[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Dear Google: Android Needs Your Help here

[mikeydangerousmwcu]

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

[DennyCraneftw]

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

This is the most lucid, intelligent response I can imagine. There's nothing further I can add. Well said.

[SuzieDD]

> battling lawsuits, getting your self-driving cars licensed, and focusing on Google+,

Those are TOTALLY separate depts at Google and have absolutely NOTHING to do with writing OS or app code.

[dev1gig]

I have to agree with this article. I use both an Adroid (HTC Thunderbolt for work) and an iPhone (4S for personal). This article sums up my frustrations with my android phone. When I first got my Thunderbolt, I thought it was the greatest phone with the speed and large screen and the built in mail app. But to be honest, I now only use the Thunderbolt for phone calls or a HotSpot for my iPad.

It is just harder to use for everyday functions than my iPhone. It is slower and I have ended up deleting half my apps because they have been flagged for malware.

I really want to like Android, and to be honest I will be purchasing a Galaxy S3 to see if it is any better...but for now, give me my slower iPhone.

[dev1gig]

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

I have to agree that the carriers are causing a large number of the problems, but Google could have been more like Apple and Microsoft and required that the apps or the hardware meet certain criteria. Is it broken? NO!!! But could it be better??? HELL YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Google could stand up and dictate more on the functionality of it's system then they are. Right now there are manufacturers that are developing the cheapest phone they can to run Android. What does that mean as a consumer? You get a "free" Android phone, but it is a piece of $h1t. Who are they going to blame? It all comes down to Google. I am all for the open source and let everyone do what they want...but let's be honest, most people are not looking at the manufacturer of the device....they are looking at the software that is running on it

Google...I love the potential of the product, but let's be serious here..........THERE NEEDS TO BE STANDARDS FOR THE HARDWARE!!!!!!

[ArmandoRodriguez]

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

I felt I needed to address this since, well I felt like it really:

I'll give you the short version now--these arguments are constantly being made because they are still a problem. They were a problem the first time these issues were brought up, and they are still a problem today.

The filter being added to the web version of the Play Store helped some in finding tablet specific apps (as did the featured Apps list on the Play Store Home Page). This doesn't change the fact that the Play Store is a mess to get around and really needs to be organized better. Apple makes it clear at a glance which apps are for which platform.

Speaking of Apple, they don't charge twice for the same apps. Both Android and iOS offer universal apps (apps that are supposed to work for both phones and tablets), but there's a key difference between the two: On iOS, you download one file that has both versions while on Android your request is sent to a server which recognizes which device you are trying to download the app from, and sends you the appropriate APK. It wasn't until ICs (which is pretty much on nothing these days) that developers were able to create apps that scaled to a variety of screen sizes. The lack of apps is caused by three things: The SDK being a huge pain to work with, having too many devices with tons of different specs and OSs, and the fact that people aren't buying apps.

Sure developers can be lazy, but if you have to test an app to make sure it works across nearly a different Android devices--then you aren't exactly making it the most appealing platform for smaller development teams that don't have the resources to do that. Payment is also an issue since there have been cases in the past of Google burying apps so no one can find them and I've heard several developers complain about not receiving payment for their apps in the past. All three of these things can be addressed by Google in one way or another.

To your final point--Yeah companies should be contributing more to the AOSP, but the truth is that not many are. Until more do, it makes sense for Google to take more control in the aspect of what tweaks can be made to Android by manufacturers and carriers. Of course Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T aren't going to let me install Google Wallet on my phone, but my selection of apps shouldn't be limited by which carrier I choose. iOS doesn't have that problem, why should Android? Why should it be up to the carriers to deliver a crucial update that can fix a vulnerability in your phone? Can you imagine what it would be like if it was up to Dell or HP to deliver patches to Windows? It's not the right way to go about that sort of thing.

Android is a different strategy--I get that. But it doesn't look like one that's going to be all that sustainable in the long run.

[capncoad]

edit: nevermind.

This post has been edited by capncoad: 14 May 2012 - 07:39 PM

[mikeydangerousmwcu]

ArmandoRodriguez, on 14 May 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

I felt I needed to address this since, well I felt like it really:

I'll give you the short version now--these arguments are constantly being made because they are still a problem. They were a problem the first time these issues were brought up, and they are still a problem today.

The filter being added to the web version of the Play Store helped some in finding tablet specific apps (as did the featured Apps list on the Play Store Home Page). This doesn't change the fact that the Play Store is a mess to get around and really needs to be organized better. Apple makes it clear at a glance which apps are for which platform.

Speaking of Apple, they don't charge twice for the same apps. Both Android and iOS offer universal apps (apps that are supposed to work for both phones and tablets), but there's a key difference between the two: On iOS, you download one file that has both versions while on Android your request is sent to a server which recognizes which device you are trying to download the app from, and sends you the appropriate APK. It wasn't until ICs (which is pretty much on nothing these days) that developers were able to create apps that scaled to a variety of screen sizes. The lack of apps is caused by three things: The SDK being a huge pain to work with, having too many devices with tons of different specs and OSs, and the fact that people aren't buying apps.

Sure developers can be lazy, but if you have to test an app to make sure it works across nearly a different Android devices--then you aren't exactly making it the most appealing platform for smaller development teams that don't have the resources to do that. Payment is also an issue since there have been cases in the past of Google burying apps so no one can find them and I've heard several developers complain about not receiving payment for their apps in the past. All three of these things can be addressed by Google in one way or another.

To your final point--Yeah companies should be contributing more to the AOSP, but the truth is that not many are. Until more do, it makes sense for Google to take more control in the aspect of what tweaks can be made to Android by manufacturers and carriers. Of course Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T aren't going to let me install Google Wallet on my phone, but my selection of apps shouldn't be limited by which carrier I choose. iOS doesn't have that problem, why should Android? Why should it be up to the carriers to deliver a crucial update that can fix a vulnerability in your phone? Can you imagine what it would be like if it was up to Dell or HP to deliver patches to Windows? It's not the right way to go about that sort of thing.

Android is a different strategy--I get that. But it doesn't look like one that's going to be all that sustainable in the long run.

I'm sorry, you do make some good points, but then you punctuate each with something that doesn't quite work. First, yes, there are universal apps for iOS, but there are also quite a lot of apps (mostly games) that will charge you twice if you want it on your iPhone and iPad, whereas this almost never happens on Android. Yes, the Android SDK can be unwieldy, but Google introduced the fragments system with Honeycomb, and it is available to developers coding for Froyo or Gingerbread as well, so the system for building once and having it run everywhere is in place for the majority of the ecosystem, not just ICS.

I've seen the numbers from Flurry, etc about Android app revenue compared to Apple, but as usual, those don't take into account ad revenue, which has always been higher on Android, nor do they mention in-app purchases, which have been very big across the board. I'm not saying that developers don't make more on Apple, but I've yet to see studies that take everything into account, and show more than a two month span of data. People do buy apps for Android, but it is still that there are more free options on Android than on iOS. The proportions aren't as different as they used to be, but for someone starting out on Apple, you'll be forced to pay for more apps, because there aren't as many free options.

And, on the final point: you can't have it both ways. You can't have Google controlling the code and releases and still have the customization and differentiation that we see in the market. Sure, it may be a pain on devs, but for consumers it has a ton of benefits because of the choice available. If you like iOS, but not the design of the iPhone, too bad. That's all you've got. If you like Windows Phone, but not the hardware, there isn't a lot of variation. But, no matter if you're on a budget, looking for high-end, want a great camera, a big screen, a small screen, a slider keyboard, whatever, Android has got an option for you.

But, if Google controlled the code and updates and wanted to make sure the ecosystem was controlled and easy, you'd have the situation like Windows Phone where hardware can't vary. Instead, Google allows all of that, but just asks that manufacturers submit back to Android. That's how open source works, and it's a pretty good model. It allows for faster identification and patching of bugs, more customization and variation, and flat out more functionality within the system. Of course, there will be drawbacks to a system like that. But, on the other side with controlled platforms there are still drawbacks. iOS apps actually crash more than Android, and the system doesn't offer as many hooks for developers to integrate with one another. Google being more like Apple may fix some issues with Android, but it would create plenty more that you don't address.

And, carriers get in the way for Android because they can. Carriers can't say or do anything to Apple, because the iPhone is a singular force, where Android is a mass of smaller devices. It's much easier to stop a swarm of flies than a charging rhino. But, again it's just a byproduct of the ecosystem setup. iOS was designed to be centralized so everything comes directly from Apple. Android was designed to be decentralized so everything comes from manufacturers, and it's far more likely that users will install updates OTA than through Samsung Kies, so that's the best option. However, that means going through carriers, which means carrier testing.

Sure, Google could make it better. I'd certainly like to see a standardized theme system so the manufacturer overlays would work just like an alternate launcher, effectively decoupling the Android system from the customizations, but that's not too likely. And, that wouldn't fix the issue with carriers having too much power. Carriers shouldn't be able to block Google Wallet, just like they shouldn't be able to block deeper Google Voice integration, but they do it anyway, and they get away with it because articles like yours just keep pointing the finger at Google.

Android has problems, and some can be fixed by Google, but a lot of them can't or shouldn't have to be fixed by Google so long as we hold the right parties accountable.

[capncoad]

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

ArmandoRodriguez, on 14 May 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

mikeydangerousmwcu, on 14 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Please stop regurgitating the same old BS arguments. If you want to find a tablet app in the Play Store, when you do a search there is a devices toggle, so just switch that to your tablet, and there you go. Besides which, Android is designed so devs don't have to make "genuine" tablet apps (and charge you again to purchase it like with Apple). Apps get made once, and if they're designed properly, it works and looks good across devices. If devs are too lazy to do that, it's not on Google.

Customizations do cause problems, but customizations also make Android what it is. Google Wallet is a terrible example for that, because it has been blocked by the carriers not by manufacturers or devices. Verizon, T-Mo, and AT&T are all invested in ISIS, so why would they go out of their way to allow Wallet?

Android does have a problem with slow updates, but as Sony has shown, if manufacturers would submit code back to the Android hub, specifics get folded into the main trunk and it makes updating faster. The real delay is with carriers that have to test everything for months.

Google isn't failing by not being more like Apple and Microsoft. It's a different model, it's not broken. Stop saying it is.

I felt I needed to address this since, well I felt like it really:

I'll give you the short version now--these arguments are constantly being made because they are still a problem. They were a problem the first time these issues were brought up, and they are still a problem today.

The filter being added to the web version of the Play Store helped some in finding tablet specific apps (as did the featured Apps list on the Play Store Home Page). This doesn't change the fact that the Play Store is a mess to get around and really needs to be organized better. Apple makes it clear at a glance which apps are for which platform.

Speaking of Apple, they don't charge twice for the same apps. Both Android and iOS offer universal apps (apps that are supposed to work for both phones and tablets), but there's a key difference between the two: On iOS, you download one file that has both versions while on Android your request is sent to a server which recognizes which device you are trying to download the app from, and sends you the appropriate APK. It wasn't until ICs (which is pretty much on nothing these days) that developers were able to create apps that scaled to a variety of screen sizes. The lack of apps is caused by three things: The SDK being a huge pain to work with, having too many devices with tons of different specs and OSs, and the fact that people aren't buying apps.

Sure developers can be lazy, but if you have to test an app to make sure it works across nearly a different Android devices--then you aren't exactly making it the most appealing platform for smaller development teams that don't have the resources to do that. Payment is also an issue since there have been cases in the past of Google burying apps so no one can find them and I've heard several developers complain about not receiving payment for their apps in the past. All three of these things can be addressed by Google in one way or another.

To your final point--Yeah companies should be contributing more to the AOSP, but the truth is that not many are. Until more do, it makes sense for Google to take more control in the aspect of what tweaks can be made to Android by manufacturers and carriers. Of course Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T aren't going to let me install Google Wallet on my phone, but my selection of apps shouldn't be limited by which carrier I choose. iOS doesn't have that problem, why should Android? Why should it be up to the carriers to deliver a crucial update that can fix a vulnerability in your phone? Can you imagine what it would be like if it was up to Dell or HP to deliver patches to Windows? It's not the right way to go about that sort of thing.

Android is a different strategy--I get that. But it doesn't look like one that's going to be all that sustainable in the long run.

I'm sorry, you do make some good points, but then you punctuate each with something that doesn't quite work. First, yes, there are universal apps for iOS, but there are also quite a lot of apps (mostly games) that will charge you twice if you want it on your iPhone and iPad, whereas this almost never happens on Android. Yes, the Android SDK can be unwieldy, but Google introduced the fragments system with Honeycomb, and it is available to developers coding for Froyo or Gingerbread as well, so the system for building once and having it run everywhere is in place for the majority of the ecosystem, not just ICS.

I've seen the numbers from Flurry, etc about Android app revenue compared to Apple, but as usual, those don't take into account ad revenue, which has always been higher on Android, nor do they mention in-app purchases, which have been very big across the board. I'm not saying that developers don't make more on Apple, but I've yet to see studies that take everything into account, and show more than a two month span of data. People do buy apps for Android, but it is still that there are more free options on Android than on iOS. The proportions aren't as different as they used to be, but for someone starting out on Apple, you'll be forced to pay for more apps, because there aren't as many free options.

And, on the final point: you can't have it both ways. You can't have Google controlling the code and releases and still have the customization and differentiation that we see in the market. Sure, it may be a pain on devs, but for consumers it has a ton of benefits because of the choice available. If you like iOS, but not the design of the iPhone, too bad. That's all you've got. If you like Windows Phone, but not the hardware, there isn't a lot of variation. But, no matter if you're on a budget, looking for high-end, want a great camera, a big screen, a small screen, a slider keyboard, whatever, Android has got an option for you.

But, if Google controlled the code and updates and wanted to make sure the ecosystem was controlled and easy, you'd have the situation like Windows Phone where hardware can't vary. Instead, Google allows all of that, but just asks that manufacturers submit back to Android. That's how open source works, and it's a pretty good model. It allows for faster identification and patching of bugs, more customization and variation, and flat out more functionality within the system. Of course, there will be drawbacks to a system like that. But, on the other side with controlled platforms there are still drawbacks. iOS apps actually crash more than Android, and the system doesn't offer as many hooks for developers to integrate with one another. Google being more like Apple may fix some issues with Android, but it would create plenty more that you don't address.

And, carriers get in the way for Android because they can. Carriers can't say or do anything to Apple, because the iPhone is a singular force, where Android is a mass of smaller devices. It's much easier to stop a swarm of flies than a charging rhino. But, again it's just a byproduct of the ecosystem setup. iOS was designed to be centralized so everything comes directly from Apple. Android was designed to be decentralized so everything comes from manufacturers, and it's far more likely that users will install updates OTA than through Samsung Kies, so that's the best option. However, that means going through carriers, which means carrier testing.

Sure, Google could make it better. I'd certainly like to see a standardized theme system so the manufacturer overlays would work just like an alternate launcher, effectively decoupling the Android system from the customizations, but that's not too likely. And, that wouldn't fix the issue with carriers having too much power. Carriers shouldn't be able to block Google Wallet, just like they shouldn't be able to block deeper Google Voice integration, but they do it anyway, and they get away with it because articles like yours just keep pointing the finger at Google.

Android has problems, and some can be fixed by Google, but a lot of them can't or shouldn't have to be fixed by Google so long as we hold the right parties accountable.

Couldn't have said any of that stuff better. I only have a few things to add. The apps you only buy once and have it available for phone and tablet: isn't that just a blown up phone app for the tablet? I've had a few android tablets and I've always noticed there ARE tablet specific apps that are additional cost, though it's rare right now because android tablets not having a good market share. And I also wanted to note that having both an iPad and an Android phone I actually see just as many crashes on iOS specifically with Safari than I do with Android. Unfortunately iOS wont give me the decency to 'wait' or 'force close', it just closes without notice. This isn't scientific, just stating in my own experiences I think the iOS app stability argument doesn't fly.

[nemesys571]

dev1gig, on 14 May 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

It is slower and I have ended up deleting half my apps because they have been flagged for malware.

Half your apps were flagged as malware? I have over 100 apps installed and have never had anything marked as malware. Most likely the reason phone got slow is because it's full of crap-apps. Research before you download.

[stevesolanki]

This is the best forum i had ever read. All the issue from top level to the developer level is highlighted and compared.
I am 101% agree with each and every word of it.
Android is just a copy and paste of IOS without thinking of the future problems. I am using android and iPhone and I love to say that I am IOS fan.

Armando Rodriguez, you are genius.
Love to read more from your end.

[os2baba]

ArmandoRodriguez, on 14 May 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

The filter being added to the web version of the Play Store helped some in finding tablet specific apps (as did the featured Apps list on the Play Store Home Page). This doesn't change the fact that the Play Store is a mess to get around and really needs to be organized better. Apple makes it clear at a glance which apps are for which platform.

Speaking of Apple, they don't charge twice for the same apps. Both Android and iOS offer universal apps (apps that are supposed to work for both phones and tablets), but there's a key difference between the two: On iOS, you download one file that has both versions while on Android your request is sent to a server which recognizes which device you are trying to download the app from, and sends you the appropriate APK. It wasn't until ICs (which is pretty much on nothing these days) that developers were able to create apps that scaled to a variety of screen sizes. The lack of apps is caused by three things: The SDK being a huge pain to work with, having too many devices with tons of different specs and OSs, and the fact that people aren't buying apps.

While I agree that the App Store does segregate the apps by Tablets and Phones and it does make it easier to find tablet specific apps, that's just about the only thing that's better in the AppStore today. Both the AppStore and the Android Market suck in many ways and the Android Market used to be significantly worse than the App Store. That's no longer the case. At this point, the Android Market is a few strides ahead of the AppStore. For me, just the one fact that it is on the web and I can download apps OTA from the web to my phone and my Transformer Prime makes every other advantage that the AppStore has pale in comparison. The fact that I don't have to use the horribly painful iTunes anymore makes it a huge advantage. Searching is better (albeit miles to go before it can be called good - especially be Google's standards), browsing is better, discovery of apps is better...

Sure there are apps on iOS that can run on iPhone and iPad. But it's an absolute scam that you have to pay twice for many many apps - one for the phone and one for an "HD" version. Where are you getting this information about having to create 2 separate apks for different screen sizes? I have been creating apps from at least v1.5 that caters to different screens sizes. You write to the API not to a device. As long as you don't use absolute layouts and use device independent pixels, for the vast majority of apps (not games), the same apk works across not just various devices, but across versions. Of course it was ICS from when you can write a tablet and iPhone app. Well Duh! That's the first version after v3 which was the unified tablet/phone OS. But even v1.5 apps could scale to tablet screens without looking like crap the way iPhone apps looked on the iPad. Naturally, if you wanted to take advantage of the extra real estate, you had to recode the pre-Honeycomb apps to use fragments and if you used the compatibility jars you can have the app run on devices running 1.6. The reason that there weren't that many apps that took advantage of this was because in the first place most apps scaled well and there wasn't enough of a market for Android tablets to make it worth while to re-code the app. As ICS gets on more phones and there are more Android tablets sold, this will no longer be an issue. Now you can blame Google all you want for not pushing hard enough to get ICS on more phones. You will not get any argument on that front from me.

ArmandoRodriguez, on 14 May 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

Sure developers can be lazy, but if you have to test an app to make sure it works across nearly a different Android devices--then you aren't exactly making it the most appealing platform for smaller development teams that don't have the resources to do that. Payment is also an issue since there have been cases in the past of Google burying apps so no one can find them and I've heard several developers complain about not receiving payment for their apps in the past. All three of these things can be addressed by Google in one way or another.

Agreed.

ArmandoRodriguez, on 14 May 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

To your final point--Yeah companies should be contributing more to the AOSP, but the truth is that not many are. Until more do, it makes sense for Google to take more control in the aspect of what tweaks can be made to Android by manufacturers and carriers. Of course Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T aren't going to let me install Google Wallet on my phone, but my selection of apps shouldn't be limited by which carrier I choose. iOS doesn't have that problem, why should Android? Why should it be up to the carriers to deliver a crucial update that can fix a vulnerability in your phone? Can you imagine what it would be like if it was up to Dell or HP to deliver patches to Windows? It's not the right way to go about that sort of thing.

Android is a different strategy--I get that. But it doesn't look like one that's going to be all that sustainable in the long run.

This is one area where Google needs to learn from Apple and unfortunately simply don't seem to get it. As a developer, I find it laughable when I hear about fragmentation being a problem for developers. However, without a doubt, there is a fragmentation problem and it's on the consumer side. The problem is OS version fragmentation and this is certainly something that Google needs to fix. I completely blame Google for not making it possible for everybody to download the latest version of the OS on to their phone directly from Google. It's not a simple problem to solve with drivers for so many devices. But it's not rocket science either. Microsoft has been doing this for years on the desktop. And I suspect that it's simply that Google doesn't believe that this is a problem. When the person in charge of AOSP thinks that it's "reasonable" for it to take 4 months to move from Gingerbread to ICS, I simply want to scream!

[shuruj]

.

This post has been edited by shuruj: 14 May 2012 - 08:52 PM

[shuruj]

dev1gig, on 14 May 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

I have to agree with this article. I use both an Adroid (HTC Thunderbolt for work) and an iPhone (4S for personal). This article sums up my frustrations with my android phone. When I first got my Thunderbolt, I thought it was the greatest phone with the speed and large screen and the built in mail app. But to be honest, I now only use the Thunderbolt for phone calls or a HotSpot for my iPad.

It is just harder to use for everyday functions than my iPhone. It is slower and I have ended up deleting half my apps because they have been flagged for malware.

I really want to like Android, and to be honest I will be purchasing a Galaxy S3 to see if it is any better...but for now, give me my slower iPhone.

unreliable comment. i've been using android since the 2nd Android phone, the HTC Magic. after that i had SE Xperia mini Pro, Desire HD, Sensation and now I have got a One X (i also own an iPhone 4S). except for better games Android OS is at least 2 years ahead of iOS in any context. Even 2 generation earlier Android OS (2.3) has better functionalities than iPhone 4S with latest OS upgrade (5.1.1).
you can mention any app in iOS, i'll be able to find similar apps for that. but there are many apps in Android that depends heavily on androids open nature that apple will not be able to replicate them without changing some core trends of iOS. i never got bored of my androids, but after using for 2 and half weeks i got bored of my iPhone 4 because of all the limitations (yeah, i'm a bit geeky)

one of the major misconception about iOS is user friendlyness.... its lack of knowledge by iOS users. in iOS many things takes long way to achieve where in Android you don't need to do anything but looking at your widgets... what else can be more user friendly than doing nothing? loading/watching/listening to movies & music is simpler in Androids than iOS.... you have different flavours of multimedia players if you don't like the Google Play Movies & Google music. You can't even install an app using web-browser in iOS (please tell me that i'm wrong, this is the worst thing of iOS i found)
the 30+ generation who are afraid of computers, technologies are the biggest supporters of iPhone (excluding gamers...). new generations are not afraid of customizing their handsets according to their preferences (not restricted to changing wallpaper or honey-bunny casing)... i know hundreds of iPhone users using their iphones just like a feature phone. why they bought iPhone? 'its the best one in the market'

[LynneFisk]

amen, yeah come on Google

[toothworld]

if you come across pdf you like ,you cant even download simple pdf and text file on ipad 2 and all other ios phone( if im not wrong , all things has to go through shitty itunes, how is that to be user friendly)...that is outrageous!!!!

[atish505]

For a moment I thought the article was serious until I read this line"Another headache for Android developers: They have to create apps that can run on more than a thousand different devices, all with different processors, screen sizes, resolutions, and versions of the OS". Then I fell out of the chair laughing.

[Joe0etd]

I own a galaxy nexus, then I discovered that there are many several builds for the GSM version of the phone, mine is yakjuzs from hong kong samsung. I'm still running on 4.0.2 tried to talk to someone on Andriod g+ page if they have info on the update process. Still no answer. I'm guessing they have no clue only on one build, yakju that is supported by google.

[ricegf]

"I don't like having carriers tell me what I can and cannot do with my phone, especially when it comes to apps."

I died laughing at this one. So you crave the free, open experience of iOS, where apps compete on their own merit rather than at the whim of an autocratic company? Like, um, Apple?

Too funny.