4 ms·

It was annoying enough that my computers eventually became too slow to run the newest versions of Windows/Ubuntu/Mac OS. I can't imagine the the frustration And

It was annoying enough that my computers eventually became too slow to run the newest versions of Windows/Ubuntu/Mac OS. I can't imagine the the frustration Android users must feel to be denied updates not because of obsolete hardware but because of handset and carrier neglect. Google should step in and assure that all Android (tm) hardware can be updated to vanilla releases of the operating system without the need to be a technology wizard.

bane 15y ago
In some ways it reminds me of the very early days of PCs. An early consumer really needed to know their stuff when buying a PC back then. Here's some common scenarios from back in those days: - Buy a Tandy? Sorry, weird video card and sound controller meant limited software selection. - PC Jr? Similar. But entirely different from the Tandy hardware. Even had a different kind of VGA and oddball joystick ports! - 5.25" drive when the software is only in 3.5"? - How about double sided disks? - Double density? - Oddball keyboard connector on your AT&T brand 8088? - No Parallel port? No printer. - No PS/2 port, but the needed trackball peripheral needs it? - Weird IBM MCA slots? Can't get a sound card. - Wrong UART chip? Stuck at 2400bps. - Hercules graphics card? good luck with that. All of these things were on systems that were "PC Compatible", and were advertised as such, but made owning and operating these things a serious pain. It was a loose "compatibility". If you had just the right hardware mix and match, and just the right drivers loaded in the just the right parts of memory, you could get 85% of the software to work. Later software sent users through extensive setup processes with questions like: "What DMA assignment?", "Hercules graphics?", "CGA, EGA? or VGA (not PC Jr. Compatible?", "EMS?" etc. etc. It's not quite that bad with Android, it seems about 95% of the software I try on my devices works fine. But it's still kind of a pain, and useful to keep the old days in mind.
- talmand 15y ago
  Ah, the good old days. Me thinks the kids these days are spoiled by all this "plug and play" nonsense and video game consoles that don't require any configuration on the user's part. Some people seem to expect perfection out of the gate and aren't willing to give things time to settle down. Not everyone can or wants to be Apple. Plus too many ignore the fact that, in the US at least, cell carriers are fully willing to do things for their benefit to the detriment of their customers.
- ConstantineXVI 15y ago
  Just like the old days, graphics are the big sticking point. Most current shipping devices have some mix of the following: - Resolution: * HVGA (mostly only low-end phones now) * WVGA ("standard") * FWGVGA (early Motorola) * qHD (most high-end phones) * WSVGA (7" tablets) * 720 (Rezound, Galaxy Nexus, more soon) * WXGA (10" tablets) - Graphics * Adreno (Qualcomm) * GeForce (nVidia Tegra) * ARM Mali (SGSII, less the T-Mobile USA variant) * PowerVR (everyone else)
nextparadigms 15y ago
Maybe virtualization will help? http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/android-virtualization-its-time/15588 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/android-virtualization-its-... I also know that Cortex A15 has hardware virtualization, so that might make things easier, too.
- wmf 15y ago
  Enjoy the overhead of running a new version of Android on top of the old version.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    I was thinking more in terms of virtual universal drivers, than virtualizing the whole OS.
masklinn 15y ago
> Google should step in and assure that all Android (tm) hardware can be updated to vanilla releases of the operating system without the need to be a technology wizard. Except that's not the case, because all Android-powered hardware require drivers which are not part of Android itself, and are bundled by integrators. That's one of the reasons why efforts like Cyanogenmod have "supported devices" and there's a different file to download for each device. In fact, Apple's the same thing: each device has its own firmware because hardware differences mean they don't bundle the same drivers, even if 95% of the firmware is the same across the device without the last 5% it just can not work.
- ChrisLTD 15y ago
  Google could change the licensing terms to require free distribution of the drivers.
  - masklinn 15y ago
    Google is a lot of things, but one thing they're not is stupid: drivers control may not even be in the hands of the device builders, and is likely tied to agreements with manufacturers and parts providers. This requirement would make support for any version of Android containing it dive into the ground.
    - ChrisLTD 15y ago
      I'm not sure why this would be a doomsday scenario. PC parts manufacturers gladly let you download drivers from their websites for use on any computer with a variety of operating systems. In the end, don't parts manufacturers need Android more than vice versa?
      - masklinn 15y ago
        > In the end, don't parts manufacturers need Android more than vice versa? No, as far as parts go Android phones are run-of-the-mill smartphones (as are pretty much all others), it does not matter what OS they run the parts are the same. Parts manufacturers only need smartphones being built, and that won't stop, Android or not.

bane 15y ago

In some ways it reminds me of the very early days of PCs. An early consumer really needed to know their stuff when buying a PC back then. Here's some common scenarios from back in those days: - Buy a Tandy? Sorry, weird video card and sound controller meant limited software selection. - PC Jr? Similar. But entirely different from the Tandy hardware. Even had a different kind of VGA and oddball joystick ports! - 5.25" drive when the software is only in 3.5"? - How about double sided disks? - Double density? - Oddball keyboard connector on your AT&T brand 8088? - No Parallel port? No printer. - No PS/2 port, but the needed trackball peripheral needs it? - Weird IBM MCA slots? Can't get a sound card. - Wrong UART chip? Stuck at 2400bps. - Hercules graphics card? good luck with that. All of these things were on systems that were "PC Compatible", and were advertised as such, but made owning and operating these things a serious pain. It was a loose "compatibility". If you had just the right hardware mix and match, and just the right drivers loaded in the just the right parts of memory, you could get 85% of the software to work. Later software sent users through extensive setup processes with questions like: "What DMA assignment?", "Hercules graphics?", "CGA, EGA? or VGA (not PC Jr. Compatible?", "EMS?" etc. etc. It's not quite that bad with Android, it seems about 95% of the software I try on my devices works fine. But it's still kind of a pain, and useful to keep the old days in mind.

talmand 15y ago
Ah, the good old days. Me thinks the kids these days are spoiled by all this "plug and play" nonsense and video game consoles that don't require any configuration on the user's part. Some people seem to expect perfection out of the gate and aren't willing to give things time to settle down. Not everyone can or wants to be Apple. Plus too many ignore the fact that, in the US at least, cell carriers are fully willing to do things for their benefit to the detriment of their customers.
ConstantineXVI 15y ago
Just like the old days, graphics are the big sticking point. Most current shipping devices have some mix of the following: - Resolution: * HVGA (mostly only low-end phones now) * WVGA ("standard") * FWGVGA (early Motorola) * qHD (most high-end phones) * WSVGA (7" tablets) * 720 (Rezound, Galaxy Nexus, more soon) * WXGA (10" tablets) - Graphics * Adreno (Qualcomm) * GeForce (nVidia Tegra) * ARM Mali (SGSII, less the T-Mobile USA variant) * PowerVR (everyone else)

nextparadigms 15y ago

Maybe virtualization will help? http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/android-virtualization-its-time/15588 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/android-virtualization-its-... I also know that Cortex A15 has hardware virtualization, so that might make things easier, too.

wmf 15y ago
Enjoy the overhead of running a new version of Android on top of the old version.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  I was thinking more in terms of virtual universal drivers, than virtualizing the whole OS.

masklinn 15y ago

> Google should step in and assure that all Android (tm) hardware can be updated to vanilla releases of the operating system without the need to be a technology wizard. Except that's not the case, because all Android-powered hardware require drivers which are not part of Android itself, and are bundled by integrators. That's one of the reasons why efforts like Cyanogenmod have "supported devices" and there's a different file to download for each device. In fact, Apple's the same thing: each device has its own firmware because hardware differences mean they don't bundle the same drivers, even if 95% of the firmware is the same across the device without the last 5% it just can not work.

ChrisLTD 15y ago
Google could change the licensing terms to require free distribution of the drivers.
- masklinn 15y ago
  Google is a lot of things, but one thing they're not is stupid: drivers control may not even be in the hands of the device builders, and is likely tied to agreements with manufacturers and parts providers. This requirement would make support for any version of Android containing it dive into the ground.
  - ChrisLTD 15y ago
    I'm not sure why this would be a doomsday scenario. PC parts manufacturers gladly let you download drivers from their websites for use on any computer with a variety of operating systems. In the end, don't parts manufacturers need Android more than vice versa?
    - masklinn 15y ago
      > In the end, don't parts manufacturers need Android more than vice versa? No, as far as parts go Android phones are run-of-the-mill smartphones (as are pretty much all others), it does not matter what OS they run the parts are the same. Parts manufacturers only need smartphones being built, and that won't stop, Android or not.