Tired of hearing about 'Fragmentation', but...

[Mopetar]

Having to stick to only Nexus phones is a gigantic blow to the platform's appeal because it removes the hardware choice that is one of Android's main selling points vs iOS.Hurt developers and you hurt users. When developers are burdened with avoidable bullshit like the glacial adoption speed of new OS versions, the users get less software, and the software they do get is worse.

If always having the latest and greatest version of Android available is a big deal, go with the Nexus line. If it's not go with whatever you want or jailbreak and run custom ROMs when they come out. It's like complaining about iPhones locking you into a walled garden when it's not terribly difficult to get out of it if you want.

 

[Pia]

If always having the latest and greatest version of Android available is a big deal, go with the Nexus line. If it's not go with whatever you want or jailbreak and run custom ROMs when they come out. It's like complaining about iPhones locking you into a walled garden when it's not terribly difficult to get out of it if you want.

You appear to have missed that we aren't talking about individual phones now, but the Android ecosystem. Which will continue to be shit until Google does whatever it takes to significantly increase the proportion of Android devices running an up-to-date OS.

 

[zerocool84]

You appear to have missed that we aren't talking about individual phones now, but the Android ecosystem. Which will continue to be shit until Google does whatever it takes to significantly increase the proportion of Android devices running an up-to-date OS.

So you want Android locked down then? I don't. You're asking Google to control what Samsung, LG, and others do. That's not what open source is about.

 

[Pia]

So you want Android locked down then? I don't. You're asking Google to control what Samsung, LG, and others do. That's not what open source is about.

Is "open source" about letting Samsung, LG and others lock down their stuff as hard as humanly possible and giving end users zero choice? You can count me out of that kind of "open source".

I don't want Android locked down, but the exact opposite. I want Google, Samsung, 3rd party modders and everyone else to be able to make new builds available without going through any bureaucracy or reverse engineering any drivers, and for Joe User to have a simple menu for whether he wants to be on his operator's approved build, Google's latest build or some third party build.

No locking down is required at all for that, just Google using some combination of carrots and sticks on the manufacturers.

 

[dagamer34]

Is "open source" about letting Samsung, LG and others lock down their stuff as hard as humanly possible and giving end users zero choice? You can count me out of that kind of "open source".

I don't want Android locked down, but the exact opposite. I want Google, Samsung, 3rd party modders and everyone else to be able to make new builds available without going through any bureaucracy or reverse engineering any drivers, and for Joe User to have a simple menu for whether he wants to be on his operator's approved build, Google's latest build or some third party build.

No locking down is required at all for that, just Google using some combination of carrots and sticks on the manufacturers.

Google can't get their own phones to have the latest version of Android in a timely fashion (GSM Nexus S took 4 months to get ICS), and that's a completely stock build! Heck, HTC and Samsung beat them to the punch in upgrading their flagship phones!

I have little hope of the utopia you describe where Android phones get timely updates.

 

[Mopetar]

You appear to have missed that we aren't talking about individual phones now, but the Android ecosystem. Which will continue to be shit until Google does whatever it takes to significantly increase the proportion of Android devices running an up-to-date OS.

Sorry, but since it's open sourced, that's utterly impossible. Plenty of companies have already chosen to ignore using Google's Android branding and use the OS to their own ends. Google can't afford to clamp down or it will just make it all more likely for others to defect.

 

[Pia]

Google can't get their own phones to have the latest version of Android in a timely fashion (GSM Nexus S took 4 months to get ICS), and that's a completely stock build! Heck, HTC and Samsung beat them to the punch in upgrading their flagship phones!

Google needed to do a whole lot more work stripping down and customizing ICS to give it satisfactory performance on hardware as weak as the Nexus S.

 

[Pia]

Sorry, but since it's open sourced, that's utterly impossible. Plenty of companies have already chosen to ignore using Google's Android branding and use the OS to their own ends. Google can't afford to clamp down or it will just make it all more likely for others to defect.

By "plenty of companies", you probably mean Amazon et al., whose profit model is based on selling content. In contrast, hardware manufacturers want to sell hardware. The technical changes (the restructuring Android needs) would just improve things for the operators and manufacturers, by speeding up updates and removing useless work. This would of course also improve things for the user. Google can do this without any resistance.

The last step of ensuring that alternative OS installs aren't blocked would not be a very hard sell for the manufacturers either - what do they care after they have already sold the hardware? It's operators who would be kicking and screaming at that step, but I think it would be too late at that point. Besides, it's milder than what the operators are already used to with Apple (does their own updates however the hell they want) and Microsoft (forces device manufacturers to do updates on a set schedule).

Not everyone even has to go along with it (of course that depends on how much leverage Google has...). Just getting some of the market would up the pressure for the rest, who would then be facing the competition of immediate vanilla Android updates. No-name manufacturers who don't want to spend money on unique SW in the first place would be delighted.

 

[Red Storm]

It's open source software, they can pretty much do what they want. They don't have to keep up with Google's releases. If it's very important to you, get a Nexus or a phone that has an active dev community. I personally care enough that I got a Nexus phone, but that's about as far as it goes (haven't been to XDA or any other site since I got my phone).

 

[MrX8503]

If you want the Google stock experience your only choice is the Nexus line. Speaking of the Nexus line, Google needs to rework that brand hardcore.

 

[alent1234]

the whole fragmentation thing annoyed me last year when my mom was interested in a smart phone and wanted a cheap one that had to have skype. she's on t-mo

at the time only a few models supported skype, mostly the new expensive ones. with iOS when an app comes out it supports every device 2 years back unless it needs some hardware in the newest version, but that's very rare

 

[Mopetar]

By "plenty of companies", you probably mean Amazon et al., whose profit model is based on selling content. In contrast, hardware manufacturers want to sell hardware. The technical changes (the restructuring Android needs) would just improve things for the operators and manufacturers, by speeding up updates and removing useless work. This would of course also improve things for the user. Google can do this without any resistance.

The last step of ensuring that alternative OS installs aren't blocked would not be a very hard sell for the manufacturers either - what do they care after they have already sold the hardware? It's operators who would be kicking and screaming at that step, but I think it would be too late at that point. Besides, it's milder than what the operators are already used to with Apple (does their own updates however the hell they want) and Microsoft (forces device manufacturers to do updates on a set schedule).

Not everyone even has to go along with it (of course that depends on how much leverage Google has...). Just getting some of the market would up the pressure for the rest, who would then be facing the competition of immediate vanilla Android updates. No-name manufacturers who don't want to spend money on unique SW in the first place would be delighted.

Barnes & Nobel along with a large number of smaller foreign manufacturers who either don't care about Google or are primarily selling in China and don't give a rip about branding are also already there or moving in that direction. Also, Amazon is probably the largest Android tablet maker, and between them and Barnes & Nobel may have over half of the market. If it reaches a tipping point, there's no way for Google to reign them in as they don't operate from a position of power at after that point has been reached.

The manufacturers probably don't care what gets put on the devices after their sold for the most part, but the carriers certainly do. Verizon wants to sell expensive crap through their V-Cast store and if people are able to put their own OS free of all that cruft on their devices, Verizon isn't going to make that extra money. Since Verizon gets to choose which devices will be sold at their stores, it makes the manufactures care. A few of them might even have a side business of pre-loading other apps for a small fee, much like the PC manufacturers often bundle software with their machines.

Open means that anyone can take something and do what they want with it. If you don't like it, don't buy it or start a competing business that does things your way.

 

[Oyeve]

WTF is the point of this thread? Get an iphone and move on then. Leave the androids to those of us who enjoy it.

 

[TuxDave]

I've only ever seen $300+ phones in person.

I only see the $300+ phones among the single male coworkers. The rest that are a little older and have kids end up buying the $99 or lower phones (mostly because the wife wouldn't approve an expensive phone lol)

 

[alent1234]

Barnes & Nobel along with a large number of smaller foreign manufacturers who either don't care about Google or are primarily selling in China and don't give a rip about branding are also already there or moving in that direction. Also, Amazon is probably the largest Android tablet maker, and between them and Barnes & Nobel may have over half of the market. If it reaches a tipping point, there's no way for Google to reign them in as they don't operate from a position of power at after that point has been reached.

The manufacturers probably don't care what gets put on the devices after their sold for the most part, but the carriers certainly do. Verizon wants to sell expensive crap through their V-Cast store and if people are able to put their own OS free of all that cruft on their devices, Verizon isn't going to make that extra money. Since Verizon gets to choose which devices will be sold at their stores, it makes the manufactures care. A few of them might even have a side business of pre-loading other apps for a small fee, much like the PC manufacturers often bundle software with their machines.

Open means that anyone can take something and do what they want with it. If you don't like it, don't buy it or start a competing business that does things your way.

2014

amazon and VZW team up to fork the most current version of AOSP and develop it together for their own devices

 

[Red Storm]

2014

amazon and VZW team up to fork the most current version of AOSP and develop it together for their own devices

I see no problem with this, as the whole point of Android is options, both hardware and software.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Google can't get their own phones to have the latest version of Android in a timely fashion (GSM Nexus S took 4 months to get ICS), and that's a completely stock build! Heck, HTC and Samsung beat them to the punch in upgrading their flagship phones!

I have little hope of the utopia you describe where Android phones get timely updates.

What? GSM Nexus S got ICS long time ago (December 16). I have a GSM Nexus S and I have a Samsung Galaxy SII. The SGS2 just got the update less than a month ago.

WTF is the point of this thread? Get an iphone and move on then. Leave the androids to those of us who enjoy it.

The point of this thread is to talk about fragmentation. You can choose to believe/accept or whatever about fragmentation all you want. IT may or may not sway people in terms of deciding between iOS/Android/WP7/any other smartphone platform, but I believe to some extent it exists. Nothing pisses me off more than Phandroids screaming it doesn't exist and that their platform is just fine. As someone who uses both iOS and Android, I recognize the deficiencies with each side, and while the walled garden is an issue, so is a fully open fragmented ecosystem.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Fragmentation is real on all platforms that handle both tablets and phones. The difference is that on iOS the fragmentation is a money maker (selling HD versions of apps) while on Android it is a developmental money drain (buying hardware to make sure every major device is supported).

 

[zerocool84]

What? GSM Nexus S got ICS long time ago (December 16). I have a GSM Nexus S and I have a Samsung Galaxy SII. The SGS2 just got the update less than a month ago.



The point of this thread is to talk about fragmentation. You can choose to believe/accept or whatever about fragmentation all you want. IT may or may not sway people in terms of deciding between iOS/Android/WP7/any other smartphone platform, but I believe to some extent it exists. Nothing pisses me off more than Phandroids screaming it doesn't exist and that their platform is just fine. As someone who uses both iOS and Android, I recognize the deficiencies with each side, and while the walled garden is an issue, so is a fully open fragmented ecosystem.

The GSM Nexus S update was pulled while it was rolling out in December there were some issues with it and the recent update that rolled out is good to go.

 

[dagamer34]

What? GSM Nexus S got ICS long time ago (December 16). I have a GSM Nexus S and I have a Samsung Galaxy SII. The SGS2 just got the update less than a month ago.

As others have said, the full update to the Nexus S GSM was only offered a few days ago. The previous update was pulled.

 

[dagamer34]

Fragmentation is real on all platforms that handle both tablets and phones. The difference is that on iOS the fragmentation is a money maker (selling HD versions of apps) while on Android it is a developmental money drain (buying hardware to make sure every major device is supported).

I wouldn't even call HD versions of apps fragmentation. That's just people wanting to make money (there's no requirement that apps be universal). Sometimes it can be incredibly complicated to keep both the iPhone and iPad versions of apps in the same file, especially when you're talking about games where the iPhone 3GS will never use large Retina iPad assets.

Besides, if an app is really worth owning on both platforms, I'll pay for it twice or three times (I've done so with Reeder, TweetBot and Instacast). I might consider doing it with games, but because so few games sync their progress with iCloud, I don't bother.

 

[Bateluer]

App devs blaming fragmentation for delays with apps is much like Ubi Soft blaming piracy for why Assassins Creed 3 PC won't have keyboard/mouse support. Its pure BS coupled with laziness, plain and simple.

Fragmentation with Android really doesn't exist in a practical sense, it was something that Apple invented in an attempt to attack Android after watching their smartphone market share drop like a stone.

 

[smartpatrol]

http://phandroid.com/2012/03/10/zom...ng-android-expect-a-lot-more-f-word-articles/

The developers of Battleheart are giving up on Android development because fragmentation made Android development simply not worth the time and money.

We spent about 20% of our total man-hours last year dealing with Android in one way or another – porting, platform specific bug fixes, customer service, etc. I would have preferred spending that time on more content for you, but instead I was thanklessly modifying shaders and texture formats to work on different GPUs, or pushing out patches to support new devices without crashing, or walking someone through how to fix an installation that wouldn’t go through. We spent thousands on various test hardware. These are the unsung necessities of offering our apps on Android. Meanwhile, Android sales amounted to around 5% of our revenue for the year, and continues to shrink. Needless to say, this ratio is unsustainable.

 

[akugami]

App devs blaming fragmentation for delays with apps is much like Ubi Soft blaming piracy for why Assassins Creed 3 PC won't have keyboard/mouse support. Its pure BS coupled with laziness, plain and simple.

Fragmentation with Android really doesn't exist in a practical sense, it was something that Apple invented in an attempt to attack Android after watching their smartphone market share drop like a stone.

It's not laziness. It's not BS. Speaking as someone who has had to bang his head wondering why an app works on one Android device and not another, I can tell you that it's not. You're telling me fragmentation doesn't exist after I spent the last two weeks bug testing Android devices. We lost days of work while the bug test team and developers tried to isolate problems that showed up only on one Android device and not another.

Fragmentation costs development resources. It takes time to troubleshoot for the various hardware you want to support. In turn this costs more money for app development and extends the development cycle. Not everyone is a big development house that can afford to throw more money at a problem. Fragmentation exists on Android and it is very real. It is not something Apple invented. Which is a ridiculous argument. iOS devices have their own quirks but at least you know you only have to support a very small number of devices.

 

[Bateluer]

It's not laziness. It's not BS. Speaking as someone who has had to bang his head wondering why an app works on one Android device and not another, I can tell you that it's not. You're telling me fragmentation doesn't exist after I spent the last two weeks bug testing Android devices. We lost days of work while the bug test team and developers tried to isolate problems that showed up only on one Android device and not another.

Fragmentation costs development resources. It takes time to troubleshoot for the various hardware you want to support. In turn this costs more money for app development and extends the development cycle. Not everyone is a big development house that can afford to throw more money at a problem. Fragmentation exists on Android and it is very real. It is not something Apple invented. Which is a ridiculous argument. iOS devices have their own quirks but at least you know you only have to support a very small number of devices.

Thats called being a developer. With the multitude of apps that work perfectly fine on all the major devices, its the developer who simply wants to write a single package, a one size fits all program, then sit back and milk profits.

The closet thing Android sees with fragmentation are manufacturer skins, not OS version or different SoCs.

Unless you're a 'Get rich quick developer', in the vein of Ubi-Soft or Electronic Arts, fragmentation is a none issue.