DroidForums.net | Android Forum & News
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Is Android fragmentation preventing world domination?
- Thread starter tehpriest
- Start date
ilikemoneygreen
Silver Member
Interesting. lol, you definetly bring some different stuff to light lately. story is interesting read. +1 for the find.
ilikemoneygreen
Silver Member
Just as a funny analogy. This is like making everyone in the world eat tomatoes... and somebody said screw it im tired of tomatoes so im going to give people apples and oranges and bannanas (they just randly flew out of no where) . The fact that apples and oranges and bannanas are being handed out make it harder to plant becuase you need 3 different seeds.... but does this mean that apples bannanas and oranges arn't going to rule the world instead of tomatoes? Its true that the planters would have an easier time planting 1 crop, but cmon, HOW ABOUT SOME VARIETY. And tomatoes are ruled by a dictator who says no one can grow tomatoes, and YOU HAVE TO EAT TOMATOES A CERTAIN WAY. (that part means jailbreaking peeps lol)
And the whining continues....The problem sounds a lot more procedural than structural to me.
You create an app, a new version of Android comes out so you need to update the app. The fragmentation wouldn't be a problem if someone figures out how to push the updates while leaving the older app out there for phones not yet receiving the update, i.e. if I'm on Android 1.6 I get XScope 1.6 from the market, but if I'm on Android 2.2 I get XScope 2.2.
The different screen sizes is just a fact of life. Consumers are going to want and they are going to have choices, and a developer needs to figure out the best way to either make their app adaptive or or put in a little extra work to deliver alternative apps for different screen sizes.
I understand if there are 10M users on the IOS platform and 20M users on multiple Android platforms that the ROI is probably higher for a developer to favor IOS. Still, the fact remains that Android will be a bigger pie.
I don't know enough about Android, but it sounds to me like this is something that shouldn't be too difficult for Google to solve. Basically, they need some sort of engine that will properly render graphics across multiple screen sizes (kind of like a PC, right?) and that takes away that complaint. Then you also need a licensing solution where if you buy XScope, you have Xscope regardless of the what screen size and version of Android you are running, but the "old" versions of XScope can still be downloaded.
The one stumbling block is the cell mfrs wanting to put their own spin on Android. I see that as a legit complaint that's difficult to solve. But, again, it's reality because the cell itself is quickly becoming a commodity and custom mfr interfaces are a way to differentiate yourself in the marketplace.
Of course, the PC doesn't quite work that way (although all the mfrs pre-load these days with a lot of their own garbage and upsell services). So stuff like motoblur isn't going anywhere any time soon, if at all.
This problem all goes away when the economics are there for guys to develop full-time. I would think we are there, but sure if you do this on the side you may have to make some choices regarding what platforms to support.
If this was really the issue/problem it's being made out to be, Google could just go out and hire a few dozen of the top developers to build 95% of the apps people need, and deliver it for free. I don't necessarily agree that apps are going to be the differentiator. Smartphones are in their infancy and the vast majority of users aren't looking for much more right now than music, pictures, video, browsing, email and messages. Stuff like a music tuning app seem like a "wow" factor but 99.99% of users have no need or use for it, nor is it likely to be a make-or-break decision to buy.
You create an app, a new version of Android comes out so you need to update the app. The fragmentation wouldn't be a problem if someone figures out how to push the updates while leaving the older app out there for phones not yet receiving the update, i.e. if I'm on Android 1.6 I get XScope 1.6 from the market, but if I'm on Android 2.2 I get XScope 2.2.
The different screen sizes is just a fact of life. Consumers are going to want and they are going to have choices, and a developer needs to figure out the best way to either make their app adaptive or or put in a little extra work to deliver alternative apps for different screen sizes.
I understand if there are 10M users on the IOS platform and 20M users on multiple Android platforms that the ROI is probably higher for a developer to favor IOS. Still, the fact remains that Android will be a bigger pie.
I don't know enough about Android, but it sounds to me like this is something that shouldn't be too difficult for Google to solve. Basically, they need some sort of engine that will properly render graphics across multiple screen sizes (kind of like a PC, right?) and that takes away that complaint. Then you also need a licensing solution where if you buy XScope, you have Xscope regardless of the what screen size and version of Android you are running, but the "old" versions of XScope can still be downloaded.
The one stumbling block is the cell mfrs wanting to put their own spin on Android. I see that as a legit complaint that's difficult to solve. But, again, it's reality because the cell itself is quickly becoming a commodity and custom mfr interfaces are a way to differentiate yourself in the marketplace.
Of course, the PC doesn't quite work that way (although all the mfrs pre-load these days with a lot of their own garbage and upsell services). So stuff like motoblur isn't going anywhere any time soon, if at all.
This problem all goes away when the economics are there for guys to develop full-time. I would think we are there, but sure if you do this on the side you may have to make some choices regarding what platforms to support.
If this was really the issue/problem it's being made out to be, Google could just go out and hire a few dozen of the top developers to build 95% of the apps people need, and deliver it for free. I don't necessarily agree that apps are going to be the differentiator. Smartphones are in their infancy and the vast majority of users aren't looking for much more right now than music, pictures, video, browsing, email and messages. Stuff like a music tuning app seem like a "wow" factor but 99.99% of users have no need or use for it, nor is it likely to be a make-or-break decision to buy.
Fragmentation is a buzz topic people bring up when they feel like downplaying Android. Once the Droid hit and proved the viability of Android as a smartphone OS, there was a substantial shift in attitude from manufacturers and carriers regarding the willingness to update existing handsets to the newest Android OS. Most every phone from the Droid onward has been kept fairly up to date with the newest version of Android. Once the G1s and MT3Gs are phased out of the market by contract renewals and upgrades, fragmentation will be even less an "issue" than it is now.
This. Blur is an abomination.
shakesbrice22
Member
Article is hard to disagree with obviously and with all the information out there that Android is amazing and overtaking Apple completely this article really puts it into perspective. Def nice find
The article has some interesting points, but I should also point out the one thing the person is neglecting in current history... The PC.
The PC and Mac argument has been going for ages. Yet who has the current strong point in the market. The PC.
The PC suffers the same problem as Android OS. Varying manufactures, and non-standardized hardware and at the moment, 8+ variations of OS (XP, XPx64, 2003, 2003x64, Vista, Vistax64, Win 7, Win 7x64, 2008, Linux...) And while PC being hardware and android being OS are two different things, again, look at Windows OS in general. The above mentioned where it is a semi-standard OS, however, looking at the difference between XP, 2003, Vista and Win7, there are different implementations on expected control and security in a buggy OS (Yes, I consider Windows still a buggy OS)... But if you also look at the number of places that USE Windows... It has a large market share still. How?
Well, the one thing that makes the PC such a pain is also what is giving it its strength... Coding tools. MS made coding easy, colleges and the do-it-yourselfers are churning out people who are programming this stuff, more so than the few that Apple has. While the PC has a saturation of crapware, it also means companies have access to good programmers to help bolster and roll out software for PC.
Now the other thing that goes for PC is the fact that the OS doesn't really require people to 'get the newest' software 100% of the time. Mac OS current has had the habit of newest hardware == newest OS == get newer software. The PC has had similar for some programs, but for the most part, newer OS or newer hardware doesn't necessarily mean you need to get the newer software for some things.
The Android OS, so far will still have growing pains. Even though this is version 2, remember also, Windows did not really 'take off' for people until around Windows 95... This is after Windows version 3.11. Macs were the 'king' of most computing because they capitalized on the convenient interface until Windows 95 made PCs look reasonably usable.
The PC and Mac argument has been going for ages. Yet who has the current strong point in the market. The PC.
The PC suffers the same problem as Android OS. Varying manufactures, and non-standardized hardware and at the moment, 8+ variations of OS (XP, XPx64, 2003, 2003x64, Vista, Vistax64, Win 7, Win 7x64, 2008, Linux...) And while PC being hardware and android being OS are two different things, again, look at Windows OS in general. The above mentioned where it is a semi-standard OS, however, looking at the difference between XP, 2003, Vista and Win7, there are different implementations on expected control and security in a buggy OS (Yes, I consider Windows still a buggy OS)... But if you also look at the number of places that USE Windows... It has a large market share still. How?
Well, the one thing that makes the PC such a pain is also what is giving it its strength... Coding tools. MS made coding easy, colleges and the do-it-yourselfers are churning out people who are programming this stuff, more so than the few that Apple has. While the PC has a saturation of crapware, it also means companies have access to good programmers to help bolster and roll out software for PC.
Now the other thing that goes for PC is the fact that the OS doesn't really require people to 'get the newest' software 100% of the time. Mac OS current has had the habit of newest hardware == newest OS == get newer software. The PC has had similar for some programs, but for the most part, newer OS or newer hardware doesn't necessarily mean you need to get the newer software for some things.
The Android OS, so far will still have growing pains. Even though this is version 2, remember also, Windows did not really 'take off' for people until around Windows 95... This is after Windows version 3.11. Macs were the 'king' of most computing because they capitalized on the convenient interface until Windows 95 made PCs look reasonably usable.