sorry. It's true. In many cases, you've either muddied the brand of your flagship devices, or made it incredibly difficult for customers to know what they should be asking for when they walk into a store. This is probably not a good thing since you want customers to buy your stuff. More than that, though, you want them to love your stuff, so they'll buy more of it.
When crowd-favorite zombie shooter Dead Trigger decided to drop its price from $0.99 to free, citing concerns over piracy, the tech world renewed its interest in an age-old debate: how bad is piracy for developers? Of course, any lost sale is money out of a developer's pocket (though it's important to distinguish between downloads and lost sales). However, the question should and needs to be answered: just how bad is the piracy problem on Android?
Update: It appears Samsung sent out the update removing universal search from international Galaxy S III's mistakenly. I'd say the point still stands for the United States, though.
On December 1, 2004, a patent was filed in the United States naming Apple as asignee (owner). Its title is "Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system." This patent, which you can find here, has become Apple's most effective weapon in its fight to see Android dubbed an iOS "ripoff" by courts and consumers.
If there's one thing that sets people off upon purchasing or downloading an app (games in particular), it's opening it up and finding it has in-app purchases.
And this is, generally, a good instinct for consumers to have - hundreds, if not thousands of mobile games blatantly take advantage of people's willingness to nickel-and-dime themselves out of money they would have never otherwise spent buying a game in the first place.