I was reading around it is seems the vibe going around is that Honeycomb may only be released for tablets.
http://www.tabletpcreview.com/default.asp?newsID=1906&news=google+android+os+honeycomb+tablets
It seems that the phones will stay with 2.x right now and
Tablets will be on 3.X
I guess there is even a leak that version 2.4 will be called ice cream?
They say down the line they plan on merging both OS's and all phones and tablets will run on the same. But until then...
Just found that interesting.
copc said:
I was reading around it is seems the vibe going around is that Honeycomb may only be released for tablets.
http://www.tabletpcreview.com/default.asp?newsID=1906&news=google+android+os+honeycomb+tablets
It seems that the phones will stay with 2.x right now and
Tablets will be on 3.X
I guess there is even a leak that version 2.4 will be called ice cream?
They say down the line they plan on merging both OS's and all phones and tablets will run on the same. But until then...
Just found that interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm seeing conflicting 'news' all over the place about this. I need to find a source I was just reading earlier with the lead engineer stating that it will be on phones. I think the confusion is in the fact that it's primarily catering to bigger screens and thus tablets as a focus - but I feel that initially it will be introduced on smartphones at the same time as tablets....meaning, it's not like the LG phone X released on July 10 will come with Android 2.3 and the LG tablet X released on July 5 will come with Honeycomb. It's a situation where they're optimizing the code for dual core cpus and bigger screens and modem-less devices and that pans out to seeming as if phones are left behind, but it's not so. Will look for what I read earlier.
Update:
these don't look familiar, but they work.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17642/android_honeycomb_smartphones
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/07/exclusive-interview-googles-matias-duarte-talks-honeycomb-tab/
Bunch of conflicting stuff. Perhaps by design, since Android may be battling inside in regards to keeping one OS platform or maintaing two now? I see no practical way to maintain one.
My guess is we will see two "platforms", kind of like iPhone & iPad. Similar guts, but different specific focus for each. JMO.
The other option is to have one really big a55 rom with both. Quite a few 512mb roms used on devices that would choke. Space is already cramped on some current 2.2 devices.
rushless said:
Bunch of conflicting stuff. Perhaps by design, since Android may be battling inside in regards to keeping one OS platform or maintaing two now? I see no practical way to maintain one.
My guess is we will see two "platforms", kind of like iPhone & iPad. Similar guts, but different specific focus for each. JMO.
The other option is to have one really big a55 rom with both. Quite a few 512mb roms used on devices that would choke. Space is already cramped on some current 2.2 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is my assumption also. I thought it was smart that Google split the OS's up because right now I don't see a big distinction between tablets and smartphones except for the size of the screen. I think Apple will eventually have a tablet specific iOS.
rushless said:
Bunch of conflicting stuff. Perhaps by design, since Android may be battling inside in regards to keeping one OS platform or maintaing two now? I see no practical way to maintain one.
My guess is we will see two "platforms", kind of like iPhone & iPad. Similar guts, but different specific focus for each. JMO.
The other option is to have one really big a55 rom with both. Quite a few 512mb roms used on devices that would choke. Space is already cramped on some current 2.2 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not so sure. I mean, I agree with you, but in a different way. Obviously mid-low to low end devices that are running with 1GB of storage or less would be left behind so to speak, sooner than later. I mean, I think most people understand that you get what you pay for. You buy a smartphone for 50 dollars on contract vs. those going for 199 then you may lose out at some point. Most of the mid-high to higher end Android devices since all the way back to June of last year are using 2GB+ internal storage which means the possibility is there to use bigger ROMs if necessary. We still can't account for 2GB of ROM in our newer HTC phones despite being blessed with 4GB.
If Android does indeed fragment at 2.3, I'd certainly have no problem with that - what I def. don't want to see is Android 3.0 and then 2.4, 2.5, etc for phones. I'd honestly rather they rename a separately focussed OS something else, like Cyborg...lol. Let 3.0 come and be the uniting point for any and all devices that can run it well, and move up from there. And let the others work with 2.3.
I want Android for early 2010 and older (depending on CPU and storage of course) to be the breaking point. I'm not talking about phones with 1Ghz CPUs and 8GB on board, I'm talking stuff with 512MB ROM and 600Mhz CPUs for example, to cut off at that point - so there's no zero confusion.
Then, I want anything released in 2011, be it low end or not, to support the next clean generation of Android...so, Honeycomb, Ice Cream, Jello, whatever.
People are talking about how apps need to be optimized for bigger screens and it requires separate code because 'stretching' doesn't work all the time. I agree, but I don't think it's worthwhile to have separate apps. 1 app that detects a screen size and 'changes' to match would do, no? Maybe it's possible with honeycomb
So, as I mentioned I do agree in that there are somewhat 2 platforms, in a way. But I disagree about each focusing on something different like iPad and iPhone apps...the only capacity in which I'd like to see them diverge is have 2.3 go to the phones that are more or less obsolete because of space or cpu constraints, and then honeycomb+ come to everything both tablet and phone.
from what I read, that is why they are saying honeycomb is not coming to the phones. all of the graphics would be too small, as it is designed for larger screens.
I guess it is all guessing as only Google knows.
I just read this article, a good eye opener for those craving for ICS
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394929,00.asp
Google needs to look to Microsoft as an example of how to get updates right. Compared to the grinding misery of the Android non-update schedule, Microsoft's transition from Windows Phone 7 to Mango is going pretty smoothly.
Like Google, Microsoft has to deal with different OEMs and get its software approved by carriers. Like Google, Microsoft has to deal with different form factors—phones with physical keyboards and without, for instance.
Yes, Apple gets it right too, but that's a little boring; Apple has only one OEM (itself) and a handful of models, so it's much easier to push out updates to iPhones and iPads.
Earlier this year, Google and its OEMs formed a consortium to pledge to deliver prompt updates, but absolutely zero concrete work has come out of that group. Every single U.S. Windows Phone will update to Mango within weeks. Two-year-old iPhones can get iOS 5. But owners of Android phones and tablets just a few months old have no clue when, or whether their gadgets will get Ice Cream Sandwich (or for that matter, sometimes still even Gingerbread.)
Microsoft keeps its Windows Phone line down to one screen resolution and chipset, and doesn't allow manufacturers to skin the OS. I don't want to see Google take on the first requirement, as competition between chip manufacturers has been a major force driving Android's advances. But even if one chipset at a time got Android updates, it would still be a major step forward.
If manufacturer skins are really stopping updates, it may finally be time for Google to find a way to punish OEMs that can't keep up with the pace of change. Google likes to trumpet its openy-ness, but the company has always blessed and punished OEMs by giving or withholding the Android Market and Gmail apps that are necessary to have a decent Android device. Google needs to set a time limit for OEMs to implement changes.
Ice Cream Sandwich looks great. So when can we get it, how can we find apps for it, and how can app developers address the widest variety of Android devices easily? That's what Google needs to answer clearly and concisely.
and it made me think alot.
I'm an android fan, but i feel this author's opinion is quite true.
whats the point of having a good and new OS but its just available on a over priced nexus phone?
android updates are slow (i mean around 6 months or probably never). and silly manufacturers are further delaying it by their custom UI. This is just sad sad news for android.
i better stop reading news about ICS, just to make myself less miserable.
in my country, malaysia, the sgs2 is still at 2.3.3. which is another reason to forget about the ICS.
I agree, that's probably the biggest stumbling block of Android. When Apple fanboys say, "When Apple releases iOS 5, most iPhones (3GS onwards) can join in the party immediately. With Android, you have to wait and you might not even get the update at all", I have no response to that, because they are right.
One thing though, Microsoft controls the hardware specs of WP7 phones very closely. Sure there's differences here and there, but not as far reaching as a Galaxy 3 vs a Galaxy S2.
Well, heres my opinion about this subject:
No, it will not make things worst, i have been using android since donut with an HTC Magic, from which i had tried 2.1 and 2.2. Never resourcing from HTC's official releases.
I'll put it simple, for someone who needs a smartphone, almost every verion of android will do, you get to manage emails on the go, music, photos, market+apps, you get the point.
Now for someone that takes "what version of android i'm running" into consideration, there are solutions to run the latest. Me for example, i do take it into consideration, and i'm running 2.3.5 on a LG2X which only has 2.2 officially.
If this was real reality, what about X86 OS's? i mean, win3.1, win95, win98, win98ME, win2K, winXP, winVISTA, win7 and now win8... And im only talking about microsoft.
Theres no such thing has fragmentation. As for the development problems regarding which target android version will "I" develop to. Cmon, theres good coding or bad coding. OFC theres some API's that are only available since version X of the android version, but still, good coding would prevent the use of this API even if it means having less functionality.
I believe android is in the right track, ICS looks to have some nice improvements, although the main development i saw was design ("Make me awesome"), i believe there has been some improvements regarding stability+smoothness+usability.
Next stop is: "Google needs to look to Microsoft as an example of how to get updates right." Wait a second, google has made the most successful mobile OS and it needs to look to Microsoft for *whatever*?
"Yes, Apple gets it right too" No! if in Sascha's opinion Fragmentation is a problem, Apple is having the same issue, but it is coming later than android, mainly due to the 23454345672384 OEM's android has versus the 1 OEM Apple has! I mean, 1 oem, 1 OS = iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPod Touch Xgen, iPad, iPad 2.. FFS! fragmentation? a single oem has made more devices than most android OEM's has! (not true, but quite)
[EDIT] Sorry im berserking.
"Microsoft keeps its Windows Phone line down to one screen resolution and chipset" if this was done in the Android habitat, there would be no sense in making different versions, varying prices, and so on. Fragmentation is good in some aspects, one of them being the different prices devices can get.
As for the version and updates problem, how about attacking the OEM's itself instead of Google? Since google is the main "victim" of this article, google has made all it can do to get it "corrected" (if this is a problem) and it even does not own the OEM's companies! All phones launched by google have had some nice updates, keeping it with the most recent OS all the time. (Yes i'm talking about the nexus lineup, Nexus One is 2 years old, so i guess it will not get ICS, still iphone 2G will not get iOS 5 neither.)
[EDIT2] Now i'm haywire.
Just take a look at the article comments, the writer ends up having no arguments. FFS He's calling WP7 an example for updates! saying that the OS provider has the obligation the get OEM's in line...NO! thats the good thing about Android, it is free, free to use, and free to transform. Every OEM is responsible for what they do with the devices they sell, and the OS they ship it with.
Thats like saying that my Dinossaur pc doesn't run windows 7 and call it Microsoft's fault, because my PC only have 96MB of Ram! Isn't that almost Apple-fanboy talk? The os provider must develop the HW for it to run properly.
Logi_Ca1 said:
When Apple fanboys say, "When Apple releases iOS 5, most iPhones (3GS onwards) can join in the party immediately. With Android, you have to wait and you might not even get the update at all", I have no response to that, because they are right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is true, except for one thing. There is a response.
If you want iOS, you have the choice of black or white. If you want Android then you have the choice of hundreds of different devices. It's a trade-off that I am more than happy with. I prefer choice over regular updates, especially when the OS is already good enough anyway.
Usually you get leaked firmwares before official release anyway. So I don't see the issue.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
drelite08 said:
Usually you get leaked firmwares before official release anyway. So I don't see the issue.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that's a valid point since only a small minority of Android users know about xda and the fact that you can flash ROMs. Every iPhone user in the world will know about OTA updates.
Sorry but there's no apple fanboy like Joshua Toposlky, he is the only one in the world (sarcasm =P) that can see the bright side of both sides of the war.
Archer said:
I don't think that's a valid point since only a small minority of Android users know about xda and the fact that you can flash ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats why i did say that for a smartphone user, every android version will sufice.
Archer said:
Every iPhone user in the world will know about OTA updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is almost not noticeable in the android environment because of the OEM's, not google's fault
[EDIT] OMFG! Now this is stupid, this is SO STUPID! Check this out, he makes a table of the new features that the new iOS can do, an compares it to other OS's... so lets start:
Location Based Reminders: Only iOS
Quick Camera Acess: iOS and WP7
Advanced Photo Editing tools: Only iOS
Advanced Voice Commands: Only iOS
My answer to this is: I am not going to open another URL coming from PCmag
The way Android works is that Google do not have that much control over it after the OS is designed, it gets open-sourced then it is down to each individual OEM to build a rom and get their carrier partners to approve it.
Google have deliberately chosen to not do it the more formal way as it will defeat the entire original purpose that android had.
Obviously there is more complicated steps in the process when it comes to the licencing of Gapps....
However google and the other major partners have expressed their wish to reduce fragmentation and move to ICS as soon as possible, but that article was right in that we have not been given any strict words. However any phone currently running android 2.3 and is still getting worked on (i.e. not EOL) should receive an ICS update. I know that samsung are working on very quick timetables and the SGS2 rom should be out very quickly, but based on the past experience companies like HTC may take a very long time.
in WP7 Microsoft give a rom to the OEMS to do very minor tweaks, this is then approved and released.
I think what people are missing
Here guys is the fact that android os is the only open source os out of three three majors!
This means that u don't really need the oems to have latest up to date os version. As we can c clearly in the case of cynogenmod project. Moreover, the android build it's reputation on being the most comprehensive os with most capabilities to consume the most of the hardware. This is a big plus for everybody.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Ray1 said:
in my country, malaysia, the sgs2 is still at 2.3.3. which is another reason to forget about the ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have just read this now, and i must say WTF? what you mean? you want 2.3.7? You have officially the latest released Android version, and you call it "still"?
svceon said:
I have just read this now, and i must say WTF? what you mean? you want 2.3.7? You have officially the latest released Android version, and you call it "still"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry i offended you. Please dont get upset.
but the upgrading firmware or version is very frustrating.
i saw in youtube and other tech website that the latest gingerbread is 2.3.5,
2.3.4 suppose to have the video call in google talk
2.3.5 suppose to have better battery life.
(i hope i'm not mistaken)
dont you feel its sad? i spend a big BIG sum of money to buy this phone (RM2099), and naturally i expect it will have good support. OTA updates should be ideal, KIES is acceptable as well, but 2.3.5 is no where to be seen even on KIES.
Ray1 said:
I'm sorry i offended you. Please dont get upset.
but the upgrading firmware or version is very frustrating.
i saw in youtube and other tech website that the latest gingerbread is 2.3.5,
2.3.4 suppose to have the video call in google talk
2.3.5 suppose to have better battery life.
(i hope i'm not mistaken)
dont you feel its sad? i spend a big BIG sum of money to buy this phone (RM2099), and naturally i expect it will have good support. OTA updates should be ideal, KIES is acceptable as well, but 2.3.5 is no where to be seen even on KIES.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ray1, i'm not upset, don't get me wrong =P i just thought you were saying that you wanted ICS now, and that you were frustraded that you didn't had. i'm only upset by PCMAG by it's acumulated stupidity.
As for the updates, there are a lot of 2.3.4/5 roms in the SGSII development sub-forum, why dont you try to flash one?
Another thing about firmware and OEM's updates:
When i buy a car, i dont expect it to be upgraded when the next generation of engines are released. When i buy a car i bought it because i needed it or i wanted it as it was being sold.
If you want the latest hardware in your phones, then don't expect to have the latest software.
linkin85 said:
If you want the latest hardware in your phones, then don't expect to have the latest software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This doesn't make a lot of sense
Ray1 said:
I'm sorry i offended you. Please dont get upset.
but the upgrading firmware or version is very frustrating.
i saw in youtube and other tech website that the latest gingerbread is 2.3.5,
2.3.4 suppose to have the video call in google talk
2.3.5 suppose to have better battery life.
(i hope i'm not mistaken)
dont you feel its sad? i spend a big BIG sum of money to buy this phone (RM2099), and naturally i expect it will have good support. OTA updates should be ideal, KIES is acceptable as well, but 2.3.5 is no where to be seen even on KIES.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no Google talk video call in 2.3.4 nor 2.3.5..
the fact that the author wrote "Google needs to look to Microsoft as an example of how to get updates right" made him lose any ounce of credibility that he had (if he had any to begin with.)
they released WP 7 without half of the proven needs on a smartphone (eg. cut and paste), released an "update" which was basically a primer for your phone to be able to OTA update when the new "patch" was released. and it didn't even adress the issues that had people *****ing about the phone. Mango was promised to be released last year, and it's already october 2011. I got rid of my windows phone within 3 months of buying on.
so what if apple releases iOS 5 to all iphone users? half of them probably doesn't even know what's on the new OS. the other half are still marvelling over siri as some technological breakthrough. it has got to be the most boring OS i've seen. everyone holding an iOS phone/tablet/ipod looks the same as the other person holding it. oh great, you can change the wallpaper...whoopdiedoo...and buy a 200 dollar case for it! wowie.
i was a loyal windows mobile user for many many years, having used them since O2 still manufactured awesome products. I loved it for how much I could customize it to suit how I'd like it to be. I'm not paying 1000 bucks and have the company tell me how I should want it to look. I'm sorry, but a homescreen with 16 icons on it just doesn't look appealing to me. I have been blown away by what the android OS can do.
how ICS release can be bad for android users baffles me. I bet the author was wetting himself when apple launched the white iphone.
This ''issue'' can be avoided by installing CM7. This way your phone is like a nexus and has the latest updates.
Umm this isn't really google's fault by any means; whether or not ICS comes to our devices is up to the manufacturers, and it's is up to us as consumers to let them know that we don't want a customized UI, but standard android instead.
Vote with your wallets and send manufacturers complaint letters and you shall have what you wish for. Just look at the locked boot loaders issue as an example of what can be done when enough people complain and commit to a cause.
1) don't rely on Official Roms all the time, plenty of leaks for 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 have surfaced
2) Just because you are not yet on 2.3.4 doesn't mean you won't get ICS, you don't have to go up every single OS step in order...
Again Android liberty. You can pick the OEM. If you want the fastest update buy a nexus. Slower OEMs will sell lesser product in the future. And I didn't get the idea of the article. Is limiting the OSs with resolution and chips a good thing? If so what are we doing here?
Sent from my GT-I9100
I was reading this article about Google Music on CNN, the writer mentioned that Android is a mess, a mess that has captured half the market. So why does this writer still consider Android a mess? Is it because the way Android system is distributed or the amount of fragmentation in the Android ecosystem?
here is the link http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/17/tech/web/google-music/index.html
Moved
Android does have a lot of growing to do, hopefully alot of it will be fixed with ICS. It can be quite painful stock, but really, who runs stock nowadays?
HTC's Android phones are pretty good but the saying you get what you pay for is definitely true with android. Each carrier customizes it differently and some are a lot better keeping it updated than others.
Android it's quite new, fragmentation is a well known problem on which BigG is working on... the fact the producers are customizing their product it's more an advantage for the market...
To sustain that Android it's a mess there should be some valid topics that the author should bring, too easy to say something without prove it.
Less a mess than it used to be
My first android, the Samsung Behold 2, was a complete mess. Immature OS, frequent FC, lack of manufacturer support for upgrades, etc. I didn't get 2 years out of that phone before I bought the HTC Sensation, which is much nicer.
I think the perceptions of Android will improve as the older pre-2.0 devices are retired to the dustbins. While I wish I had the ability to circumvent HTC and TMO for core Android OS software updates, it's just not a reality except for headsets that are sold a native/vanilla Android devices. With that said, I still prefer the innovation and variety available on the Android platform over the "one size fits all" iOS approach.
I just saw an ad on TV for an android device on one of the big us carriers (I forget which one) and it was really bad. It made me realize something I've never agreed with before: that indeed android fragmentation is a hinderence.
Hear me out. Obviously being an active xda member I'm pro-android, but most people with android devices aren't on xda and wont root or even use a different launcher. So that is why I realize carriers like Verizon or whoever have to show generic commercials with no or little focus on the actual operation system. Don't get me wrong, I'm not sticking up for the carriers, they are the ones that take forever to update android versions. But they don't have to. That's the "beauty" of android.
But this has never been more of an issue than right now, I argue. Android 4.2.x is excellent and beautiful. It is the first time an iPhone user could try android and actually feel like it could be in the same competition as iOS in terms of looks and general UI. Meanwhile only a very tiny percent of android users have the latest version.
So to bring it back around to the commercial I saw, which goes for pretty much all android commercials I've ever seen, they do not display android at all! Its always generic futuristic music and background fx and distractions. Meanwhile iOS always shows a closeup of the phone with a mere finger navigating the os.
The ironic thing is that android is better now! But carriers take months or a year to update so they can only advertise their ****ty versions of android which are always stale at the time so instead they just show the phone dancing to dubstep music in front of lightning. They should be showing how Google Now is already way better than siri, how the notification drop down was started by Android (taken by iOS) and is now beautiful and functional, and how the recents button has become essential, not just usable.
There should be a SHORT grace period for carriers to update to the newest version of Android. Only then will they realize that their biggest asset isn't their ability to have 20 different android phones, or their attempt at theming a ROM (sense, touchwiz), but you actually have the best operating system out now! You just don't have the latest version because you're a phone network company and not a software development company.
But I put the blame on android because surely they are able to have a bit more control over how the big carriers manipulate their os? Why wouldn't a company like Verizon want to display the freshest os and advertise that they have the newest version of android and will always be this first to update because they don't change a thing? They would advertise that if Google had some sort or mandate on update time periods. Then android wouldn't always be thought of as the poor mans iOS .
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
The problem is, I don't think the average user - the one you're talking about - cares about "updates". They're just something annoying that happens and you have to restart your phone for a while. They don't care if it has the "newest" Android OS, just that it does what they want - this is the rest of my family feels, and even some of my friends who ARE interested in tech.
My dad couldn't give a crap if he has ICS or JB and wouldn't be able to tell the difference. If you put 4.2 in front of him, I doubt he could tell you the difference without spending half an hour hunting it down - and after that, I would question if the changes are anything he would actually care about. That kind of a user doesn't really WANT fast change - they care that things are familiar and easy to use, they don't want to have to re-learn parts of their phone in a few months - that's one thing I can give to iOS - as boring as it is, it's well, the same.
People have always said that one particular iteration of Android is when it's "finally ready to take on iOS". I think ICS is fine in that regard. iOS is so stylistically "stagnant" that Android really doesn't have to do much to match it. The advantage of iOS is that it's always the same, that it's not changing, that you can upgrade your phone hardware and still have everything work exactly the way you knew.
"Constantly updating" appeals to tech geeks who love learning new things and better ways to use them - and that's what the Nexus line is for - that's what flashing ROMs is for. People that want that find it.
Basically, your average Android phone shopper is Windows, not Linux. They're there because they want a phone that fits their needs and price-point - something Apple isn't offering. Sure, some people are Windows people for other reasons - but we're talking the average person who just wants a computer they can afford that "just works".
A good example is my mom - I just helped her buy a tablet. She was a little afraid of the idea of an Android tablet because she had no brand familiarity. She'd seen people using iPads to do what she wanted, and was worried because she'd never heard of ASUS and better knew Samsung as an appliance-maker. These ads, the most important thing they can do is just get people to recognise the name. There have been studies done on this, and it's true - getting people to know your brand's name is one of the best things you can do. That way, the "average Joe" goes into the store and thinks, "Hey, that's Samsung - I've heard of that" and the human brain tends to go, "I've heard of that, so it must be good" - true or not. They aren't looking at the specs and comparing, they're looking for a device they can trust. Trust starts with familiarity. The iPhone came from a company that already had name-recognition, but they grew that into a much larger market by using exclusivity and ease of use. It's like with liquor - people see an expensive liquor and assume that it must be a better liquor. Simply jacking up prices has totally worked for some brands to gain success. I'm not even kidding. People do this with expensive purses and jeans and crap, too - even if it's all made in the same exact Chinese factories.
Um.
Sorry for the novel.
tl;dr : Our brains are often illogical
sd0070 said:
Android 4.2.x is excellent and beautiful. It is the first time an iPhone user could try android and actually feel like it could be in the same competition as iOS in terms of looks and general UI.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android has been able to compete in looks and general UI since 4.0 IMO, and easily since 2.2 with Sense. Smoothness is a completely different factor, but the actual look and feel of Android has been decent for a while. iOS isn't even a UI anymore, it's an app launcher and that is all. You can't do anything at all in iOS outside of the apps, which is frankly pathetic. iOS works as Apple wants it to, Android works like you want it to.
As a developer I do think Android fragmentation is a huge issue. I agree that Android 4.0+ is nice looking and has some very nice API's however developing Android applications that run consistently accross different devices is very difficult. I find more and more that a good portion of my code ends up being wrappers and reflection calls to support API's and classes not found in previous Android versions. For example, If I want to add media player lock-screen controls to my application it's not a problem in Android 4.0+ but the class isn't available in versions below 4.0. So, what am I supposed to do? Do I release a version to the play store and say my application supports lock screen controls ONLY if you run a specific version of Android? That certainly won't ecourage people to use the application. Just my opinion.
I agree it can be a problem for development.
However, I think it's reasonable to say, "this feature will only work on 4.0+" - people are used to that, if you have a Windows 98 machine still, I hope you're not expecting to be able to run everything a Windows 7 machine could, for example. I see things like designations requiring XP/Vista/7, et cetera on packages - I don't think it's unreasonable that at some point Android is the same - you can only reasonably support so far back because at some point it's just not worth your time.
If it's possible to implement below 4.0 and it's worth your time to make it happen - that's the cost of business to decide if it's worth it or not to support the older devices based on what your market looks like.
What do you think when someone asks you about the worst part about Android? Chances are, Android fragmentation is one of the first things that flies through your head. But I've been thinking about it and I haven't noticed anything to suggest that I am not alone.
It is well known that Android owns the smartphone market globally. It has done this by being open source. This has become it's greatest strength and it greatest weakness. For the first point, it is currently on over a billion devices all over the world. As for the second, I think you can guess: fragmentation. God knows how many different companies have taken Android and twisted it to their laggy and unsupported preference. I would really like to point towards the manufacturers that basically releases a new phone every month to three months. These include Samsung, Blu, and countless others. Here looks like a good place to say that I HATE THOSE LITTLE COMPANIES WITH THEIR CRAP TABLETS ON AMAZON. Anyway, Samsung probably is the worst right? With their big fancy skin and slow updates....well look at Blu! They have at least two dozen phones, tablets, and everything in between, most of which don't get a single update (to the next large update like 5.0, 5.1, etc. This doesn't include small patches, though I'm sure that they don't give many of those). Now I know that this is starting to turn into a rant, but that's OK. I'm almost ready to point out my...point. :l
If any of your friends, co-workers, acquaintances have iPhones, you might have heard the "why does my iPhone 4 on iOS 6 not support this app" complaint (or something similar). I've found that most apps work with Android Jelly Bean, ICS, or even Gingerbread, all of which are as old or older than iOS 6. Android apps support older versions of Android better than iOS does, which has very few fragmentation problems. Quick note: Some people haven't updated their iDevices to the newest version, so please don't give me crap for it. So that is my first supporting argument, which is a little harder to go against than my final point.
Quick recap: there to many different skinned versions of Android. This might seem to contradict my rage about "THOSE LITTLE COMPANIES WITH THEIR CRAP TABLETS ON AMAZON", but no one cares since most people probably agree with me on that. We should all calm down about the slow updates on our devices. Don't get angry at me and say that I must have a Nexus or a Motorola and I've never known the struggle; I have the LG Optimus G AT&T version and it hasn't gotten the official Kitkat release. Actually, I haven't even gotten an official update since 4.1.2. Thanks to custom ROMs, I'm on Lollipop right now. But that isn't the point. Maybe we shouldn't think of Android as "be together, not he same", but more like "be not the same, not together." That didn't quite work the way I hoped...
So I'm starting to think of Android a only a base and that we should think of skinned versions of Android more like Linux and it's distros. Ubuntu is based off Linux, but it isn't Linux (not actually sure if there is a pure Linux...would it be text based?). It rather another creation of it. The candied named Android versions are just new standards and aren't really necessary. I'm pretty sure that Samsung could take the current version and just add the security and new features in as they need it. Well, maybe some dev could correct me on that? Anyway, I'd like to end this summing up this thread (b/c it isn't very organized to my eyes) by saying that it's OK that you don't have the newest update and that Samsung really should add in the new features if not update the whole OS.
:silly: