Related
This question has flooded my mind almost as much as Android has flooded the market...
Does anyone else think that Android has gone out of control? I mean there are literally dozens of devices announced / released every week, updates are a mess, developing is tricky due to all the different versions of the OS, screen resolution, cpu, gpu etc. The custom overlays is so common that the AOSP phones are almost non existant.
Manufacturers release a new phone each week since its an easy buck because its free and they know that with Android it cant keep a decent life span since its forgotten pretty much the day its released since all the new phone arriving or due to arrive, so asking for good support is a bit much nowadays. It seems like Android is becoming the new "featurephone OS" since almost every phone released runs it, so imo it loses its Premium feel since i can run most of the same apps in a crappy free budget device than a high end monster save some games and speed...
I have had dozens of android devices, from the HTC Touch port, to the EVO 3D, and frankly its hard to get exited for an android device nowadays since theres always something bigger and better almost immediatly instead of living out its life span before it gets eclipsed by something else. Thats why i like the iOS and WP7 approach since they release it in batches (cept apple because its 1) in a certain time frame, so you know you dont have to worry about being left behind or being behind the curve for a good while (i you care about that stuff like me) OS updates are a sure thing, app compatibility is all there and it just feels more integrated and organized
Android feels like mess actually, i have an android and really like the OS but honestly, its a touch friendly version of Windows Mobile in my eyes. It has all the features you would wanr, but performance is inconsistant, user experience is a mess, updates are hit and miss, and development is a headache
Sorry to rant so much, i really like Android actually, but got to the point that flooded the market with such a thing has ruined a good thing imo
Any imput?
s3nT Fr0m mY pYrAmId fLaVoReD gLaCi3r
*Fixed a few things
Well, I believe that's what android is about. Its like windows, many different computers run different versions of windows. I understand the "premium feel" aspect, but there's no alternative to Linux on phones besides android.
on the other hand, no one wants to be as confined as iphone. there is nothing unique between one iphone and another. they are both iphones whereas android has variety
It'll really be interesting to see what the future holds. Android could replace Windows and MacOS in a lot of ways.
Good post OP. I feel, as you do, that the fragmentation of the Android platform is a complete mess. It would have been nice if Google had more control over what happened to the OS on a manufacturer level. I'd have liked, at the very least, to have seen a minimum hardware requirement, an outright ban on carrier bloat and manufacturer skins too. I'm a purist though and some people buy HTC, for example, because they want 'Sense'. Personally i believe these skins should have been an optional component, perhaps available as a Market download.
Updates to the OS should have been arranged in a more consistent and controlled manner too, but with the diversity of hardware it has become a crap-shoot. Manufacturers are churning out phone after phone and most are horribly derivative. Of course, it's all about the $$.
I'm a fan of what Microsoft are doing with the WP7 platform and can only dream about a similar scenario with Android!
I think its all good.Its all about freedom.The freedom to choose you firmware,kernal,ROM or what ever.Others like iOS are to confined.Its great.
It is just because android is "opened". All manufacturers can produce and sell a phone running android. Like the computers, for example, you can't say to HP that "Why did you guys releases computers so fast? ASUS just released one yesterday!"
Also about what you think android is complicated is because of it's customizability (ability to be customized). When it can be very personalized, it gets a lot of settings. When it have a lot of settings, things get complicated. This is also why every android device is unique
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I've always been a PC guy and have used Macs in the past. I'm just used to Windows as opposed to an iOS. The fact that Android is open sourced, it allows for any user to customize it however they want.
I own an EVO 3D, and own an iPod Touch. There's endless possibilities on what I can do on the 3D versus what I can do on the iPod. I also know that the iPod can be jailbroken as well.
I do understand your argument as there are many different phones that come out each week/month. It gets overwhelming as to which device is better and what not, but it all comes down to what the end user wants for a device that fits their needs. A typical user just wants to be able to call, text, and get online. These typical users would like to see different styles, colors, sizes that fit their lifestyle.
Apple has a standardized iPhone/iPod and it receives an update once in a while. Granted, you can pick out a cover for it in different colors and styles, but it has the same UI look.
But I, on the other hand, like to tinker and like to customize the device of my choice.
Based on the fact that we're all members here on this forum by choice and are happily reading and writing...I'd say that there's no such thing as too much.
Although I'll be honest, I was dying to just say about this much "...................." (there I said it)
i agree that android is all over the place with late updates ect however i love the fact that its available in all flavors not just one flavor like you know who.
Android is just the hip thing. It's quickly becoming to mobile-devices what MS-DOS/Windows was to home computers. Only, the licensing is different
That doesn't mean there's too much of it though. Android is still linux at its core, and part of that is putting up with the disorganized community development.
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem to think that they are entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
They won't charge because they can't adhere to any established schedule.
LG Optimus 3D (T-Mobile/P920)
Theoretically that could work and provide an incentive to the vendors. They could lower their initial price to buy a device (since the support cost are baked in), but software is still hard and i think customer acceptance of those upgrade fees would be the problem. As long as the industry leader (Apple) gives free OS updates it would be a hard sell to charge for Android updates. The bigger problem for most handset and tablet makers is that they are in a constant churn cycle trying to bring the next shiny new paperweight to market ahead of the competition. Apple has a fanatical user base and is somewhat insulated from competition. If you look at their hardware against say Samsung, Apple is a generation behind in radio and processor technology.
And each of these new churns of the newest hardware causes a hardware maker to have to redo all the device specific software (there's a lot of it) to run Android.
sbrownla said:
They won't charge because they can't adhere to any established schedule.
LG Optimus 3D (T-Mobile/P920)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who says they have to have a schedule? MS doesn't have a schedule. Also, didn't MS charge for one of the Windows Mobile updates? Pretty sure I'm remembering that correctly.
Well and the reason a lot of us even use Android is that it's perceived (rightly or wrongly) as being more open and inclusive. Part of that openness has been the eventual Open Source release of each version of the operating system.
I'd pay extra for hardware that ran a 100% Open Source version of Android though, with some freeer alternative to Market, etc.
TidBit said:
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the Windows world things are a bit different. You pay Microsoft only for the OS. The biggest issue to get a new Windows version running on an old pc is drivers. If we translate the Windows world to Android we would pay Google for the OS (and upgrades) and HTC (for example) for the hardware (and drivers). In this world, when a new Android version is released, I can asure you that users will start to chase HTC to write new drivers compatible with the new Android version. And they want it for free.
It would be better to standarize all internal components and connections in devices. And android should contain some generic drivers to at least boot the device and use basic functions (screen, sd card, touch).
I wouldn't mind paying something extra for OS upgrades, but I don't like the idea of paying HTC for an OS upgrade while most of the work was done by Google.
Btw, by buying an HTC Android device, you also donate some bucks to the nice guys @ Microsoft.
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using xda premium
As a consumer, unless you enter a contract with a vendor, you are entitled to nothing. However the market forces suppliers to behave in a certain fashion in order to maintain a place in the market. How well a company balances service, vs. cost vs. profit will in the long run determine how well they do in comparison to their competitors. Therefore consumers are in effect entitled to expect some level of support from vendors when they purchase a product.
The problem is , that level of support is undefined, so a vendor has to be careful how they set expectations and consumers have to be realistic in their expectations. It's a hard balance to achieve.
I would love to see the whole concept of mobile devices move to a more PC oriented ecosystem.
Think about it.. Being able to pick and choose which hardware and which OS, and only having to deal with the carrier for service (ala cable providers) would certainly change the way things work. In my opinion for the better.
No more carrier locked phones, no more manufacturer locked OS's. I could go pick up my HTC Phone1 or Samsung Phone9, load up my Android XP and punch in my Verizon credentials and im off.
Crazy concept, i like it. Downsides i could see being increased price in phones. But on the same token, just the fact they are carrier free would drive down the price due to competition.
Would drive down cellular prices too since the only thing they would be competing with would be service area, price and data caps. Similiar to now, but without the contracts tying you in to a phone for 2 years.
Also, side-rant. 2 years for a mobile contract is absurd right now. Mobile tech is exploding, and with major hw improvements within a years time are rolling out, its just not fair.
My buddy just upgraded from his HTC Hero last month. I couldnt imagine still using that relic after having upgraded to an Epic, then an iphone4. Going back to the Hero would be torture.
TidBit said:
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION:
I don't know why, but it seems to me that people seem to think that they are entitled to get the newest operating systems.
I am not talking about incremental items like 2.3.3 to 2.3.4, 3.1 to 3.2 but major upgrades... Froyo to Gingerbread, Gingerbread to Honeycomb, etc.
If I want to upgrade Windows XP to Windows 7, it will cost me money, and my hardware might not be able to run it. If a Mac user wants to upgrade to Snowleopard, it cost them, too.
I think if we had to pay $49 for a new operating system, we wouldn't be so hard HTC or other manufactures that are slow to release an operating system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny that you mention this because I remember Apple charging like $5 to upgrade older ipod touches to the newer OS and people were throwing a fit. They eventually gave the software upgrade away for free. I think everyone feels entitled to the honeycomb upgrade since HTC promised that it was going to be available soon. Nobody wants to buy a new tablet every year. Just look at Apple as an example. They could have easily only made IOS 5 only available for the Ipad 2 and alienated the millions of Ipad 1 owners out there. Instead, they offered the upgrade for both devices so people with the older model can still enjoy some of the new features. I think what everyone here is afraid of is that HTC is going to announce a HTC Flyer 2 in a couple months with a dual core processor and honeycomb/ice cream sandwich.
thetruth1983 said:
It's funny that you mention this because I remember Apple charging like $5 to upgrade older ipod touches to the newer OS and people were throwing a fit. They eventually gave the software upgrade away for free. I think everyone feels entitled to the honeycomb upgrade since HTC promised that it was going to be available soon. Nobody wants to buy a new tablet every year. Just look at Apple as an example. They could have easily only made IOS 5 only available for the Ipad 2 and alienated the millions of Ipad 1 owners out there. Instead, they offered the upgrade for both devices so people with the older model can still enjoy some of the new features. I think what everyone here is afraid of is that HTC is going to announce a HTC Flyer 2 in a couple months with a dual core processor and honeycomb/ice cream sandwich.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you are right. I did buy my HTC Flyer when the price dropped to $299 and I really love it. It is much better than my old Viewsonic G Tablet. I guess if I paid the $499, I would feel a little different.
Google tried the complete unlocked , open source concept essentially with their first Nexus phone, unfortunately it was a flop. The percentage of people that want to tinker with a phone (or tablet) vs. those that just want it to work is really small, otherwise, Apple wouldn't be so successful. I know most if us feel differently because we are passionate about the tech. and customizing.
And one more note. I worked for General Electric doing commercial software development for many years.I understand the business and legal aspect. Consumers are not "entitled" to anything, but..
I also understand that consumers are entitled to feel they are being treated fairly or you will be out of business (unless you have a monopoly , which unfortunately the cell industry behaves like in a lot of instances).
I do have a problem with false or deceptive advertising which this industry engages in fairly routinely.For example HTC announcing that the Flyer would get the honeycomb update and not delivering is deceptive. Verizon's TV ads about speed of network "rule the airways" while not talking about how they throttle your speeds is deceptive. It's not illegal, but it is deceptive and I do think consumers are entitled to the truth at some point.
DigitalMD said:
As a consumer, unless you enter a contract with a vendor, you are entitled to nothing. However the market forces suppliers to behave in a certain fashion in order to maintain a place in the market. How well a company balances service, vs. cost vs. profit will in the long run determine how well they do in comparison to their competitors. Therefore consumers are in effect entitled to expect some level of support from vendors when they purchase a product.
The problem is , that level of support is undefined, so a vendor has to be careful how they set expectations and consumers have to be realistic in their expectations. It's a hard balance to achieve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think there's an implied agreement that any major defects will be fixed unless you state otherwise. Take for example the HTC logging security issue.
---------- Post added at 03:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:35 PM ----------
DigitalMD said:
Google tried the complete unlocked , open source concept essentially with their first Nexus phone, unfortunately it was a flop. The percentage of people that want to tinker with a phone (or tablet) vs. those that just want it to work is really small, otherwise, Apple wouldn't be so successful. I know most if us feel differently because we are passionate about the tech. and customizing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FWIW, consumers *do* care about crapware. Friends know I'm an Android developer and the first thing they always ask, without a doubt, is how to remove ESPN or Avatar or other crap from their phones. Especially when people move over from the iPhone world, they are inundated by crapware.
I think the biggest selling point of the Nexus phones SHOULD be that they are mostly crapware-free, although I consider Twitter and Facebook superfluous.
ICS will let you disable system apps, which is going to be a huge bonus for users as long as the carriers don't find a way of blocking that feature.
If you believe that whole "implied agreement" thing, go check out what Sprint customers are dealing with now that Sprint yanked their unlimited data plan out from under them.
Eliminating as you call it ,Crapwear is not going to happen in Android period. You seem to have forgotten, Google is a advertising company. That's where they make the overwhelming majority of their income, about $12.5 billion last quarter. Android is a platform for leveraging that market.
The Nexus One phones were actually targeted toward developers and as such were pretty clean and open. The new Nexus Galaxy is a consumer phone.
Google doesn't make a dime from ESPN and Avatar pre-installs. The money they make on Admob is mostly from apps that users opt to download. Maps, which has some sponsored results, isn't crapware by most people's standards.
If Google had no interest in helping people out with clean phones, they wouldn't have put the ICS feature in to disable system apps.
As for implied agreement, see that those customers are angry. It's not like you're going to sue Sprint (although class actions do happen), but if you advertise one thing and do another, people get mad.
well ...
barry99705 said:
Who says they have to have a schedule? MS doesn't have a schedule. Also, didn't MS charge for one of the Windows Mobile updates? Pretty sure I'm remembering that correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS most certainly does have a schedule for updating all of their devices to Mango, by the way. And, they are updating every single one built by every single manufacturer. The schedule is available online. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsphone/en-us/features/update-schedules.aspx MS didn't charge end users for updates and never has, but the expectation is that all phones built around the same time period will have similar capabilities with regard to updating. With Android it's, "build first, slap the OS on later and see what works." In other words, it's not an OS-based market, it's a device-based market (I can't stand that word "ecosystem" unless it's used to describe biological phenomena, sorry).
What it boils down to is consumer expectation, as brought up by other commenters.
If Google were to charge for updates, they'd have a greater obligation to fulfill the promises made: update schedules, device lifespan, OS compatibility, etc. That would put more pressure on manufacturers to adhere to Google's whims, instead of allowing manufacturers to do whatever they want in terms of price/OS--that was the freedom and flexibility that the Open Handset Alliance was meant to offer manufacturers.
Android is too unwieldy and manufacturers (and Google) are making more money just throwing things out there and hoping that they stick than they would if they solidify anything related to the software on devices--which is what they would have to do if they began to charge for the OS.
They also run the risk of exposure to even more complicated licensing issues. You thought the Oracle debacle is bad, if Google were charging end users directly it would have been far worse for them because of the money they would have made on IP that came from sources that: (1) didn't put it out there to be 'profitable' to any one particular entity, (2) didn't put it out there in the first place (allegedly), etc.
Read this for a good perspective of where Google and the Android update schedules actually sit at the moment. Google tired to get a group of hardware makers to agree to timely updates and virtually nothing came from it. Google has no control.
http://www.tested.com/news/what-googles-android-update-deal-means-for-fragmentation/2310/
Sad but true.
I wish there were a Nexus with a physical keyboard.
I remain optimistic for the Flyer. I don't expect much from HTC, but I believe one of our independent developers will pick the ICS ball up and run with it.
HTC has shown a previous pattern of leaving their customers behind. I hope it is changing, but I don't count on it.
Hey Guys, just came across this article and thought it was a good read. Do you think Android will partner with Asus to make their own brand of tablets...will it be better for us as Android buyers in the future if Android had more control by being the hardware as well as software maker. or do you feel like this is turning them into Apple-lite
http://www.androidauthority.com/will-google-abandon-android-71483/
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
detta123 said:
Seems like Android Authority is a bit desperate for clicks. That is all I got from it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah basically..lol.
they taking the whole Asus Manufacturing Google Nexus tablet and spinning it into some crazy apocalyptic Android dying story. Android will be fine. Android growth has really actually just begun. we haven't seen nothing yet. Google needs a nexus tablet to instill confidence and optimism in Androids future. It can almost be guareenteed to attract more developers to android ecosystem. If android was dying, I'd seriously doubt they'd be making a tablet with Asus, restructured Google Play Store, and Making Google store purchases possible to be made online by anyone. All these recent moves Google has made is pointing to something big coming up.
Android for LIFE!
All of my current and future devices will continue to be android.
It is just way too much fun, IOS sucks.
If android goes away, I will go back to laptops.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
I dont even want to read that article Android brings profit and is a huge thing worldwide. Why would you abandon something like this? Of course its not Google's biggest income generator but it has so much potential and it serves as competition to Apple.
Google deciding to do some hardware manufacturing? I really like that. They probably learn from it and be able to improve the software/hardware.
There is one thing though they could do to android imho. I like some of the 3rd party GUI's that come with android devices. For example HTC Sense. They add alot of nice widgets and great looking uniform base apps.
BUT. At the price of getting important updates like ICS half a year later? No... No.
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
clouds5 said:
For me there are 2 ways those companies could handle the situation. Make custom UI's optional. Let people use vanilla Android if they want fast upgrades and let them switch to custom UI's once their done. Or just open all the bootloaders and release all kernel source and stuff to XDA so people can make their own roms and updates (which usually are better anyway...).
Apart from that Android is just totally great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Yeah i've read about that too. i dont think custom UIs need to go away. Sometimes they're great. And with tegra3 phones coming out i guess the performance wont be such an issue anymore.
But i'd love to see some change in that situation. I think updates shouldnt be delayed more than 1 month. Not like half a year.
The article is the usual blog filler; title is admittedly clickbait. Then again, most news & blog sites have SEO'ed titles to varying degree. Yellow journalism used to be on the fringe. Now, it's the way to get clicks. That's the cost of "free" content.
Idle gossip aside, Google's strategy for tablet adoption has not worked. It will need to do something, and soon. We should know by Google I/O in June, if not earlier.
IMO, the rumors presently circulating--direct-sale of cheapo tablet & online store--aren't enough. The problems are more fundamental, and are myriad. To me, what's discouraging aren't the obstacles, but that I haven't seen any signal from Google leadership that they recognize the scope of the obstacles.
At any rate, Android won't suffer the fate of WebOS. It's entrenched on phones, and its open-source distribution will allow it to live on as a "hobbyist" OS, if nothing else.
Things move pretty fast in this mobile market, so we won't have long to wait, one way or the other.
Trolling done wrong.
A terrible excuse for either op-ed or journalism. sigh.
Seems this kid who wrote the article didn't get the point of android....
It amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products... it generates Google accounts which can be used for the almost infinite range of Google products. It helps to spread G+ and not to mention Google ad-words..
There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand... When you use it the normal way you pretty soon notice that Android is a Google product... you are asked to create a Google account, you have a ton of Google services pre-installed etc. .
Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort. Just because it spreads Google stuff. The power you have when 50% of the smart-phones world wide run with your is is enormous... Google does not have to worry too much about branding as long as the providers don't remove the Google-Products from it...
I see it like a commenter in the article, Google Tablet to fight the Kindle Fire... because it breaks the Google-branding... not so funny for Google...
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
e.mote said:
>Google bought Motorolla, why would they need to partner with ASUS?
Because Asus can make cheap tablets, eg the rumored $199 tab, and Moto can't. Secondly, because Google still needs to maintain some degree of impartiality. With declining vendor support (on tablets), it can ill afford to piss off the few remaining.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, the Motorola Xoom, great as it was(I owned one), was simply overpriced.
I do believe that in order to be widely accepted as being better than Apple, Google needs to seriously focus on getting better developer support. You can release the best tablet in the world, but if you do not have developer support, people will continue to flock to IOS. Lower the price of tablets while maintaining good quality standards, and gain developer support=win for Android
e.mote said:
>[Android] amplifies all the Google services. It gives Google a extremely huge platform to present their products...There is no essential need for a strong Google Phone brand...Android could be a losing deal and it would still be worth the effort.
These are all true. But IMO it misses the forest for the trees, the forest in this case being the next computing form factor, ie the tablet being a successor rather than adjunct of laptops. That should be the goal, not just an extension to sell more wares.
To be the next "computer," the OS has to do more, akin to the range of functions on desktop OS'es. Android, like iOS, lacks basic underpinnings--things like built-in networking, printing, support for peripheral devices, apps interoperability, etc etc.
The shortcoming doesn't affect Apple, because iOS has achieved critical mass on phones and tablets. Its success engenders 3rd-party support to address any deficit faced.
The other aspect not oft mentioned is that a bona fide OS needs support. One takeaway from a quick scan through these and other (official) Android forums is that OS support is grossly inadequate. As much complaints as there are in this forum, Asus is actually one of the better vendors for support. Users of Acer, Toshiba, and others, have given up on support. And these are enthusiasts. Think of how worse it would be for normal users.
The writing is on the wall: HW vendors don't have the expertise to support the OS. Google needs to do it. But with its current distribution philosophy, ie making AOSP code public and let HW vendors do what they will, Google can't do that. For it to support its OS, Google will need to follow the Microsoft path.
Getting its hands dirty with its own hardware may be a start, assuming Google better supports its product. But customer support has never been in Google's DNA, so I have my doubt that things would improve soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You make some interesting points, but I disagree that iOS is anywhere near being accepted as a PC replacement. In many important ways, Android is much farther along in this respect--access to the file system alone is one area. And, I think the idea that tablets will replace PCs is way overblown--having tried to use mine (even with the keyboard dock) as a replacement for my Windows notebook, I can testify that although some things are more convenient with tablets (like ebook reading, casual surfing, etc.), NOTHING is as efficient as with a "real" PC.
I could never do my job on any existing tablet, whether it's iOS or Android. I work with complex documents, use Photoshop for more than changing color tones, do some light video editing, etc. None of those are efficient (or even possible) on a tablet. Even the simple things like browsing, Twitter, etc., etc., are more efficient on a notebook or desktop. Again, a tablet is convenient--lightweight, long battery life, etc.--so it has its place alongside a real PC. But thinking it can replace a PC for most people is, I think, entirely unrealistic at this point.
Maybe that'll change in a few years, although I doubt even that. Seriously, who can imagine working EXCLUSIVELY on a 10" screen? And if a tablet becomes something that you plug into external monitors and keyboards and such, well then, ASUS is already mostly there with the Transformer series. And at that point what we'll have is just a more portable PC with external accessories. Once a tablet becomes complex enough in terms of network support, printing, peripheral devices like scanners, etc., then is it really a "tablet" any longer?
..........
demandarin said:
Actually Google is already consdidering this. read several articles on it. it's a great idea bit one catch, Phone carriers would hate it. those companies add those GUI to devices to differentiate themselves from other similar devices. I'd rather have vanilla android experience and not have bloat ui on top of it. A GUI on top of vanilla android will never be faster out the box than a plain vanilla experience. one suggestion was to make the various companies GUI removable if the user chooses. they could use that companies GUI or go vanilla route or use one of the many launchers available on android. Usually a company GUI will be more integrated and stable than one from marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
sparkym3 said:
I was hearing at one point that Google was looking to simplify the custom GUI creation (just a custom GUI xml that the manufacturer can push that the vanilla OS will honor) so that even if there are large changes underneath by Google, there is no change needed by the manufacturer prior to release (assuming the manufacturer is only making GUI changes and not anything deeper).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was what it was involving. thanks for pointing out those details.
Link doesn't work anymore!
Many of you out there haven’t got the chance to taste Google’s Ice Cream Sandwich yet, the latest version of Android operating system for both, tablets and smartphones. However, for us who have tried it, we can still dream and speculate and even suggest features for the next release of the proved to be a successful mobile operating system and the devices that operate on it.
Everyone wants to try out the new stuff first, but with the current upgrade path it’s kind of exhausting that you need to wait 12 months to get it for your device. Sure it’s difficult to adapt the latest features in the new version of OS with older ones, but speeding the task will improve the manufacturers’ market share and will satisfy the users.
A voice activated assistant like the one in the iPhone 4S, Siri, or the ones already in the market, will be a definite killer in Android, since iOS earned its success due to the integrated app. What we, the fans, want to see in the next system update is an app much better than the ones that are already on the market; integrating a full featured app will please the fans, since, if it’s released, it will be integrated with every service provided by Google, which everyone surely uses now.
Since Android devices are often criticized for being unsecure, improving the security should be a top priority; although the last update added new security options, it still feels that something is missing, a master password to lock the device. The master password will block unauthorized access to the download or recovery mode on the device in case it got stolen, since the device cannot be accessed with a lock code. In case the SIM card is changed, flashing a new firmware to the device will bypass that unless there is a master lock key to prevent that.
Speed and light, everyone is looking for that. When it comes to Android, no one can deny that, but the reason behind it is simply dual-core and quad-core devices that the system operates on. They cost a lot and not everyone can afford them, so they have to get mid or sometimes low-end devices. Google should consider this and try to work on a light version based on the computing speed of those devices
As for battery efficiency, Apple has done a good job or even a greater one with their energy efficiency plan for the iPhone more than Google has. Google needs to consider this, as not all Android powered devices can last long with their dual core and quad-core power-draining processors. Indeed, the battery life has improved over the latest updates but it can get better and faster this time. Google should pack the next OS with a better management app in the user interface alongside an effective energy plan.
In general, the Android OS is all about customization. This is what makes it a great OS, but to use a third party app for anything we want to add to the device is not a good idea at all. Every app that we use on the device is going to drain more power, keyboards, launchers, music players and the list goes long. Simply, what the Android community out there wants is an OS that works for them, secure, fast and light.
original post
I agree especially about battery life. I will buy Motorola Razr Maxx just for the battery and this phone proves that bigger batteries won't effect the size or weight.
Sources and references : This list, by Charles Hudson, was a part of a talk he gave this week at an event put on by Yetizen. Betable reposted it on their blog and we couldn’t resist re-re-posting it.
1. Fragmentation
Problem: Unlike the iPhone, there are many types of Android devices, which leads to OS fragmentation, varying screen size and resolutions, and types of hardware. This means that the user experience can vastly differ from user to user. Also, developers can drown themselves in work trying to make their game compatible with everything.
Solution: Charles suggests that you test your game on multiple devices to make sure the user experience can consistent across a sea of devices. He said that he bought old, “well loved” Android phones from resellers to cheaply test his game on each type of hardware. As for OS, if you need to draw a line in the sand and not supporting older OS versions to provide a consistent experience, then do so. According to Ngmoco, which spoke later in the evening, 94% of Android gamers are on 2.1 or above, so you won’t miss many customers by cutting out the troublesome 1.6 and 1.7 versions.
2. Development & Testing
Problem: Because it is so easy to launch new applications and versions on Android – you are essentially just one button away from pushing new versions – developers can sometimes get trigger happy. This can overwhelm users and stop them from updating your game.
Solution: Android users typically don’t update their apps as often as iOS users, so Charles recommended a minimum period of one week between app updates, excepting urgent bug fixes of course. And as we mentioned before, you should test your game on each major type of phone and supported OS version before an update goes live. This can prevent unforseen hiccups and help you avoid those urgent bug fixes.
3. Metrics
Problem: Developers are typically flying totally blind when it comes to the way that users are interacting with their app, especially on Android.
Solution: Look into integrating with an analytics platform that fits your budget. Google Analytics is free, but can be a trickier integration as it isn’t built for mobile. If you are looking for an easier and more mobile-friendly solution, there are mobile game analytics platforms that are free to try such as Flurry and Localytics.
4. Platform Wars
Problem: 23% of all smartphone customers are on iOS devices, and conventional wisdom states that iOS users are more likely to pay for apps and complete in-app purchases than their Android counterparts.
Solution: To paraphrase Charles Hudson, “it is better to build a great game on one platform instead of a mediocre game on two platforms.” Each platform has different capabilities, so focus your resources in building an awesome game on one platform before you worry about iOS. Bionic Panda is an Android only game studio, so Charles clearly practices what he preaches.