Shogmaster
Member
This would be fine by me. Aptoide or sideloading apps would serve me fine.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Am I crazy to think that Switch will do worse than Wii U if it doesn't run Android?
- Thread starter Shogmaster
- Start date
This would be fine by me. Aptoide or sideloading apps would serve me fine.
Sora the Cat
Member
Jangowuzhere
Banned
I don't think there is anything Nintendo could do to make the Switch appealing as a portable pocket device. If I'm going to pick one device to leave the house with, it will always be my phone. The portable aspect of the Switch will have a strong appeal with children, but I can't imagine most adults carrying around a Switch with them.
geordiemp
Member
If a secure android is not possible then fair enough, maybe it was looked at.
Its not Nintendo vs Google, they would have to co-operate somehow.
But more apps and functionality is more. Some people play games like clash of clans etc.
Shogmaster
Member
Internet hi five!
345triangle
Member
this is no more inherent to AOSP or android itself than the fact that the PS3 runs slower today than it did at launch. completely depends on how nintendo handles it and what's prioritised.
Brat-Sampson
Member
I feel like this is a lot less true if all of a sudden multiple devices have a ton of overlap to combine with their USPs. If I need my phone for calls and texts, my Tablet for, say, comics and my Switch for NS games but they also all have access to the Play store and a bunch of other common functionalities, that makes me resent having to buy all three devices. It would feel to me that I would have preferred the NS be a dedicated thing at a lower cost than making it cost more and giving it a bunch of additional bells and whistles that I likely already had immediate access to anyway. It also makes keeping parity across devices a pain.
Switch will just be Switch and that should be enough.
johnnydrama
Banned
yes
Shogmaster
Member
Only if some google service was running in the background I'd think. All I want is app support from PlayStore. Can be Aptoide or sideloading too.
geordiemp
Member
Still think if you add the WiiU and 3DS hardcore together >>> WiiU crowd.
So Switch will be fine sales wise, but I cant see it catching the blue ocean casual crowd unless it has web browsing, plays videos and all the other popular apps one would expect from a tablet in 2017...
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
I'm not sure if Android is necessary, but it needs support for media, social and web browsing apps.
The problem is that it looks like a tablet, even if that's not what it is, people will make that link and wonder why they would buy what is effectively a less functional device.
The problem is that it looks like a tablet, even if that's not what it is, people will make that link and wonder why they would buy what is effectively a less functional device.
LeeRoyBrown
Banned
I have zero interest in this thing running Android.
Im hoping it doesn't.
I want a games console. Not phone.
Im hoping it doesn't.
I want a games console. Not phone.
That's probably what would happen. Unnecessary waste of resources.
If switch would run android that would make the feeling of the Nintendo exclusivity instantly go away. There are so many android devices out there with the look of Switch, with controllers on sides an so on.
It might be a better "deal", but putting more and more features and functions into a piece of technology often obscures its focus, confuses the average consumer, and makes the product more difficult to use.
Shogmaster
Member
Yeah, I do seem to often underestimate how crappy Wii U really did in the market. But then again, to do Wii U + 3DS numbers, the price is very important. 3DS did terrible until price was lowered to $150 or around there. Switch won't be under $200 for a long time I'd think.
ChrisMahoney
Banned
A fan goes on top of the CPU, away from any battery. It doesn't really take up battery space
{insert code here}
Member
OP I think is right. Who is the NS being marketed to. Nintendo fans will buy it obviously but I there's hardly enough of them to sustain an entire platform (WiiU). And the mobile market is owned by Apple and smart devices that do far more than just play games. Looking 3DS sales and the downward projectory they've been on the last 3-4 years I think Nintendo would've had a better shot going after the home console market.
1) They are going after the home console market.
2) You say "the OP is right" but none of the rest of your comment has anything to do with what the thread is about.
Android is a pretty awful OS for gaming. This is a gaming device. It better have an OS that will optimise its main purpose, to play games on it. I'd rather get good performance from games than some additional things I can do also on my smartphone that I anyhow need to carry around with me.
Edit: Hermii, damn.
Edit: Hermii, damn.
Toadthemushroom
Member
Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary
Why would people want to buy a device to run Android apps which would run better on the iPhone or smartphone they already carry in their pocket, that's going to be a better fit for those apps? A 720p, 16:9 display is far from ideal for that kind of software.
Furthermore, allowing for Android apps means either including Google Play services and the Play Store - ceding control to Google and losing sales from Nintendo's own store, or if Nintendo doesn't do this (see below) they'll have to try and build everything in-house to try and match Google's efforts. Which would require a tremendous amount of resources for a questionable gain (apps people can already use on their own devices).
If Nintendo wants to go down the app route I'd rather they just made it easy for developers to build them themselves on their own OS, tailor-made software for the unique hardware platform that serves a very specific focus. The Vita OS actually does this well - it offers apps which make sense given the platform and are (for the most part) competently built. Same with Wii's channels, like Netflix. That offered smooth performance and an interface built around the Wii Remote pointer.
Wouldn't work in Nintendo's favour. Forking Android would anger Google and Nintendo would be banned from using a huge number of OEMs to manufacture the device. For example, Foxconn is part of the Android "open" handset alliance, and therefore Nintendo would be banned from using them to build the Switch hardware:
Why would people want to buy a device to run Android apps which would run better on the iPhone or smartphone they already carry in their pocket, that's going to be a better fit for those apps? A 720p, 16:9 display is far from ideal for that kind of software.
Furthermore, allowing for Android apps means either including Google Play services and the Play Store - ceding control to Google and losing sales from Nintendo's own store, or if Nintendo doesn't do this (see below) they'll have to try and build everything in-house to try and match Google's efforts. Which would require a tremendous amount of resources for a questionable gain (apps people can already use on their own devices).
If Nintendo wants to go down the app route I'd rather they just made it easy for developers to build them themselves on their own OS, tailor-made software for the unique hardware platform that serves a very specific focus. The Vita OS actually does this well - it offers apps which make sense given the platform and are (for the most part) competently built. Same with Wii's channels, like Netflix. That offered smooth performance and an interface built around the Wii Remote pointer.
Wouldn't work in Nintendo's favour. Forking Android would anger Google and Nintendo would be banned from using a huge number of OEMs to manufacture the device. For example, Foxconn is part of the Android "open" handset alliance, and therefore Nintendo would be banned from using them to build the Switch hardware:
Ron Amadeo said:
Shogmaster
Member
I just want to run some Android apps. N doesn't have to replicate full Android functionality at all. Apps are valuable in this case. Google serviced are not.
I actually think they are emphasizing on the Switch allowing what a tablet doesn't, and being a real gaming device, with multiplayer titles etc.. It's not meant to be an all around tablet for everything. It's meant to serve a certain purpose. At least i hope that's what they want to show.
GlamFM
Banned
"I think it would be cool if the Switch ran on Android" would have been a damn fine threat.
No idea why you felt the need to go down the hyperbole/buzzfeed route.
There is no way this thing will sell worse than the WiiU.
That said - I think it would be cool, but the Switch´s success in no way relies on that.
No idea why you felt the need to go down the hyperbole/buzzfeed route.
There is no way this thing will sell worse than the WiiU.
That said - I think it would be cool, but the Switch´s success in no way relies on that.
An Android virtual machine ala the latest Chromebook OS (the only way this would work on a primarily video game focused device) may still leave the device open to be hacked.
But that's the only way you're getting the Play Store on Switch. A substandard VM experience if Nintendo really cares that much. They don't. They never have.
GeekyDad
Member
Yeah...
This has to be one of the worst ideas ever. Android is such an inefficient OS and is extremely easy to pirate with. Plus, the only people I ever see happy with their Android tablets are those who really only use it for the web browser and Netflix, apps that easily can be run on Nintendo's OS. Nintendo would also have to be extremely shortsighted to not include their own mobile games, Pokemon Go, etc on the Switch. But then again, Nintendo doesn't always follow through with the logical choice...
Mysterious
Banned
It definitely 100% won't run Android.
Blackpuppy
Member
You insist that Nintendo needs Android in order to be viable. We show evidence that Android is terrible for gaming at its core foundation level.
OK, well why not create a fork and shape it into a great gaming OS that can also run Android apps, you say... Well, we just showed an article that tells you that Google is trapping developers into using their private APIs that require you to use an official version of Android. Developers CAN use public APIs but that just means more work on an already fragmented marketshare.
OK, well forget Google services, I just want some apps. What do you mean by SOME apps? What you're describing is just a crap ton of workarounds for a few apps.
Now what would actually be best for Nintendo would be for them to allow developers to port their apps to their own OS by creating tools that will allow them to easily port their mobile apps from iOS or Android. That is MUCH simpler.
I could see the big players porting their apps: Netflix, of course, Youtube, Spotify, etc etc. Nintendo will, of course, include a webbrowser (the one on the 3DS is a fork of the engine used in Apple's Safari and Google Chrome). This pretty much covers 90% of what people use a tablet for.
Toadthemushroom
Member
Most big Android apps are heavily dependent on Google Play Services. And they are designed around portrait orientation smartphone devices - they would look like a joke on a 16:9 720p screen. Many of them don't even support landscape mode! The Switch hardware is not the hardware config that Android developers target for their apps.
At worst you'll have apps that aren't compatible with the Switch, or apps that don't even support the landscape orientation the device is meant to be held in. At best you'll just get a stretched out smartphone app with loads of white space.
If most apps don't even run satisfactorily on Google's own Pixel-C device, what are the odds they will a Nintendo Switch, which is even more unconventional than a tablet?
Facebook in landscape:
Twitter:
Instagram:
Like I posted above, if you only want some apps, then they should be native Switch apps that utilise the OS. For example, the Android version of Twitch wouldn't be anywhere near as good as Switch-optimised version that integrates more with the OS's Share functions itself.
Oh... android is off the table then. Gotcha.
Let's just hope they still get some good third party browsers and video players on the system.
Peter Ian Staker
Member
Dual boot Android and Nintendo's OS would make the Switch a no brainer for me since I need to replace my aging iPad Mini. It would also help the consoles long term software support since you wouldn't be stuck with whatever apps Nintendo decided to stop updating.
I don't know if it would really help Nintendo move units though since everyone already has a tablet.
I don't know if it would really help Nintendo move units though since everyone already has a tablet.
Toadthemushroom
Member
Re: My two posts above. I get that people want access to Android apps, but it's just not feasible, and even if they did have access to them, it'd just result in a really crappy user experience for people that own the device.
Because of Android device fragmentation, developers often target devices that make up the largest population of Android devices (smartphones), often which also are running an older version of the device.
This results in apps like DropBox looking like this on a device that isn't a smartphone:
Because of Android device fragmentation, developers often target devices that make up the largest population of Android devices (smartphones), often which also are running an older version of the device.
This results in apps like DropBox looking like this on a device that isn't a smartphone:
FantasticMrSnake
Member
I personally don't care at all, but I hope android is not part of the main operative system, I want nintendo games, no mobile games on a console, there are plenty of tablets for that and Android doesn't run smooth enough, and Java D: dddddgghhhhh.
It would not bother me at all if it has the possibility to restart in android/tablet mode because it's optional.
No if it's "another OS" thing, like if you need to restart to run it in android mode.
It would not bother me at all if it has the possibility to restart in android/tablet mode because it's optional.
No if it's "another OS" thing, like if you need to restart to run it in android mode.
This looks like an interesting article, thanks. I'll read it when I wake up (fuck! it's 430 already?!)
Getting Android apps to run without google services can be kind of a pain, even if not all apps use google services. It seems like most "popular" apps do. I had to do quite a bit of work to figure out how to get some android apps to work on my Blackberry Passport just to "patch" certain apps to remove the google play services check (all I wanted was my home security system app). I don't think that most people would even bother with that, or Nintendo would be okay with people sideloading "patched" apss on their switch.
Yeah, Z10 was my last phone. Was pretty great. I remember it being a lot easier with Snap, though...
Toadthemushroom
Member
It's a great read from Ars' Android expert.
And yeah, I had the same issues as you -- I used to have a BlackBerry Z10 (really underappreciated device) which included an Android 4.2 runtime at the time. I'd much rather BlackBerry didn't go down that route, as native BB10 QNX apps were so much better.
LastCupOfSorrow
Banned
I thought threads like this weren't allowed after a reveal...?
But no. They need Android as much as Sony/Soft needs Android.
I am trying to understand your thinking of why it would even matter to begin with. I mean, it's not a phone or tablet in that sense.
But no. They need Android as much as Sony/Soft needs Android.
I am trying to understand your thinking of why it would even matter to begin with. I mean, it's not a phone or tablet in that sense.
DerekOfTheDykes
Member
The pitch was absolutely super clear... here is a home gaming console that lets you bring the experience away from the tv. What was confusing about that trailer? How did that not immediately convey what the device does and is meant for?
Sure, most people don't care about dedicated gaming hardware. That's how it goes when you make a hobbyist product like a gaming console and not a mass-market product like a smartphone. But this idea that the NX needs to be an Android smart device to be a good business venture is just absurd. There's still a market for dedicated gaming hardware, proven by the 3DS being the best selling system on the market and the PS4 kicking the Xbox One's ass while people joke about the multimedia focus of its reveal.
Switch is nothing like an Android tablet in function, and the trailer already made it exceptionally clear what experiences you should expect out of Switch.
You and OP are basically saying that if Switch had a bunch of extra multimedia functionality and apps, and unclear messaging in the reveal, that people will think it's superficially similar to a tablet based on said nonexistant poor marketing, therefore it should be an Android smart device anyway. And if my aunt had wheels, she'd be a bicycle.
Tl;dr... the idea that Nintendo needs Android or the Play Store for Switch to not be a flaming ball of failure is just absurd. Gaming consoles are gaming consoles, with a different market and focus. Switch isn't intended to replace the smart device everyone already carries with them everywhere they go.
Theognosis
Member
Given my frustrating experiences with AndroidTV (slow as shit) and Android phones, the Switch doesn't need this poor OS.
sechsterangriff
Member
You're not crazy OP. People have smartphones and already think twice before bringing their tablets with them. The proposition of bringing yet another device who only plays games just isn't a good one and part of the reason of declining marketshare for dedicated handheld systems. So this thing better have some sort of smartdevice functionality if it wants to have a chance at mass market.
You could say that Nintendo are not positioning it as handheld device but as a home console. But you only have to look at their domestic market and at the 3DS as being a device at the end of its lifecycle to understand who they're really targeting there and see a repeat of the "3rd pillar".
You could say that Nintendo are not positioning it as handheld device but as a home console. But you only have to look at their domestic market and at the 3DS as being a device at the end of its lifecycle to understand who they're really targeting there and see a repeat of the "3rd pillar".
Muskieratboi
Member
Theory:
It's not going to run Android in and of itself, but I'm thinking that Nintendo will develop an API so that developers will be able to very easily (to the point of push buttan) port Android apps and games to the system, to court Mobile Developers.
Mind you, they'll still be released through the eShop with all the vetting and curation involved in getting a game on there, so we're not going to get the glut of clones, malware, and copyright violations that plague the mobile app space. (And definitely no Emulators, lol)
It's not going to run Android in and of itself, but I'm thinking that Nintendo will develop an API so that developers will be able to very easily (to the point of push buttan) port Android apps and games to the system, to court Mobile Developers.
Mind you, they'll still be released through the eShop with all the vetting and curation involved in getting a game on there, so we're not going to get the glut of clones, malware, and copyright violations that plague the mobile app space. (And definitely no Emulators, lol)
Even with smart device functionality they have an uphill battle to climb. If the battery life is actually 3 hours IMO this has a strong chance at flopping, unless there's a lot of amazing first party games and the price is very cheap.
People don't want to carry a bunch of shit around.
LastCupOfSorrow
Banned
What is the 3DS normal battery life? How many hours? 5? 6?
Similar threads
- Poll