amartya916

Do read the main letter by Jeff Bezos on the Amazon.com homepage. The link I have posted contains more details.

The problem is with the pricing. As someone else mentioned, they wanted to take the fight to the Kindle Fire and hence started at $200. I get that.

However, I still think that Google could have taken control, and released it's own hardware (although the Nexus 7 is an Asus tablet first shown at CES ... mostly) with some profit($249 as the starting price) built into the equation, and still sold boatloads.

While I love the Nexus 7 tablet's pricing, ultimately I think it's going to hurt the Android tablet ecosystem. With wafer-thin (non-existent?) profit margins on the hardware, only companies like Amazon and Google, which have content to sell at a profit, will be able to compete in the market.

I don't think any company that is not subsidized by Google (i.e. Asus in this case), is going to get out of the tablet business.

So yes, the Nexus is a fantastic device at a fantastic price, but my hopes of a vibrant ecosystem for Android tablet -though previously low- seems further diminished.

I would love to know what version of Firefox (and what platform) you are on. Firefox's total memory usage is in my personal experience better than Chrome right now (OS X 10.7 and Windows 7).

As someone mentioned below, Firefox doesn't get due credit when things improve. With Google's massive marketing muscle Chrome ate up a lot of Mozilla marketshare, but to call Firefox failing is completely unfair. If you love and cherish Firefox, contribute to the project. Contributions can be as minimal as being a test pilot.

Congratulations to the Product design team at Mozilla. I loved what they've done with 'Junior', the browser on the iPad. For people who want to dive into the video for the demo, go to approx. 31mins.; otherwise, here's a summary of the stand out features:

a. Full screen browsing. No URL/address bar eating up screen real-estate.

b. Two translucent buttons on the sides, very close to where one would grip the iPad (easy access with the thumbs). These two buttons are the "<" (back) and "+". "+" allows you to access other fullscreen sites currently active in the browser and add new ones.

c. Party trick, drag on the buttons (again possible comfortably with the thumbs) mentioned above to expose "forward", "print" etc. Beautifully done, looks slick.

Off-topic: By all means, charge the $99 for distributing on the App Store, but I am not really sure why Apple doesn't allow for Apple ID level verification for personal apps. Something similar to the mobile provision they use right now, e.g. having Xcode generate a binary that is associated with the same Apple ID as on the iPhone.

"It could easily scoop up an infirm company like Research in Motion, which is valued at less than $6 billion, and drop a beautifully designed Facebook operating system on top of RIM’s phones."

I find this to be an affront to engineers and designers. It trivializes the amount of time and effort it takes to make a well engineered product.

Can someone elucidate why it might be important for Facebook to have it's own hardware? Why wouldn't apps on an Android or iOS or Windows Phone be good enough (of course with seamless integration like Twitter on iOS)?

P.S. With Facebook's current alliance with MS, doesn't Windows Phone make for a good platform to build upon. Note, I believe that Windows Phone will eventually take off.

Absolutely correct, the wiggle does make it happen. One of those "Why didn't I think of it" interaction technique.

Kudos to the developer. Just a (very) minor change will make it better for me: slightly less opacity for the pop up window. On an 11inch Macbook Air, I think it'll help. I just bought the app, it's fantastic and worth every penny.

The Verge did a piece about privacy policies: http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/25/2973849/google-drive-terms...

Not very conclusive but Nilay highlighted the fact that while Dropbox's terms seem friendlier, in legalese, it's perhaps has more leeway.Also, he mentions that Google's unified policy means that they have to be extra verbose/careful about this. For example, if I can attach large documents from my Google drive while e-mailing from my Gmail account (basically not have to upload it from the local system), I'll consider that to be an interesting value addition; but that'll require me to give Google the right to move files between their servers, maybe compress it etc. This is a hypothetical example.

I trust Google as much as I trust Dropbox (which is to say that I'm cautious) and I expect Google to refine their offering as well as their policy over time.

Exactly, and the review nails it when it says that "It's a bridge to 22nm, warming the seat before Haswell arrives". Intel is being fairly conservative (later in the review, the real estate on chip to push the graphics further is mentioned), but the fact that all the improvements you list come at no additional costs for the user - despite having a brand new fabrication process - is nice.

I should have clarified; yes indeed, Silk does perform like a pig currently, but I like the idea behind it, and I believe that Amazon has the engineering chops to pull it off.

Immediate access to the mobile phone market along with a huge amount of data that can go Amazon's way if they fix Silk, might make a partnership seem mutually beneficial. (Also, since the mobile phone market is still carrier dependent, Amazon will have a harder time penetrating that market segment on its own)

For RIM to come back, just having a new OS (BB 10) and shiny hardware is not going to be enough.

As an aside, Nokia, a company with similar brand recognition - albeit in a different market segment - is trying to claw back into the game is using Windows Phone 7 and Lumia 800, 900 series of phones. If I see this correctly, Nokia isn't betting on just the new hardware and Microsoft's OS (and financial muscle); they are also implicitly optimistic about Windows Marketplace and other content (XBox?) gradually becoming seamlessly available across it's product range. Content and services are the key; a decent piece of hardware and a decent OS should be agiven.

The reason I brought up this is that for RIM to make a comeback, they need to be able to offer something more than Apple is offering at the moment; that's the only way to entice users away from a platform they've invested in. In my opinion, the only company that can provide RIM with an edge in content and services is Amazon.

I wonder if RIM and Amazon can cut some sort of a deal. Amazon already makes a tablet that is fairly successful; the prospect of mobile phones with the Silk browser running on them, seems quite interesting.

Also according to their release schedule, the updates are soon going to be background (silent) updates. So version numbers will matter less and less.

Mozilla has upped it's game and I have started to see that memory usage is now quite competitive to Chrome.

While I think this a a worthy suggestion, I also believe that "hidden" gestures that have low "discoverability" should be dealt with extreme caution.

For example, in a reading app, a pinch gesture can also be assigned to changing font sizes, and perhaps that's what many users will expect to happen.

I think keeping gestures to a minimum (in this case, just a tap, which coincidentally, is a feature of many e-book readers) serves Instapaper well.

By the way, well done Marco. Solid update, worth working hard for, and I am sure your customers appreciate it.

Absolutely. Respect for the competitor and open acknowledgement where it's due. Also, Instapaper is a one man show, and this piece made me have greater respect for him .

The article also links to his earlier post on Readability, which too was a welcome break from what one generally tends to see in the tech. scene.

Adding a link here (again), in case people missed it: http://www.marco.org/2011/11/16/readability

Sorry, I'd missed that link in your article. Although I don't claim to know him personally, I've interacted with him a few times and I know that he takes an interest in getting the mainstream tech. media to cover or correct popular myths (such as Apple pioneering multi-touch). Next time around, drop him an e-mail. Never hurts to ask, although I know why Microsoft's PR might have turned you down :).

By the way, a much better and more detailed commentary can be found here: http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

Bill Buxton is currently a Research Scientist at MSR and he more than knows what he's talking about.

You are right, and Gruber is wrong... in this case. Gruber usually does a good job of citing sources and for the rest of the article he makes some good points. Like I said before, one can agree or disagree. To reiterate though, his rushing to Siegler's defence is just silly. Gruber does himself and his readers a disservice by linking to Siegler's blog. Siegler sensationalizes the smallest of things -something Lyons brings up eloquently- and then is hypocritical enough to try and portray that he actually abhors the practice! The main reason I wanted to not drag Gruber into the discussion was:

a. Lyons' article makes no mention of him. b. Gruber and Siegler might write about Apple, but Gruber can actually write, and Siegler can't. Ankle biting chihuahua is just right.

Anyway, you make a good point, and I hope I clarified why I thought Gruber shouldn't be in this list.

While there is some truth to what you said, I don't think dragging John Gruber is appropriate. One can at least see that a post is well written (I actually think that in terms of plain English, Gruber does the best job within the tech. blogosphere) and that some care and thought has been put into framing a cogent argument. From there, it's up to you to agree or disagree. I am not referring to the links he posts, but the actual writing that he does.

MG Siegler on the other hand has been perfectly described by Lyons. All he does is generate venom, and copious amounts of it, followed by a couple of "Fuck You's"" and so-on. I think he's the National Enquirer of tech. reporting. And hence, ankle biting Chihuahua is more than correct.

If Dan's reading this, good-luck mate. I am glad you called out Siegler's bluff. What he was trying to do with the Path issue was simply 'diversion'. Rake up an issue that can get people talking - loud enough - that it drowns out the issue at hand (callous and selfish handling of privacy in the Silicon Valley).

Completely agree. Do they release region wise sales? It'd be really interesting to see 'where' this 26% came from. I expect Asia (mainly China) to be the driver in this.

I'd actually highly recommend iwantmyname.com - I found the whole process to be a breeze (transferred from Name Cheap to them actually :)).

Again, I am not affiliated to iwantmyname nor do I have ties other than my own domain being with them.

You are correct, it does seems like a minutiae indeed. I even took a video of it, just because the part peeled away (like you said). The problem is, once I saw that, I couldn't 'unsee' it. I started pressing the area of the backplate around the camera, and saw that it flexed quite a bit.

I don't change phones often, and I was looking forward to this one. But after I saw this, I decided that I'm going to check out the a Motorola with ICS...... if that doesn't happen by January end, I might jump ship to Windows Phone 7 with the Lumia.

Precisely why I don't want it to be there, I don't really need access to the battery. For the SIM, a solution similar to the iPhone will ensure that the phone feels a lot more solid.

I guess you've tried putting back the back cover, each time a tab snapped into place, I winced, fearing I'll break one. I still have the first Nexus, it has its own issues, but it feels more 'solid'.

I tried the Galaxy Nexus today and the really poor quality back plate (to gain battery/SIM access) threw me off. I was about to pay close to 700 dollars for a unlocked version and the quality seemed to be fairly humdrum. I can now categorically say that HTC phones seem to have better build quality.

Do pay attention to the finish of the backplate, in fact, try removing it in store. I saw that the fit and finish was slightly different between phones.

I do think Josh Toposkly overreacted. MG's analogy was not great either, it needed a couple of caveats (see next para). But, Just because a Mercedes is being compared to a Honda doesn't mean that there's some sort of a class issue at stake.

Honda is a fantastic engineering company. In terms of drivetrain technology they are right up there with the very best (for lower capacity engines, I'd say they are better than Mercedes, but I digress). However, Mercedes (especially till the early nineties) was about attention to detail, not just the drivetrain, but each and every part that went in, was famously "over-engineered". If I may, my interpretation of the analogy:

a. Honda's focus is on the engineering (drivetrain to be specific), they are willing to do an average (nothing special, but not bad) job for the rest of the package. That includes average interiors, average ride quality, average styling etc.

b. Mercedes tries (or did try) to do a stellar job in each of those categories listed above.

So, if Android is Google's engineering, Google let's Samsung get away with a plasticky phone (I have used the Galaxy nexus for an hour and a half today). Yes, even now the feel of the phone in one's hand is not even comparable to the iPhone 4.

But the analogy falls flat because the Galaxy Nexus is more expensive on contract than the iPhone. Price matters, the pricing helps Mercedes devote resources to develop the products the way they do.

Gruber, got this wrong too. His own quote "You either see it or you don’t. If you don’t, that’s cool, enjoy your Nexus. " is correct, but it's correct on it's own, not with MGs quote.

Absolutely correct about the Canadian prices. I have spent the last 2.5 years here, and I get your point about selling other stuff (like Chapters/Indigo already does).

The thing is, that other stuff can also be bought online. People browsing for books in store (before buying it from Amazon), don't really buy those other items either (why should they). So, these stores aren't really gaining anything from people browsing their selection, other than perhaps taking a cut from coffee shops.

On the other hand, if I want to gift a book, I almost always pick it up from a store. I generally don't plan ahead enough to order from Amazon (no Prime in Canada either :)) and dropping into a store works well. I am caught in two minds about these stores, I love going there, but I can't figure out a way for those guys to turn a profit without charging us the premium that they do.

I'd tend to agree with you. While this is great for the hacker community, the lack of hardware is crippling. I don't see major manufacturers like Acer, HTC, Samsung picking up on this, especially since Windows Phone 7 is already a credible alternative to Android. Better developer tools, excellent UI and Microsoft's marketing muscle.

The only hope is that if Nokia becomes successful (wildly) with the Win 7 platform and Motorola does the same with Android, then as a product differentiating factor, manufacturers like HTC may pick up WebOS. Now, that's a really long shot.

I had posted this on another thread too, however, this discussion around Samsung's design "independence" is ridiculous. Unless one is a lawyer, it's fairly obvious that they ripped off Apple's designs, take a look at this link:http://www.reddit.com/tb/kr14a

Jason has been an Android user for a while and him being partial to Android is not a secret. He clearly says it himself. In my opinion, this review was an honest assessment of what had improved with respect to earlier versions of Android; the comparison with iOS at each step is fair because that's the only other game in town.

Judging by all the reviews I've read thus far of the Nexus and ICS, I think it's great that Android is slowly catching up in areas where iOS was the clear winner, it'll keep Apple on it's toes. Can only be good for us, the end users. The only fly in the ointment for me personally is the sheer attention to detail that Apple puts into it's hardware, something that I don't think Samsung can ever do (maybe Motorola can?) with it's finger in too many pies (Win Phone, Android, feature phones etc.)

EDIT: My nitpick with the review is the somewhat flippant dismissal of Siri.

I understand that people on Hacker News detest courtroom bickering and would rather talk about innovation, including design innovation; I think I fall under the same category, however:

a. Samsung's designs are really similar to Apple's designs. Yes, all cars have to have round wheels, but as Nokia has shown (N9?), it is absolutely possible to design a phone with the same level (or more) minimalism without copying the design DNA.

b. Look at an HTC phone. There's no way one can mistakenly think that it's an iPhone. Same with tablets; a Xoom (esp. Xoom2), an Iconia, or a Touchpad will never be confused with an iPad.

In fact, this STEALING (couldn't mince words here) goes much deeper. This was on the internets a few days back: http://www.reddit.com/tb/kr14a

Doesn't this seem like Samsung crossing the line?