...So I've got my quad core...dogs nackers....android ran phone in my hand. How long do I have to wait before it runs apps that utilises its full potential? I'll tell you...approx 4 years... There are too many people with inferior handsets that are running the same android software, which if optimised for use on a "quad core" handset, will not function correctly at all.
Would it be fair to say that apps still run quite well on an iPhone 3G? I am unsure why you're now trying to suggest that we all need incredibly powerful devices to run apps on - or even games. Your argument would suggest that everyone must now get an iPhone 4, except - wait - it will take years to get anything that takes advantage of it.
I've overclocked my Milestone to 1.2GHz, but given that it steps up and down as neeeded, it's quite happily running at 125MHz a lot of the time! And I am sure that the iPhone does too - or else the battery would be dead in no time. I overclocked it for the sake of it, it actually runs just fine at 550MHz and that includes 3D games.
We clearly don't need all that power unless we're playing 3D games or something else that requires loads of processing time (I'd like to get some examples). And, this is where Android perhaps falls down at the moment. Not because even an X10 mini running at 600MHz couldn't run 3D games (hint; it can) but because developers are still failing to produce amazing content. For every decent game, there are probably 10 awful ones. I know because I've tried a lot of them (and, so far, not any have required knowing IP addresses or hacking the phone - you just click 'install'). Still - even trying out the awful apps is fun and a great way of occupying your 'dead time'. Every now and then you stumble across something excellent!
However, poor content has ALWAYS been the case since we had Java games for phones on the market long before Apple went into mobile. It's always improving and every big name developer has stated its intention to write for Android. Who wouldn't given the fact the audience will be so much bigger than iOS in a lot less than four years? Apple did allow all sorts of dross on the App Store at the start too, including soundboards, iFart and so on - it's only recently that Steve Jobs has begun to start protecting us from ourselves. Maybe that's a good thing for quality control, but is it good for those who want choice?
Google desperately needs to improve its store, just as Apple has tried to do a few times. At the moment, there's too much dross being shown high up in ratings with obviously fake ratings and comments to boost up the average. But, given how Google always gets things right eventually, you can be sure they will do that soon.
Another big plus, although some developers may disagree, is the ability to buy anything and get a full no quibble refund within 24 hours. Apple doesn't offer this, but has a 'try before you buy' that simply offers a 'lite' version if available - which may not even be anything like the final version you'd get. For once, Google is ahead of the game would you not agree?
Anyway, let's ignore this red herring that the choice of devices is going to affect developers. I do agree that the process is a little more complicated, but there aren't that many different configurations or screen resolutions - and if you look at the PC market where Windows can (and does) run on multiple platforms with different hardware, you know it can be done. What's more, even Apple is going to have to do this with its different processors and screen resolutions should they want to retain any backward compatibility.
