Slashdot Mirror
Google Trying New Strategy to Fix Fragmentation
CWmike writes "Google announced a new version of Android this week with some impressive new features, but it's unclear if it's done enough to solve a problem that has dogged its mobile OS: fragmentation. Even as it announced the imminent launch of Android 4.1, or Jelly Bean, the majority of users are still running Gingerbread, which is three major releases behind. According to Google's own figures, just 7 percent are running the current version, Ice Cream Sandwich, which launched last October. That means apps that tap into the latest innovations in the OS aren't available to most Android users. It also means developers, the lifeblood of the platform, are forced to test their apps across multiple devices and multiple versions of the OS. So when Google's Hugo Barra announced a Platform Developer Kit during the opening keynote at I/O this week, the news was greeted with applause. The PDK will provide Android phone makers with a preview version of upcoming Android releases, making it easier for them to get the latest software in their new phones. But is the PDK enough to secure for developers the single user experience for big numbers of Android users that developers crave? In a 'fireside chat' with the Android team, the packed house of developers had more questions about OS fragmentation than Google had answers."
...enabling users to upgrade the devices themselves? And actually forcing all carriers to open source everything?
The PDK does address an issue that Google shouldn't have made an issue to begin with - manufacturers actually getting some lead time. But it doesn't address the issue of why Gingerbread itself is still such a big chunk of the market.
ICS simply can't run on budget Android devices. The Android makers that are making money (Samsung) are targeting a much wider market then just the high end subsidized North American market. Samsung is able to turn a profit because they're spreading their costs over a much wider net with both mid range phones like the Ace line and a lot of super-low end ones (Y, Mini, Pocket) that compete directly with feature phones and in emerging markets. ICS is never going to run on those and Samsung and others won't try - they're still releasing brand new phones, 8 months later, running Gingerbread with no hope for an upgrade.
Android will continue to be 'fragmented' between Gingerbread and whatever the latest and greatest is for a long time, at least as long as the gulf exists between heavily carrier subsized phones in a few countries (allowing iPhones, Samsung Galaxy Ss and HTC One Xs to sell in any quantity) and full cost phones in other countries where (Gingerbread) Android's price point is the biggest selling point against more expensive smart phones and increasingly identically priced feature phones.
Fragmentation has been getting less and less of an issue for Android over time, it's a lot more complex than Apples presentations would have you believe.
The first issue is that a lot of features announced as part of new Android releases are actually new features of the apps, and those apps are often backported to old OS releases and released through the Play store. For instance, basically any feature added to Maps becomes available all the way back to at least Gingerbread, and I think also Froyo. Voice search, upgraded Gmail apps, upgraded YouTube apps, new versions of the Play app etc, all backported. Apple tends to announce new app features as part of new iOS releases, and then remove them from the "upgrade" distributed to old devices. Therefore you can be running a new iOS or an old Android yet have the same or better features!
So what about from a developer perspective? Well, here too the issue is more complicated than it looks. A lot of the new APIs that are "pure software" have also been backported through compatibility libraries. These are drop-in libraries you include with your app download that provide the API on older phones that don't have them natively. The APIs that remain are often hardware oriented and wouldn't be available on older iPhones either.
The final issue is upgrades that aren't. I used to think that OS upgrades on a phone were a no-brainer and if you didn't get them, you got screwed. Since then I've seen a few things that changed my mind. One is that manufacturers including Apple have sometimes (not always) released updates for old devices that can't really keep up and which seriously degrade performance. Typically you can't go back, so that's a problem. The upcoming iOS 6 might be seen as a downgrade on the Maps front as well.
Another is that the Gingerbread to ICS was a huge change in user interface - for the better, I think - but time and time again the software business has learned that some users just don't want big UI changes, period. I'm pretty sure if every Gingerbread device became Jellybean tomorrow, a lot of Slashdot readers would rejoice and a lot of our friends/relatives/etc would hate Android with a passionate fire, just because it's a big change that would take them by surprise. Apple has largely avoided this problem by not making any big UI changes over the iPhones lifetime. You could argue they got it right first time, I guess ;)
The most important reason is you'd riot if your laptop couldn't be upgraded, but the carrier business model depends on you signing a new 2 year contract in exchange for a new "free" phone... with upgraded software.
If the vast majority of people were only able to buy laptops via their ISP, their ISP would use upgrades as a lever to force 2 year contracts, just like cell phone operators.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
You're an idiot that has failed to understand the point of Android. Google does have certain mandates to let you Google-certify a device, that is load the Android Market (Google Play) and apps (Gmail, etc.) onto it. If you don't want Google certification you can still run Android and do whatever you want with it, but even then the Google mandates are more to ensure quality rather than consistency.
Google's ethos is that they want people to innovate and do things differently. Google APPROVES of the custom-UI's like Sense and TouchWiz and according to the guy who actually designed ICS
Less requirements means more innovation and more diversification. Otherwise you just end up with 5 phones that are all the same.
Yes, this comes at a cost - the Changes to Android's system need to be ported over to the various custom skins and that takes time, but that's what Google is focusing on now rather than just giving up and making everyone do the same thing.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
I don't know if open sourcing everything is necessary.
If SONY wants their experia UI, HTC wants their Sense, Samsung wants whatever theirs is called, then I'd be fine with them keeping that locked up as tight as they want.
But when they add a piece of hardware that is not familiar from other devices, open up the interface to that hardware.
Right now I could put CyanogenMod on mine, but the FM radio wouldn't work, the camera wouldn't work, and mobile data wouldn't work. Pass.
But that's not the CyanogenMod devs fault - they have to work with what's available, and the stock Android rom doesn't know what to do with the hardware there either.
If only the manufacturer opened up the interfaces, then those devs could easily build bridge software.
As it is, I opted to go with another rom that's based on the manufacturer's official rom binaries. That's not gonna fly for getting ICS or JB on there, though.
That said, I'm happy with it as it is - some setcpu and link2sd sprinkled on top and off it goes. It'll never be a Galaxy SIII - but then, a Galaxy SII will never be a Galaxy SIII either.
You know that Android vendor you bought Google? Motorola Mobility.
Certain phones are still stuck on 2.x because *your company* won't update them. Less than 2 year old (24 month contract) phones are stuck on froyo - e.g Defy.
Providing an unlocked bootloader so the community (e.g. cyanogenmod) can update them to Jellybean would be a good sign.
And by "old," you mean 18 months. It's a significant problem for those of us living in Canada, where 3 year contracts are the norm. By the time the contract is half over, your phone is no longer supported.
If you begin with "you are an idiot", you have already lost the argument.
But 99% don't give a crap.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Thats not even the worst of it. Add a phone to an existing account, new 2 year contract. Drop a phone, new 2 year contract. Change your plan, even to add more services, new 2 year contract. Probably next step is if you call for support, you have to sign a new 2 year contract.
Maybe if upgrades were linked to a new 2 year contract the carriers would take upgrading more seriously. Of course people would riot, but then again the average sheep doesnt seem to complain about these abuses any more than they complain about dropped calls, low data rates, and piss-poor call quality. Im dumbfounded that no one has seriously sued any of the carriers over failure to support existing contracted customers with sufficient towers and software updates.
I have an iPhone, and I don't have a hard time believing 80% of users would update.
Well, hard time believing it or not, the simple fact is, the actual rate of upgrade is a good bit lower--probably around 50-60%.
That number will change now that OTA updates were put into iOS. The majority of those who don't upgrade will be because they never connect their phone to their computer. Now you don't need to do that to update it, and it will still periodically check for you, so there will be an even larger percentage using the current version of the OS in the future.