Slashdot Mirror
Google Android — a Universe of Incompatible Devices
snydeq writes "Galen Gruman writes about the dark side of the recent flood of Android smartphones: versions run amok. 'That flood of options should be a good thing — but it's not. In fact, it's a self-destruction derby in action, as phones come out with different versions of the Android OS, with no clear upgrade strategy for either the operating system or the applications users have installed, and with inconsistent deployment of core features. In short, the Android platform is turning out not to be a platform at all, but merely a starting point for a universe of incompatible devices,' Gruman writes. 'This mess leaves developers and users in an unstable position, as each new Android device adds another variation and compatibility question.' In the end, Google's naive approach to open sourcing Android may in fact be precipitating this free-for-all — one that might ultimately turn off both end-users and developers alike."
As reader donberryman points out, you can even put Android onto some Windows Mobile phones, now.
Here is some background on the article author: http://www.zangogroup.com/galen.html
Anyone else get the feeling that he is the Pat Goss of the computer world? I.e. getting paid to pretend he knows what he is doing?
Living With a Nerd
What you think Microsoft just screwed up Windows Mobile on purpose for all those years?
Look at history, Windows Mobile came out swinging strong, kicking butt and taking names, and then it got bogged down in its own ecosytem as it attempted to support an ever wider and wider range and form factors of devices running on more and more different hardware platforms.
Mobile deviecs are far more complicated than desktops, both in terms of the little things (boot loaders!) to the big things (OEM relations!)
Microsoft learned this, I don't see how Google expected to basically copy Microsoft's mobile OS strategy (in every detail except for pricing) and have any less issues.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
This "problem" isn't a problem at all, it is an opportunity for a business. The freedom of the Android platform could use some development house to take the lead. They should pick a platform or 3 that are the most popular and develop their own version of Android as well as quality applications and quality application reviews. They need to find the best apps in the app market and improve them and brand them so that they are guaranteed to work on their version of Android and have customer support or at least real bug tracking and message boards for suggestions to bug fixes. Maybe even sell it as a monthly service. Something that would really stand out.
If I didn't already have a job and I had the start up capital I would have already been working on it, but since I have a nice job and no start up capital I leave it up to someone else to develop a business around the Android platform. Currently there is a hodgepodge of unheard of development houses making apps that look like they were developed by undergrads.
I completely agree with this statement. Having personally hacked android on to 3 devices that it was never intended to run on, I can say that the Android platform is even more consistent than windows mobile, or the iPhone OS. In fact, its even more consistent than a standard desktop Linux like Ubuntu. Furthermore, Linux (which is of course the pivotally important part of Android) runs on more platforms than any other operating system in existence. Linux itself does more than provide a 'consistent' API, it provides a POSIXly correct API, which is fathoms more than any other mobile OS can say.
As for variations between hardware (e.g. some device supporting multi-touch, some not) - the same API is running on all of them - there are no differences, Android uses what the Linux kernel provides.
Lastly, with respect to different UI features provided by various companies (HTC Sense, MotoBlur, etc), developers target their apps according to a common API. The presentation (the look and feel of the UI) is also done according to a certain API.
This topic really is a non-issue, whoever even brought it up likely forgot to eat their wheaties this morning.
Galen Gruman (the writer of the article) used to write for Macworld and is also part of iPhoneInTouch developers group.
This can all be found on his linkin profile. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/galen-gruman/0/37/599
It's something you would want to take with a grain of salt, if he wasn't hounding it with every article he wrote about it. FUD.
Ah, but the issue is going and buying, say, the new Xperia x10 (which is about to come out, months /after/ the Droid and Nexus One) and then discovering that some app which works on the Droid does not work on the x10, because while the Droid is on 2.0.1, the x10 is on a heavily-modified 1.6. To use your analogy, this is like someone going to go buy a new gaming computer, and then discovering your new system only has a DirectX 8.0 card in it.
Tech-saavy smartphone buyers will know to look at what version of the OS the phone comes with before purchase. However, part of what people are pushing for lately is smartphone adoption outside of the 'traditional' smartphone market. Most of the people I know who have iPhones are not people who previously had Blackberries or Windows Mobile phones; they had little Samsung candybar phones, or Motorola sliders, or whatever. These are not people who want to look at the tech specs of their phones before buying them; they just want a phone that does what it says on the tin, and where they don't have to worry about compatibility and conflict. To them, the Xperia x10 is a /newer/ phone, thus should /have the newer stuff/.
This is where the fragmentation will hurt Android adoption. Someone can go and say, 'well, a new iPhone just came out. It'll be fancier/newer/faster than last year's model, so it can do everything last year's could and then new stuff.' You cannot do that with Android; someone sees the Droid has Facebook integration in the address book, goes 'cool! I want that!' and goes out to buy some even-newer Android phone, only to discover they cannot do the things their friend's Droid could, because their phone is using an older version of Android. To the average consumer, this doesn't make sense; those are both Android phones, and theirs is NEWER! Shouldn't their phone do MORE, not LESS? Etc.
(And let's be honest, even the tech-saavy gadget-addicted folks get unhappy when they don't have the latest and greatest update for their system. You need only check the irate threads at Phandroid or on the Verizon forums about 'when is the Droid getting 2.1?' 'Screw the Droid, when is the Eris getting 2.x at all?' and so on. It makes them annoyed to see that the Droid was promptly supplanted by the Nexus One two months later, and then people who bought the Nexus One now have /that/ being supplanted by the Desire shortly thereafter, etc.)
--Rachel
The real issue here isn't an Android problem at all, it is the fact that manufacturers/carriers never upgrade the software. They have no incentive to, they already sold the product and made their money, why would they waste time/money making sure the new version will work? It actually works in their favor not to as the customers have to spend more money getting a new phone with new software. Until you actually own your phone and can upgrade it at your discretion this will continue to be a problem. Or buy something from Apple who actually understands this and has the clout to force it on the carriers.