3 ms·

Google really needs to figure out how to keep Android phones updated, preferably for 3 years, because I think that's how much most people keep their phones. Th

Google really needs to figure out how to keep Android phones updated, preferably for 3 years, because I think that's how much most people keep their phones. The biggest problem Google is facing regarding that is the fact that essentially every OEM creates its own "distro" of Android, which makes it very hard for Google to fix everything. Some of the bugs could be in software of those OEMs. I think Google should build-in deeper customization frameworks that allows OEMs to customize the OS quite a lot, while still doing it in a "standardized way" that would allow Google to fix the problems. In a way Google chose this. They could've done what they did with ChromeOS - make Chromium OS open source, but only promote Chrome OS, which is why all OEMs choose the proprietary Google version instead of the open source one. That's how Android should've worked as well. But they probably thought of this too late.

cwyers 12y ago
The thing about all these counterfactuals that people come up with for how Android should've been done is, if Google HAD done them, what would the market for smartphones looke like now? We don't know. It's possible (I think it's probably likely) that all the compromises and concessions Google made with the carriers and manufacturers are part of why Android has the market share it does. Google was playing catch-up with Apple, it's not like they had the luxury of time.
Someone1234 12y ago
Google has figured out a way and are slowly deploying it... When people talk about Android updates that can include several things: - Launchers - Apps (e.g. Camera, Browser, Calculator, and so on) - Operating system components (services, drivers, etc) - Linux kernel A normal Android update has the ability to update all of the above. However most of the user-impacting and security impacting issues are at the "apps" level (since Android apps are largely isolated from the underlying OS via a Java-like VM). So what Google have been doing is leaving the Kernel and OS components to the OEMs and providing app updates via the Play Store even onto older devices. So now on the Play Store we have: - Chrome (replaces Browser) - Google Services (updates a large chunk of APIs) - Google Search (more APIs, Google Now, and so on) - Google Voice (more APis, etc) - Google Keyboard (built in keyboard) - Gmail (will replace email eventually) - Google Launcher - Google Calendar - Google Camera - Google Talkback, Text-To-Speech (accessibility) - Google+ (replaces SMS Messenger) And so on...
- kuschku 12y ago
  Which is a really bad solution. The proper solution would be to put the AOSP version on the store, but keep it open. Also Google Play Frameworks should be split in the AOSP parts of their libs and the few actually closed parts.
  - vetinari 12y ago
    Vendors often don't ship AOSP apps at all, they ship their own dialer, messenger, email client, camera, gallery and all the other apps. So AOSP apps in the app store would not update them anyway.
    - kuschku 12y ago
      But would allow the user to install them. It would have the same effect as the Google Apps in the store, without losing AOSP.

cwyers 12y ago

The thing about all these counterfactuals that people come up with for how Android should've been done is, if Google HAD done them, what would the market for smartphones looke like now? We don't know. It's possible (I think it's probably likely) that all the compromises and concessions Google made with the carriers and manufacturers are part of why Android has the market share it does. Google was playing catch-up with Apple, it's not like they had the luxury of time.

Someone1234 12y ago

Google has figured out a way and are slowly deploying it... When people talk about Android updates that can include several things: - Launchers - Apps (e.g. Camera, Browser, Calculator, and so on) - Operating system components (services, drivers, etc) - Linux kernel A normal Android update has the ability to update all of the above. However most of the user-impacting and security impacting issues are at the "apps" level (since Android apps are largely isolated from the underlying OS via a Java-like VM). So what Google have been doing is leaving the Kernel and OS components to the OEMs and providing app updates via the Play Store even onto older devices. So now on the Play Store we have: - Chrome (replaces Browser) - Google Services (updates a large chunk of APIs) - Google Search (more APIs, Google Now, and so on) - Google Voice (more APis, etc) - Google Keyboard (built in keyboard) - Gmail (will replace email eventually) - Google Launcher - Google Calendar - Google Camera - Google Talkback, Text-To-Speech (accessibility) - Google+ (replaces SMS Messenger) And so on...

kuschku 12y ago
Which is a really bad solution. The proper solution would be to put the AOSP version on the store, but keep it open. Also Google Play Frameworks should be split in the AOSP parts of their libs and the few actually closed parts.
- vetinari 12y ago
  Vendors often don't ship AOSP apps at all, they ship their own dialer, messenger, email client, camera, gallery and all the other apps. So AOSP apps in the app store would not update them anyway.
  - kuschku 12y ago
    But would allow the user to install them. It would have the same effect as the Google Apps in the store, without losing AOSP.