4 ms·
I don't think the problem you're addressing (new features being slow) is the problem the regulator had. I believe the problem was that the updates made existin
by Youden 8y ago
I don't think the problem you're addressing (new features being slow) is the problem the regulator had.
I believe the problem was that the updates made existing functionality slower. e.g. the same Facebook app you had before the update scrolls slower afterwards or the old launcher is replaced with one that's more jittery, without letting you use the old one.
Adding new features is fine, just don't break the old ones.
- azinman2 8y agoExcept if part of the new features is a rewrite of display output that takes advantage of new hardware features / assumptions in ram characteristics, then that can be both a new feature and slow down older phones at the same time.
- emn13 8y agoGiven the actual changes apple+samsung made it's hard to argue this was in any way necessary - they chose to prioritize making the old phones look more like the new ones, which makes sense from their point of view because they want to encourage upgrades - so maximizing (visual) consistency at the cost of sluggishness is much better than maximizing quality for old phones at the cost of making phone differences more apparent. And in any case: they're free not to offer feature upgrades to old phones; I just doubt that's a wise choice in the market. If they really can't provide a few updates and reasonable performance - good riddance, their successors surely will.
- vokep 8y agoThen you don't include that in the build of the update for the older models it doesn't apply to, or you include both approaches to output and choose which is appropriate at runtime.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoCould they have saved themselves by giving users an informed choice: "this update will harm performance but improves security and gives access to new features; your choice" (imagined release note on update clickthrough) ?