4 ms·

I think it's very valid criticism and it can't really be compared with Windows. There's many differences: - Windows has a lot of APIs and hardware abstraction

by dendory 15y ago

I think it's very valid criticism and it can't really be compared with Windows. There's many differences: - Windows has a lot of APIs and hardware abstraction levels. Microsoft has always been known to change things very, very slowly, and keep backward compatibility. - Hardware makers don't mess with Windows nearly as much as they do with Android. They will install a Norton trial and that's it. They don't remove the UI and put their own. - Microsoft acts as a gate to what innovation hardware vendors can bring in, even more so today with driver testing and signing. Remember back in the day when an OEM did something crazy you'd get BSODs from bad drivers. Now that doesn't happen anymore, because everything is so much more robust. Android is still no where near that, and Google isn't doing much, relying on the open community.

kaffiene 15y ago
If you beleive that Windows is backwards compatible then you have never released a game on Windows.
huggyface 15y ago
There's many differences None of your differences are really the differences you think they are. Android has a lot of APIs and hardware abstraction levels. Of course it does or it wouldn't work across over a thousand devices with a pretty high degree of success. OpenGL ES 2.0 itself is an abstraction that has allowed for lots of triple-A (relative to mobile) iOS apps to painlessly get ported to the NDK on Android. To get the market and the Google apps -- to be a Google sanctioned Android device -- the maker has to pass the Android compatibility tests. Should they be more stringent? Absolutely, but they exist and have done a good job. The linked article is terrible, and horrendously biased, using exaggerated language at every turn. It makes completely unsupported claims at every turn. What Android has accomplished is amazing, and the level of compatibility is incredibly high, but yes with over a thousand devices, not all of which are certified, hundreds of millions of users, and hundreds of thousands of apps, you will find problems. Big surprise.

by dendory 15y ago

kaffiene 15y ago

If you beleive that Windows is backwards compatible then you have never released a game on Windows.

huggyface 15y ago

There's many differences None of your differences are really the differences you think they are. Android has a lot of APIs and hardware abstraction levels. Of course it does or it wouldn't work across over a thousand devices with a pretty high degree of success. OpenGL ES 2.0 itself is an abstraction that has allowed for lots of triple-A (relative to mobile) iOS apps to painlessly get ported to the NDK on Android. To get the market and the Google apps -- to be a Google sanctioned Android device -- the maker has to pass the Android compatibility tests. Should they be more stringent? Absolutely, but they exist and have done a good job. The linked article is terrible, and horrendously biased, using exaggerated language at every turn. It makes completely unsupported claims at every turn. What Android has accomplished is amazing, and the level of compatibility is incredibly high, but yes with over a thousand devices, not all of which are certified, hundreds of millions of users, and hundreds of thousands of apps, you will find problems. Big surprise.