3 ms·

Speaking of Google specifically, my experience with third parties, even ones who are modestly well known is them not keeping up to date with the latest versions

Speaking of Google specifically, my experience with third parties, even ones who are modestly well known is them not keeping up to date with the latest versions of Google’s software and APIs and whatnot and things breaking and becoming less stable. Nobody is as committed to long term support of Google’s technology than Google themselves. Standards which should be interoperable in theory like Bluetooth have ambiguous specifications and the best way to ensure you don’t get bugs is to buy everything from the same company where even if they didn’t QA their own products you at least avoid the problem of Google and a third party pointing fingers at eachother. Interoperability is a great way to add functionality to your product you would never be able to add otherwise. It’s nice for customization. Yet from the consumer perspective I’m increasingly finding I prefer with dealing with as few different companies as I can get away with. This lets me get away with a greater amount of complexity without it biting me in the rear. From a business perspective, the focus on your own products over interoperability has an obvious appeal.

gumby 3y ago
> Speaking of Google specifically, my experience with third parties, even ones who are modestly well known is them not keeping up to date with the latest versions of Google’s software and APIs and whatnot and things breaking and becoming less stable. Nobody is as committed to long term support of Google’s technology than Google themselves. I assume that last sentence is sarcastic. API stability is pretty important in the real world (look at the system call interfaces of modern OSes for example); Google stepping their APIs (and then abandoning their products) is the opposite of commitment to long term support.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  Nah I meant it straight, compared to some of the vendors in the smarthome market Google themselves are a dream when it comes to support. Same goes for Android OEMs and Qualcomm. Notice how Google only offered 7 years of support on the Pixel after they stopped using Qualcomm’s chips? Google’s third parties are even worse than Google in terms of support and Google’s support is bad. It’s such a mess that I’m happy to pay more to avoid Google products nowadays.

gumby 3y ago

> Speaking of Google specifically, my experience with third parties, even ones who are modestly well known is them not keeping up to date with the latest versions of Google’s software and APIs and whatnot and things breaking and becoming less stable. Nobody is as committed to long term support of Google’s technology than Google themselves. I assume that last sentence is sarcastic. API stability is pretty important in the real world (look at the system call interfaces of modern OSes for example); Google stepping their APIs (and then abandoning their products) is the opposite of commitment to long term support.

faeriechangling 3y ago
Nah I meant it straight, compared to some of the vendors in the smarthome market Google themselves are a dream when it comes to support. Same goes for Android OEMs and Qualcomm. Notice how Google only offered 7 years of support on the Pixel after they stopped using Qualcomm’s chips? Google’s third parties are even worse than Google in terms of support and Google’s support is bad. It’s such a mess that I’m happy to pay more to avoid Google products nowadays.