The Android Alliance: By their powers combined

[Bateluer]

http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/0...os-updates-for-18-months-after-device-launch/

This is huge. Like, massively huge. Probably the best thing to come out of Google I/O so far this morning huge. I’m talking about the Android Alliance and the solution to a problem that has plagued Android users since the beginning of time (okay, maybe not that long).

The Android Alliance is a special task force dedicated to delivering Android updates quickly and efficiently to all devices for 18 months after they’re released. Among the companies involved are Verizon, HTC, Samsung (imagine that), Sprint, Sony Ericsson, LG, T-Mobile, Vodafone, Motorola, and AT&T – which basically covers most of the Android world.

Seems like a good plan, lets hope they can deliver. 18 months doesn't seem that long, but it should take most users through the end of their contract, and by the time 18 months pass, they'll be substantially more powerful devices available.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/10/google-clarifies-18-month-android-upgrade-program-details-far-f/

 

[Red Storm]

Sounds good on paper, but I am skeptical and will remain so until they prove my doubts wrong.

Still kinda lame when you think about it. Most contracts are 24 months, and they're promising to support your phone for only 18 out of those 24 months. Damn you carriers!

 

[Bateluer]

Sounds good on paper, but I am skeptical and will remain so until they prove my doubts wrong.

Still kinda lame when you think about it. Most contracts are 24 months, and they're promising to support your phone for only 18 out of those 24 months. Damn you carriers!

Support for OS updates. Pretty sure if you're paying for warranty service, you'll get that through the life of the phone/contract.

To quote Google, "It's a logistics problem." We can only imagine. Trying to get every Android partner to follow a timeline for releases has to be a complete and utter nightmare, but the company seems certain that these stipulations won't cripple anyone's ability to innovate on their skins (or have too little time to make the needed changes).

I guess cripple is a relative term. All the skins we've seen so far from these guys have been utter garbage.

 

[cheezy321]

haha I love the first comment on the engadget article

sounds like their fragmentation reduction plan is rather, um, fragmented.

 

[Krynj]

Sounds good on paper, but I am skeptical and will remain so until they prove my doubts wrong.

Still kinda lame when you think about it. Most contracts are 24 months, and they're promising to support your phone for only 18 out of those 24 months. Damn you carriers!

Give me a list of phones you've owned over 18 months that still received regular maintenance updates. I've had my Evo since launch (just over 11 months now), and I'll be jumping to the EVO 3D whenever that launches.

I firmly believe there are two types of Android users. The crowd that upgrades their phone every year to get the latest and greatest, and then the crowd that just has an Android device because it's everywhere, on every carrier, and some people just want a basic smartphone, so they end up just staying with a low-end device for the entire length of their contract.

 

[gsaldivar]

18 months is more than generous...

However, in my opinion, once any phone is owned by the subscriber free and clear (i.e. "out of contract"), neither the carrier nor the manufacturer should enforce any kind of carrier or firmware lock on the device.

As long as the phone is still in good working condition, the owner should be free to update that device (at their own risk) and activate with any carrier they want - assuming the phone is compatible with the carrier's network.

 

[cheezy321]

18 months is more than generous...

However, in my opinion, once any phone is owned by the subscriber free and clear (i.e. "out of contract"), neither the carrier nor the manufacturer should enforce any kind of carrier or firmware lock on the device.

As long as the phone is still in good working condition, the owner should be free to update that device (at their own risk) and activate with any carrier they want - assuming the phone is compatible with the carrier's network.

Good idea, but that will never happen.

 

[gsaldivar]

Good idea, but that will never happen.

If enough people want it, it will happen. The world is what you make of it...

 

[vshah]

Good idea, but that will never happen.

already does happen on GSM networks.

 

[mammador]

lol.. So how can people criticise Apple of having lower market share, when it has to compete with lots of other companies?

yes, Android is one OS, as is iOS. But the combination of the resources of HTC, Samsung, Motorola, etc. is what Apple has to compete with. Google doesn't do the R&D for Android phones, but HTC would do all of the R&D, manufacturing, marketing, distribution, etc. for its phones. Android vs. iOS, despite Apple's size, is not really fair competition.

 

[cheezy321]

already does happen on GSM networks.

I misread it. I thought he said that phone makers will give you all of the tools to do that.

 

[zerocool84]

lol.. So how can people criticise Apple of having lower market share, when it has to compete with lots of other companies?

yes, Android is one OS, as is iOS. But the combination of the resources of HTC, Samsung, Motorola, etc. is what Apple has to compete with. Google doesn't do the R&D for Android phones, but HTC would do all of the R&D, manufacturing, marketing, distribution, etc. for its phones. Android vs. iOS, despite Apple's size, is not really fair competition.

Why? It's always been platform vs platform no matter what platform it is. RIM makes all it's own hardware/software as well, does that means it's unfair to them as well?

 

[alent1234]

Give me a list of phones you've owned over 18 months that still received regular maintenance updates. I've had my Evo since launch (just over 11 months now), and I'll be jumping to the EVO 3D whenever that launches.

I firmly believe there are two types of Android users. The crowd that upgrades their phone every year to get the latest and greatest, and then the crowd that just has an Android device because it's everywhere, on every carrier, and some people just want a basic smartphone, so they end up just staying with a low-end device for the entire length of their contract.

iPhone

Bought a 3GS the day it came out with iOS 3.0. It just received 4.3.3. And will probably get 5 later this year but with apple's recent history it's a maybe

 

[mammador]

Why? It's always been platform vs platform no matter what platform it is. RIM makes all it's own hardware/software as well, does that means it's unfair to them as well?

To some extent, yes. Whilst it is platform vs. platform, a platform cannot produce or market a product. Apple and RIM have to weigh up resources and capability when producing phones. Which company in any industry wouldn't?

 

[alent1234]

Sounds good on paper, but I am skeptical and will remain so until they prove my doubts wrong.

Still kinda lame when you think about it. Most contracts are 24 months, and they're promising to support your phone for only 18 out of those 24 months. Damn you carriers!

Contract is 24 months but most carriers will give you discounted pricing starting around month 17 depending on your history with them