Those services being tied RIGHT INTO the OS is a huge advantage. Thats arguably what the SHELL is. My interface between me and (facebook | microsoft | google | apple | amazon) services. Using iOS as a google app launcher is a complete waste of integration and usability potential.
Take for example JUST google photos. When I say service, I mean a best in class experience across my phone, my kitchen screen-speaker, laptop, desktop, and living room tv. Google photos does not live up to its full potential from a phone alone.
A service gives me consistent access to the same data, from a variety of interfaces. Each interface is tailored to use cases for that device type. Desktop interfaces are going to be more powerful than tablet, tv, or kitchen screen-speaker.
It's the same reason I prefer Facebook Messenger to text messaging. Works great from any device I sign into.
(Not being able to set defaults is inexcusable at this point as a product, and
borderline anticompetitive. Microsoft is playing an equally dangerous game with Edge.)
I'm not sure what you mean by your Google Photos example. I use it on my iPhone and the photos all show up on the Chromecast I have plugged into my TV. I can't think of many features I am missing by not running on Google Photos on Android.
And that's what I think the OP was getting at. If Google's main differentiator is services then I have little reason to buy an Android phone. I can get the built in security and privacy associated with iOS and dip into the Google ecosystem as and when I want by downloading individual apps. It works great for me
On iOS Google Photos doesn't sync automatically unless you open the app regularly. On Android it runs in the background, so your photos are backed up even if you don't open the app.
I'm not sure if it's an iOS limitation or Google choose to artificially limit the app but OP is right that Android provides a better platform for Google services.
You download photos from Google Photos to your device before they're available to other apps. That's a fair weakness to point out, though it's never really been a problem for me. I only delete the local copies of photos every couple of months.
being able to navigate around a mini version of the photos app, from within a share/upload screen of another app, isnt a benefit you would think of until youve tried it.
Thats just an example though. Current Apple will never treat non-Apple apps with the same kind of integration. Messaging apps, photo apps, map apps, music apps, movie apps. It will never be the same as a place with choice.
"Hey google, gift mum a copy of Almost Famous." (google remembers that my mom likes text messages, and has vudu.)
"Hey google, gift dad a copy of Key Largo." (google remembers my dad likes facebook messages, and has prime.)
Send me a message when Apple starts being friendly to competitors. iOS is a glorified app launcher if you are not a heavy Apple Services user, and Apple Services are substandard. Even iMessage only works from Apple hardware. Useless.
I am being a little silly here, Google and Microsoft are moving TOWARDS Apple-Like ecosystem lock-in, whereas Alexa/Prime and Roku are the more vendor agnostic shells.
> isnt a benefit you would think of until youve tried it.
I used an Android device full time until about a year ago, so believe me when I say I know how it works, and that I don't really miss it.
> "Hey google, gift mum a copy of Almost Famous." (google remembers that my mom likes text messages, and has vudu.)
These conversational examples always seem bizarrely contrived to me. But either way, part of the argument against this is that I don't want Google to know these things. I value privacy. I don't gift my parents movies often enough to make the trade-off worth it for me - I'll just do it manually the one time a year I do it.
> Even iMessage only works from Apple hardware. Useless.
Very obviously not true. When the vast majority of your friends and family are on iMessage it is, hands down, the best messaging solution. Better than anything Android can offer, because less tech savvy people don't even need to think about it. It is very far from useless for a lot of people. It just isn't useful for everyone.
what makes iMessage better than Facebook Messenger or Snapchat or Whatsapp? The fact that it can only communicate with most people? The fact that it doesnt work from a web browser while you are away from devices you own?
If I own an iPhone but a Windows PC, iMessage is only a fraction as powerful as something cross platform.
Youre nitpicking a conceptual example. Alexa, Roku, and Android are currently built to let ME have the power to set defaults and mix and integrate services between providers. On iOS either I use the Apple service if I want full integration, or my access to said services is locked into only the app for that service itself and apples extremely limited share menu.
> what makes iMessage better than Facebook Messenger or Snapchat or Whatsapp?
That it is already set up when you buy the device. This can't be understated. Among my friends and family, some have FB messenger, some have Snapchat and some have Whatsapp. The only one they all have is iMessage. And even Android users can participate in group messages by (automatically) downgrading to MMS.
I think being able to set FB messenger AS my SMS app is more powerful.
The entire point I am making is that we increasingly access MANY services. Content is a great example, with Netflix, ATT, Disney, National Amusement, Sony, Amazon, and Comcast getting into a pretty nasty battle. Service agnostic hardware is very very attractive, whether that service is messaging/calling, backups, or content consumption. Shells treating all services equally, is a value upon itself. They can still ship from the factory with an in house default. Roku being able to surface and categorize content from many apps, and being able to deep link directly to movies is a much more pleasant experience. Or searching for a movie and being asked which ecosystem/service I want to view it from.
It SUCKS when a company like Apple says "you need Apple hardware to watch our original series" or when "you need ATT wireless to watch this HBO show" becomes a thing.
It SUCKS that I need an Amazon Echo Show 2, Google Home Hub, Facebook Portal Plus and an iPad all set up in my kitchen to answer Video Calls!!..!.. verbally when my hands have egg on them. https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/how-smart-... (at least Facebook is considering Alexa and Google Assistant. At least Amazon Echo may allow Android texting and Skype, while also supporting Zigbee.)
> Those services being tied RIGHT INTO the OS is a huge advantage.
Assuming you own an non-Google Android phone, what difference is there? I use Google photos on my Samsung...
On iOS, I will admit there is a difference is not being able set default applications but other than that I don't really see a big difference. Google, of course, works hard to ensure the same experience regardless of device so it's not much of selling point of their own phones.
By comparison, you actually need an iPhone to experience any of Apple's product integration.
For example. I cant, in facebook messenger, pull a photo from google photos. Everything has to proxy through iOS photos. First I have to go download it, then upload. Google photos is tacked on top of the OS instead of being a part of the shell. The share/passthrough/permissions menu is the gatekeeper. Google Photos isnt a SOURCE that can be accessed from other apps on my phone.
In the future, I imagine, at the upload screen, I will be able to type in a friends name, to filter all the photos of a person. In the future, I expect to be able to use voice to be able to say things like "hey google, send my mum the latest photos from bob and sues wedding, that have Molly and I in them" and I expect Google to remember my preferred communication app is different for my Mom and Dad, know which Molly I mean, know what latest means, and act accordingly. Do you imagine Siri will integrate well with Google Photos and Facebook messenger?
What I mean is that services CAN BE hooked into the OS. My messaging service being independent from my messaging app (sms as an example.) What I mean is, by default, Google has best in class services. (Photos and Maps are clearly superior to Apple.)
Being able to SET my default maps service. I need the os to be aware of what kinds of queries my maps app can handle.
Being able to swap out my voice assistant between google, alexa, cortana, m. I need the hardware and os layer listening, ready for me to trigger my voice assistant, but once they do, they should had it off to the service of my choice. Or my Roku being able to deep link directly to content within apps, apps that advertise their content to the os search.
Android is built to allow google, a manufacturer, or a user to swap out services, but still allows the service to feel integrated.
I do think there is a distinction between Android and Google Play Services. GPS is an advantage, and a great set of default services, but im not stuck with them for the life of a device, if I choose to replace them.
Take for example JUST google photos. When I say service, I mean a best in class experience across my phone, my kitchen screen-speaker, laptop, desktop, and living room tv. Google photos does not live up to its full potential from a phone alone.
A service gives me consistent access to the same data, from a variety of interfaces. Each interface is tailored to use cases for that device type. Desktop interfaces are going to be more powerful than tablet, tv, or kitchen screen-speaker.
It's the same reason I prefer Facebook Messenger to text messaging. Works great from any device I sign into.
(Not being able to set defaults is inexcusable at this point as a product, and borderline anticompetitive. Microsoft is playing an equally dangerous game with Edge.)