3 ms·
15 years - so only four years less than MS-DOS ('81 - 2000) by which point it was considered hairy and terrible? I'm no big fan of Google, but 15 years is plen
by japanoise 7y ago
15 years - so only four years less than MS-DOS ('81 - 2000) by which point it was considered hairy and terrible?
I'm no big fan of Google, but 15 years is plenty long enough. And really, Android is definitely struggling and showing its age by this point.
- bulldoa 7y agoOut of curiosity, why is android struggling? What aspect of it needs improvement?
- cwyers 7y agoThere is no sense in which MS-DOS died in 2000.
- coldtea 7y agoI guess the parent means when (NT-Kernel based) Windows XP replaced Windows ME, which was the last version to run on top of MS-DOS (iirc).
- japanoise 7y agoWikipedia lists the last release of MS-DOS as version 8.0 in 2000, linking to the page for Windows ME. This is what the comments above were alluding to, a "final release" before the project is abandoned. Installations still continue, in the same way there's probably places still doing the books on a C64, but it's no longer supported.
- Benjammer 7y ago>Android is definitely struggling and showing its age by this point I have the opposite viewpoint on this. I've worked on mobile the last 5 years or so, and dedicated native Android the last 2.5 years. The last year or two have been dramatic revolutions in the Android developer experience, from my perspective. Things like ConstraintLayout and full Kotlin support with ktx have opened up a new world for me compared to the state of the art several years ago. Then you look at companies like Peloton using large form-factor Android devices in their core products, and Samsung DEx using Android as a seamless mobile<->desktop computer. To me it seems like Android is just hitting it's stride. Who knows though, it's Google.