Android Co-Founder: Fragmentation "an Overblown Issue" 289
curtwoodward writes "Sure, developers might pull their hair out trying to keep track of all the versions of the Android operating system scattered across hundreds of millions of mobile devices worldwide. But a co-founder of Android says the OS's fragmentation problem is being blown out of proportion. At an event this week in Boston, Rich Miner — now a partner at Google Ventures — said some level of fragmentation is inevitable with Android's reach and the number of partners in the ecosystem. But things are getting better, he said, and in any case most consumers don't notice the difference: `This is a bit of an overblown issue, frankly.'"
Re:Yeah. (Score:5, Informative)
He never said it wasn't a problem. He simply stated it was overblown - ie, it's an issue, but not as big an issue as people (read: Apple and Microsoft) are making it out to be.
Re:Most don't notice the difference (Score:4, Informative)
Because they have no clue what they are buying. They just wanted a cheap phone than runs apps.
Which is why high end Galaxy S# and HTC One phones sell so well huh?
Remember that a $350 Nexus 4 is in the same category as a $900 Iphone. So in that context, what you say is half true (I'd wager good money that Iphone buyers know less about phones than Android buyers), but a cheaper phone is not a crappier phone (in fact, between the Nexus 4 and the Iphone, you're getting more phone for less money).
To everyone who thinks it is overblown... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:BS (Score:2, Informative)
So, tell me, Mr great programmer, how can I verify that my app will run on every Android device before I release it?
If you tell me that I need to test it on various versions of Android on several devices, I claim that fragmentation indeed is a major problem.
Re:Yeah. (Score:5, Informative)
Thing is, he's not wrong. Most consumers won't notice.
I certainly noticed when Google Chrome would not install on my android 2.3 phone, which LG refuse to provide any further updates for.
In fact Google seem to be the most inclined to produce apps which will only run on the latest version of android and bugger anybody who hasn't thrown out last years tech and bought something new.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: IOS has the same problem (Score:2, Informative)
My exact situation. I have the 1st gen iPod touch and wanted to use it purely for a pocket calorie tracker for my father. Unfortunately after wiping it clean to give to him I hit this problem. The calorie tracking app I use (version available in the app store) won't install on the latest version if the OS for this thing. It is truly worthless to me now.
Stupid.
Re:Yeah. (Score:2, Informative)
Not many.
A lot of Android phones have similar spec's to the Iphone of the same vintage, some have better specs. However few are offered at the same extortionate price point. Even Samsung and HTC flagship phones are $1-200 less, something like the Nexus 4 was half the price.
Re:IOS has the same problem (Score:4, Informative)
Ipod Touch 1st gen came out in 2007, replaced in 2008 with second gen. So you have a 5-6 year old widget that is no longer supported, big whoop.
The truly shameful thing about Android is that you can still buy brand new Android phones sporting 2.3.7 that were will NEVER be offered an upgrade despite being a malware magnet out of the box. Most iOS devices get several major upgrades, for years after they have been replaced, before being put out to pasture.
I have a mix of iPods, iPads, and an Android phone, and frankly I have to say Apple does a darn good job avoiding fragmentation and avoiding the love'em and leave them feeling you get buying an Android widget. Apple is in real danger of being badly undercut thanks to their gouging for RAM and flash memory that has not budged over the time that prices have plummeted, and expectations of soared. I would like an iPhone, but frankly the level of gouging just goes too far for me to stomach.
Re:Yeah. (Score:4, Informative)
You don't understand what is fragmentation. In context of the Android discussion, it's not about what kind of bloatware was installed or not installed, required, or not required. It's about the different versions of Android in use. If you want to target your app at 1/3 of the Android market, you can write towards Android v4.0.
If you want to target your app towards 3/4 of the market, you write towards Android v2.2. If you want to hit higher percentages of the market, you have to go down to earlier versions of Android.
Obviously later versions of Android have features and functionalities you can leverage, improved security, etc. Earlier versions of Android means you have to write those yourself, or just not use that feature.
Compare this to iOS. If you want to hit 99% of the iPhones on the market, you write towards iOS 6.0.
Re:IOS has the same problem (Score:4, Informative)
Two quick statements, and then the rest. First, I agree fully with your comment. Second, I disagree with your subject line entirely, since the OP was describing a completely different problem than the one you're addressing.
I agree that OSes need to be EOL'd and that there's nothing wrong with companies doing so, but that it would be far better if they wouldn't take steps to obsolesce devices before their time by making it more difficult than necessary to continue using a perfectly functional device. That said, wouldn't you agree that there's quite a big difference between EOLing your iPod touch almost two years after it was no longer on sale, and what we see with many Android phones, where they're effectively EOL'd while they're still on sale? That's the sort of problem the OP was talking about, rather than the one you discussed.
Your iPod touch:
Last available for purchase in September 2008
Came with the latest version of iOS at the time of purchase
Capable of running the latest version of iOS until June 2010
Contrast that with T-Mobile's Android offerings [t-mobile.com], all of which are available for sale today, yet only two of them (the Nexus 4 and the Galaxy S4) out of the fourteen listed will be running the latest version of Android when you open the box of your "new" smartphone. Some of them support upgrades, of course, but not all of them, and many of those that do offer upgrades only upgrade as far as 4.1.2, which hasn't been the latest version of Android since last November. I'm sure if I went poking around hard enough, I could probably dig up some 2.3 phones that are still being sold as new today too.
So, yes, while both Android and iOS make it more difficult to use a perfectly functional, older device than it should be, the problem being addressed here is an entirely different one that Android bears.
Well, I can tell you're not an Android developer. (Score:4, Informative)
(I am an Android developer responsible for testing my company's product on dozens of different tablets.)
It's a problem, but one Google has been working at (Score:2, Informative)
- Announced the release of the Android PDK, a preview-esque version of the new OS available to manufacturers before the official release hits source
- Begun de-coupling official Google apps from the OS and therefore from the update cycle (e.g. Google keyboard, IIRC Gmail and Maps, etc)
- From a 'smoke and mirror' perspective, kept the Android codenames the same across Jellybean (4.1 and 4.2)
- Most recently, "updated" Android completely without actually updating it via pushing updates to core apps and services like Play Store, Music player, sync APIs, etc.
- Adding to above: Held off on releasing a numbered Android update to let the natural cycle for replacing handsets to continue (so people with Android 2.1 phones hit the end of their contracts and buy 4.2 phones)
Re:Yeah. (Score:5, Informative)
Your mistake was expecting a relatively young OS to provide you with a codec that could do some pretty unusual stuff. You could bundle your own codec, Android supports native code for performance.