5 ms·

>It's tempting to think of the Moto G as some kind of "Nexus Jr.," a cheaper way to buy into the clean UI and quick software updates that Google's reference pho

by pedrocr 13y ago

>It's tempting to think of the Moto G as some kind of "Nexus Jr.," a cheaper way to buy into the clean UI and quick software updates that Google's reference phones have always received. However, Google is making no promises about versions of Android beyond version 4.4, and speculating about whether Android 4.5 or 5.0 or whatever will roll out to the Moto phones as quickly as KitKat is a pointless exercise. Again shooting themselves in the foot.

stusmall 13y ago
How so? The quick software updates is a selling point to devs but not so much to consumers. We aren't their target market. It seems like a good place to cut costs since you don't have the huge reaccuring engineering costs and there is much more freedom on part selection
- alexmat 13y ago
  Anecdotal point, but my Mom is much happier to get an update with a new phone than to have an old phone updated.
  - winterswift 13y ago
    I kind of wonder if that's because a lot of updates are rolled out poorly to older devices. On my previous two phones, I've ended up running CyanogenMod or another third-party ROM, even at the same base Android version at the stock OTA updates, because many times even the RC versions run better than what's getting pushed by the carrier. Verizon customer here though, so I don't know if other networks are better about that. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if that effect (wanting a new phone over an update) is intentional.
    - derekp7 13y ago
      Part of it is just change. One day, I needed to pull up the map on my Nexus phone -- and it had a completely different interface to it. I had to sit in a parking lot for an extra 15 minutes to get it to do what I wanted. Now I've got KitKat, and the phone dialer has changed -- I have to hit an extra button to get all my contacts, and I don't like the "premium" spots being automatically populated (there are only 3 large icons, and room for two smaller icons, in the quick-access screen). The most important contact is the one I need right then. Oh, and I also have to re-agree to the license terms on a number of apps whenever I launch them the first time after an upgrade. And my tethering is no longer working. And the flashlight app that worked fine is now rebooting the phone randomly after it is on for a few seconds. At this point, I'm ready to wipe and re-install the older OS version.
      - lostlogin 13y ago
        Depending on what flashlight app that is, crashing might actually improve it. http://m.fastcompany.com/3023042/fast-feed/this-popular-flashlight-app-has-been-secretly-your-sharing-location-and-device-id http://m.fastcompany.com/3023042/fast-feed/this-popular-flas...
        derekp7 13y ago
        In this case, it was the free/free one from F-droid -- I always go there first for utility-type apps, before hitting one of the app stores. I think this is actually why I was so upset, is I don't want to have to resort to a flashlight app (or any utility for that matter) that may be doing other things behind the scenes.
- pedrocr 13y ago
  Google is interested in building Android as a platform. Having 80% of your install base stuck 4 versions behind[1] is a crappy way of doing it. Even after they've moved more and more of the platform into the Play frameworks you're still leaving users without a bunch of improvements to the core platform, not to mention security fixes. iOS is miles ahead on this front exactly because it controls the hardware. That Google doesn't do the same now that it also controls the hardware seems short-sighted. Building a 150$ great phone would allow them to set a feature/quality floor for the market. If they forced their suppliers so the hardware in these phones is properly supported upstream, targeting new versions of Android should be pretty easy. When Ubuntu launches a new version it doesn't need to go and retrofit it to the thousand different types of laptop out there. The state of Android though is that the GPU/Camera/whatever drivers are binary blobs locked in to a specific kernel version. [1] https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html
  - mgkimsal 13y ago
    and they could/should have done this 4 years ago, minus the hardware, simply by tightening the licensing model. you want to say you're "android" and use our software? You have conform to these minimums. most people could predict from a mile away that when there's no restrictions on it, the carriers and manufacturers will generally race to the bottom in terms of quality and support. ESPECIALLY when the google name is tangentially attached to something, why would they bother making a good hardware model or updating it regularly? laypeople - who they are targeting - will blame google before they blame a handset maker or carrier.
    - cbr 13y ago
      Four years ago Android was well behind iOS, RIM was still around, OEMs were still considering having their own smartphone OSes, and Google had minimal leverage. There's a good chance the OEMs would have refused to go with an Android with a tighter licensing model.
  - fixedd 13y ago
    Point in case: I have a Galaxy Nexus that is fewer than two years old that won't receive any future releases because it's old enough they don't want to bother with.... not that it isn't capable... they just don't want to bother updating devices that are older than X (where X = less than the average contract length in the US).
CJefferson 13y ago
Guessing (possibly incorrectly), one reason they might not want to promise upgrades is in case the hardware simply can't handle it.
- cmelbye 13y ago
  Probably true, but they're still shooting themselves in the foot. Apple is still supporting a device from 2010 with software updates.
  - oh_sigh 13y ago
    Have you used an apple phone from 2010? Yes, they provide updates, but the updates make the phone incredibly slow and almost unusable. I'm not implying that apple intentionally does planned obsolescence updates, but that is what happens when you run new software on old hardware.
    - potatolicious 13y ago
      There's a middle ground here though. The iPhone 4 is legitimately pretty shitty on iOS7, but the 4S runs the newest OS just fine. I've tested some pretty demanding apps on 4S/iOS7 and the thing barely breaks a sweat. And that's a 2 year-old phone. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect at least one major update out of new hardware, even low-end.
      - oh_sigh 13y ago
        That's fine. the 4s, the oldest model phone that actually continues to work with their software updates, came out 80% through 2011. That's a little different than saying apple still supports phones that came out in 2010.
        fixedd 13y ago
        The Galaxy Nexus was launched in the US 2 years ago today. It was sold until about 1 year ago, by Google. They are refusing KitKat for it due to it being obsolete. A (barely more than) one-year-old NEXUS phone is obsolete......

by pedrocr 13y ago

stusmall 13y ago

How so? The quick software updates is a selling point to devs but not so much to consumers. We aren't their target market. It seems like a good place to cut costs since you don't have the huge reaccuring engineering costs and there is much more freedom on part selection

alexmat 13y ago
Anecdotal point, but my Mom is much happier to get an update with a new phone than to have an old phone updated.
- winterswift 13y ago
  I kind of wonder if that's because a lot of updates are rolled out poorly to older devices. On my previous two phones, I've ended up running CyanogenMod or another third-party ROM, even at the same base Android version at the stock OTA updates, because many times even the RC versions run better than what's getting pushed by the carrier. Verizon customer here though, so I don't know if other networks are better about that. I also wouldn't be terribly surprised if that effect (wanting a new phone over an update) is intentional.
  - derekp7 13y ago
    Part of it is just change. One day, I needed to pull up the map on my Nexus phone -- and it had a completely different interface to it. I had to sit in a parking lot for an extra 15 minutes to get it to do what I wanted. Now I've got KitKat, and the phone dialer has changed -- I have to hit an extra button to get all my contacts, and I don't like the "premium" spots being automatically populated (there are only 3 large icons, and room for two smaller icons, in the quick-access screen). The most important contact is the one I need right then. Oh, and I also have to re-agree to the license terms on a number of apps whenever I launch them the first time after an upgrade. And my tethering is no longer working. And the flashlight app that worked fine is now rebooting the phone randomly after it is on for a few seconds. At this point, I'm ready to wipe and re-install the older OS version.
    - lostlogin 13y ago
      Depending on what flashlight app that is, crashing might actually improve it. http://m.fastcompany.com/3023042/fast-feed/this-popular-flashlight-app-has-been-secretly-your-sharing-location-and-device-id http://m.fastcompany.com/3023042/fast-feed/this-popular-flas...
      - derekp7 13y ago
        In this case, it was the free/free one from F-droid -- I always go there first for utility-type apps, before hitting one of the app stores. I think this is actually why I was so upset, is I don't want to have to resort to a flashlight app (or any utility for that matter) that may be doing other things behind the scenes.
pedrocr 13y ago
Google is interested in building Android as a platform. Having 80% of your install base stuck 4 versions behind[1] is a crappy way of doing it. Even after they've moved more and more of the platform into the Play frameworks you're still leaving users without a bunch of improvements to the core platform, not to mention security fixes. iOS is miles ahead on this front exactly because it controls the hardware. That Google doesn't do the same now that it also controls the hardware seems short-sighted. Building a 150$ great phone would allow them to set a feature/quality floor for the market. If they forced their suppliers so the hardware in these phones is properly supported upstream, targeting new versions of Android should be pretty easy. When Ubuntu launches a new version it doesn't need to go and retrofit it to the thousand different types of laptop out there. The state of Android though is that the GPU/Camera/whatever drivers are binary blobs locked in to a specific kernel version. [1] https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html
- mgkimsal 13y ago
  and they could/should have done this 4 years ago, minus the hardware, simply by tightening the licensing model. you want to say you're "android" and use our software? You have conform to these minimums. most people could predict from a mile away that when there's no restrictions on it, the carriers and manufacturers will generally race to the bottom in terms of quality and support. ESPECIALLY when the google name is tangentially attached to something, why would they bother making a good hardware model or updating it regularly? laypeople - who they are targeting - will blame google before they blame a handset maker or carrier.
  - cbr 13y ago
    Four years ago Android was well behind iOS, RIM was still around, OEMs were still considering having their own smartphone OSes, and Google had minimal leverage. There's a good chance the OEMs would have refused to go with an Android with a tighter licensing model.
- fixedd 13y ago
  Point in case: I have a Galaxy Nexus that is fewer than two years old that won't receive any future releases because it's old enough they don't want to bother with.... not that it isn't capable... they just don't want to bother updating devices that are older than X (where X = less than the average contract length in the US).

CJefferson 13y ago

Guessing (possibly incorrectly), one reason they might not want to promise upgrades is in case the hardware simply can't handle it.

cmelbye 13y ago
Probably true, but they're still shooting themselves in the foot. Apple is still supporting a device from 2010 with software updates.
- oh_sigh 13y ago
  Have you used an apple phone from 2010? Yes, they provide updates, but the updates make the phone incredibly slow and almost unusable. I'm not implying that apple intentionally does planned obsolescence updates, but that is what happens when you run new software on old hardware.
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    There's a middle ground here though. The iPhone 4 is legitimately pretty shitty on iOS7, but the 4S runs the newest OS just fine. I've tested some pretty demanding apps on 4S/iOS7 and the thing barely breaks a sweat. And that's a 2 year-old phone. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect at least one major update out of new hardware, even low-end.
    - oh_sigh 13y ago
      That's fine. the 4s, the oldest model phone that actually continues to work with their software updates, came out 80% through 2011. That's a little different than saying apple still supports phones that came out in 2010.
      - fixedd 13y ago
        The Galaxy Nexus was launched in the US 2 years ago today. It was sold until about 1 year ago, by Google. They are refusing KitKat for it due to it being obsolete. A (barely more than) one-year-old NEXUS phone is obsolete......