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.
The moderators have taken a break from reality. This is nonsense.
ARM/X86 desktop distros can communicate just fine with each other. Avahi, network file systems are two high-level examples used in desktop distros that make communicating between distros easy.
Maybe the moderators are confusing Microsoft and Apple hostility to interoperability with Linux? The problem is at Microsoft and Apple, not the Linux community.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Unless of course it requires hardware level interfaces that don't exist in your machine, leverage drivers or hardware you don't have, leverage legacy APIs no longer included in the OS, leverage "features" that were patched and the back door the app used is now locked, needs more resources than you have available, or in general is poorly written or buggy, or you have a virus or other system corruption that causes issues, and a hundred other reasons.
I can attest to the fact that I have dozens of apps designed even for XP, let alone NT/2K, that don't work in Vista, let alone 7. I even have apps written for XP that don't work in SP3, and many, many that require SP2 or higher.
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
> See that's the thing. We don't have dependencies. No need to run after libfoo to run appbar.
> Just open the DMG, drag and drop to wherever (/Applications is nice) and run.
Yes you do. You just won't admit to them.
The whole exclusive nature of the Mac tends to discourage casual observers. You generally
have to buy special hardware in order to have a copy of MacOS to play with really. This
tends to minimize the number of people that know anything about MacOS that haven't already
bought into the platform.
Although some Macs made cost effective HTPC machines for awhile...
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The problem with eating Big Macs and Whoppers is that you become a Big Whopper yourself. Bland and full of bloat and handcuffed to the medical industry. It takes an effort to be a lean machine, the path you take is your own choice.