Slashdot Mirror


Android Compatibility and Fragmentation

tbray writes "Here are the details on the Android Compatibility Program — which combines the source, a formal compatibility spec, an open-source test suite, and access to the Android Market as reward for good behavior (program page). People like to rant about the subject of fragmentation, so here's TFM that they should be R'ing first."

35 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Fragmentation is mostly FUD by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fragmentation is mostly FUD, there are only a few screen sizes and the OS changes are pretty minimal.

    1. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Informative
      From the Android developer blog

      Because it means everything, it actually means nothing, so the term is useless. Stories on “fragmentation” are dramatic and they drive traffic to pundits’ blogs, but they have little to do with reality. “Fragmentation” is a bogeyman, a red herring, a story you tell to frighten junior developers. Yawn.

    2. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Informative

      Agreed on screen changes. But there's a major psychological issue with people shelling out hundreds of dollars for what they perceive as the "latest, greatest" phone, and then 6 months later being told they are stuck on version 1.6 when we've already gone through 2.0, 2.01, 2.1 and are about to see 2.2.

      If you think this isn't real, go see the thread on Engadget right now on this topic. People are angry about it. Frankly, I'd be pretty angry if my phone was still running 1.5 (apparently a third of Android phones out there are still stuck on this old-ass version as of a few weeks ago, and a third or so were still on 1.6, with another third on 2.1).

      Mind you, almost every phone has at least an *unofficial* community-produced ROM that will get them the 2.1 features and apps. Even the klunky G1 which was the first Android phone can get there - it's just not officially supported, presumably because Google, HTC and T-Mobile don't want to push down an update that replaces the SPL - I guess they think the support costs from doing that would be higher than the PR costs of not doing it.

      So yeah, the issue is a bit overdone - or rather, it's not so much fragmentation of hardware specs that's the issue - I think allowing some hardware diversity is a good thing, it encourages innovation. The real issue is lack of hardware support from manufacturers and telcos after the point of sale. Google has up-to-now done basically nothing to force guaranteed support periods and guaranteed maximum release delays on a newly released OS version. I saw nothing in the article to address this.

      *That* is the real issue that gets people riled up. *That* is what the users at Engadget are seething over. They want 2.1. They don't want to be told "we can't support 2.1 on your 8 month old handset, eat a dick" by HTC or Sprint or Verizon or whoever. Google is letting the carriers and hardware manufacturers release products, pimp them, then drop support 3 months later. They need to force some structure on customer support - I don't think every piece of hardware should be supported forever, but I think a year of official support for the latest version releases after the last date you sold the product is a minimum, and I think that a 2-3 month lag from Google's release of a new version to an officially supported ROM from the hardware vendor and carrier is a maximum. If a vendor falls outside of those parameters, every handset of their should be banned from the market, effective instantly.

      That's the stick they need to support their customers. If Google doesn't man up and do this, I'm afraid it will do a significant amount of harm to the rapidly developing Android market.

    3. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by sortius_nod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's funny, I saw this article on my RSS and knew that the first post would be this. You don't give any reason as to why the fragmentation stories are FUD.

      I am personally very hesitant to look at any android device due to the fragmentation. Hell, you have 1.6 devices being released alongside 2.1 devices. If this isn't fragmentation then what is?

      As has been posted, read some comments from users about how pissed they are that their 1.6 device won't run certain apps or is lacking features that could be implemented by a 2.x release but their carrier won't deploy any updates.

      While the fragmentation can't be squarely put at Google's feet, there's a shared responsibility between the hardware manufacturers, the carriers and Google to ensure that this doesn't happen. Unfortunately this hasn't happened and Android is headed squarely toward a cluster fuck.

    4. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think every piece of hardware should be supported forever, but I think a year of official support for the latest version releases after the last date you sold the product is a minimum

      If the contract period is 2 years, and the early termination fee is based on the contract period, they better support the phones for 2 years.

    5. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by ducomputergeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Android Market makes sure your app is only visible to those devices where it will run correctly, by filtering your app from devices which don't have the features you listed.

      I've seen this a lot with friends who have different android phones. Friend A with HTC: "Hey try this really cool app". Friend B with Motorola: "What App? I can't find it anywhere in the market place." My understanding is that the app doesn't even show up if their phone is not compatible, it's invisible. I guess they don't want a bunch of apps that when you bring up the page says, "Sorry your phone is not compatible".

      I also know from the QA side of the house that you can have the same phone hardware with 2 different OSs depending on the carrier. Usually we don't have major problems, but there can be glitches and bugs that are introduced. And then there is the speed of the upgrades. With the iPhone we looked at one major update per year. When we started working with Android last year it was 1.5 (which had been our for a while on the G1) and 1.6. Then suddenly it was 2.0, then 2.1, now 2.2 all the last 9 months or so. Apple has generally release a new OS every year with a minor .1 release shortly there after. Same with blackberry.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    6. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by Sancho · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The stories just say that fragmentation is killing Android, but they provide no evidence. They are making the claims, here. I have found no evidence that there's a fragmentation problem. There are apps that don't work for all devices, but iPhone OS has that issue, too, and it's only going to get worse.

    7. Re:Fragmentation is mostly FUD by sortius_nod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed, however the killing of the platform has started in minor ways, unless there's collaboration between carrier/manufacturer/Google it will end up as a platform that users don't want a bar of.

      Let's face it, we're not talking about techies who can handle that some apps don't work, we're talking about users. They don't know the difference between a 1.6 & 2.1 device, they just see a phone with Android across the box. If it doesn't work they'll never buy another Android phone.

      Sometimes it is difficult to step back and ask "What would a user do in this situation?". It's something that the IT industry seems to forget, that the users are what matters for a consumer device.

  2. This wasn't his point, but..... by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This wasn't his point, but the author of the article described the android fragmentation perfectly. Quote:

    * Bugs - devices might simply have bugs, such as a buggy Bluetooth driver or an incorrectly implemented GPS API.
    * Missing components - devices might omit hardware (such as a camera) that apps expect, and attempt to "fake" or stub out the corresponding API.
    * Added or altered APIs - devices might add or alter APIs that aren't part of standard Android. Done correctly this is innovation; done poorly and it's "embrace and extend".

    Each of these is an example of something that can make an app not run properly on a device. They might run, but they won't run properly. These are the things that I spend my time preventing.

    The only thing I might add is that devices of different resolutions can be annoying, especially if your app has static images or custom widgets.

    --
    Qxe4
    1. Re:This wasn't his point, but..... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2, Informative

      This wasn't his point, but the author of the article described the android fragmentation perfectly.

      Actually, that was specifically his point. From the preceding paragraph:

      Now, that’s not to say that there aren’t real challenges in making sure that Android devices are compatible with each other, or that there aren’t very real concerns that keep app developers awake at night. There definitely are, and I spend a great deal of time indeed thinking about them and addressing them. The trick is to define them clearly.

      ..then he goes on to offer a definition for "Android Compatibility", and a few examples of problem areas (which you quoted). He then goes on to describe steps they have taken to mitigate the problems. The first step in solving a problem is to define the problem, and that's what he's doing.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  3. Re:Screen res by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are the screen sizes a big deal? Application and web developers have dealt with this problem for decades now.

    I think there's only two right now - HVGA (320x480), and WVGA (480x800), though there may also be VGA sized screens as well.

    The big issue is that the density increases but the screen size remains the same, so if your app isn't DPI aware things get small and hard to control. Desktop app developers tend to be fixed DPI - a larger window lets you show more information. Ditto web developers. But high-DPI displays means you don't want to show more information, but you should scale everything up. Even pictures if it makes the picture grow from literal thumbnail to larger blob.

    DPI-awareness is a difficult thing and many apps still get it wrong on the desktop, if you switch your Windows desktop to high-DPI mode.

  4. Here, let me have a go by DavidR1991 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The thing is, nobody ever defined “fragmentation”"

    Let me try: You have several different versions of Android 'in the wild' on different phones, different carriers, etc. There are different stances on whether these version of Android can be updated (based on manufacturer) etc. yadda yadda

    Now, looking at that situation, I would say 'fragmentation' is more along the lines of 'Is it going to remain easy for to target Android phones in general considering how many versions currently exist [/not obsolete] concurrently?'

    So yes, it is mainly about compatibility. But it also means (much like any other platform) if the version leaping continues (and so many versions exist concurrently all the time) playing to the 'lowest common denominator' of supported features will be required

    1. Re:Here, let me have a go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Aren't the newer versions of iPhoneOS not available for older ipods (and possibly iphones)? If that's true, I think the change in features between the versions is much less 'backward-compatible' than the change between Android 1.5 and Android 2.0, at least from an app's perspective.

      For instance I doubt we'd find an iPhone developer willing to write their app for the iPhone OS 2.0 so that it'd work on older devices (and miss out on the cool multitasking of OS 4), whereas I'm sure that unless an Android developer had a specific new feature (such as contact integration), they'd stick their app as compatible for Android 1.5 and be available for the vast majority of phones.

      Furthermore, having a little bit of experience writing an android app everywhere I looked they were trying to get you into good compatibility practices. Simply designing a different layout for a different screen size (which was just the layout itself, it still interacted with the same code) and checking that a feature was present on the device before using it.

      I've seen iPhone developers stressing about their app running smoothly on both the 3G and 3GS due to the different specs; the problem is not Android's alone.

    2. Re:Here, let me have a go by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Informative

      To date I believe every iPhoneOS device can run the latest version of the OS.

      That won't be true for long. iPhone 4.x's pseudo-multitasking feature is only going to be available on the 3GS, not the 3G.

      Any loser can develop apps for android. That does two things in my mind. 1) floods the market with garbage 2) opens the door for malware, which we have already seen.

      We've seen malware for the iPhone too. A lot of good Apple's policy has done there, huh?

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  5. Re:Screen res by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Motorola Droid is FWVGA, at 854x480

  6. hrmf... by hitmark · · Score: 4, Interesting

    this should have been made perfectly clear from google's side from day one. Yet everyone kept talking about android marketplace as if it was a part of the android source until the first android based devices without marketplace showed up, and none could figure out why.

    i only ran into it after ranting about google's mismanagement of marketplace access on some forum, and got a link handed to me.

    another issue is that 1.6 required that a compatible device could function as a phone. So any device thats been in development since 1.6 was first released, wont have marketplace unless its a phone or stalls its release until they can get 2.1 or newer working and approved by google. And even then the max resolution of the screen is 800x600, and i think the screen size is in the 5-7" range.

    basically, google is lagging badly behind where third parties want to go with android. And its not helping that marketplace is only really usable in select nations so far (and when a sim is inserted into the device).

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    1. Re:hrmf... by dave562 · · Score: 2, Informative

      basically, google is lagging badly behind where third parties want to go with android.

      That sound eriely familiar to the way they handled Google Apps. I was all gung ho to replace my Exchange server with Google Apps but there were a couple of not so minor little details to be addressed. I tried to get an answer from Google but couldn't get one. Everyone suggested talking to a GAPE partner. I tried to ask the GAPE partners the same questions and their response was, "Google assures us they're working on those features. No, we can't tell you when they will be ready. No, we really can't. Google won't tell us when new features are coming. Here, why don't you try this work around...."

  7. Re:This doesn't solve fragmentation by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The hardware vs onscreen keyboard does not require two apps.

    The iphone is not one platform, there are 3 different phones and there is about to be a forth.

  8. Re:Screen res by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which you can just treat as 480x800, who will really notice the missing 54 pixels?

  9. And in any mobile device by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You will have either fragmentation, or stagnation as the device gets older. Even something totally controlled like the iPhone. As time goes on, one of three things will happen:

    1) Apple will introduce new iPhones with features the old ones do not, and cannot, have such as higher rez screens, faster CPUs, etc. Software for these new phones will not run properly, if at all on the old ones. The phones will fragment along the lines of new and old.

    2) Apple will refuse to introduce any features that would break compatibility with older phones. They maintain total compatibility through keeping various things at one spec. This leads to stagnation of increasing proportions as time goes on, such that new iPhones are literally years behind competing products.

    3) Apple discontinues all support for older iPhones. They have the service providers remotely kill the hardware so you are required to purchase new hardware.

    There's just no way around it. If you want new devices to have new capabilities, well it will lead to fragmentation. There are plenty of things you can do to help, particularly in making sure newer devices can seamlessly run older software, but you can't have all sorts of new stuff and have everything work just like it did before.

    1. Re:And in any mobile device by hitmark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      3b) apple makes sure to plan for a "incompatible" hardware upgrade when most of the early adopter contracts about to expire, and therefor they will be looking around for a replacement anyways.

      planned obsolescence is a "wonderful" thing.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:And in any mobile device by ekhben · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1) 3GS has better processor, graphics, and more memory than 3G. iPhone has better location and a camera, iPod Touch does not. These differences exist, they just don't currently impact more than a few niches of applications.

      2) Clearly not happening.

      3) If you ignore the hyperbolic nonsense about remotely killing devices, this is happening. The original iPhone and iPod Touch devices are not supported by iPhone OS 4.0. The iPhone 3G is no longer available for sale, on the same trajectory as the original iPhone was a year ago. Apple have shown that they won't hang on to old hardware forever - OS X 10.6 doesn't support PPC, for example.

      One thing is highly in Apple's favour right now: all devices can upgrade to the most recent OS without the carrier being involved. There's very limited OS-level fragmentation in the App Store; users who never sync very rarely purchase, and users too cheap to spend $10 on their iPod Touch are generally too cheap to buy many apps. Developers can target the most recent OS version quite happily. When the original iPhone is no longer supported by the current OS, there will be a lost market segment for people still happy with their device but unable to keep up.

      A higher resolution on the new iPhone will probably increase fragmentation, though many apps should not need any work at all, if they followed the UI guidelines and used auto-resizing and system fonts. Unless they specifically need to use the higher resolution, new apps going forward should have very little trouble targeting the whole family (less the two out of support originals).

    3. Re:And in any mobile device by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if you read your own post - point 1 applies to android just the same. the version differences only impact a few niches of applications.

      Same with the screen resolution issue. "If [the developer] followed the UI guidelines and used auto-resizing and system fonts", an Android app will fit whatever size screen it's running on.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  10. Re:Screen res by hitmark · · Score: 3, Informative

    DPI awareness is mostly a problem if your GUI toolkit is pixel based, rather then vector based. Especially if those pixels have hardcoded limits.

    all the major linux UIs are moving towards using vector graphics for instance, and i think microsoft headed the same way with vista and later (tho win32 legacy programs will still be a pain, and why microsoft wants to see xp and older dead).

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  11. Re:Screen res by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not 54, it's 54*480 which is 25920. Which is a non trivial amount on a device that small.

  12. Re:This doesn't solve fragmentation by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 2, Informative

    So fragmentation will ALWAYS be an android issue until they say "here is our reference hardware platform(s) -- you must use of these three sets of features when building hardware."

    To an extent that's already happening. Phone goliath Nokia among others are setting up an alternative to appstore:

    Twenty-four mobile network operators have formed the Wholesale Applications Community to avoid fragmenting the apps market and to give developers one point of entry to all the members, the GSM Association announced on Monday.

    The operators will now start working on uniting their existing developer communities, so developers will be able to go to one place to get their applications distributed instead of having to go through multiple application approval processes.

    The community will also start working on a common development standard that should be ready within the next 12 months. The standard will be independent of phone type and operating system, according to the members.

    That will allow them to better compete against Apple's App Store or Google's Android Market, which have independent and competing approvals processes tied to their phone or operating system.

    "Developers are going to have a lot more access to a lot more customers," said Alex Sinclair, chief technology and strategy officer of the GSMA, at a news conference at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

    The Wholesale Applications Community members include: AT&T, China Mobile, Deutsche Telekom, NTT DoCoMo, Orange, Telefónica, Telenor Group, Sprint, Verizon Wireless and Vodafone. Together the operators in the group have about 3 billion subscribers, the GSMA said.

    The group has the full backing of the GSMA and the list of supporters will grow in the coming days. "There are several people who are annoyed they couldn't get their name on the list in time," said Sinclair.

    Apple is not among those clamoring to be added to the list, but if the company wants to join the group, "it will be welcome," he said.

    Just like many phone manufacturers, operators have seen the success of Apple's App Store and want a piece of the pie. Some, including Orange, Verizon and Vodafone, have already launched their own application stores.

    Mobile phone manufacturers LG Electronics, Samsung and Sony Ericsson have also voiced their support for the apps community.

    The Wholesale Applications Community faces a number of obstacles, according to analysts at CCS Insight.

    "Operators are trying to regain control of apps, but have a poor track record with this type of industry consortium," they said in a research note.

    "Big challenges remain overcoming inconsistency between standards bodies like JIL and Bondi," the analysts continued, referring to the Joint Innovation Lab created by a group of mobile operators including Vodafone, China Mobile, Softbank and Verizon Wireless, which also has the support of phone manufacturers LG Electronics, Research in Motion, Samsung Electronics and Sharp.

    There is no competition between the Wholesale Applications Community and JIL, as all members of JIL are also members of the community, according to Sinclair.

    "The last thing we wanted was a Jack versus JIL situation," he said. The groups hope to converge their various specifications within 12 months, he said.

    These are some seriously big names, big enough to knock it out of the park if they wanted to.

  13. Re:This doesn't solve fragmentation by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 2, Informative

    It amuses me to no end

    Is that you, Lo Pan?

  14. "The Web is not a 'print' medium!" by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even now lots of web developers want to treat the browser view like a physical sheet of paper, demanding iron-fisted control over placement of everything on the page. This leads to all kinds of work to maintain the control. I keep wishing more web developers would get over this. Not only would I find it a lot easier to actually make use of their work on smaller screens (my Android phone, my netbook...), I think in the end it would be a lot easier for the developers, too.

    It sounds like mobile application developers often have the same problem...

  15. It's a huge issue to app developers, not Googlers. by pocopoco · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've developed 7 Android apps and the huge diversity of Android versions and devices out there really is a nightmare. I have an enormous number of extra code paths due to it. All this extra complexity makes apps tougher to write, tougher to test, tougher to debug, tougher to enhance.

    Some examples of bizarre stuff I have to do:
    Android 1.5 has a Java NIO bug that forces me to copy data to a temporary array on its way to buffers to be rendered via OpenGL. This hurts performance on older phones that often need it the most. It also means I have to do more testing to make sure both code paths are well exercised. I bet many developers don't even realize the bug is there an just have broken OpenGL apps on Android 1.5. The bug fix would be trivial to port back to Android 1.5, which would make it drastically more likely to get on to these older phones, but there's no sign this will ever happen. Do I keep code paths like this? Or do I give up the 25% of the market that is Android 1.5? Neither is desirable.

    Another really frustrating one is how I have to detect specific devices and request certain size depth buffers just to get decent performance. Hardware graphics acceleration is only enabled on the Samsung Galaxy for depth buffer size 16, for example, not for no depth buffer. Depth buffer size 24 works best on the Droid, etc.. The Galaxy has had this bug for a very long time. The Archos tablet has no hardware acceleration and there are promises that cheaper phones will be similar. Do I write all the extra code for adjusting rendering for each of these? Or do again give up large swaths of the market?

    Anyway, I'm constantly dealing with issues like this. It is really disappointing that Android team, the carriers, and the device manufacturers don't do more to prevent it. Doing things like back porting fixes so that older phones can be more trivially updated would help enormous numbers of apps and app developers compared to the very few resources needed on Google's part to do it.

    Meanwhile Google isn't even interested in solutions to these problems from what I've seen. One developer brought up another potential solution during a session at Google IO. He suggested making the highest level of Android a distributable framework, like .NET. This would allow updating it much easier. Not nearly as many phones would be stranded with old, buggy versions of the Java portion of Android at least. The Google staffers just brushed the idea off without even discussing it. They said fragmentation should really be called progress and to deal with it.

    This isn't really surprising. If you look at a recent app produced by Google, the Twitter app, you'll see that it is unavailable to a huge percentage of the market because they don't support older versions of Android with it. Independent developers can't afford to ignore large sections of the marketplace like that. Google isn't in the app business, so the Googlers just go ahead and ignore the issue. You can see a graph of the versions of the devices on Android Market here:
    http://developer.android.com/intl/fr/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html

    And of course there are plenty of devices not on Google's market, many of which are even less likely to receive updates because they are updated by PC software rather than over the air.

    So Googlers aren't even eating their own dog food on this issue. They just make app developers put up with it on their own, never experience it themselves, and then ridicule the issue as a bogeyman. I think I was happier before I read the blog post. At least then I could imagine they were working hard on the issue and just doing terrible at it. Now I know they don't even consider it an issue.

  16. Re:This doesn't solve fragmentation by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The problem is (from an app developer standpoint) is that there are too many variables in the android world to code an app once to run successfully across the ecosystem.

    Yet strangely many people are successfully doing this.

    You have to design a version for on-screen keyboards (because it'll use part of the screen real estate) separately from a version that uses a hardware keyboard. They don't need to be separate apps, but you need to design (visually at least) for both scenarios, or you end up locking out a good portion of the people who use android devices.

    Completely wrong. Where are you getting this from?

    Sure, there are 100,000+ android devices out there

    Over 100,000 Android devices activated per day.

    so in order to sell your app on all 100,000 of those phones you've got to tweak your app for each device

    No you don't. You have no idea what you're talking about. And you're at Score:4 right now, which is shameful.

    One way to call the Camera API

    Ugh. You shouldn't have posted because almost everything you have said is just completely wrong.

    The Android developer platform is extraordinarily universal. There's a density independent pixel format (which is how an app looks almost the same on a 320x480 screen as it looks on a 480x800 screen), support for varying screen ratios, a single way to inter-operate with the camera and send emails and read the GPS signal and get orientation signals, or even do advance OpenGL graphics.

    One app to rule them all.

    There are of course differences and occasionally "quirks". If you make a rich graphics game it's going to run terribly on a G1. Flash is only available on some devices. And of course if you have to target a newer API, presumably because it has a feature that you can't live without, you limit your app to that version and above (just as if I use Transactional Filesystem calls my Windows app would be Vista or newer).

  17. Re:It's a huge issue to app developers, not Google by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or do I give up the 25% of the market that is Android 1.5?

    Most of the phones that run 1.5 right now are terribly underpowered -- OpenGL on a G1 is almost a sick joke.

    If you're targeting OpenGL, you probably should cut your losses and cut them.

    If you look at a recent app produced by Google, the Twitter app, you'll see that it is unavailable to a huge percentage of the market because they don't support older versions of Android with it.

    The Twitter application is an Android showpiece app, which is why it targets 2.1. They wanted to use animated wallpaper, quick contact bars, and so on, to highlight the best of the contemporary platform. Aside from the fact that about 50% of Android phones are running 2.1 right now, most other phones are going to see a 2.1 upgrade in the relatively short term. I suspect Google intentionally targets 2.1 to try to motivate the vendors to expedite their upgrades.

  18. Why fragmentation is FUD: by symbolset · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You will find the answer to this mystery in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric S. Raymond [1992].

    Basically, Microsoft and Apple are code cathedrals. Using the Cathedral system they can organize the labor of a great many people. In a Cathedral you can do anything that is permitted to be done in that Cathedral - which can be almost anything that brings the controlling powers profit really. But if you want to do something they don't want you to do, then you can't and there's nothing you can do about it but leave the cathedral or accept that you can't do that thing.

    Android and the Linuxes are the Bazaar. It's noisy and chaotic. It can be harder to find things. Some of the things you find in a Bazaar are quite crude. But in the Bazaar you can do anything you want any way you want. The Bazaar is run by everybody in it, for each to his own benefit. Almost anything that can be found in the Cathedral can also be purchased in the Bazaar by a man with ready cash. Almost anything.

    One thing that can be bought in the Cathedral but not in the Bazaar is the preventing of things you don't want others to do. If somebody wants to prevent the use of VP8 or Flash in the Cathedral, or the development of hardware platforms that don't run Windows, well, anything can be proscribed if the price is right. The Cathedral is run by the head priest, and not specifically for your benefit but primarily for the benefit of the Cathedral - because it's this self serving nature that makes Cathedrals persistent and powerful.

    One is not necessarily better than the other. Each has merits, each has uses.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  19. Re:They openly admit fragmentation exists by Namarrgon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh for.. look, how do you propose to make e.g. a GPS tracking app run on a device that doesn't have GPS? (yes, I'm aware all Android devices must have GPS) How is allowing apps to use specialised hardware on Android any worse than allowing apps to use the compass on an iPhone 3GS, but not on a 3G? or camera apps on an iPhone but not an iPod?

    The only way to avoid fragmentation as you define it is to have one unchanging, stagnant piece of hardware that only runs one version of the OS, on one network from one vendor. Even Apple doesn't do that.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  20. Re:This doesn't solve fragmentation by adolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And of course if you have to target a newer API, presumably because it has a feature that you can't live without, you limit your app to that version and above

    Indeed. There have been several occasions on which I was forced to upgrade the OS on my iPod Touch, just to use a new app. ("Forced" as in: The app would not bloody install on the software version I was running.)

    And, of course: On the iPod Touch, OS upgrades sometimes cost actual money.

    So. If we assume that fragmentation is a problem, then it is very plain that it is not an Android-specific problem.

  21. Re:It's a huge issue to app developers, not Google by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not sure what you want Google to do about this. Do you want Google to dictate a certain hardware spec to all the vendors? If you favor a consistent platform (more or less) from a well-known set of hardware on a single carrier, you should go with Apple.

    This is simply software engineering - taking one set of trade-offs for others. If you want newer features, you target the later API, at the cost of a smaller audience. These are all very straight-forward cost/benefit decisions, that YOU get to make, not Google. This is the strength of the open platform.

    This is my thoughts exactly.

    You're gaining a huge install base by having Android compatible with multiple handsets. People like choosing different feature sets, not everyone wants a keyboard for example, but some wouldn't live without one. Some people will pay extra for a phone with excellent gaming performance, others won't care.

    This is akin to figuring out if a hypothetical game will run on User X's computer. Ship the game for a console if you don't want to deal with it.

    To be fair, for the wide variety of devices Android supports, there are very very few compatibility glitches.

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)