Slashdot Mirror
Android Orphans: a Sad History of Platform Abandonment
MBCook writes "After seeing the announcement that Nexus One users won't get ICS, Michael Degusta made a chart to show how current the OS version on Android phones was over time... and the results are not encouraging."
if a device works on a given version of the OS, leave it the hell alone
Why is it that unlike desktops and laptops, mobiles are locked down so tight
I can install virtually any OS on my PC, why cant the same be done with mobiles?
I'm so confused. First of all, this doesn't list the Samsung Galaxy, which has stayed updated. Or the S2 for that matter. Did they specifically pick Android devices that are not being updated (there are many, I don't deny that)?
Second of all, the original iPhone 2G, which I have, is definitely not supported by iOS5, or even iOS4 for that matter. What are they smoking?
I can't help but think this is intentionally skewed for Apple...
Applications designed for newer APIs won't run on devices whose operating system doesn't support those APIs. And as applications get updated to correct security problems and add features, some of them also get updated to use the new APIs.
The real reason: Because unlike Intel and IBM, ARM never managed to specify one standard boot process. Nearly x86 PC since the 1980s has supported BIOS, but every ARM platform has something different.
Look at Apple just releasing new hardware to force you to update! You sheep. Android is a FREE and OPEN platform. Why would anyone be locked down by iOS is beyond me. Keep it up Android and Android hardware suppliers, eventually you'll overrun the dark walled garden that is Apple.
</sarcasm>
(anything else I missed out on the typical Apple Bashing?)
-
My Optimus V doesn't technically have the latest released for it but Cyanogenmod and a root (Mind you rooting it took much longer than jailbreaking my iPod Touch) took care of that. But not everyone is this tech savvy, my girlfriend is still waiting on her update. And this is why people buy iOS devices for themselves, friends or family.
What source have "they" (I presume you mean Google) not published? No phone running ICS has been released. Google has explained why they didn't release Honeycomb and they've committed to releasing the source for ICS soon after phones running ICS have been released. Ignorant troll is Ignorant.
God is imaginary
millions of people are.
most people wipe the stock image as soon as they get it home and put a better build on it.
I do this, you do this, most people do not.
Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
That same 90% won't care about upgrading to the next version of Android and may not even know it exists.
She might not want to upgrade, but she *needs* to upgrade, to fix security vulnerabilities.
That's the #1 problem here.
Never had an iphone, never wanted one, but, that being said, they have the OS update thingy correct! Control the OS update at the vendor level, NOT the carrier level. It just isn't in the "best" interest of the carriers to put the latest & greatest OS on the phones. Makes it much easier to talk sheep into extending their contract by saying the old phone doesn't have the new stuff, but this shiny new phone does. I wish google would take the apple approach to the OS updates and control it from THEIR end, not allowing the carriers to bloat it & cripple it, THEN, if you are lucky, release it.
BTW how long do you think handset makers and carriers should be forced to update phone software for?
Let's start with the length of the cell phone contract and work from there. If they're going to sell 2-year contracts, you should reasonably expect that the phone you buy will receive updates during that time. Once the contract expires, people can base their decision to get a new phone or switch carriers on the lack of updates. But when you're still under contract, you've got no choice but to accept the crappy situation, and that's not right.
This story is pointing out a legitimate problem with Android. As of yet, not one single iPhone has been sold that has not been supported for the entire 2-year contract. Meanwhile, 7 of the listed Android phones never ran the latest version of the OS, even when they were sold. I don't really take sides in the Android vs. iOS argument, but this is an area that Google really needs to address.
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
It's just what happens when you have one party supplying the hardware and another party supplying the software, and both with different priorities.
The Android scenario is closer to the PC scenario in the bad old days before "Windows Update" etc.For example the old computers might still be running an old version of Windows. Is that a problem? Yes. Did Dell/HP/etc care? No. Did Microsoft care? Not back then. Did most users care? No. Not until something goes wrong.
As a recent article says, Apple of today is focused on Product not Profit: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/10/25/2246209/how-steve-jobs-solved-the-innovators-dilemma
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/23/steve-jobs-failure_n_1025732.html
"My passion has been to build an enduring company where people were motivated to make great products," Jobs told Isaacson. "[T]he products, not the profits, were the motivation. Sculley flipped these priorities to where the goal was to make money. It's a subtle difference, but it ends up meaning everything."
When you have separate companies treating the software and hardware as different products, with different vision and priorities, the "whole product" is less likely to be as great.
For a regular consumer a question is what will support be like if he buys an Android phone? What is this like vs. buying a phone with the competition's operating system, iOS?
These are rational questions for a regular customer, and they are answered quite well. It even helps answer a third question: If I buy an Android phone, which brands have the best history of support?
Your phone is broken.