Why do manufacturers put skins on android? Wouldn't it be cheaper to use stock?

[gotsmack]

I don't really see the point of android skins. Wouldn't a company be better off using stock android and spending the saved money designing better phones?

Users would be able to update to the newest release version instead of having to wait for an "official" version to be released by the manufacturer and the manufacturer doesn't have to waste any money in developing one.

 

[nickbits]

they want to differentiate themselves

 

[vshah]

it's ironic, arguably the best differentiation a company could provide in the current market would be "Look, we're the only ones who provide a pure, stock android experience with fast updates."

 

[gotsmack]

they want to differentiate themselves

I don't believe that the little tweaks make the experience better. Just slightly different or most of the time it's worse.

Why doesn't a company like HTC pump out 1 line of stock android phones? no one else seems to be doing it.

 

[gotsmack]

it's ironic, arguably the best differentiation a company could provide in the current market would be "Look, we're the only ones who provide a pure, stock android experience with fast updates."

yea, or even something like "Look we have guaranteed updates, unlike samsung, because google is the one doing it"

 

[NikolaeVarius]

I don't believe that the little tweaks make the experience better. Just slightly different or most of the time it's worse.

Why doesn't a company like HTC pump out 1 line of stock android phones? no one else seems to be doing it.

Just because you don't think it makes it better, doesn't mean the average consumer doesn't. Skins tend to greatly simplify the Android experience, stock android isn't exactly the most colorful and awe inspiring piece of software.

 

[Bateluer]

I don't believe that the little tweaks make the experience better. Just slightly different or most of the time it's worse.

Why doesn't a company like HTC pump out 1 line of stock android phones? no one else seems to be doing it.

Carriers don't like open phones like the Nexus line. Gotta remember, carriers are major control freaks.

Seems like it'd be fairly easy for manufacturers and carriers to look at XDA, CM, Droid Forums, etc and see that almost always the very first ROMs people want are stock Android.

 

[gotsmack]

Just because you don't think it makes it better, doesn't mean the average consumer doesn't. Skins tend to greatly simplify the Android experience, stock android isn't exactly the most colorful and awe inspiring piece of software.

that may be true but with each new release of android it's getting better, at some point stock will be an awesome experience for the average user.

 

[tatteredpotato]

The reason IS differentiation. I personally have my Evo running CM7 nightlies and prefer the speed of senseless roms better, so for me it's a moot point.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

that may be true but with each new release of android it's getting better, at some point stock will be an awesome experience for the average user.

At what point? We can't copy paste easily in many apps. Gingerbread brings in DECENT copy and paste support, but what about in apps like Twitter? Copy and paste is half-assed. HTC Sense makes it better.

The Android 2.0 keyboard was a piece of crap. It took til Gingerbread to bring in a multitouch keyboard. Why else did HTC and Moto throw in their own keyboards?

The fact is Google isn't doing enough to make vanilla Android a decent experience. There's a lot that needs to go into every feature and instead of working on dumb things like Google TV, I'd appreciate it if they refined the OS first a bit. things that matter to us 24/7 would be nice.

 

[Phokus]

I think the question is, why isn't there 1 or 2 more phones out there that are stock? If everyone else is customizing to differentiate, then there should definitely be a market for more than just the Nexus S.

 

[BigSmooth]

I think the question is, why isn't there 1 or 2 more phones out there that are stock? If everyone else is customizing to differentiate, then there should definitely be a market for more than just the Nexus S.

Isn't the T-Mobile G2 pretty much vanilla Android?

 

[akugami]

Carriers don't like open phones like the Nexus line. Gotta remember, carriers are major control freaks.

Seems like it'd be fairly easy for manufacturers and carriers to look at XDA, CM, Droid Forums, etc and see that almost always the very first ROMs people want are stock Android.

Carriers and OEM's are control freaks because they have to pay for support. Now, we on AT are tech oriented and we should be able to troubleshoot most issues. It's just that Joe User isn't as tech savvy and may screw up a jailbreak or root. Guess who has to pay for support? Even if it's ultimately determined that the fault was with the user and no replacement fix will be coming, the carriers or OEM's would have still paid for a grunt manning the phones.

This is not related to the custom skinning issue but there is a valid reason for the control freak nature of companies. The only bad thing is when carriers would limit "standard" features like Bluetooth with custom firmware as Verizon has done in the past.

 

[Phokus]

Isn't the T-Mobile G2 pretty much vanilla Android?

Yeah but nobody uses t-mobile

 

[gotsmack]

they want to differentiate themselves

Also what about Windows 7? Aren't all windows 7 phones pretty much the same interface and user experience? (less a few very minor tweaks). Seems to me they compete on design instead of software and they are doing 'ok' against other windows 7 phones.

 

[destrekor]

yea, or even something like "Look we have guaranteed updates, unlike samsung, because google is the one doing it"

Well, do you understand the corporate world?

Updating devices with the latest and greatest software is something companies kind of do begrudgingly. They want to please customers who already own their [legacy] devices... but what they would really prefer to see is hardware upgrades - the customer purchases a phone that has the latest and greatest OS version, as well as new hardware.

Companies aren't obligated at all to give we consumers the latest OS versions. We are lucky some do it at all, to be honest.

And also, unless it is a phone pushed directly by Google (like the Nexus series), Google won't be the one pushing out updates. Manufacturers, even if the software is pure Android, still have to tweak the OS for the exact hardware they utilized in the phone.

Look at the original Motorola Droid. It's pure Android, but there are delays for updates, because Motorola has to tweak the update Google released, and then Verizon has to approve the update.
And now, I honestly do not expect to see any more OS updates on the original Droid, not with so many other newer phones by Motorola out there.

In an ideal world, we would be treated like royalty by the companies we choose to give our hard-earned money; but this isn't a communist-inspired Disney story we live in, it's the real world. Expect nothing so you can't be disappointed, and can only be ecstatic when you actually receive a free bonus.

 

[zerocool84]

Also what about Windows 7? Aren't all windows 7 phones pretty much the same interface and user experience? (less a few very minor tweaks). Seems to me they compete on design instead of software and they are doing 'ok' against other windows 7 phones.

They have strict requirements on what the phones have to have so you get a similar experience across all phones.

 

[vshah]

Well, do you understand the corporate world?

Updating devices with the latest and greatest software is something companies kind of do begrudgingly. They want to please customers who already own their [legacy] devices... but what they would really prefer to see is hardware upgrades - the customer purchases a phone that has the latest and greatest OS version, as well as new hardware.

but at the same time, those people who already own the phones are locked in to two year contracts by the carriers. so the chance of them purchasing a new phone are slim before those two years are up.

if however, during those two years, they had a good experience with the manufacturer providing quick updates, who do you think they'd look to first when their contract expired?

 

[Strk]

Also what about Windows 7? Aren't all windows 7 phones pretty much the same interface and user experience? (less a few very minor tweaks). Seems to me they compete on design instead of software and they are doing 'ok' against other windows 7 phones.

MS is trying to offer an experience more similar to the iphone than an android phone. The whole idea is that when MS releases an update, you aren't waiting for it -- and it will actually get to you. Whereas with Android you have to be very selective of carrier and phone manufacturer on whether or not you get those updates at all, let alone in a timely manner. The theory works, but the same can't be said for execution.

As for the internals, WP7 only supports one GPU, which basically means it only supports one SoC presently. MS also has requirements for other things (camera etc).

 

[finbarqs]

It's funny... Android kind of reminds me of how customizeable A Windows Based system is (Linux isn't really comparable when talking about the masses) and WP7 kind of reminds me of MacOSX... But then again, so does iOS.

You think, you throw Windows 95 on an HTC EVO 4G, or even something slower, like a Palm Pre, and the thing will FLY. But with all these OS's with higher specs, and a "lower footprint OS" it seems like it's still not as fast as what W95 would've been, if it were ported to a phone!

I guess it takes Apple and MS to make a really really fast OS