Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Android Google

Android Ditches Desserts as Q Becomes 10 (bbc.com) 117

Posted by msmash from the what's-in-a-name dept.
The next version of the Android operating system (OS) will not be named after a dessert or sweet treat, ending a tradition that started in 2009. From a report: Following the pattern, the name of the new version would have started with Q. But Google said it had ditched the naming scheme because it made it difficult for consumers to know which version of the OS was the latest. The new edition, which will be released later this year, will be called Android 10. Previous versions of the mobile operating system have been nicknamed Jellybean, Kitkat and Lollipop.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Android Ditches Desserts as Q Becomes 10 More

Android Ditches Desserts as Q Becomes 10

Comments Filter:
  • ... does this article have a red header?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Megane ( 129182 )
      That happens when you see the article just after it was released to the front page. I think subscribers are supposed to see them before they appear, and the red header takes a minute or two longer to go away than it should have.

  • *Raises hand* (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Nidi62 ( 1525137 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:15PM (#59113074)

    Following the pattern, the name of the new version would have started with Q. But Google said it had ditched the naming scheme because it made it difficult for consumers to know which version of the OS was the latest.

    Glad to see I wasn't the only one who never noticed the names were going in alphabetical order.

    • Re:*Raises hand* (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:16PM (#59113078)
      I'm sorry you're so bad at the Alphabet

    • But Google said it had ditched the naming scheme because it made it difficult for consumers to know which version of the OS was the latest.

      That's easy. It's the one more than 80% of Android devices won't have until it's been out long enough to be end-of-life'd.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Targon ( 17348 )

        You must not understand that Android isn't locked into the Apple way of doing updates. Components within Android can be updated on the fly as a service, without the need to update the operating system. As a result, even without getting a new OS version, people have been getting features added going all the way back to Android 5.0. This allows Google to add features without the concern that phone makers may not release updates after a phone is launched. This also means that old phones are not automat

        • There are also custom roms that can be maintained open source and provided by the community. That's why I can still run the latest version of Android on my old OnePlus One. Good luck with that custom ROM of the latest iOS on your old iPhone.

          • That's why I can still run the latest version of Android on my old OnePlus One. Good luck with that custom ROM of the latest iOS on your old iPhone.

            Well, I guess after about 5 years, aren't most people ready for a newer phone...better hardware, new battery, etc?

            I mean, how long DO you keep and use a single phone?

            • Re:Android has a shitty update model (Score:5, Insightful)

              by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @03:13PM (#59113590)

              Why would I stop using something just because it's 5 years old? This isn't the 1990's anymore.

              My main computer is still a mid-2010 Mac mini (Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz), upgraded to 16GB and a small 120GB SSD. If it weren't for ad-infested pages or pages bloated with dozens of useless javascript libraries used because a moran somewhere didn't bother to learn how to write 10 lines of actual javascript, my computer would still be more than enough.

              • Why would I stop using something just because it's 5 years old? This isn't the 1990's anymore.

                My main computer is still a mid-2010 Mac mini (Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz), upgraded to 16GB and a small 120GB SSD. If it weren't for ad-infested pages or pages bloated with dozens of useless javascript libraries used because a moran somewhere didn't bother to learn how to write 10 lines of actual javascript, my computer would still be more than enough.

                I keep computers longer...but portables, I think about 5 years or s

        • And you must not understand how security updates work and that many vendors stop updating OS-level components after just a few years from the launch date, while critical-rated vulnerabilities in WiFi components and media components are announced every single month.

          The fact that you're still receiving feature updates on a heavily vulnerable device encourages you to:
          a) Keep using said heavily vulnerable device, none the wiser
          b) Not demand a better update model

        • Case in point. iOS's 'arbitrary' gamepad bluetooth support requires a full version upgrade to implement...iOS 12 only allows mFi certified controllers

          Why does it take a full point upgrade to get this simply open up the function to other controllers?

    • Still, even if people noticed, it takes too much cognitive load to remember the order of the alphabet, because outside of primary school, it has no real purpose. Knowing the difference between vowels and consonants is more important.

      'a' coming before 'b' is inherently meaningless, and for most of us the alphabet is qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm anyways.

      • Re:*Raises hand* (Score:5, Insightful)

        by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @02:12PM (#59113320)

        Still, even if people noticed, it takes too much cognitive load to remember the order of the alphabet, because outside of primary school, it has no real purpose. Knowing the difference between vowels and consonants is more important.

        'a' coming before 'b' is inherently meaningless, and for most of us the alphabet is qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm anyways.

        Speaking of meaningless, how about this entire concept.

        The argument from Google was consumers didn't know which version was the latest. Find me a consumer who cares about OS versions first. Then we can talk about alleged confusion regarding shit they don't care about.

        All consumers want to know today is if they're up to date or not, so let's stop pretending this I'm-confused-because-funny-names bullshit was ever a problem to solve.

        • We're heading into "2020" soon. And Google just decided that the next version of Android is going to be "10". That's just another useless number.

          Call it "Android 2020" and everyone will know immediately if their devices are up-to-date, and if they're not, they'll at least know immediately how old the OS on their devices is.

          Same thing goes for Apple and their pointless marketing department. Anyone actually remember where in the timeline "The New iPad" is supposed to fucking go? Is it the 3rd iPad? The 5th? W

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by xlsior ( 524145 )
            "the new iPad" was a far stupider choice, because it made it a disaster when the /next/ one came out: sellers could legitimately sell the old one as "the new iPad" (since that was the official name) at full price, and many buyers would have had no idea that they were actually buying the OLD model. Very deceptive, and 100% apple's fault.

            • No, it's perfect... the iPad after "the new iPad" is just called "the new new iPad" and "the new new new iPad."

              It's an elegant system where the version number is contained in the word "new," much easier than writing something like "iPad 3"

              Sam

      • Re:*Raises hand* (Score:5, Funny)

        by OrangeTide ( 124937 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @02:22PM (#59113366) Homepage Journal

        Still, even if people noticed, it takes too much cognitive load to remember the order of the alphabet, because outside of primary school, it has no real purpose.

        Then how in the world do you organize your pantry? Are you saying Cheerios are not immediately left of the Corn Flakes?

      • Not to mention there is no such thing as "the" alphabet. The old naming scheme used "an" alphabet, which many people in the world do not use and might learn later in life if at all. Meanwhile, ordinal numbers are almost universal.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jrumney ( 197329 )

        Right... The next target should be libraries. If only they could come up with a numerical classification system for fiction books so that ordinary people could find things without taking on the cognitive load of their obscure alphabetical order system most of them seem to use these days.

      • Still, even if people noticed, it takes too much cognitive load to remember the order of the alphabet, because outside of primary school, it has no real purpose. Knowing the difference between vowels and consonants is more important.

        'a' coming before 'b' is inherently meaningless, and for most of us the alphabet is qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm anyways.

        Word order is really important for manually finding words in a sorted list. Yes, Google and search sometimes are available, but printed books and pages also exist, and even with a screen, browsing is much easier and more efficient with a sorted list.

        I can understand how a child or someone who is just starting learn how to read may require conscious thinking to remember alphabetical order. However, I don't consciously think of alphabetic order when I try to find a name in a sorted list. For me, recognizin

    • Re:*Raises hand* (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot@worf.ERDOSnet minus math_god> on Thursday August 22, 2019 @02:30PM (#59113394)

      Following the pattern, the name of the new version would have started with Q. But Google said it had ditched the naming scheme because it made it difficult for consumers to know which version of the OS was the latest.

      Glad to see I wasn't the only one who never noticed the names were going in alphabetical order.

      It's less that, and more like you don't know what version of Android it has. I mean, if I said something came with Android Pie, is that the latest, or is it Q? What about Ice Cream Sandwich? Is that the same as Android 4.1? (No, ICS is 4.0, Jellybean is 4.1 and KitKat is 4.2). But if we know Oreo is 8, is Pie 9?

      The problem is major Android releases are not major releases. The 2.x series had a bunch of small changes ending with Froyo as 2.2 (which was a fairly major update) and Gingerbread as 2.3 with Honeycomb at 3.0. But what is Android 8.1? It's Oreo, right? But Oreo is 8. But it's also 8.1?

      Add in mass consumer confusion as well and developers have to keep track of API levels as well too.,

      Names are cute, but they get confusing soon, especially since most companies, (Apple and Google both do this) don't have a convenient list telling you what name maps to what version. After all, if I have a Mac running Tiger, what's that? The About screen happily tells me the number, but someone says I need Snow Leopard to run their app. Or Mojave? Apple is particularly bad because they often will reference the name without the user having a clue as to whether their Mac has it, or can run it, or they need to upgrade, or they already are beyond it.

      I know the list is on Wikipedia somewhere, but still, if you're going to use a name, it won't hurt to have a canonical list easily available, perhaps as one of the top links on your support site.

  • Rumor: The reason the fun naming was dropped is entirely because someone high up at Google hates Marzipan.

    • M was marshmallow.

      Nougat, Oreo, and Pie have already been released.

      • How have they gotten away with using trademarks like Oreo and Kitkat, I wonder? Did they actually ask the relevant companies for permission? I assume so given there hasn't been a lawsuit. But it's interesting that the companies agreed to it.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          How have they gotten away with using trademarks like Oreo and Kitkat, I wonder? Did they actually ask the relevant companies for permission? I assume so given there hasn't been a lawsuit. But it's interesting that the companies agreed to it.

          Easy. I believe Google got paid by Nestle (KitKat) and Mondelez (formerly Kraft) for marketing money. Basically the companies realized it could be a nice branding exercise and marketing exercise (read: advertising) opportunity and paid Google for the naming rights. Andro

          • "So technically, you have to type the little TM symbol every time you reference Android KitKat(tm) and Android Oreo(tm),"

            no i don't.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Rhipf ( 525263 )

          They can probably get away with this since KitKat the candy bar isn't in the same industry category as KitKat the operating system (or Oreo the cookie vs Oreo the OS).

          It could also be as tlhIngan states that they were paid to use them as a form of advertising.

  • Do they hate developers? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by pjt33 ( 739471 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:24PM (#59113108)

    Why can't they number the release the same as the API version, which is the number which identifies the release in the manifest file?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Targon ( 17348 )

      It is always possible to do significant updates to the OS without needing to change the API version.

      • It is always possible to do significant updates to the OS without needing to change the API version.

        There is a mismatch, but it tends to go the other way. The API level often gets bumped in maintenance releases as well as dessert releases (aside: we're clearly going to need a different name for "dessert release").

      • If an API is any good you shouldn't have to update it very often. And updates would be backwardly and potentially forwardly compatible.

        Oh wait, we're talking about Android. Nevermind

    • Manifest just has the git tags or branch names of each project as far as i know. Like so:
        <project path="build/make" name="platform/build" groups="pdk" revision="master" />

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by pjt33 ( 739471 )

        That looks like an Android Studio project file. I'm talking about the manifest: the XML document whose root element is manifest and which probably has a line looking something like

        <uses-sdk android:minSdkVersion="19" android:targetSdkVersion="28" />

  • Searching for a single letter .. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:25PM (#59113116)

    surely won't get any false positives! /s

    Search: "android q"
    Result: What is your question?
    **Facepalm**

    At least with a word you can apply SOME context.

    Marketing Droids at the helm again?

    • Search: "Android Q"
      Result: "Data and Q enter Ten Forward and order a drink..."
      **Picard Facepalm**

    • Android Q is the code name; those are generally one letter but are only used temporarily (Pie was Android P, Oreo was Android O, etc). Android 10 is the official name used in marketing going forward. Regardless, searching for them hasn't really been an issue, I'm sure Google just considers "Android Q" or "Android 10" a special search term if it sees them in the same query. Go ahead and search for Android Q on Google, you'll get relevant results.

  • Bad idea using 10 (Score:3)

    by xack ( 5304745 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:25PM (#59113120)
    Considering other operating systems with 10 in their name.

  • So we will have MacOS 10, Windows 10, and now Android 10. Then they make it part of the name and do year.month releases right?

    Or is this supposed to be a joke....?

  • Google goes Keto (Score:4, Funny)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Thursday August 22, 2019 @01:37PM (#59113178)

    No more sugary names.

  • Surely we can come up with an "appropriate" name and get it to spread through the internet ;)
  • Then went to numbers because of everything with Q just sucks. I am sure they all sat in their board room with their finger down their throat going. Noooooooooooo, nooooooooo, noooooooooooo.

  • Android Quiche (Score:3)

    by BeerMilkshake ( 699747 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @02:19PM (#59113352)

    Not sweet enough?

  • I don't understand Google.

    On the one hand most of their apps nowadays look extremely childish and very schematic. Their recent Play store app revamp [androidpolice.com] is just horrible.

    On the other hand, they want to get serious with the Android versioning scheme.

    Go figure.

    • The novelty wore off, the right people left, and marketing finally got thier way. This whole time no one except for Android developers knew which OS was which.

  • I can understand (Score:3)

    by Megahard ( 1053072 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @02:48PM (#59113458)

    They didn't really want to name it Queijadinha [wikipedia.org].

  • In preparation for Microsoft taking over Android as the new spiritual parent we are renaming it Android 10. One day Google will be gone and Microsoft will be far from it. This seems like the logical choice.

  • MacOS? 10
    Windows? 10

    For now we also have Debian and Android both at 10.

    I'm going to make an OS and brag about how it goes to 11 "It's one louder"

  • The real reason is that the Q continuum rejected all name proposals.
  • Could be release 16 (they skipped 'B' for some reason.

    Or perhaps the Q release is actually Q ANON?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by q4Fry ( 1322209 )

      Can't believe I had to get so far down to find someone else who can count.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by maird ( 699535 )

      Could be release 16 (they skipped 'B' for some reason...

      So, 10h then?

    • Re:Wouldn't Q be Release 17? (Score:5, Informative)

      by jrumney ( 197329 ) on Thursday August 22, 2019 @04:42PM (#59113924)

      The version numbers often had minor versions, so even though it is their 17th release, the version is only up to 10.

      1.0: (no name)
      1.1: Petit Four (internal name only not following alphabetical order yet)
      1.5: Cupcake
      1.6: Donut
      2.0: Eclair (also 2.1)
      2.2: Froyo
      2.3: Gingerbread
      3.0: Honeycomb (also 3.1, 3.2)
      4.0: Ice Cream Sandwich
      4.1: Jelly Bean (also 4.2, 4.3)
      4.4: Kit Kat
      5.x: Lollipop
      6.x: Marshmallow
      7.x: Nougat
      8.x: Oreo
      9.x: Pie
      10.x: 10

      • The only dessert listed on Wikipedia under the letter "Q" is Queijadinha, so maybe that's why the sudden change of heart...

  • Google could (re)name the versions after The Duggar kids [wikipedia.org]. That'll hold'em through Version 19.

  • Future generations will know this time as the Age of Ten. Mac OS 10, Windows 10, Android 10...

  • Google's stated reason is nothing more than spin. The truth is, real men don't eat quiche.

  • Android Q is/was supposed to drop in Q3 2019, which will be over in less than two weeks.

    Let's see this jam already.

  • No one could come up with a sweet or dessert that starts with "Q"

  • In unrelated news ... (Score:3)

    by quenda ( 644621 ) on Friday August 23, 2019 @01:12AM (#59115090)

    Google's parent company is being rebranded to "Integers Inc".

  • I am sorry, but apart from tech enthusiasts, nobody gives a damn about their phone OS version. It is a line on the spec sheet of the phone, or lost in a god forsaken menu of phones where nobody goes willingly. Their marketers can touch themselves for ages, that does not change the fact that consumers do not give a damn about that.
    So yeah, changing the naming scheme is pointless, probably cost millions.

    • I am sorry, but apart from tech enthusiasts, nobody gives a damn about their phone OS version.

      I'm a tech enthusiast, yes, but I care about my phone OS version not for masturbatory reasons, but because there is relevant functionality associated with it. I don't give one tenth of one shit about what they call it, but I do care that the next version of Android is going to have on-device speech recognition. It's both immensely useful, and promotes an immense pucker factor in the phone-based surveillance department.

  • They should change the naming scheme to deep, cutting insults that are too real to handle. Like call the next one "preloaded crapware platform with apps that can't be removed except in countries where that practice was made illegal, version 10.1"

Slashdot Top Deals

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Close