Slashdot Mirror
Android Update Alliance Already Struggling
adeelarshad82 writes "Earlier this year many Android phone vendors and U.S. wireless carriers made a long-awaited promise, which was to push timely OS updates to all new Android phones. Seven months in and especially with the release of Google Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich), PCMag decided to reach out to all those vendors and wireless carriers to see how things were coming along. Brace yourselves Android fans, you're not going to like the responses."
Android is dead!
Why is anyone surprised? A pledge, not backed up by, say, a money-back guarantee, is meaningless. If these people could get a refund for their phones if they weren't updated, the "pledge" would have teeth. This is why nobody trusts companies who pledge not to sue over patents. This is why people didn't trust AT&T about their merger pledges. Pledges are just for PR and they mean nothing.
Android is more like a collection of related but not entirely compatible operating systems. The inability to have a consistent version of the operating system across current smartphones is really surprising for something that's supposed to be an open source project, but one of the big drawbacks of Android is how much control Google gives the carriers over your phone.
Why do you think Steve Jobs pushed to hard with AT&T and demanded full control over the OS? So shit like this wouldn't happen with the iPhone platform.
Money grubbing cell carriers would rather have your device locked down, so if you want the latest features, you buy a new phone.
And yet people are still surprised that Android is becoming more fragmented every day. The drawing has been on the wall since the launch of the the OS.
It seems to me that phone vendors have not changed their mindset from the pre-smartphone era. Back then, no one cared about OS or version. You got an integrated product and it never changed. Today, it feels like phone makers still think "we put it together and ship it - this idea of later changing or upgrading the software is kind of weird to us."
To them, a phone is complete and unchangeable one it leaves the factory. Alas for their mindset, consumers see phones as customizable, upgradeable devices. If they were $50 each, sure, just replace it, but at $500+ (even if it's stretched over two years), people are making a more significant investment and don't want to be left behind.
Looking for a job in Portland, Oregon?
Still Android 2.3.4, just some crappy system Verizon version 5.5.893.XT75.Verizon.en.US
I was so hopeful.
All the phones I've owned, at least 10 of them have been obsolete before I had them. I don't have the expectation that my phone has the latest OS. I am currently using a work-issued blackberry curve 9300. People chuckle at it, but it is functional enough I don't spring for a second phone.
I was hoping Google would be good about backwards-compatible updates but I am not surprised. Hardware changes so much it seems hard to make the OS compatible across all platforms. I don't get why people are so worked up about it. Your phone does what it does when you were all excited about it a few months ago, what's the big deal?
Man, you really need that seminar!
Even Microsoft does better job regarding Windows Phone 7 than Google with Android. They have by far updated all of their old phones. In fact, they demand from manufacturers that they update. Manufacturers are only allowed to skip one update. If they skip and next one comes, they are required to provide that update to users. That is how it should work, not unlike how Google runs things.
And this is the main reason why my next smartphone will be another iPhone. I have a bit of lock-in because of my existing apps, but that's less than $100, so I would not mind switching to something more free. Currently I'm still on my 2.5 years old iPhone 3GS, for as least as long as it still gets updates and the battery is good.
Stories like this give me very little in Android, Google might lose to Microsoft what it gained the last couple of years very quickly.
RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
I'm replacing my Droid Incredible next month, and this very issue is steering me towards an iPhone 4S even though I'm generally happy with other aspects of Android.
If I'm locked into a contract for 2 years for a phone, I don't think it's incredibly unreasonable to expect updates (especially ones that relate to security, stability, or performance) for at least 18 months.
i mean, there are just so many clones! who knows what bus you use, is it ISA? EISA? PCI? what kind of memory does it use, EMS or XMS? which version of DOS do you want, 4 or 5? what about Windows -- windows 3 or WFW?
there are just too many choices, too many options. the X86 based PC platform is dead. and so is the x86 processor.
this is 1986 for crying out loud. people want stuff that is easy to use. not junk that you have to fiddle around with.
Screw their pledge, just let us root our phones easily. CyanogenMod has treated me better than any carrier or handset maker, and it will never ever come with Carrier IQ: http://www.cyanogenmod.com/blog/cyanogenmod-will-never-have-carrier-iq
They plan Ice Cream Sandwich via CM9 for almost any CM7 (current version of CM) compatible phone they already support, except for really old models like the G1.
I8-D
Owning 30% of the market while only selling two generation models at any one time is hardly a failure for Apple. Considering that there are dozens upon dozens of different Android models it's only natural they'd have more market share.
This has little to do with Google, the exception being for hand sets that Google made themselves. Would you blame MS if HP didn't release Win7 drivers for old printers for example?
which is totally what she said
This is why I always recommend sticking to the google controlled nexus series. google has complete control, carriers or the manufacturers themselves can't even lock it. Its the reference platform for apps and to top it all off, updates come quick.
My Nexus one always had timely updates, it still competes with modern day non-nexus phones and iPhone wasn't even a competitor for what Nexus One offered.
Just upgraded to Galaxy Nexus and its is a good phone, real good.
Would you blame MS if HP didn't release Win7 drivers for old printers for example?
If you want to compare this situation to Microsoft, then yes, Microsoft actually mandates that carriers update their WP7 phones.
They already started, and it didn't change much.
> This has little to do with Google, the exception being for hand sets that Google made themselves. Would you blame MS if HP didn't release Win7 drivers for old printers for example?
That's a *great* question. I was in that situation -- upgraded recently to Win7 and found that my perfectly functional HP scanner wouldn't work at all, ever, on Win7. As a geek, I'm sure there are perfectly good reasons why XP drivers won't work on 7, but as a user it's beyond irritating.
But just on the off chance it's HP's fault, I gave away the scanner to someone who was going to buy an HP scanner (eliminating one sale) and bought an Epson scanner as a replacement (eliminating two sales). So there.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
To be clear: I am *NOT* an Apple fan. In fact, I won't own an iThing... well I have a Mac mini collecting dust but that's all.
Apple CONTROLS its phones. From the beginning, it used its exclusivity with AT&T as a means to assure that AT&T would let them (mostly) have their way with the user experience of the device. And since the variety of the devices are very limited, making updates to the OS of the device is a bit more simple and is user controlled through iTunes. (Can iThings even get OTA updates?)
Android manufacturers and the carriers are otherwise DOING IT WRONG. Between the two, they each blame the other for delays and these delays cause frustration for the users but also end up as additional new sales of new devices which is seemingly the only way to get "updates" these days if at all.
So why do the makers want to delay?
1. take developer time away from "new" things
2. encourage the sale of new devices
So why do carriers want to delay?
1. they want to keep shopping for new and creative ways to resell their customers by adding new bloatware and spying apps
2. encourage the sale of new devices and extended subscriber commitments
Of course they won't admit to any of these reasons but they should be obvious to anyone paying attention.
Um, Verizon blocked Google Wallet, as they are working on a propriety - and no doubt to be a crap and insecure - competing service.
Yes. Thats why Apple release Siri for older phones. Its because they dont want you to buy the latest iProduct.
No, that's because Siri is beta and they want to tune the thing with a reasonable amount of load before they push it out to all iOS5 owners.
I'm sure there's some degree of marketing behind the choice as well, but the fact is that it's a technically sound choice with a good reason behind it as long as Siri eventually makes it to all iOS5 owners.
I expect we'll see that mid-year, though it may not support the 3GS (that may lack the CPU to handle the audio encoding fast enough to get it to the server in a reasonable time).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Can someone tell me if any Android-based phone of that age is still supported by any vendor?
There are none. Most receive their last update before they're even done selling them. The Nexus One was the record holder until it got its last update on Sep 24th of this year - 1.5 years after the original announcement date. If somebody knows of a phone supported longer I'm all ears, but so far Android's best case is far behind Apple's worst case.
I don't mind rooting my phone, but I don't consider the willingness of phone owners to maintain their own phones a substitute for proper vendor support.
Perhaps one of these days somebody will release a virus targeting Froyo and we can watch the world's mobile networks collapse...
jsut for mentioning VLB i think you should get a $500 christmas present
...and iOS 5.0 supports my two-and-a-half year old iPhone 3GS.
Can someone tell me if any Android-based phone of that age is still supported by any vendor? Rail against Apple all you want, but the fact is that iPhones are supported longer than any Android-based phones. It's not iPhone buyers that are compelled to rush to the store to buy the newest model. It's Android-based phone users that are flavor-of-the-week... because they have no choice.
Do those "updates" perform equally well (Cough, iPhone 3) and are all of the features available (cough, Siri) on all of the platforms? If the answer to either question is no, then what is an upgrade besides a change to the text in the version number and perhaps some alternate windowdressing? The fact is that Apple makes it's customers happy by providing updates but the net effect is shockingly similar to what Android users experience: by and large a phone that does what they want it to do.
There is no substance unless there is a point to be made that leaving older devices to go without updates is somehow detrimental to their performance (which there may be, and that is where the argument should originate.) Playing the game of whose updates are more frequent or more visible is really just a pissing match.
an Android phone is almost certainly going to be out of date very quickly and will almost certainly never be upgraded to the latest OS
if you're writing for a general audience, yes. If you're writing for Slashdotters, Cyanogenmod seems like a better recommendation.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I am willing to give Apple some time to roll out its infrastructure to handle the strain of existing iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 users jumping onto Siri's servers, but past experience with vague promises from Apple tends to lead to vapor (again, I must reference the FaceTime protocol, which was incredibly disappointing to me).
But, I am not willing to accept that the iPhone 3GS cannot handle Siri. There is no voice recognition performed on the iPhone itself, except possibly checking for flat noise (nothing spoken, to avoid sending "nothing"), and anything that they could be checking with phone hardware will be minor. This has been proven by the jailbreaking community, similar to how they proved that the iPhone 3G could legitimately not handle multitasking in any way that would be acceptable to most users.
I agree that Siri is a huge marketing draw, but I am not sure that it is too big for Apple to keep it off of older phones. Apple was quite happy to market the iPhone 4S as the phone with Siri, and it definitely helps them sell that phone for more money even though teardowns suggest that the iPhone 4 cost's similar amounts to make. I don't fault them in any way for minimizing costs of their hardware, nor for the price of the phones, which are within the expected range compared to all other phones, but that is all to say that I would only be happily surprised if they choose to release Siri for older iOS 5 phones. I no longer expect it.
Google did not destroy Apple's place in the market. The big loser to Android was Symbian, which was phased out by Nokia and held the top spot when Android came out, not iOS.
You must also keep in mind that all iPhones are high-end smartphones whereas Android powers quite a number of budget devices.
Finally, Google has admitted that 2/3 of its mobile hits come from iOS devices. I think that means a lot more about the platforms' real success than their market shares, and let us not even get started with app store revenues!
Considering that there are dozens upon dozens of different Android models it's only natural they'd have more market share.
There really is no logical causation between having many models and marketshare, no matter how often it is repeated.
If there were, everyone would just release more models.
There are many models of tablets that run non-Apple operating systems. Apple out sells them combined by 2-1.