Google defrags Android by removing OEMs and Carriers from the loop

[Red Storm]

BrightCandle what phones did these guys have? Even a phone as old as the Droid X runs a newer version of Android. 2.0-2.1 is ~3% of the Android market...

Also I don't see why you have to do 16 APIs. Jellybean all the way down to 2.3 Gingerbread is 5, 6 if you count Honeycomb. Maybe I'm not understand that correctly, but I can tell you that most modern apps are 2.3 and up, not 2.0.

 

[Eug]

Yeah, that surprises me too. That said, 2.2-2.3 runs a large chunk of the Android market - over one-third in fact. Those too would not have worked with his 3.0 target.

I'm curious though, why target 3.0? Just about nobody uses 3.x. I'd figure 2.2 or 2.3 (although that wouldn't have worked in his case) or else just 4.0. As of now, roughly about 2/3rds run 4.0 or later.

http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html

 

[Red Storm]

To clarify, 2.3.2 and below make up just under 4% of the market, so having a room full of guys with such phones is by itself quite a feat.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Exactly.

Seriously though, people like Bateluer who believes that "There is no fragmentation on Android" and people that believe that "There is no fragmentation on iOS" need to be rounded up together and put in the same room.

As I've already explained, there is fragmentation on both platforms.
The question everyone has to answer for themselves is "How important is fragmentation to you?"

Personally, I don't see fragmentation as a big deal on iOS or Android. I'm with Crono on this issue.

Well yeah, I don't think fragmentation is a deal breaker for either platform. It just affects me a lot more on Android because it's such a heavy development platform and for the custom ROMers out there, you depend on which developer will support which phone and how easy development is for that specific phone.

 

[Red Storm]

Well yeah, I don't think fragmentation is a deal breaker for either platform. It just affects me a lot more on Android because it's such a heavy development platform and for the custom ROMers out there, you depend on which developer will support which phone and how easy development is for that specific phone.

You're talking about a completely different type of fragmentation than the OP though.

 

[Deeko]

To clarify, 2.3.2 and below make up just under 4% of the market, so having a room full of guys with such phones is by itself quite a feat.

If they were company issued and hadn't been updated in awhile, its possible. My company still gives out a lot of old blackberry curves.

That aside, there are still a lot of people out there with 2.3.3, and there have been tons of SDK changes since then. As a developer I would be happy with 4.0 or 4.0.3 as a baseline but that still alienates a lot of users.

 

[Tom]

Like when my wife asks me why whatsapp is frozen on her iPhone 5? App issues are non-exclusive, every side has them.

Funny you can't actually name a real app..

My post has nothing to do with comparing ios to Android so your response is pointless.

The issue is fragmentation and whether it matters or not to the average user. When the average use goes to the Play store and can't DL an Android app to her Android phone she might not know that the reason is fragmentation but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter to her.

And its not just old versions of Android. There are apps I own that worked on the 2012 Nexus 7 that I can't DL to the 2013 Nexus 7 because its "not compatible".

For some reason I can DL the Directv tablet remote app to my Nook HD but not to my Nexus 7. I don't know for sure why but I expect "fragmentation" is a likely reason.

 

[mosco]

From a developer perspective, I think fragmentation can be a big deal but it really depends on what you are trying to accomplish and what part of the OS APIs you are trying to use.

I work with streaming video, and HLS is pretty much a mess on android. Even with 4.2/4.3 there are issues with live streaming where the media player will just crash completely or not pick up the right segment. Don't even get me started on a certain unnamed DRM provider, which is baked into almost every android device where the same code will cause kernel panics one some devices and work perfectly on others. This for example why the BBC needs 3x more android developers to produce apps with as much quality as their iOS counterparts.

I am sure there are other parts of the android that are similarly difficult to make work between different API versions.

 

[Red Storm]

Funny you can't actually name a real app..

My post has nothing to do with comparing ios to Android so your response is pointless.

The issue is fragmentation and whether it matters or not to the average user. When the average use goes to the Play store and can't DL an Android app to her Android phone she might not know that the reason is fragmentation but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter to her.

And its not just old versions of Android. There are apps I own that worked on the 2012 Nexus 7 that I can't DL to the 2013 Nexus 7 because its "not compatible".

For some reason I can DL the Directv tablet remote app to my Nook HD but not to my Nexus 7. I don't know for sure why but I expect "fragmentation" is a likely reason.

So you've never heard of whatsapp, only one of the most popular messaging apps in the world?

Maybe because the Nexus just recently launched? Or are you implying it's not going to work ever?

If they were company issued and hadn't been updated in awhile, its possible. My company still gives out a lot of old blackberry curves.

That aside, there are still a lot of people out there with 2.3.3, and there have been tons of SDK changes since then. As a developer I would be happy with 4.0 or 4.0.3 as a baseline but that still alienates a lot of users.

Most apps I see require 2.3 or above.

 

[Eug]

And its not just old versions of Android. There are apps I own that worked on the 2012 Nexus 7 that I can't DL to the 2013 Nexus 7 because its "not compatible".

For some reason I can DL the Directv tablet remote app to my Nook HD but not to my Nexus 7. I don't know for sure why but I expect "fragmentation" is a likely reason.

To be fair, the 2013 Nexus 7 is brand-spanking new.

That's why I mentioned "recent, but not too recent" flagship phones with Jelly Bean still having problems. I'd expect a 1 year-old flagship phone to be compatible with common apps, but if the phone is just 1 month old, I'd expect a lot of problems unless it's an app from Google itself.

 

[Tom]

To be fair, the 2013 Nexus 7 is brand-spanking new.

That's why I mentioned "recent, but not too recent" flagship phones with Jelly Bean still having problems. I'd expect a 1 year-old flagship phone to be compatible with common apps, but if the phone is just 1 month old, I'd expect a lot of problems unless it's an app from Google itself.

Ok. So the average consumer is supposed to figure out they should buy Android devices that were designed more than a month ago but less than a year ago.

Does that change per day, per month ?

btw, the 2013 Nexus 7 isn't brand spanking new, I'm pretty sure I bought mine in July and I assume they spent a few hours or days before that doing development work.

 

[Tom]

So you've never heard of whatsapp, only one of the most popular messaging apps in the world?

Maybe because the Nexus just recently launched? Or are you implying it's not going to work ever?



Most apps I see require 2.3 or above.

If whatsapp is real then I apologize, I never heard of it.

 

[sweenish]

If whatsapp is real then I apologize, I never heard of it.

It's not a matter of "if." It's a matter of you live under a rock, metaphorically speaking.

It's also a google search away, since it appears that you're still in doubt.

 

[Eug]

I don't use it, but whatsapp is HUGELY popular.

Ok. So the average consumer is supposed to figure out they should buy Android devices that were designed more than a month ago but less than a year ago.

Does that change per day, per month ?

btw, the 2013 Nexus 7 isn't brand spanking new, I'm pretty sure I bought mine in July and I assume they spent a few hours or days before that doing development work.

This is a problem on both platforms. Buy a brand new machine and it might take several weeks for 3rd party apps to be updated for it. Depends on how different the machine is though. The new Nexus 7 is quite different.

BTW, developers usually can't get new hardware products if they haven't been released yet.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

You're talking about a completely different type of fragmentation than the OP though.

It's fragmentation nonetheless, and my fragmentation is regarding the different phone models out there. You don't think even in regular apps development that developers need to account for various phones and how one might work slightly differently even if we made sure we had 100% adoption of Android 4.3?

Fragmentation comes in many forms. OS version edition is really just one of them only. Manufacturer skins play a role, and so do 50 models. Heck, you could say HTC's lineup is fragmented with phones like the HTC One X, One XL, One X+, etc.

 

[Red Storm]

It's fragmentation nonetheless, and my fragmentation is regarding the different phone models out there. You don't think even in regular apps development that developers need to account for various phones and how one might work slightly differently even if we made sure we had 100% adoption of Android 4.3?

Fragmentation comes in many forms. OS version edition is really just one of them only. Manufacturer skins play a role, and so do 50 models. Heck, you could say HTC's lineup is fragmented with phones like the HTC One X, One XL, One X+, etc.

Right, but that's not the fragmentation that this thread is about. Having different phone models is one of the biggest features of Android.

 

[Deeko]

Maybe because the Nexus just recently launched? Or are you implying it's not going to work ever?

I mean, personally, I was pretty disappointed in that with my new Nexus 7. It was the first time I'd ever had a Nexus device; I thought, hooray, finally no fragmentation for me! Always up to date! Turns out you get bit by that whether you're on the leading edge or the trailing edge of Android.

Of apps I use on nearly a daily basis, the Nexus 7 can't use American Express, Citibank, Starbucks, or Nike Plus. There might be a few others I can't think of, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head. These aren't tiny little indie shops...these are big name apps from huge companies.

Most apps I see require 2.3 or above.

Yes, app developers have three options:

1) Use a baseline of 4.0.3 which has a superior SDK, but alienates users
2) Use a baseline of 2.3 which lacks features, polish, and performance
3) Create versions for both, which requires considerably more development and testing time

None of these options are terribly optimal for a developer, which in turn, is not optimal for users, even if they don't directly realize it, it still impacts them.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

yeah, some of those 1.5+ apps or 2.2+ apps definitely hold back the platform.

It's the same reason why Textra went with an ICS+ version of their text app. But that in itself is fragmentation when they have to maintain ChompSMS and Textra. I'm beginning to feel like developers should just start targeting 4.x+, but that might not happen for another year until Gingerbread drops below 10% or something.

 

[BrightCandle]

There are 16 API versions between 1.6 and the latest. You might choose to only target a subsection of those, any many developers target a subset out of necessity. But they all exist and provide unique features and you need to know the versions so you can guard the API calls appropriately. The carriers simply don't push all their phones to upgrade so every minor version is available in the market even if only in small numbers. As you use API features you certainly need to be aware for every call you make that is recent that it could get called on a phone lower, so many of the modern ways of doing things also need code guarded with an if statement checking the version and calling some older version. Which either means you don't use the new version (most likely) or you write something to skip doing some feature on an older version, all of which costs more time.

I chose version 3.0 because that was the first API level that introduced the feature I was using. I started on the latest and then set the version back to the earliest API that worked with the application because I had assumed that they were all basically on the latest phones based on the initial meeting. I just made the support as wide as could be possible based on the features used. Just because very few users have a version doesn't mean you can't/shouldn't cater to them and in this case I had no choice.

But from a user perspective I don't think there is much of an issue. The latest OS version is normally faster and better but from an apps perspective its mostly a problem for developers to choose to support older devices and how they do that. Fragmentation IMO isn't really a problem for users because developers mostly hide it. I still recommend people get Google devices instead of phones from their carrier so they get the latest updates faster, because the updates regularly bring performance and UI improvements worth having. It reduces fragmentation but having an older Android version isn't going to leave you with no apps. Google's strategy now is to make fragmentation largely become irrelevant for their own apps as well because they are doing what all of the developers have been doing for years already.

 

[Red Storm]

Yes, app developers have three options:

1) Use a baseline of 4.0.3 which has a superior SDK, but alienates users
2) Use a baseline of 2.3 which lacks features, polish, and performance
3) Create versions for both, which requires considerably more development and testing time

None of these options are terribly optimal for a developer, which in turn, is not optimal for users, even if they don't directly realize it, it still impacts them.

A lot of modern apps require 2.3 or above, and they don't lack features, polish or performance...

 

[Deeko]

A lot of modern apps require 2.3 or above, and they don't lack features, polish or performance...

If they went with option 3 it would still say 2.3 or higher, and I can assure you that apps with 4.0.3 are faster and more polished. Is it possible to make an app with 2.3 as good as an app with 4.0.3? Yes....but with a LOT more work, which again circles back to my original point that fragmentation sucks for developers.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

I think the issue is illustrated by the fact that Samsung's new Galaxy Gear smartwatch is not yet compatible with its own flagship S4 or SIII. I mean, how hard could it be? I realize the phone would need updating or a special app, but why isn't that update/app ready the day that they launch the watch? I read this and smacked my forehead. What a stupid move not to support your own flagship phones with this super-hyped product! At least have a set date for support, say "October 15 for S4, October 31 for SIII" or something like that, not just "whenever we get around to it."

At launch, the Galaxy Gear will only work with Samsung’s Galaxy Note 3 and upcoming Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition. Future software updates will allow the Gear to pair with the Galaxy S4, Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note II, but it doesn’t look like Samsung’s going to support other phones, even those that run Android.

Source: http://techland.time.com/2013/09/04/samsungs-galaxy-gear-is-a-very-samsung-smartwatch/

 

[Red Storm]

Because the Galaxy Gear uses the low power bluetooth, which is a new feature of 4.3.

 

[Crono]

I think the issue is illustrated by the fact that Samsung's new Galaxy Gear smartwatch is not yet compatible with its own flagship S4 or SIII. I mean, how hard could it be? I realize the phone would need updating or a special app, but why isn't that update/app ready the day that they launch the watch? I read this and smacked my forehead. What a stupid move not to support your own flagship phones with this super-hyped product! At least have a set date for support, say "October 15 for S4, October 31 for SIII" or something like that, not just "whenever we get around to it."

Source: http://techland.time.com/2013/09/04/samsungs-galaxy-gear-is-a-very-samsung-smartwatch/

That doesn't demonstrate this issue, that demonstrates the broader issue of brand exclusivity and proprietary integration/connectivity between products that companies like Samsung likes to in order to cross-promote their varied and newest consumer products. When everyone owns the very latest Samsung televisions, phones, tablets, appliances, and now watches, they'll be happy.

I'm glad I'm not brand loyal. It's not good for any of these companies to become too dominant or they start to lock us in individually into their platforms to the point where it's hard to leave even if there are better alternatives. Just look at the Apple side of things. I'm not saying they are very much worse, but a lot of potential "converts" are queasy about switching to Android for fear of leaving the walled garden where all their iTunes stuff is.

Screw that. I can jump between Android, iOS, Windows/Windows Phone, Firefox OS, Ubuntu, Tizen, or whatever else and on any hardware brand (LG, HTC, Samsung, Nokia, Apple, Acer, ASUS, Lenovo, ZTE, etc) without issue. And I want these companies to design devices that will work together on a single or a few standards that are NOT brand or device specific. That's one of the points of the existence of Android, or at it least it should be as it evolves.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

That doesn't demonstrate this issue, that demonstrates the broader issue of brand exclusivity and proprietary integration/connectivity between products that companies like Samsung likes to in order to cross-promote their varied and newest consumer products. When everyone owns the very latest Samsung televisions, phones, tablets, appliances, and now watches, they'll be happy.

I'm glad I'm not brand loyal. It's not good for any of these companies to become too dominant or they start to lock us in individually into their platforms to the point where it's hard to leave even if there are better alternatives. Just look at the Apple side of things. I'm not saying they are very much worse, but a lot of potential "converts" are queasy about switching to Android for fear of leaving the walled garden where all their iTunes stuff is.

Screw that. I can jump between Android, iOS, Windows/Windows Phone, Firefox OS, Ubuntu, Tizen, or whatever else and on any hardware brand (LG, HTC, Samsung, Nokia, Apple, Acer, ASUS, Lenovo, ZTE, etc) without issue. And I want these companies to design devices that will work together on a single or a few standards that are NOT brand or device specific. That's one of the points of the existence of Android, or at it least it should be as it evolves.

Your point about brand loyalty is sound, but it does indeed demonstrate the fragmentation issue. As Red Storm pointed out, it requires Android 4.3, which is not yet available on these devices. Why is the latest version of Android not yet available on Samsung's current and previous generation flagship smartphone models? Because it takes time and manpower to make a new OS work for each and every device with each and every combination of SoC, screen, camera, RAM sizes and speeds, WiFi/broadband modems, and God knows how many other chips and controllers inside.

(As a side note, it's hard for me to understand how Samsung doesn't have devs working constantly on each new release and testing all major models with the nightly builds up until the official release of each new Android version, with the ability to release customized Samsung builds within a few weeks at the most.)

Apple has it so easy: only a few SoC's, each of which have been closely managed to have the same feature sets (and any differences are fully known and documented). Only what, maybe 3 or 4 camera modules across all the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch models? They keep the WiFi chipsets pretty consistent, etc. Creating a new OS and validating it on Apple platforms is dead simple because there's not as much variation.

I think it's pretty telling that the most popular Android phone maker, with the most popular Android phones on the planet, cannot do a little better. Really, Samsung should be able to do day-and-date updates with the official Android releases. It's not like Android is a closed development project that is sprung on the world at random times with no advance notice.