Eric Schmidt Doesn't Think Android Is Fragmented

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Eric Schmidt Doesn't Think Android Is Fragmented

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday January 12, 2012 @06:49AM from the trial-seperation dept.

adeelarshad82 writes "Eric Schmidt took issue with the idea that the Android mobile operating system is fragmented, arguing that it's a differentiation between devices rather than a fragmentation. The difference, as he explains it, is that differentiation means manufacturers have a choice, they're going to compete on their view of innovation, and try to convince consumers that their innovation is better than somebody elses whereas fragmentation is quite the opposite. Not surprisingly, some company analysts beg to differ, pointing out the ever increasing incompatibilities between OS and apps across different Android devices and other problems with Android."

45 of 431 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by bonch · 2012-01-12 06:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

Manufacturers competing on their "view of innovation"--which apparently means junkware like TouchWiz--is precisely what is fragmenting the platform. Schmidt seems to believe that by reframing it with a feel-good word like innovation, he can successfully claim that it's somehow the opposite of fragmentation. The differentiation and and in-fighting between manufacturers and devices is the fragmentation. Nothing he stated refutes the claim that the platform is fragmented; he's just describing the fragmentation in a different way.
NPD now says that iOS has officially closed the gap with Android in U.S. marketshare since the release of the iPhone 4S, so these issues are having a real effect on the platform. According to NPD's report, 150 Android handsets can't beat three old iPhone models. What's happening here is that Android phones catered to techies and budget buyers, but with the iPhone 3GS now free on contract, Apple now has budget buyers covered--and there are way more of them than there are techies.
1. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by jedidiah · 2012-01-12 06:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I dumped my iPhone for an Android.
  Clearly my use of a phone is too "geeky".
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
2. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by SJHillman · 2012-01-12 06:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I paid $160 for my LG Optimus Slider from Virgin Mobile. For my use, the only thing that works poorly on it compared to an iPhone is NetFlix, which tends to have choppy video. However, it has a physical keyboard, which more than makes up for not being able to watch tiny movies in my opinion. I also find the Android interface to be somewhat more intuitive than IOS (at least in most cases). Also, everything I can't do on my Android phone, I can do on my $180 Nook Color. So for $340, I can do everything I would want with an iPhone and a whole lot more. Having it split between two devices is actually more convenient for me as I take the phone with me everywhere but I rarely use the Nook (mostly for Netflix and books) outside of home.
3. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by hedwards · 2012-01-12 07:05 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  There is no fragmentation problem with Android. It's always been something that Apple fanbois have used to attack Android for being less homogenous. The fact though is that Google provides the tools for developers to handle the variations in screen size and such and in practice developers don't seem to be having too much trouble with the fragmentation issue.
  True early on some features wouldn't be supported on older versions of Android, but the same is true with iOS, Apple adds new features and doesn't necessarily port them to old iPhones.
4. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Baloroth · 2012-01-12 07:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Oh wow shocking, Apple gained sales market share right after releasing a brand new super-hyped phone and lowering their old prices! Android is doomed! DOOOOMED, I tell you!
  Anyways, fragmentation is good for the market. Allows for true competition and drives features. The newest Android phones are far and away more featureful than any iPhone, plus you can choose from any carrier and any range of features you want. I would have liked Google to encourage manufacturers to release more updates to their phones so people didn't get stuck on 2.1 or whatnot, but the fact that most Android programs work on most Android devices is nothing short of amazing when you think about the vast array of different hardware they can contain.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
5. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by tripleevenfall · 2012-01-12 07:10 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  But per the usual misunderstanding on /. , the general public is not geeky. It does not use hacks or cracks, it does not sideload or use custom ROMs. Most don't even upgrade the SD card, or even know that you can.
  The general public picks a phone up and evaluates it, if they evaluate it pre-purchase at all, based on a 1-5 minute poking around on the device. I think the iPhone wins these battles with the average, uninformed consumer because the graphical presentation is slick and the interface is intuitive to the non-techie.
  Some people equate smartphone with iPhone. For those who don't, most of them will buy whatever gives them the cleanest presentation and seems easiest to use. Openness and Google and other geek-factors don't enter into it.
6. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by tripleevenfall · 2012-01-12 07:14 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  My experience has been a little bit different, I used an Android phone for about 2 years and now use an iPhone. I can't name any app that is better on Android. Sometimes they are roughly equivalent, sometimes they aren't, but what is usually the case is that the iOS version is smooth graphically, opens/closes without fits and starts, doesn't creak when interrupted by calls or texts, etc etc.
  A good example is the ESPN Scorecenter app. the iOS version is great. The android version is more simplistic graphically, it doesn't wipe or update as well... for me, sometimes it needed to be killed and restarted to update scores.It works well enough, it's just not as polished.
  It's probably not the developers' fault, I think there is universal agreement that Android is much harder to develop for. This works itself out in app quality.
7. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Missing.Matter · 2012-01-12 07:17 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Only on price though. Android runs terribly on low end smartphones and don't even have the full feature set of a top of the line android phone. Further, they're likely to be abandonded, perpetually running an outdated version of android until you ditch it. With the iPhone, even buying last gen you're getting most of the features of the top of the line. The WP7 Samsung Flash costs .99 on AT&T and offers the same exact user experince as a top of the line WP7 phone. So why is anyone ever choosing low end android phones? Because 1) the carriers are pushing them since they know they don't have to provide expensive upgradde support and will rope customers in for another contract since the phone will never be updated and 2) there's a lot of buzz around "Android" and people think even the low end phones will deliver the same experience, when what they get is a slow, feature-barren, "smart phone" that was abandonded by the manufacturer the second it shipped.
8. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by fightinfilipino · 2012-01-12 07:17 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  i just picked up a Samsung Galaxy S2 skyrocket and a 32gb minisd card for a grand total of US$200. that's a total of 42gb in storage space (the phone has 10gb internal storage), along with a very fast dual core processor and, more important, actual 4g LTE capability.
  in comparison, Apple's 32gb nonexpandable iPhone 4s is $100 more, has a weaker processor, and is stuck with 3g speed.
  i don't consider myself a full android fanboy, but based on these facts alone, you can get MUCH better android devices for far cheaper than a handicapped iPhone.
9. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 07:22 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  The fact though is that Google provides the tools for developers to handle the variations in screen size and such and in practice developers don't seem to be having too much trouble with the fragmentation issue.
  I'm just finishing up my first Android app. It's a simple app, yet several times I've already needed to use reflection to dig around in undocumented APIs or roll my own version of a class included in the framework because of differences between the API versions. I have also found that it is difficult to add functionality to framework classes because Google makes many of the methods either private or final.
10. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by neokushan · 2012-01-12 07:23 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I know plenty of the "general public" who aren't geeky but love Android phones. I know even more that love phones which happen to be Android phones, all former iPhone owners.
  
  --
  +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
11. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 07:32 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Oh sorry, I was busy playing my superior games and using my wider selection of apps, to care that your phone has more numerical specs than mine. Geek bias.
12. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Missing.Matter · 2012-01-12 07:34 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Apple adds new features and doesn't necessarily port them to old iPhones.
  Apple is pretty good about updating their product line to the current OS. True, you're not going to update your original iPhone to iOS5. But you're not going to buy a brand new last gen iPhone 4 or even iPhone 3GS with iOS 3. Same with Windows Phones, they all currently run the latest release of WP7, even if you buy a last gen samsung focus from. However, in the Android world you can buy a brand new Android phone with an OS 2 versions out of date, and that phone will never be upgraded. THAT is the problem. We're not talking about 4 year old phones not getting the latest release. We're talking about brand new phones that are out of date, out of the box. This isn't a fairy tale.
13. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 07:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Yet you will still run into choppiness and various performance issues with that faster processor. I have yet to see an Android system that runs as crisply and smoothly as an iPhone. It's probably due to all the things that can run in the background (crapware + whatever else), on top of the Linux kernel's questionable scheduler, which dogs desktop machines as well. And let's see if you're still running the latest Android firmware a year from know. Even iPhone 3GS's were instantly upgradable to iOS 5 the second that Apple announced it.
14. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by wzinc · 2012-01-12 07:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  With iCloud, my whole 80+ GB collection of music and movies is with me wherever. Phone storage doesn't matter.
15. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by nahdude812 · 2012-01-12 07:42 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  The target demographic for smartphones is geekier than the average public. Most geeks have smartphones, for example. Teenagers and young adults regularly defy the traditional concept of "too geeky" or requiring too much effort for the "average" person, and these same are also among the prime candidates for smart phones.
  Nonetheless, "fragmentation" is a marketing term being bandied about by Apple apologists. It's an excuse to justify a technology monoculture that Apple has established in some corners of the market. Technology monoculture has invariably led to technology stagnation.
  Rather than "fragmentation" being a bad thing, what's actually going on is "innovation," and that's a good thing. People didn't talk about desktop fragmentation in the PC era, people don't talk about console fragmentation when you need specialized controllers to interact with many of today's games.
  This is survival of the fittest. My wife is a complete non-geek. She traded out her iPhone for Android and is eager to ditch her iPad. The sole reason being that she wants to consume content which requires Flash. She's not interested in assertions that her life would be better if only websites would ditch Flash, she's interested that her technology can't do the task she wants it to.
  Technology monoculture is the real problem here. iOS suffers from it, while Android doesn't. Android should wear this term with a badge of pride; they are currently steadfastly half way between steps 2 and 3 (out of 4) in Gandhi's famous quote about winning. They were ignored (Android 1.x era), they were laughed at ("fragmentation"), now they're being fought (Apple v. Samsung for example). Only one more step to go.
  
  --
  Slay a dragon... over lunch!
16. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by bkaul01 · 2012-01-12 07:47 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I agree that the general public is not geeky, but if their purchasing were primarily based on having a slick graphical presentation and intuitive UI, the new Windows Phone should be winning hands-down. Most of the general public, I'd posit, is heavily influenced by Apple's slick marketing, and a large number buy whatever the salesman at the retail store pushes (which is largely based on sales incentives or his own fanboyism), or what their friends and family recommend.
17. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by karolbe · 2012-01-12 07:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Really?? I have Samsung Galaxy S2 and I can't recall any incorrectly working application, and I have downloaded a lot. Guess I am (again *) lucky ;-) (*) - the same is with my Linux PC, in last 2-3 years never had any issue with drivers, non working devices etc.
18. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 07:52 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  My experience has been a little bit different, I used an Android phone for about 2 years and now use an iPhone. I can't name any app that is better on Android....
  Google maps. Navigation specifically. Voice navigation more specifically.
19. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Galestar · 2012-01-12 07:54 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Android actually reduces fragmentation. Could you imagine what would happen without Android? Every phone manufacturer would have its own completely different OS. If Apple MS and RIM threw in the towel today and all switched to Android there would be significantly less fragmentation in the marketplace as a whole.
  
  The argument that Schmidt is making - manufacturers need to be able to differentiate their products. Android allows them to do this without sacrificing interoperability on the scale that Apple/RIM/MS sacrifice it.
  
  You - bonch/Overly-Critical-Guy - live in a closed bubble where all you can see is "Apple good, Android bad". You have blinders on your eyes. Please either take them off or stop posting.
  
  --
  AccountKiller
20. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by SplashMyBandit · 2012-01-12 07:54 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I'm just finishing up my first Android app. It's a simple app, yet several times I've already needed to use reflection to dig around in undocumented APIs or roll my own version of a class included in the framework because of differences between the API versions. I have also found that it is difficult to add functionality to framework classes because Google makes many of the methods either private or final.
  Good luck with that app. Yes, unfortunately many Java developers think that good encapsulation means making a lot of stuff private or final. Actually what it often means is that the code is not fit for re-use, you end up re-writing code to do the same stuff that in a more open way and use that. IMHO if you are a Java developer that automatically defaults to private and final methods, forces the use of singletons or factories instead of trying to make POJO JavaBeans which can then be used as singletons (or as ordinary objects, as the need arises) then you ought to consider yourself an orthodox developer that is probably not like by anyone forced to re-use your code.
  Part of the problem is the attempt of Java library writers to try and protect the user from themselves. I used to do this but after using so many other libraries over the years I now think this is misguided. Now I try and make POJOs and POJO services whereever I can and make sure I properly Javadoc what needs to happen and also check the preconditions and arguments of all method calls. IMHO I find that in later stages of a project I have access to all sorts of information I need, rather than having to continually go back and publish formerly private methods due to inflexible and closed interfaces. A little bit of encapsulation is good (avoid non-final public members for sure) but that does not mean encapsulating yourself into a straightjacket is good either
  Sorry for getting a bit off-topic there, but I hear your pain with the currently 'orthodox' way that Google close their framework off. If there are any Java devs reading out there - keep it POJO if you can and unless you have an extremely good reason for using a private method you should make it public (which also helps unit testing too). And ffs write *meaningful* Javadoc about what can and can't cause usage of the class to fail (eg. preconditions, what argument values are invalid etc).
21. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Galestar · 2012-01-12 07:58 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  you're doing it wrong
  
  --
  AccountKiller
22. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by wzinc · 2012-01-12 08:11 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Nope, it's free for iTMS purchases and $25/yr for all else. I've never been anywhere AT&T didn't have a good signal, or I can just hit the cache button if I'm going on a plane. As for the EULA, never happened and couldn't care less. I don't do illegal music, so I have nothing to hide. The only reason Apple would change anything in a negative way is if the music industry forced them, such the old limits to five devices or ten burns of a playlist. Apple has been fighting for the consumer for a long time.
23. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by jo_ham · 2012-01-12 08:16 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  And I have a few that went the other way - they had Android and decided they didn't like it and went to iPhone. One of them was a high-spec Android owner, the other had a crappy Android phone. One moved because he preferred iOS, the other (with the crappy handset) really doesn't like Apple but the device he had was beyond frustrating so he got a 4S.
  I asked him why he didn't go for a Galaxy S II or similar and he said he was just fed up with how bad the experience was.
  I also know people who bought Galaxy S's (esses?!) and love them.
  I don't think it's necessary to be geeky to appreciate Android phones, but it certainly doesn't hurt given what I've seen while using them (and I've tried a whole gamut from really poor to really good).
24. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by jo_ham · 2012-01-12 08:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Nonetheless, "fragmentation" is a marketing term being bandied about by Apple apologists.
  That's a dangerous assertion to make, and smacks of putting your fingers in your ears and saying "la la not listening".
  Android has some absolutely stellar features and plus points but it also has downsides, and to just attempt to "shush" them by claiming it's just Apple apologists does nothing to help Android.
  Fragmentation is a problem, and one created by one of the major benefits of Android - the wider selection of hardware that it will run on. iOS minimised the problem by limited the number of devices that developers need to target and test against, which gives you the benefit that apps in the store really only need a couple of branches: iPhone or iPad > Pick one of a few options regarding model. It has the downside of limited model selection compared to Android.
  Don't get me wrong, I think Android is in the ascendency and everyone is the better for it (including iOS users), but ignoring constructive criticism is not a sensible way to go about things.
  Your wife is also going to be disappointed with whatever tablet she gets if she wants to watch flash content, since Adobe pulled the plug on it.
25. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by neokushan · 2012-01-12 08:29 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  That's a problem with Android - there are a LOT of sub-par devices out there and people that start off at the low-end are often left with a bitter taste. At least with iOS, the devices are reasonably capable, even the older models. I dare say that the experience your friend with the crappy device had would have been much improved just by moving to a higher-specced android phone, but the important thing is that they're happy.
  I'm going to be honest - I'm a big Android fan, but I am a geek through and through. I rooted my phone within a week of getting it and installed a custom ROM the next day - that alone was tonnes of fun for me and a plus to the Android experience. However, when family and friends ask which phone they should get, I'll never say "Get Android, it's da bomb!" partly because I know the reasons I like Android are reasons they'll hate it and also because I don't want yet another device to support. However, I will recommend devices that meet their needs and there's almost always an Android that fits in there, but I'll always say "Go into a store and play with it, ONLY get it if you like it". If anyone buys a phone just because its cheap or because people rave about it, yet end up not liking it, it's really their own fault for not trying before buying.
  
  --
  +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
26. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by edmicman · 2012-01-12 08:35 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Pretty much any Google app is better on Android. The way I've viewed it, when recommending phones to people, is that it depends on which non-phone camp you're in. I don't use iTunes, my email is Gmail, news reader is Google News, etc. My music is mostly from Amazon and stored in a folder structure but any major player is able to read the tags. And I've been dabbling in Google Music lately anyway. So Android gives me the best Google experience. The Google+ app is always going to get Android updates and features first, as is most any other app by Google. And like you mentioned, Google maps navigation is top notch. However, if someone has their life in iTunes and would love to have that seamlessly carry over to their phone. I'll tell them they might prefer the iPhone. For what it's worth, my wife just upgraded from a BB Storm 2 to an iPhone 4S. It was hardly a seamless upgrade and she spent the first few days complaining about how much of a pain it was to set up the new phone and make it do what she wanted. She even said at one point that it was easier to set up the BB than the iPhone! Ultimately I don't think there's that much of a difference anymore either. Both are a phone with a button and a bunch of app icons. Both get you on the web. Both have Facebook. However I've yet to still see anything really that the iPhone does better than my Galaxy Nexus.
27. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Sancho · 2012-01-12 09:17 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I'm not the AC to whom you replied, but I did the same thing s/he did. Had an iPhone, switched to Android, and switched to a 4s as soon as my contract was up.
  The reasons for moving to Android were openness and ability to side-load. It turned out, these weren't that big a deal.
  First of all, ideologically, Android isn't really open for me. It's open in the same way that Tivo is open. Parts are based on Linux, other parts are new. Some of it is available to me, some of it isn't. But what matters (to me) is that I can't just download the source, compile it, and end up with a working build. At BEST, with a lot of work, I can get something on my phone which resembles the original (minus e.g. Google's apps, which are half of the reason to get an Android phone to begin with.) At worst, the phone has a locked bootloader, and you can't put a new ROM on there.
  If my two choices are both effectively closed, then the openness of the platform is irrelevant.
  I also found that I never cared to sideload. It wasn't difficult to do--I just never had a reason to. And all of the apps I had on my phone would have gone through the Apple App Store approval process--I wasn't doing anything really off the wall. So I had no need to sideload.
  Then there's the issue of upgradeability. I figure that my Android phone would have been vulnerable to known exploits for about 1/4 of the contract. That's due to the carrier/manufacturer failing to update in a timely manner. The build process is fairly onerous, so I wasn't going to do it myself. Going with Cyanogen, I got updates faster. But I don't want to have to do that. Apple updates very old hardware to new OSs. Their time-to-fix vulnerabilities isn't much (if any) worse than Cyanogen.
  So at the end of the day, I had to decide based on features. Both Android and iOS do what I want them to, but iOS does it cleaner and smoother.
28. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by Knuckles · 2012-01-12 09:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You don't? Merriam-Webster sees it differently:
  Definition of CONSUME
  transitive verb
  1: to do away with completely : destroy (fire consumed several buildings)
  2 a: to spend wastefully : squander
  2 b: use up (writing consumed much of his time)
  3 a: to eat or drink especially in great quantity (consumed several bags of pretzels)
  3 b: to enjoy avidly : devour (mysteries, which she consumes for fun — E. R. Lipson)
  4: to engage fully : engross (consumed with curiosity)
  5: to utilize as a customer (consume goods and services)
  intransitive verb
  1: to waste or burn away: perish
  2: to utilize economic goods
  But be that as it may, the original complainer didn't seem to be annoyed by the term "consumed", but by the "content which requires flash" construction; else his alternative suggestions would probably have been along the lines of "wants to watch content which requires Flash".
  
  --
  "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
29. Re:Eric Schmidt, master of non-answers by SplashMyBandit · 2012-01-12 12:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If you are not documenting and validating the input methods of your methods (regardless of whether they are public or private) then you are making a colossal mistake. How do you know when the maintainer who comes after you is going to refactor the class; answer: you don't. If you are not validating your inputs and thinking out the overall object state when you first write the method just because you're too lazy to then no wonder people like myself are forced to re-invent the code people like you write. I *hate* re-implementing code that other people have done, but it turns out that people that don't design for re-use by others (that is, hide methods that are required to extend functionality while maintaining invariant conditions) are the majority and mistake the contrived examples given in textbooks (showing you how to hide *critical* methods) as examples take this as what should be done for *all* classes.
  You are welcome to think I'm full of it. Like I said, I used to think as you do, but with a lot more experience of using other's code I realized how unfriendly this is for third-party devs trying to use your code (who will need to re-use it in ways you never thought of - thanks to their particular requirements). For example, just try extending JavaMail to allow to arbitrarily muck around with MIME mail parts and nest them as you see fit. Turns out the methods you need to do that are all implemented but hidden away, yet looking at the source (thank goodness I had access to it - not always the case) there was no good reason for hiding it away that I could see, apart from it being 'orthodoxy' (which means the author never thought about it too hard, as they probably never had to try using his own code while trying not to access the source, as a user would try to do). In the end I had to wastefully re-write a chunk of Javamail for the clients use. This kind of crap is why 'Not Invented Here' is so prevalent - because orthodox Java development as promoted by the textbooks and circuit speakers goes too far so as to make encapsulation a straightjacket. Some encapsulation is good, but too much is worse than too little, if you know what you are doing (as most professional Java devs do these days - which is why it is so frustrating). Basically I see the excessive hiding of information as an unhelpful 'denial of service' by the author - maybe because they are too damned lazy to document the method, validate its inputs, or test it in isolation (of course getter/setters [accessors/mutators] don't need this level of work), and it sucks when I have to re-implement what they did just because they unnecessarily closed off a few very helpful methods. I'd bet you money that if you've been developing for a while you've had this yourself. One last thing, when developing a class I believe you should always be thinking of how the class could be used in a stand-alone fashion (as any Java Bean can be) without the rest of the machinery of your particular application. The corollary is that the smaller the dependencies (example, choose JRE standard classes like java.util.logging over third party libraries) the easier it is for other people to use. Most Java developers don't try to minimize their library dependencies and think whether each library contributes enough to justify the extra weight, but they should. This is why some small Java programs come with hundreds of extra JAR libraries, some of which have very tenuous utility for the application (and sometimes a single class is used from a library, which brings in a raft of other libraries, when a simple implementation of the simple class would have saved the dependency mire).
  I understand what you are saying. I just happen to disagree that methods should be hidden by default. With proper documentation and unit test examples for client developers to follow (you do unit test, don't you?) then trying to 'protect the developer from themselves by hiding functionality' becomes unnecessary - which gives the client more freedom to use more of your classes, and therefore the client
Just playing with words by SharkLaser · 2012-01-12 06:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

The difference, as he explains it, is that differentiation means manufacturers have a choice, they're going to compete on their view of innovation, and try to convince consumers that their innovation is better than somebody elses whereas fragmentation is quite the opposite.
How is that different, and how is fragmentation quite the opposite? It's not. Fragmentation on Android is real problem. Of course Eric Schmidt is going to say it's not a problem, or that it doesn't even exist. Companies always deny problems. It's not a bug, it's a feature!
1. Re:Just playing with words by jedidiah · 2012-01-12 06:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  What's a problem exactly? How is that different than any other platform that has diverse hardware and different OS release levels applied to it?
  It makes for some sensational rhetoric but seems to be less meaningful in practice.
  I can't play the latest and greatest CPU/GPU crushing game on an ION but no one seems to think that's such a great tragedy.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
2. Re:Just playing with words by Troed · 2012-01-12 07:06 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Well, the wordplay is correct. You could also say that the mobile market is fragmented between iOS and Android, yet we call that differentiation and innovation.
  After all - we could create a government mandate that all computers have to be x86 based - that would've stopped a lot of fragmentation. Would it have created a better world?
  
  --
  it's in my head
3. Re:Just playing with words by hedwards · 2012-01-12 07:08 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Except that Google provides developers with tools for managing that and I'm sure that there's a list of safe features to use as well. The typical people making a big deal out of fragmentation are Apple Fanbois that can't imagine how an OS could exist where all devices aren't identical.
  I haven't personally found that I wanted to use an App that wasn't available for my particular handset but was for other Android handsets. I doubt very much that I'm alone, at least when it comes to folks that waited until the market got really going good.
4. Re:Just playing with words by Missing.Matter · 2012-01-12 07:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It might not be different, but it is a bad thing and consumers do suffer. Consumers go into a cellphone store and they buy an android phone, thinking they're buying into a certain level of quality or experience. But Android runs on some pretty craptacular phones and tablets these days. It's a complete crap shoot as to what kind of specifications and capabilities any given android phone has. Contrast this with the iPhone. As a consumer you know exactly what you're getting even if it's a last gen phone. Contrast this with Windows Phone. Even if you buy the lowest end windows phone or a last gen phone, it's going to have the same exact capabilities as the top of the line.
Member of Executive Team... by jkyrlach · 2012-01-12 06:51 · Score: 4, Funny

put's positive spin on a potentially negative product quality. Film at 11.
Shocked by Overly+Critical+Guy · 2012-01-12 06:53 · Score: 4, Funny

Totally shocked that the CEO of the company that licenses Android insists that it's not fragmented. Could we also get China's opinion on internet censorship or Rush Limbaugh's thoughts on Obama?

--
"Sufferin' succotash."
1. Re:Shocked by symbolset · 2012-01-12 07:23 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  His role used to be "world's most expensive babysitter" but the kids had already grown up.
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
Eric Schmidt: the New Google Information Minister by mveloso · 2012-01-12 06:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

In the footsteps of Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf comes Eric Schmidt:
"No, what you are seeing is not fragmentation, it's differentiation!"
"Google search plus your World is not favoring Google+ results - it's just reranking them more appropriately!"
Android reduces fragmentation by danbob999 · 2012-01-12 07:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

As I said in a previous discussion, Android reduces fragmentation.
The main fragmentation that interest developers is the one between platforms, not within a platform. If Apple and RIM both switched to Android, it would be much easier to develop for mobile devices. They add a lot of fragmentation by continuing to push their proprietary platform. Google actually removes fragmentation by giving away for free an OS that anyone can use. There would be much more fragmentation in the mobile world if HTC, Motorola, Sony, Samsung and LG all pushed their own OS like Apple and RIM are doing.
fragmentation not a problem by khipu · 2012-01-12 07:17 · Score: 5, Interesting

Most apps work fine across all common Android versions; the only ones that don't are those that require functionality that just wasn't available on earlier devices. Most of the so-called "fragmentation" is things like manufacturer-specific apps and launchers. Those do exactly what Google says they do: they allow manufacturers to differentiate themselves from one another. That may not be a good thing (I prefer "pure" Android), but it isn't a problem.
I think a lot of the complaints from developers about fragmentation is complaints from iOS developers, who are used to an unusually rigid level of constraints across devices and have developed bad coding practices (like hard-coding coordinates and layouts etc.) because of it.
Marketing by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 07:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you are afflicted with bad press, argue the semantics.
Since it's technical stuff, nobody but the geeks are going to understand, and nobody listens to the geeks.
It's not the apps, it's the OS by Superken7 · 2012-01-12 07:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

Most apps run well on every android version thanks to the design of API cross-compatibility (I have experienced this myself, being an early android developer).
However, I don't think you can avoid the fact that the OS itself is fragmented when your OS takes 6 months to a full year to be available on the majority of android handsets.
In addition, has Mr. Schmid had a look at this chart, put up by google themselves?
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
It reads OS fragmentation all over it! And this is PRECISELY what pisses many (geek) users off, that they can't get the latest and greatest or that new phones come to market being outdated!
1. Re:It's not the apps, it's the OS by brainzach · 2012-01-12 07:36 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Windows machines are heavily fragmented between Windows 7 XP and Vista. It will just get worst when Windows 8 comes out.
  The problem isn't fragmentation. It is the lack of OS updates.
Re:Fragmentation=Doom by Fahrvergnuugen · 2012-01-12 08:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is the mother of all failed analogies. All of the devices you mentioned are interoperable and standardized in very important ways. Why do you think all Ryobi batteries are interchangeable? Why do you think all cars have the same basic layout and conform to the laws of the land? Why do all tv sets have the same basic standardized ports and display the same basic standardized signal? Why does just about any thermostat work with just about any furnace?
As an iOS developer, Apple has made it really easy for me to write code once and I know I only have to test it on about 3 devices. From there I know my addressable market is hundreds of millions of devices.
As a consumer I have confidence that when I buy a new iPhone in 2 years, all the apps I pay for today will work in the future. I don't hesitate about making the investment because I know it can be long term. And I don't have to go setup my phone from scratch either.

--
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!