6 ms·

Google's inability to get new software into user's hands is definitely going to be a problem going forward. I'm actually surprised it hasn't burnt them worse al

by jsz0 15y ago

Google's inability to get new software into user's hands is definitely going to be a problem going forward. I'm actually surprised it hasn't burnt them worse already. Take ICS for example. It was a very good update for Android yet by the time it reaches even 25% marketshare iOS6 and Windows Phone 8 will probably be out. It's quite possible iOS7 will be released before ICS/JB comprise even 50% of the Android market. Is that really sustainable?

cpeterso 15y ago
If Google cared supporting users on old devices, they could continue to add features to apps on old OS versions (even if they can't get carriers to push OS updates). Consider that Google's Chrome Beta I'd only available for ICS.
zanny 15y ago
This I feel the meat of the problem. When it is easier to upgrade an IOS device over a Windows PC, and Apple supports the same devices for longer than Android (which being a tiny bit open source opens up easy backporting) it is strange that people wonder why no one likes classic Android as much. Hint: When Siri came out, everyone with a Droid phone wanted it too. When the feature complete competitor comes out in full force, probably in Android 5? they will all be hilariously frustrated with how they can't use it because they have a 2 year old phone.
- myko 15y ago
  Any reason Google's Siri counterpart would be limited to new versions of the OS? Most (all?) of Google's core apps are available on older versions of the OS. In fact I'm not sure I understand why Siri isn't available on the iPhone 4/iPad 2, etc.
huggyface 15y ago
Google's inability to get new software into user's hands is definitely going to be a problem going forward. I'm actually surprised it hasn't burnt them worse already. Take ICS for example. Google is endlessly iterating their core service applications - mapping, navigation, voice recognition, gmail, places, and so on. With Chrome they are quite welcomely decoupling the browser (long overdue), though that is one of the only major dependencies on ICS. The notion that the operating system needs to iterate for Google to move the base forward is not accurate. Which is interesting seeing the focus on ICS, which makes me wonder whether we're past the point of diminishing returns. People desperately wanted each of the prior iterations because they fixed fundamental flaws in the operating system (e.g. slow runtimes, bloat, etc). From Gingerbread to ICS, however, is largely a "meh" affair on smartphones. Of course new devices come with it, but for the existing base it just isn't that compelling.
- cageface 15y ago
  The crucial fix in ICS is that it finally provides hardware accelerated rendering of the UI. This is going to go a long way towards finally silencing the complaints about Android being slow and unresponsive.
  - huggyface 15y ago
    The crucial fix in ICS is that it finally provides hardware accelerated rendering of the UI Honestly I see virtually no difference between 2.3 and 4.0 on the Galaxy S II when it comes to scrolling, etc. Indeed, if you turn on the development option that blinks the screen red when the main thread is blocked, it occurs all the time in the basic operating services and in most apps. Which correlates with the argument made by Hackman (? Hackwell?) regarding GPU offloading not being the actual issue: Instead it's the OS still not, essentially, giving enough respect to the UI. This still isn't a solved problem, beyond simple brute-forcing it (e.g. a HTC One X).
    - colig 15y ago
      IIRC the Galaxy S II has had hardware acceleration from the start, provided by Samsung's modifications.
      - huggyface 15y ago
        Only the browser featured hardware acceleration. They couldn't unilaterally add it to apps -- the big benefit of ICS -- as there are limitations once you go to the hardware renderer.

by jsz0 15y ago

Google's inability to get new software into user's hands is definitely going to be a problem going forward. I'm actually surprised it hasn't burnt them worse already. Take ICS for example. It was a very good update for Android yet by the time it reaches even 25% marketshare iOS6 and Windows Phone 8 will probably be out. It's quite possible iOS7 will be released before ICS/JB comprise even 50% of the Android market. Is that really sustainable?

cpeterso 15y ago

If Google cared supporting users on old devices, they could continue to add features to apps on old OS versions (even if they can't get carriers to push OS updates). Consider that Google's Chrome Beta I'd only available for ICS.

zanny 15y ago

This I feel the meat of the problem. When it is easier to upgrade an IOS device over a Windows PC, and Apple supports the same devices for longer than Android (which being a tiny bit open source opens up easy backporting) it is strange that people wonder why no one likes classic Android as much. Hint: When Siri came out, everyone with a Droid phone wanted it too. When the feature complete competitor comes out in full force, probably in Android 5? they will all be hilariously frustrated with how they can't use it because they have a 2 year old phone.

myko 15y ago
Any reason Google's Siri counterpart would be limited to new versions of the OS? Most (all?) of Google's core apps are available on older versions of the OS. In fact I'm not sure I understand why Siri isn't available on the iPhone 4/iPad 2, etc.

huggyface 15y ago

Google's inability to get new software into user's hands is definitely going to be a problem going forward. I'm actually surprised it hasn't burnt them worse already. Take ICS for example. Google is endlessly iterating their core service applications - mapping, navigation, voice recognition, gmail, places, and so on. With Chrome they are quite welcomely decoupling the browser (long overdue), though that is one of the only major dependencies on ICS. The notion that the operating system needs to iterate for Google to move the base forward is not accurate. Which is interesting seeing the focus on ICS, which makes me wonder whether we're past the point of diminishing returns. People desperately wanted each of the prior iterations because they fixed fundamental flaws in the operating system (e.g. slow runtimes, bloat, etc). From Gingerbread to ICS, however, is largely a "meh" affair on smartphones. Of course new devices come with it, but for the existing base it just isn't that compelling.

cageface 15y ago
The crucial fix in ICS is that it finally provides hardware accelerated rendering of the UI. This is going to go a long way towards finally silencing the complaints about Android being slow and unresponsive.
- huggyface 15y ago
  The crucial fix in ICS is that it finally provides hardware accelerated rendering of the UI Honestly I see virtually no difference between 2.3 and 4.0 on the Galaxy S II when it comes to scrolling, etc. Indeed, if you turn on the development option that blinks the screen red when the main thread is blocked, it occurs all the time in the basic operating services and in most apps. Which correlates with the argument made by Hackman (? Hackwell?) regarding GPU offloading not being the actual issue: Instead it's the OS still not, essentially, giving enough respect to the UI. This still isn't a solved problem, beyond simple brute-forcing it (e.g. a HTC One X).
  - colig 15y ago
    IIRC the Galaxy S II has had hardware acceleration from the start, provided by Samsung's modifications.
    - huggyface 15y ago
      Only the browser featured hardware acceleration. They couldn't unilaterally add it to apps -- the big benefit of ICS -- as there are limitations once you go to the hardware renderer.