Android set to self destruct?

[dpeco33]

hey guys, did you hear? Microsoft Windows comes in so many different monitor sizes, resolutions, and processor speeds, and OS versions that its only a matter of time before it self destructs to a 0% market share.

I agree with the article, 90%. I do not feel that the competitors should be deterred in making new phones, but the operating system should be updated as Google sends out updates and Google should demand same, if the manufacturers and carriers want to use it.
This way everyone has the latest OS, developers can have easier time developing and like some of you have said, no one feels they purchased a dud three months after it was purchased. Remember...most of us need a TWO Year contract with these carriers to afford these devices.

At least with Computers as you state in your quote above, we can update on Microsoft's network, any OS Updates and upgrades as they come and even update OS from home to professional, for a fee, but the way the carriers and Manufacturers are doing this, we have no choice unless we Root and risk ruining the phones or losing warranty covg.

Also Apple phones all update and as someone said that eventually the older ones will not be able to, but that is OK because by then they will be in for another update after two years and it is worth it for the consumer.

My 2 cents

 

[shadowdude777]

I want to just point out that the reason I feel it's unfair to compare Android to Blackberry and iPhone is that the latter two are OSes designed for a device; there is one manufacturer of the device and they also make the OS. Android, like Windows Mobile, consists of a large base of devices designed for an OS. It's obvious that you're going to get some weaker devices that can't handle everything; that's like complaining that your computer is obsolete. What do you want from them?

That being said, I think Android's development cycle is a bit fast, but hey, that's how this new platform has managed to contend with the long-time players and with iPhone OS in the smartphone industry.

 

[EMSguy]

I agree with the article, 90%. I do not feel that the competitors should be deterred in making new phones, but the operating system should be updated as Google sends out updates and Google should demand same, if the manufacturers and carriers want to use it.
This way everyone has the latest OS, developers can have easier time developing and like some of you have said, no one feels they purchased a dud three months after it was purchased. Remember...most of us need a TWO Year contract with these carriers to afford these devices.

At least with Computers as you state in your quote above, we can update on Microsoft's network, any OS Updates and upgrades as they come and even update OS from home to professional, for a fee, but the way the carriers and Manufacturers are doing this, we have no choice unless we Root and risk ruining the phones or losing warranty covg.

Also Apple phones all update and as someone said that eventually the older ones will not be able to, but that is OK because by then they will be in for another update after two years and it is worth it for the consumer.

My 2 cents

Well uhh, before I fully switched over to Ubuntu (like two months ago) I'd been on windows xp for maaannnnyyy years. I never got my free OTA update to windows 7 courtesy of Microsoft or HP

 

[alostpacket]

I agree with the article, 90%.....

What do you agree with 90%? There was no substance to the article at all, the whole thing was speculation based on ignorance.

Give me one fact from the article that supports his conclusion. Just one.

 

[MikeTyson]

700 minutes talk & text 90 + 30 + 30 = 4 lines with one active droid... I spread this out over the four quarters of the year and every three months I can upgrade to a new device and leave the other three lines with a basic flip phone from the past...

All in all it's 150 per month which helps my addiction to having a shot at the latest devices at a reasonable price... Well worth it to me as I actually need one of the extra lines for business anyhow...

Wont work for all financially, but it's not the worst idea for those who can swing it...

Android has the promise to keep pumping out devices witout really relying on any ONE as the flagship phone...

 

[stevonyc34]

Android for ever! It will continue to grow and develop. Which one will be the first to fall to android? Winmo? Webos? I welcome all the new devices. The majority want a stable device, maybe a nice keyboard, easy access to social network, great multimedia and good phone coverage and the avg joe will be content. The sky is the limit for the green robot. I can't wait to see what the droid 2 will look like.

 

[stevonyc34]

I had a dream...a dream where all android phones could be bought unlocked for $99.98

 

[alostpacket]

I had a dream...a dream where all android phones could be bought unlocked for $99.98

I would like to buy a 2 year contract to your dream

 

[RoyMustang]

You do realize that PCworld is anti-Google. Earlier last week one of their editors lambasted Google for the Buzz fiasco basically stating that the big G was, in essence, an "evil" company.

 

[alostpacket]

They also got caught lying about win7 memory usage last week

 

[andy22]

sorry for this but why the f doesn't everyone root and custom Rom by now? these things can run on the network like an unrooted phone. the development belongs with the people and nobody is stopping us. they aren't blocking rooting.



Sent from my HERO200 using Tapatalk

 

[QrafTee]

hey guys, did you hear? Microsoft Windows comes in so many different monitor sizes, resolutions, and processor speeds, and OS versions that its only a matter of time before it self destructs to a 0% market share.

I think it's more fair to compare Windows Vista to Android. Vista was launched at a time when there were many machines which could not use many of its features (Aero, Silverlight, DX10) so people were getting frustrated. Although a set group had Windows Vista, some could run Aero, some could not, but everyone agreed that it should be available for everyone. Some software worked, some did not... same with some Market Apps; but it wasn't really the OS's fault, it was the hardware and not creating strict standards.

Microsoft wanted to get new adopters, but they also wanted the upgrading market as well so they post some bull about a Windows Vista Home Basic which kills a lot of the whole Vista feel to it. Basically, Android needs to find a way to make the Android experience not drastically different for its entire userbase.

 

[darreno1]

Certainly a bunch of FUD. And no, I had an iPhone 3g and it ran like sh*t compared to the 3gs. If you want the latest and greatest OS, you have to have the hardware to match. Even though the eris or hero can run 2.1, they will not run anywhere as smoothly as a Droid, Moment or Nexus 1 running 2.1. What will happen is the future phones with better hardware will come with the OS to match: 2.1 or above.

Eventually the hardware across the board at every price point will catch up to and surpass the OS and when that happens, Android will become more uniform. Everything will fall into place in due time and as far as I can see, there is no need to rush. Right now people are just impatient, speculative and whiney.

 

[kbayer]

Another article along the same lines... where's this stuff coming from, and who's prompting it?

Motorola Droid: Why It's Already a Loaf of Day-Old Bread - PCWorld

 

[sooper_droid12]

But the N1 was for a different carrier! If Android wants global penetration to beat the iPhone, different phones need to come out for different carriers. And if they have a slightly modded version of Android, so what? As long as the apps all run like they do on 2.0.1, 2.0, 1.6, 1.5, etc., then its all good.

I think the biggest fuel behind these "fragmentation" articles is the fact that someone is mad that their Droid no longer is the top dog. Well, that's evolution and technology evolves quickly. I'm not mad that the N1 has 2.1 and my Droid doesn't. I bought the Droid for what it was, expect upgrades when I can get them until my Droid can no longer handle them and by then my contract runs out and I buy whatever is hot at that moment. I'm not expecting the next iteration of Android OS before anyone else, just on a timely basis.

You see, that's exactly the point:

Apps don't run like they're supposed to on different platforms. OS2.x was supposed to support different screen resolutions, and yet, developers are having to release different iterations of apps in order to play nice with older OS devices. The fragmentation dilemma isn't about DROID not being the top dog; this would be a gross over-simplification of the issue. If that's all you think it is, then I think you're blind to what's actually happening.

Edit: I like the idea someone posted about about those overlays being aftermarket and not shipped with phones. That way, phones can still get updates without waiting for development getting the OS to play nice with a new overlay. The overlays could be refined after the fact while the update can take place.

As mentioned above, about "who cares if more phones go out?" Well, yeah, that works if you're selling dinky $50 phones, not $500 smartphones. Variety for consumers is great, but you're shooting manufacturers in the foot. This is why you're seeing manufacturers pushing things like Sense, MotoBlur and whatever Sony is calling theirs. Unfortunately, with those overlays, you're talking about further delays in getting updates.

The trickle down effect are apps that aren't backwards compatible. So you see, it's not as simple as some people think. Right now, we don't see the grand effect of it because Android is relatively new and there's less than a handful of OS iterations. I foresee Android not being as lucrative a partner in the future than iPhone or even WinPho. Both Apple and MS know how important it is to equipment restrictions and requirements in order to see their OS's succeed. Google doesn't seem to get that.

 

[sooper_droid12]

Certainly a bunch of FUD. And no, I had an iPhone 3g and it ran like sh*t compared to the 3gs. If you want the latest and greatest OS, you have to have the hardware to match. Even though the eris or hero can run 2.1, they will not run anywhere as smoothly as a Droid, Moment or Nexus 1 running 2.1. What will happen is the future phones with better hardware will come with the OS to match: 2.1 or above.

Eventually the hardware across the board at every price point will catch up to and surpass the OS and when that happens, Android will become more uniform. Everything will fall into place in due time and as far as I can see, there is no need to rush. Right now people are just impatient, speculative and whiney.

I agree with this sentiment, but this is why I propose that Google at least update ACROSS THE BOARD all their devices to either 1.6 or 2.1. Instead of the mish-mash of 5 different versions of the OS out there right now.

 

[dpeco33]

Well uhh, before I fully switched over to Ubuntu (like two months ago) I'd been on windows xp for maaannnnyyy years. I never got my free OTA update to windows 7 courtesy of Microsoft or HP

Good Point LOL.

 

[dpeco33]

What do you agree with 90%? There was no substance to the article at all, the whole thing was speculation based on ignorance.

Give me one fact from the article that supports his conclusion. Just one.

Basically the whole article is truth. There is nothing in the article (#'s wise) that needs supporting. It is true that Google is growing very fast, it is true that phones are being left behind when practically new, there is a lot to the article that is true, maybe not something you agree with when he opines about how it will effect Google and or how the OS goes from here on out but hey that is your opinion, not his or mine.

I do not hate Android, love it, that is why I am on this site... just wish that it could somehow be easier to update diff phones that can take it so that we can all enjoy the updates as they come out. There has to be some sort of consistency somehow or it will as he states, in my opinion, fall apart...Like the original Windows OS did.

Some one made a great point about the OS being diff because it was made for more than one phone and one manufacturer, however Google should make it Open, if the OS is used in its as you say Vanilla sense, without adding all the proprietary crap that the manufacturers and carriers put into it, that way, if your phone is not old and has the balls to upgrade, than you can, if not, maybe it is time to get a new phone and upgrade your hardware. At least Google would be enforcing a consistency, that would keep all its users more stable and happy.

I do not know if this is the answer, but it sounds to me that if all its customers and developers are on the same page and happy, the better the OS will grow and prosper.

 

[alostpacket]

Basically the whole article is truth. There is nothing in the article (#'s wise) that needs supporting. It is true that Google is growing very fast, it is true that phones are being left behind when practically new, there is a lot to the article that is true, maybe not something you agree with when he opines about how it will effect Google and or how the OS goes from here on out but hey that is your opinion, not his or mine.

I do not hate Android, love it, that is why I am on this site... just wish that it could somehow be easier to update diff phones that can take it so that we can all enjoy the updates as they come out. There has to be some sort of consistency somehow or it will as he states, in my opinion, fall apart...Like the original Windows OS did.

Some one made a great point about the OS being diff because it was made for more than one phone and one manufacturer, however Google should make it Open, if the OS is used in its as you say Vanilla sense, without adding all the proprietary crap that the manufacturers and carriers put into it, that way, if your phone is not old and has the balls to upgrade, than you can, if not, maybe it is time to get a new phone and upgrade your hardware. At least Google would be enforcing a consistency, that would keep all its users more stable and happy.

I do not know if this is the answer, but it sounds to me that if all its customers and developers are on the same page and happy, the better the OS will grow and prosper.

Sigh. I don't get why you're putting up this wall and not seeing the article for what it is.

Meanwhile, users with first-generation Android devices (running Android 1.6 or earlier) were largely out of luck getting the current Android OS. In 2010, the situation became even murkier.
[\quote]

It's not even two full months into 2010, and now we're "murkier."

Every handset manufacturer/carrier for the major devices has stated or been rumored to be upgrading all the major devices to 2.0 or 2.1. Sony with their X10, Sprint for the Hero, Verizon for the Eris, TMO for the MyTouch3G and G1, Motorola for the Droid and their other Moto-blur device (I forget the name). The only ones I don't know of off the top of my head are the Samsung phones.

There are 3 screen resolutions, two of which are only different in one dimension, and very similar. There are 4 OSes 1.5,1.6, 2.0 and 2.1. It's not a "fractured landscape" by any means.

As a developer familiar with at least some of the differences in the SDK I can tell you they aren't that big and aren't hard to code around. Most everything a dev needs is provided by the 1.5 SDK.

Also how did Windows fall apart again? 20 years of Monopoly level domination of PCs is "falling apart"

It sounds to me like you're just upset you cant update your phone yourself. Which is a valid complaint, but like the article, you are posting non-sequiturs. No of his generalized and often just incorrect assumptions are evidence of an impending fracturing of the OS.


You say it's true that Google is growing fast but how does that lead to ticking tome bomb of self destruction? You say it's bad the manufacturers can customize, but that's just opinion and not evidence of impending implosion. In fact, manufacturer customization has driven adoption and sales. People love the SenseUI. And many have drooled over Sony's Rachael UI.


To be honest I doubt he has even read how Google handles backward compatibility in the various OSes. He just pretends like they never gave it a second thought until he came along.

Anywho, you seem like a good guy but I hope you can take a step back and see this article for what it is. I don't really have the energy nor the time to write more about this FUD.

 

[QrafTee]

There are 3 screen resolutions, two of which are only different in one dimension, and very similar. There are 4 OSes 1.5,1.6, 2.0 and 2.1. It's not a "fractured landscape" by any means.

It is fractured only when one can do something the other doesn't--but should be able to. That's why Windows 2000 and XP co-existed, but when Vista was out it became the black sheep because it fractured OS's. But that's always why XP, Vista, and 7 are in harmony now, a lot of that crap has settled.

There is indeed a divide between the Android OS, but it's not 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, and 2.1... it's mostly 1.5/1.6 and 2.0/2.1 as of now. I'm sure Google will find and maintain a balance so as long as the manufacturers are willing to play along.

 

[Soultics]

Planned/Perceived Obsolescence

 

[alostpacket]

Fractured is just a buzz word though. This is what I've been trying to say. You havent given an significant techniocal detail here except to point to an anology of other software upgrades that had differences.

Obviously there are differences, but calling that "fractured" is sensationalistic hoohaa.

Google has already put thought into it -- there are several long documents with tutorials on how to maintain backwards compatibility and how to degrade gracefully. Any developer worth his salt has read them thoroughly.

I even explained what some of the differences mean in real world terms but you guys keep coming back and saying "nonono man but there are 'fractures!'"

 

[QrafTee]

Planned/Perceived Obsolescence

Did you watch that video on "Stuff" too?

 

[alostpacket]

Planned/Perceived Obsolescence

An interesting concept indeed, but sans proof this is just speculation too. I cant in my 10 years as a developer think of a single time I was asked to withhold features for a later product. Not to say it doesn't happen, but it really is just imaginative speculation at best. For sure companies do set plans on the EOL (end of life) of products though and do their resourcing accordingly.

 

[bbrosen]

An interesting concept indeed, but sans proof this is just speculation too. I cant in my 10 years as a developer think of a single time I was asked to withhold features for a later product. Not to say it doesn't happen, but it really is just imaginative speculation at best. For sure companies do set plans on the EOL (end of life) of products though and do their resourcing accordingly.

well, you can bury your head in the sand, call people whiners or what ever, but the masses, the general public are what makes consumer products rocket to stardom. People do love to customize and personalize, which can be done very easily even with out root on android. But availability of apps is also the next part of the equation, and with new phones coming out with old os levels, people will get frustrated. i deal with the general public, they won't stand for this for long. i realized this early on when i got into android. The general public cannot or will not root their phones. besides when one pays 500.00 for a device one wants to keep the darn thing for awhile, these are not 40.00 nokia bar phones. No one is saying, as far as i can tell upgrades should be free, but they should be available to those who want it. i would be more than willing to pay for them.

there is a natural cycle to electronics that most people come to expect, especially when they are expensive. Yes my pc will be great for 3-4 years, then the hardware will be outrun by the os, that is to be expected.

i was unlucky and got an underpowered hero that cannot multitask very well, even tho the os allows you to multitask. no one is saying everything should be alike, but some standards in hardware would really help this situation.

i expected the os to be on a phone that could actually handle the os, as most of the general public would. geeks who are into this stuff, already knew the hero was under powered. a fickle public can change and move at a whim.

the public sees"android" phone, suzy buys her htc and sally buys her droid, suzy says hey look at this app, sally says what app? i dont have it in the market...yet they bought their phones the same week. these are the things the public, will not like.

i hear a lot about how people don't care about updating the os, but the majority of posts on this forum is those wondering and waiting for 1.6, or 2.0 or 2.1, which tells me it's does matter to people. uneven user experience will hurt android, it will hurt anyone with any product.

these issues are not confusing or bothersome to the geeks, they completely redo the os on their phones anyway, but to the general public, these will be stickler issues.