The Understatement

I think the article was good, and Jason tried to be unbiased (he "tried", since he has always historically been pro-Android). However I believe an honest comparison between iOS and Android cannot be done in less than 10 pages of indepth review.

For example, I believe he missed the following positive points for iOS and iPhone (just my casual thoughts):
1. iPhone 4s is 2 to 3 times faster than Galaxy Nexus in graphics: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5133/galaxy-nexus-ice-cream-sandwich-initial-performance
2. Software update support: The new OS updates are not pushed fast enough to all android phones -- you may have to wait months to get the latest OS release like 4.0 on your phone -- and for most phones, it will actually never be released (apart from Nexus phones which have the best experience in this regard, but when comparing Android you have to look at all phones). Look at this: http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support
3. Android market apps cannot be fully trusted, since they may be of poor quality or may be malware -- since they have not been reviewed, and also they can access more things on the phone. (with permissions, but most users just say yes to all permissions)
4. Lots of accessories available for the iphone whereas there are so many android phones that accessories available for each phone are much much less.
5. Airplay on iOS can push the screen content and video/audio to speakers/TV via apple tv. This is a…

It's important to note that unlike older phones and Macs, Apple is still currently selling the 3GS.

The original iphone and the iphone 3G stopped receiving updates 3 years after release[1]. It's important to note, though, that in both cases the update cycle continued for a significant amount of time after the devices were no longer available in stores.

The original iPhone received its last update 1 year and 6 months after the device was discontinued: iOS 3.1.3 was released February 2, 2010 while the original iPhone was discontinued July 11, 2008.[2][3]

The iPhone 3G received its last update 5 months and 18 days after being discontinued. In this case, given that it had the same specs as the original iPhone except for the 3G modem, I think that iOS was rapidly becoming too resource intensive to continue updating for this device, considering that by 2010 the majority of the hardware was already 3 years old. That said, iOS 4.2.1 was released November 22, 2010, and the 3G was discontinued as of June 4, 2010.[2][3]

Contrast this to Android where some flagship phones don't even receive security updates after even a year (the chart in my references only includes notable Android devices, and ignores cheaper ones that go after the free w/ contract market etc.)

Paying for updates is not the solution. Unfortunately, unless Google or consumers grab the vendors by the balls, the only thing that I honestly think will do anything at all about this situation is a rather nasty worm…

UPDATE: Pandora's response:

"We love Bette’s music and certainly respect her advocacy for fair compensation for artists," a Pandora spokesperson said in response to this story. "But we must clarify an important fact: Pandora paid more than $6,400 for those 4+ million plays, based on our 2014 rates which are published publicly. In terms of compensation to the creative community Pandora remains by far the highest paying form of radio. Pandora pays songwriters a greater percentage of revenue than terrestrial radio. And Pandora paid 48% of our revenue in performance royalties to rights-holders in 2013 – more than $300 million – while terrestrial radio was required to pay nothing."
http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/digital-and-mobile/6039697/bette-midler-disparages-pandora-spotify-over-artist

Older rebuttals during the original Thom Yorke / RIAA campaign:

Forbes estimates Spotify royalties per listener are almost double those of terrestrial radio:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/07/17/spotify-royalties-appear-to-be-awfully-high-despite-what-thom-yorke-says/

The artist doesn't see most of the royalties, the payouts from Pandora / Spotify can be orders of magnitude larger than the check the artist sees:
http://theunderstatement.com/post/53867665082/pandora-pays-far-more-than-16-dollars
(This is a problem worth examining too, but it's a different problem.)

Tim Westergren makes some additional points, like Pandora's value for promotion is higher than…

This is the new normal, folks. Consumer technology is manufactured for six to twelve months, but live in our homes for three to five years. Today's manufacturers cannot afford to update software for hardware devices they have already moved on from. Changing that requires a significant upheaval in their business models.

This applies to every "connected device:" printers, cell phones, home routers, refrigerators, thermostats -- you name it. Michael DeGusta did a great infographic demonstrating this for Android phones in 2011 [1, 2]. Sadly, this hasn't materially changed in the eight years since. Just this year, Google added new terms to the Android license requiring security patches, but even then only for "popular devices." [3] Imagine those dynamics in the secondary and tertiary markets of printers and refrigerators.

As an industry, we've been to this rodeo before. The advancements we've made in operating system and core applications security over the last 20 years have more about patching speed and agility than shipping fewer bugs. However, those areas have backing and control from Apple and Microsoft, managing the end to end ecosystem. There is not a similarly equipped manufacturer of embedded operating systems with the scale to provide post-sale/post-deployment patching infrastructure.

Since this is Hacker News, I'll point out the enormous opportunity to anyone who can address that problem. Can you provide an "enterprise class embedded OS" to device…

As characterizations of Microsoft's historical strategy go, I'd say that merely calling it a "software-only strategy" is pretty anemic. The real strengths of that strategy were drawn from the details that you claim are irrelevant.

I couldn't disagree more on that point. You ask what those details have to do with the software-only strategy? Well, they were the historical context in which that strategy allowed them to dominate. Did it matter that the hardware innovation of that era had to do with cost reduction? Yes. Did it matter that Microsoft was able to keep customers captive through closed document formats & protocols? Yes. Did it matter that Microsoft both had and leveraged a monopoly position? A thousand times yes. Did it matter that Microsoft had OEMs over a barrel and got them to sign anticompetitive distribution terms? Of course.

I would be reluctant to point to Android phones as an example of a software-only success, because that knife cuts both ways for Microsoft. How is Microsoft going to sell Windows Phone in a market where Google is dumping a free operating system as a loss-leader for potential ad-revenue? Android is just yet another way in which the historical context that allowed Microsoft's software-only strategy to thrive has changed. You have to be able to actually sell the software, after all.

Regardless, here's a great illustration of the effects of Android's software-only…

I'm looking at this from a different angle. Based on what I read from this article [1], Tesla is able to send data from a car back to the factory and on at least one occasion has done so without the permission and knowledge of the owner.

"In at least one case, Tesla went even further. The Tesla service manager admitted that, unable to contact an owner by phone, Tesla remotely activated a dying vehicle’s GPS to determine its location and then dispatched Tesla staff to go there. It is not clear if Tesla had obtained this owner’s consent to allow this tracking5, or if the owner is even aware that his vehicle had been tracked. Further, the service manager acknowledged that this use of tracking was not something they generally tell customers about."

"There appears to be no reference to Tesla having the ability to track a vehicle’s location at its discretion in either the data recording section of the Roadster Owners Manual [Page 1-2, Column 2: PDF] or the addendum that covers the GSM connection [Page 9: PDF] "

AFAIK, Tesla has never addressed this publicly.

[1] http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-tesla-motors-devastating-design