Maybe if android 14 was guaranteed to have 70% adoption in one week developers would actually care. There’s no point developing features for 5% of users
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
148 points (92.5% liked)
Android
17612 readers
152 users here now
The new home of /r/Android on Lemmy and the Fediverse!
Android news, reviews, tips, and discussions about rooting, tutorials, and apps.
🔗Universal Link: [email protected]
💡Content Philosophy:
Content which benefits the community (news, rumours, and discussions) is generally allowed and is valued over content which benefits only the individual (technical questions, help buying/selling, rants, self-promotion, etc.) which will be removed if it's in violation of the rules.
Support, technical, or app related questions belong in: [email protected]
For fresh communities, lemmy apps, and instance updates: [email protected]
📰Our communities below
Rules
-
Stay on topic: All posts should be related to the Android OS or ecosystem.
-
No support questions, recommendation requests, rants, or bug reports: Posts must benefit the community rather than the individual. Please post to [email protected].
-
Describe images/videos, no memes: Please include a text description when sharing images or videos. Post memes to [email protected].
-
No self-promotion spam: Active community members can post their apps if they answer any questions in the comments. Please do not post links to your own website, YouTube, blog content, or communities.
-
No reposts or rehosted content: Share only the original source of an article, unless it's not available in English or requires logging in (like Twitter). Avoid reposting the same topic from other sources.
-
No editorializing titles: You can add the author or website's name if helpful, but keep article titles unchanged.
-
No piracy or unverified APKs: Do not share links or direct people to pirated content or unverified APKs, which may contain malicious code.
-
No unauthorized polls, bots, or giveaways: Do not create polls, use bots, or organize giveaways without first contacting mods for approval.
-
No offensive or low-effort content: Don't post offensive or unhelpful content. Keep it civil and friendly!
-
No affiliate links: Posting affiliate links is not allowed.
Quick Links
Our Communities
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Lemmy App List
Chat and More
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Google never should have opened it up for hardware manufacturers. They should have just made the OS and licensed it out like windows. Then hardware manufacturers wouldn’t be able to release crappy forks that never get updated.
I disagree. If google hadn't opened up, manufacturers wouldn't have bothered. We also have great UIs like oneui with useful quality of life features not found in stock android. Not to mention a longer update cycle than even Google the developer of android.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This assumes that Android would have anywhere near the reach it does now because of it's openness.
Google actually is enabling hardware manufacturers to control the end to end experience by allowing them this level of control over their own ecosystem.
The difference is ... they're not Apple. No Android manufacturer operates at the scale Apple does. Licensed Android won't change that any more than it will change all of the Windows 7 and 10 licenses that still live on in the real world.
It would also put the onus on Google to produce all the device drivers and compatibility layers needed to support the breadth of hardware currently available. This would slow the entire market down.
Hardware manufacturers on average do a shitty job keeping their fragmented operating systems up to date. My iPhone has gone through many major version updates. If hardware manufacturers don’t want to quickly, or ever, update they should have just shipped their phones with stock Android, and allowed us to update it to whatever is the latest.
Stock Android wouldn't include the kernel drivers and compatibility layers needed to run your phone. I think you've missed the point.
load more comments
(3 replies)
They didn't really have a choice. They were building on open-source software and Linux and Arm are somewhat bad at abstracting the hardware. So this means that the manufacturers must homebrew their own distro for their hardware, instead of just publishing drivers like windows hardware does.
They've been working on fixing this, but fundamentally they built their castle on sand. And if they hadn't, they probably never would've gotten anywhere at all and we'd all be on Blackberry or WebOS or WinPhone or whatever.
Windows Phone and webOS were amazing. Not just for their time, but even today. Major advancements in mobile OS’ came from WebOS like multi window task managing and my favorite feature of all came from Windows Phone. The most perfect on screen keyboard man has ever made. Specifically with audio. It had click sounds that were specific to a region of the keyboard and it was a low tone that was audibly pleasing. I wish we still had the same levels of competition that we did back in the day. Link to a video about the pleasing typing sounds on windows phone
There are still features of my windows phone I miss today.
Metro UI was and still is a sexy AF interface. The widget tiles had a motion to them that was delicate and beautiful. It was just such a beautiful OS. I’ve kept most of the phones I’ve ever owned because I like them and of the 10 or so I’ve done through over the last 13 years especially my two favorites are my windows phones an HTC 8x and a Nokia Lumia 1020.
Also the tiles were so useful because they didn't take too much space and gave you necessary information at a glance. Another thing I liked was the app drawer where you just click on some letter and it pulled up a grid of letters (I don't know what is the term used for this feature, it’s also there in windows pc) and we can just click on the letter of the app we want to access. I found this very convenient because I am very lazy about actually typing the name of the app I want or even scroll down for it. In fact I now use a third party launcher called launcher 10 on my android. It's very similar to the windows phone launcher. I still have my old windows phone which I had purchased in 2014.
That was an interesting video.
You guys really just said that Linux and open source licenses are "a castle on sand" and they should "have done it like Windows"?
If you start running before anybody notice you may be able to make it. Go. Just. Go.
But no, seriously, that's why I prefer Android. I have versions of it customized to handheld consoles, single board computers and a bunch of other stuff. I don't want to be out there buying licenses for my platforms from Google.
Samsung is the biggest phone manufacturer in the world, Sony is a massive corporation.
If people want to sell phones the least they can do is have the software staff to back it up by doing maintenance. If I wanted an iPhone I'd buy an iPhone.
Look I love open-source but the whole lack of a separate binary driver layer is dumb and is why Windows can support a machine for over a decade while Android has terrible device-specific support windows and you don't just get your new OS version from Android Update, you have to get it from your vendor.
Imagine if you owned a Dell and couldn't run Windows Update, but had to use Dell Update instead?
I have an ASUS.
So... no need to imagine anything.
Also, I'm not an OS engineer, but that wouldn't require a closed source, privately licensed OS, would it? Just to not build it as a Linux offshoot, I suppose.
I disagree. For me that is the beauty of android.
As long as you’re happy, I’m happy.
Remember that all apps need to target the almost-latest target API at least. That means Android 13 for all new apps and app updates since Aug 31.
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/11926878
The update philosophies on Android and iOS are vastly different, as is mentioned in the article.
iOS bundles a vast amount of things in their updates, such as core app updates, platform capability updates and developer API updates.
Android uses the OS update to bring new platform capabilities, mostly, and not even entirely through the mechanism, with lots of things now starting to be delivered unbundled from OS version. Core apps are delivered entirely separately from the OS version. Developer API updates often are backwards compatible using the AppCompat library, meaning that older OS versions sometimes get to benefit from the updates as well.
These differences have led to some significant differences in OS version support - a common OS version support policy for iOS app developers is to support the two most recent OS versions, while android support often is afforded to versions as far back as 5.0.
This in turn leads to an interesting effect, where the useful life of an Android device can actually be longer than that of an iOS device, despite the latter having access to OS updates for a longer time. This being because of the fact that the iOS device essentially becomes unusable once it's no longer supported - you literally can't install apps from the app store anymore, because they have long since dropped support for your OS. Android in the meantime keeps on going, because of the different philosophy of backwards compatibility among Android developers.
All of that being said, I do wish that Android developers were a bit better on things like UI consistency and supporting the latest OS features. I don't know if I'd trade it for what iOS has, though.
This in turn leads to an interesting effect, where the useful life of an Android device can actually be longer than that of an iOS device, despite the latter having access to OS updates for a longer time.
This is so true.
I have a first-Gen iPad Air that runs fine, but is fast becoming useless, despite having received an OS update months ago.
While an old Galaxy S4 I have around runs many apps that still function fine (especially since I can find old compatible versions on apk mirror).
Pretty frustrating, because the iPad Air performance is plenty for the things I want to use it for.
All the things they listed that Apple added is already possible though
I think there also is something different in play. Most Apps come from the U.S. where most people in the tech sector use iPhones. So what OS are they most likley to support better?
Most people in the tech sector use iPhones
As someone in the "tech sector", this is not my experience.
Yea, we'll use them for work phones because Corp manages them anyway (so no advantage to using Android). But pretty much everyone uses Android for personal devices.
Management and above are iPhone.
view more: next ›