Google Trying New Strategy to Fix Fragmentation 355
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the lets-stay-together dept.
from the lets-stay-together dept.
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."
I actually just wrote about the PDK hours ago (Score:5, Informative)
To quote what I wrote:
The general consensus regarding the PDK for Android Jellybean and upwards seems to lean in the same direction as I am saying: "it won't amount to much, if anything at all." The biggest problem for end-users is the fact that companies do not want to do updates for already-released products, so releasing a PDK that is supposed to let start working on the updates slightly earlier than regularly -- with no other positive effects or incentives whatsoever -- really means nothing. If Google really sought to improve the situation for end-users they should start maintaining a "Google Experience" - version of Android.
Implementing a "Google Experience" Android would first off require them to modularize Android somewhat so that it can be slimmed down by not installing features that won't be used, like e.g. voice search and everything related to it is mostly worthless in any country which do not support it so why insist on installing it? Allow user to choose to install it, yes, but do not force it. Modularizing Android this way would help in a situation where there is not enough storage to install the whole thing: the installer could present the user with a warning dialog explaining the situation and let user pick and unpick features -- with explanation on what each feature means -- until the system fits comfortably, then before starting the installation remind the user of what features won't be available and make certain the user still wishes to proceed.
A second thing that would be needed would be for manufacturers to start including, say, 32 kilobytes of ROM where would be details about the actual hardware: device manufacturer, model, revision, amount of installed RAM, sizes, types and location of any storage and then a listing of all the hardware with manufacturer, model, revision, connection type, memory addresses/register addresses/etc. needed for using the device, what features the device supports and so on. The installer would then be able to check the list against Google-maintained drivers to see if there even exists drivers for the hardware, if the drivers support the connection type/scheme, etc. Also, one of the more important things would be that it would also be able to check if the Google-maintained drivers support all the features the hardware supports, and if not, the installer could warn the user of the features they would lose by installing "Google Experience" - Android.
In that ROM could also be defined a list -- even if it were just a partial one -- of what applications the manufacturer provides on the stock ROM so that the "Google Experience" installer could try to offer substitutes for them after the installation is finished.
These two things would solve almost all the major issues related to upgrading to newer Android-versions and would quite obviously benefit end-users enormously. As always, though, there's a catch. Actually, two catches, in this case: manufacturers won't want to make it easier for customers to get updates for their devices because they want people to keep buying new shiny, ergo. they will not install the kind of list I mentioned, and Google won't want to go along with the plan because Google wants only their Nexus-line to be directly Google-approved.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Also how about virtual machines for testing for all those, with all known display sizes as easy-to-configure test options and atomatic generation of binaries for each version.
You mean this one? http://developer.android.com/tools/devices/emulator.html [android.com] AVD makes it pretty simple to set up most configurations.
Likewise Eclipse makes it simple enough to target any OS version. The problem is if you use and ICS-specifc function, it won't work on devices with earlier versions of Android. As a result, most of us design/target 2.2 and ignore all the recent cool stuff.
Re:Addresses one issue but not the other (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How about... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Make phones like laptops (Score:5, Informative)
That's the last thing manufacturers want. They saw what happened to the PC hardware market, which was basically a race to the bottom on price.
Too late.
Chinese companies like MediaTek, Allwinner and RockChip are already producing and selling very capable low cost SoCs. Manufacturers are already using them in $150 phones that perform better than last year's premium handsets.
http://armdevices.net/category/chip-provider/mediatek/ [armdevices.net]
I've said this before, but I don't think we're too far away from seeing very usable phones cheap enough to be retailing in blister-packs in supermarkets.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I don't know if this will fix it or not. (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong:
http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/03/ios-5-1-upgrade-stats.html [iphonehacks.com]
Even though iOS 5.1 didn't include any major new feature and jailbreakers were warned to stay away from it, David Smith - developer of Audiobooks app (App Store link) reports that quite a large percentage of users have already upgraded to iOS 5.1.
Smith who gets approximately 100,000 downloads per week for his app, shares some interesting statistics about the adoption rate of the latest iOS software update:
More than 50% of the users had upgraded to iOS 5.1 within 5 days, which was almost as fast as users upgrading to iOS 5.0.1 released back in November.
Re:Users can upgrade Android devices (Score:3, Informative)
But 99% don't give a crap.
This,
I hack my phones and make sure they're on the latest community ROM's but my housemates also have Android phones and they dont know, let alone give a shit what Android version they're on.
\
99.9999999% of IOS users are the same, they dont know, let alone give a shit about what version of IOS they are on. I regularly come across outdated Iphones, hell I've come across Iphones that are over 2 years out of date with the user being completely oblivious to this ("oh, Apps? I don't bother with those" or "Itunes, oh I don't listen to that new fangled music son"). All because the user couldn't care less.
It didn't stop anyone on Android or IOS.
The great grim spectre of "fragmentation" is not the spectre that iFanatics have made it out to be.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Problem is that the you are not (usually) the hardware manufacture's customer. The carrier is and from a hardware manufacture's point of view, why should they spend any money on getting a new version of the OS onto an already sold and accounted for phone?
Because GOOGLE should be creating a licensing agreement that FORCES them to.
But GOOGLE doesn't care about you any more than the OEM or Carrier does.
Think about it. Google could solve this with the stroke of a pen. It's their baby; they control the licensing, period.
But 2.2, 2.3 or 4.1 all return ad hits to Google quite nicely, thank you; so why SHOULD they care?
Re:The world you want is here today, in UK at leas (Score:4, Informative)
In America it is NOT cheaper to buy a phone and go with a month to month contract. Those contracts are MORE expensive than plans that include subsidized phones. I've done the math repeatedly to try to find the best deal. Hands down, it is cheaper to buy a phone on a two year contract, than it is to buy a phone up front and go with a similar month to month plan. It isn't even close.