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."
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.
Because every ARM board is unique, and there is no universal means for an OS to determine hardware capabilities and peripherals.
On the PC we have the BIOS, PCI, ACPI, and a number of other facilities that work well enough that the OS can automatically enumerate the hardware and configure itself to operate on the platform. With ARM devices, even between two boards with the same SoC you'll have peripherals connected via different GPIOs, interrupts on different pins, a wide array of voltage regulators (some more, some less, all connected differently.)
And since everything is stored in a flash chip at a custom location, working with the kernel and bootloader is a lot like working with the BIOS on your pc- if you mess it up, your device is screwed (unless it can cold flash, has a hard ROM for flashing, or accessible JTAG, all of which are extremely rare on consumer level devices.)
But even if you have all of the above taken care of, the complete lack of effort on behalf of Google and the hardware vendors to getting their changes upstream in the kernel generally means that porting newer versions of Android to older devices is a pain in the ass due to needing to rework or sometimes rewrite the drivers. Normally they would be updated and tested by people as the kernel moved forward, but instead they rot in tarballs and zip files out on vendor websites.
Never mind Google's wacky reworking of the file system. I'm sure devices like the Nexus One have plenty of space to store ICS. But their broken layout and insistence on storing applications on that NAND instead of having a higher capacity internal NAND or only storing applications on the SD card is a large part of this problem as well.
But that would be a non-traditional usage of the word "most".
The chart doesn't lie; you're failing to read it. The original iPhone and 3G were all able to use the most recent OS release three years after their release date, which is what the chart clearly shows.
iPhone 3G: on sale 7/11/08. Plus 3 years = 7/11/11. At that time, the 3G could use the latest iOS version, 4.2.1.
There is certainly a bias by omission. I would like to see more of the high-profile phones included (like the Galaxy mentioned above). But what I don't understand is this: why are phones being sold new that are already one or two OS versions behind?
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.
Unless you were dumb enough to get a phone that was tightly locked down with a custom UI, in which case it kind of serves you right.
Yes because the majority of consumers clearly should have to concern themselves with researching the concepts of bootloaders and the effects of custom UIs on the inner workings of the OS and impact it will have on future software updates. The only dumb people around here are those with your attitude.
The iPhone 3G did get software updates, up to the latest version of 4, but it really is just not capable of running iOS5 (it was barely capable of running iOS4)
Probably just another pro-Apple troll post. By the time a handset is truly no longer being supported by Android, chances are good that it's out of warranty and you may as well just unlock it and install a custom firmware.
Unless you were dumb enough to get a phone that was tightly locked down with a custom UI, in which case it kind of serves you right.
Yeah, only a troll would suggest that it's reasonable for a vendor to support a phone for the entire length of the two-year contract you signed to get it.
Jeeeeezus is Slashdot out of touch with reality. Unlock it and install custom firmware? Seriously? You want to tell your Mom that she has to pay $200 for a phone, then pay $70 a month for the next two years, but after ten months she has to go find and install firmware herself? And anyone who doesn't think that's reasonable is a troll? BUUUUULLLLSHITTT.
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.
There are plenty of people who have never seen a line of source code and have no idea what a bootloader is, that still know enough to be interested in updates to the OSes of both their PCs and mobile devices. Information about major Android releases are found in fairly mainstream tech and news sites.
Example:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/top-10-features-in-android-23-gingerbread/2143
"User features
1. New on-screen keyboard. The standard keyboard has been greatly improved in Android 2.3, with faster input and more intuitive typing. Even cut-and-paste got a makeover.
2. Streamlined user interface. New color schemes and various UI changes and polish make Android more consistent and simpler to use.
3. Application and power management. Android 2.3 provides better insight into what is running in the background, how much memory and CPU time it is using, and even lets you kill misbehaving apps. Yes, after months of telling us we don’t need a task killer, they give us a task killer. Enjoy your chuckle, iPhone fans.
4. SIP Internet calling. Voice over IP is integrated directly into Android 2.3. Unfortunately you’ll have to get a SIP account from a third party, and the ability might be curtailed on some carriers.
5. Download management. All your downloads from your browser, email, and other apps, can now be viewed and controlled from one place."
You don't have to know about rooting, bootloaders, open-source, or coding to have some understanding of the above points and potentially be interested. There are many levels of technical ability between "I compile my own Android builds for fun!" and "Does this here phone thing have the GeeBees and the Why-Fis and play them Angry Birds"
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!"