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.

Comments

Re:How is this worse?

[Sandbags]

man, that is EXACTLY why i love Apple so much. Some argue the premium price (though spec for spec research shows them to be more often the cheapest competitor in the device class), but even if there is, i prefer it, because they're a SINGLE SOURCE support vendor. I can't have a hardware vendor blame and OS vendor who blames an app vendor, who blames a hardware issue.

i can buy any common device (and lots of uncommon ones) and plug it into the mac, and the only people involved would be the Device manufacturer and Apple, and half the time, Apple has taken on the driver support role for the provider as well (just not hardware support of the device).

With the iPhone, even when I call AT&T for help, there's a special devision of Apple staffed at AT&T to support the phone, and I can walk into any Apple store and get support. I know for certain that upgrades to the OS will include a minimum number of version of backward compatability, and apps sold in the store work exclusively withthe latest version of the OS or they're de-listed. Devs don't use unapproved APIs, and Apple keeps them all in the loop about changes to the APIs they're allowed to use months before the change takes effect.

People complain about Apple's Lock in a LOT, but in truth, it provides the devs a lot more freedom, make the platform more predictable, and simplifies code development. Devs know what they can and can't do. The devs who get apps in that get thrown back out later know damned well they were cheating the system to begin with, and if their app got selected and approved, it was lucky from day 1 and their number could come up anytime.

In the beginning, when Apple was using mostly man labor to inspect apps, and were completely overwhelmed with unexpected dev interest, and had an OS not designed from day 1 to support that kind of app development, there was a lot of issue and inconstancy. Now that Apple uses code inspection tools that run mostly automatically, and they've made more clear their stance (which appears to only frown on anything against the law, associated with porn, or against the carrier contracts, but all else is fair game), it's been a great marketplace. With 150,00 apps, I don't feel restricted at all, and I don't have to worry about security issues or app compatability at all.