4 ms·

I bet that not supporting those are intended. I don't get why there is always this need to support old tech. Can't we not just move forward?

genericacct 12y ago
Both my android devices run 2.3 and I'm using highcharts without problems on both. Which is why I won't probably be using this.
- smt88 12y ago
  Why? You're like one of those people who still uses Windows XP. Spend $100 and get a device that runs something released in the last SIX years.
  - duckmysick 12y ago
    But 2.3 (Gingerbread) was released in December 2010, so his device indeed runs something released in the last six years. In an ideal world (for software and hardware vendors, at least) we would be replacing devices with their latest versions as soon as they come out and backward compatibility wouldn't be a problem. However, I can imagine a situation where spending $100 on a new phone is a luxury and not everyone can afford it. If a phone makes calls, sends text messages, and connects to the Internet, it's still usable.
    - smt88 12y ago
      You're right about the release date. Not sure why I thought 2008. Like XP, Gingerbread has unpatched security vulnerabilities. Having a mobile phone with up-to-date security is well worth spending $99 (for a Moto G, for example). I get that not everyone can afford something like that, but it's like car insurance. You absolutely can't afford to have your identity stolen.
      - duckmysick 12y ago
        I think it's more like an old car versus a new car. Having a new one is a better choice since it has more features, it's safer, it's more fuel-efficient, it pollutes less. Yet there are consumers who consciously choose older cars because in their mind lower price outweighs potential benefits of a new car. I agree that having your identity stolen is something you cannot afford. But then again we are both frequenting Hacker News so we are aware of how technology works and how damaging compromised security can be. An average user however might not realize that an outdated Android version has unpatched vulnerabilities. They are just happy that they can send Snapchat messages to their friends and can watch Youtube videos when they are waiting for a bus. Also, how long before Moto G stops being supported with updates and becomes vulnerable as well? What should happen next?
tagawa 12y ago
I don't get why there is always this need to ignore old tech, despite so many people around the world still relying on it, likely not by choice. In the case of Android, 14% of users are still on 2.3.* or less [1]. Sure, library developers are free to ignore them but it restricts how widely their code is likely to be deployed. It's not about not moving forward, it's about providing fallbacks. [1] https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/ https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/

genericacct 12y ago

Both my android devices run 2.3 and I'm using highcharts without problems on both. Which is why I won't probably be using this.

smt88 12y ago
Why? You're like one of those people who still uses Windows XP. Spend $100 and get a device that runs something released in the last SIX years.
- duckmysick 12y ago
  But 2.3 (Gingerbread) was released in December 2010, so his device indeed runs something released in the last six years. In an ideal world (for software and hardware vendors, at least) we would be replacing devices with their latest versions as soon as they come out and backward compatibility wouldn't be a problem. However, I can imagine a situation where spending $100 on a new phone is a luxury and not everyone can afford it. If a phone makes calls, sends text messages, and connects to the Internet, it's still usable.
  - smt88 12y ago
    You're right about the release date. Not sure why I thought 2008. Like XP, Gingerbread has unpatched security vulnerabilities. Having a mobile phone with up-to-date security is well worth spending $99 (for a Moto G, for example). I get that not everyone can afford something like that, but it's like car insurance. You absolutely can't afford to have your identity stolen.
    - duckmysick 12y ago
      I think it's more like an old car versus a new car. Having a new one is a better choice since it has more features, it's safer, it's more fuel-efficient, it pollutes less. Yet there are consumers who consciously choose older cars because in their mind lower price outweighs potential benefits of a new car. I agree that having your identity stolen is something you cannot afford. But then again we are both frequenting Hacker News so we are aware of how technology works and how damaging compromised security can be. An average user however might not realize that an outdated Android version has unpatched vulnerabilities. They are just happy that they can send Snapchat messages to their friends and can watch Youtube videos when they are waiting for a bus. Also, how long before Moto G stops being supported with updates and becomes vulnerable as well? What should happen next?

tagawa 12y ago

I don't get why there is always this need to ignore old tech, despite so many people around the world still relying on it, likely not by choice. In the case of Android, 14% of users are still on 2.3.* or less [1]. Sure, library developers are free to ignore them but it restricts how widely their code is likely to be deployed. It's not about not moving forward, it's about providing fallbacks. [1] https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/ https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/