Android is a misnomer...

[tek_heretik]

The cute little green guy (the OS logo/icon) is a ROBOT, an android is a mechanical human, meant to mimic its creator, just sayin'.

This guy(s)... http://www.flickr.com/photos/7978633...n/photostream/

[james147]

Technically, it is an opertaing system so should be called OS by your logic... hmmm...

Android is now a brand name as well as a word, just like most other brandnames out there.

[tek_heretik]

Technically, it is an opertaing system so should be called OS by your logic... hmmm...

Android is now a brand name as well as a word, just like most other brandnames out there.

My logic?! Really?! Wow, just wow. The difference between an android and a robot have NOTHING to do with operating systems or anything else, a misnomer is a misnomer, you are from the UK, the creators of this language, you of all people should get this, phhht. Let me post the definition for you... http://www.google.ca/webhp?hl=en#hl=...w=1916&bih=911

[HalationEffect]

The cute little green guy (the OS icon) is a ROBOT, an android is a mechanical human, meant to mimic its creator, just sayin'.

This guy(s)... http://www.flickr.com/photos/7978633...n/photostream/

Gonna have to disagree... an android is an anthropomorphic robot, which merely means it is broadly human-shaped. The Android as shown in the picture you link to has two arms, two legs, a torso, and a head, which IMO does qualify it as an android. It does mimic its creator, even if that mimicry isn't perfect.

[tek_heretik]

Gonna have to disagree... an android is an anthropomorphic robot, which merely means it is broadly human-shaped. The Android as shown in the picture you link to has two arms, two legs, a torso, and a head, which IMO does qualify it as an android. It does mimic its creator, even if that mimicry isn't perfect.

I see what you are saying but the widely held definition is that of a mechanical creation that closely resembles a human...face, emotions, arms, fingers, etc etc. See definition link in post #3.

Edit: Read this too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28robot%29

Edit #2: lol @ gynoid, the female version.

[SteveRiley]

I think this qualifies as the silliest argument on KFN ever.

[tek_heretik]

I think this qualifies as the silliest argument on KFN ever.

I was just making an observation and then a point, don't shoot the messenger, lol, although, it is quite a successful logo, I must say.

[HalationEffect]

I see what you are saying but the widely held definition is that of a mechanical creation that closely resembles a human...face, emotions, arms, fingers, etc etc. See definition link in post #3.

Edit: Read this too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28robot%29

Edit #2: lol @ gynoid, the female version.

It really depends on where you get your definition from... in just 5 minutes of searching, I found various definitions that said anything from "any robot that is humanoid in shape" to "an autonomous robot that closely resembles a human being". I guess it depends on where you draw the line that the resemblance to a human is close enough to qualify as an android rather than a robot, and that's very subjective. For me personally, I would say that (for example) Star Wars' C3PO qualifies as an android, but R2D2 doesn't.

@SteveRiley: Agreed! But, I'm sure if we all really, really try, KFN can have a sillier argument sometime in the future

[tek_heretik]

I would say that (for example) Star Wars' C3PO qualifies as an android, but R2D2 doesn't.

@SteveRiley: Agreed! But, I'm sure if we all really, really try, KFN can have a sillier argument sometime in the future

Thank you Halation, you just proved my point, the Android logo looks MORE like R2D2 than C3PO.

As for silly, , I am bored, need a job, again.

[HalationEffect]

Thank you Halation, you just proved my point, the Android logo looks MORE like R2D2 than C3PO.

The reason I disqualify R2D2 is that it has 3 'legs', glides around using wheels built into its feet rather than walking, and has no arms.

Instead of seeing android / robot as being an either/or type of thing, I see it as a spectrum. Imagine a spectrum with obviously non-humanoid robots (e.g. washing machines, production line robots) at the far left hand end, and androids that are almost indistinguishable from humans at the far right of the scale... then on that scale, the Android logo would be quite a bit to the right of R2D2, and only slightly to the left of C3PO.

I can't really fault Google's choice here, because "humanoid robot" would make a crummy name for an OS, just as a picture of a "person" (which is what a perfect android would look like, after all) would make a lousy* logo

*They'd have a phenomenon known as the 'uncanny valley' to contend with.

[tek_heretik]

The reason I disqualify R2D2 is that it has 3 'legs', glides around using wheels built into its feet rather than walking, and has no arms.

Instead of seeing android / robot as being an either/or type of thing, I see it as a spectrum. Imagine a spectrum with obviously non-humanoid robots (e.g. washing machines, production line robots) at the far left hand end, and androids that are almost indistinguishable from humans at the far right of the scale... then on that scale, the Android logo would be quite a bit to the right of R2D2, and only slightly to the left of C3PO.

I can't really fault Google's choice here, because "humanoid robot" would make a crummy name for an OS, just as a picture of a "person" (which is what a perfect android would look like, after all) would make a lousy* logo

*They'd have a phenomenon known as the 'uncanny valley' to contend with.

You make a good argument, or should I say debate, but to ME, an android will always be a human-like machine. I remember watching Blade Runner (based on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) on a huge tube TV (early 80s), the second it came on VHS, ah, memories.

[oshunluvr]

Uh yeah - If androids looked like Sean Young, Apple would go out of business in a week!

[SteveRiley]

I stand by my earlier assertion, with modification. This thread really isn't much of an argument. But silly it most assuredly is.

Ah, KFN... where else would one find a dicussion of the spectrum of mechanical things, a discussion that unselfconsciously identifies a tenuous link between a lowly household appliance and a golden guy with a programmable soul?

[HalationEffect]

I stand by my earlier assertion, with modification. This thread really isn't much of an argument. But silly it most assuredly is.

Ah, KFN... where else would one find a dicussion of the spectrum of mechanical things, a discussion that unselfconsciously identifies a tenuous link between a lowly household appliance and a golden guy with a programmable soul?

Perhaps we need a "Random Nonsense / Whimsical Musings" sub-forum

[tek_heretik]

I stand by my earlier assertion, with modification. This thread really isn't much of an argument. But silly it most assuredly is.

Ah, KFN... where else would one find a dicussion of the spectrum of mechanical things, a discussion that unselfconsciously identifies a tenuous link between a lowly household appliance and a golden guy with a programmable soul?

Thanks for the giggle.