
We Need to Talk About Android - shinyzhu
http://speirs.org/blog/2012/3/6/we-need-to-talk-about-android.html
======
tomschlick
A lot of the points made here are exactly why I'm going from an android device
to an iPhone once my device cycle from Verizon is up later this year.

I'm so tired of hearing about all the new awesome things that are happening
with the android operating system and not being able to get them. Even when my
device (HTC Incredible) would support such features it's always a question of
if HTC/Verizon is going to put in the effort to update the device because they
have to update all of the modifications they have made on it. I feel that with
android based devices, manufacturers and carriers just focus on the quantity
of devices they produce not the quality of the service that is given. This is
understandable because they have already made their money and they would
rather sell you a new device than put in development time to upgrade your
current device.

With an iOS device everyone gets the same updates at the same time as long as
the hardware supports the software changes. You know the date you will get the
update and you know the feature set you will have. This is because apple
focuses on just a few devices and tries to make them really great. I think if
HTC/Samsung/Motorola did the same with a stock android OS that got updated as
soon as it was available from google they might have some of the same success.

For android to really succeed as a longterm platform I think google needs to
crackdown and stop carriers from modifying the OS directly. If they want to
"enhance" the OS with changes they should be downloaded in the form of
applications when the phone is setup at the choice of the user.

~~~
erohead
Buy a nexus phone?

~~~
vibrunazo
I did that. That's the one reason why I bought a Nexus S.

It's March, about 4 or so months after Android 4.0 launched. I still have 2.3
on my Nexus S, because of delays for my region and carrier.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
You realise that Google is constantly updating your phone via it's Apps (e.g.
new Youtube, new Market), yes?

If so, why would you not feel you are missing out during the year between
functionality updates for iOS and instead focus only on the OS version number?
Is it simply that you don't want other people to have updates if you don't
have them, rather than missing the actual functionality itself? Because you
not having an update because it's in Apple's secret lab seems fairly similar
to not having it because your phone hasn't yet update to the latest Android
OS.

Would you prefer if Google kept all those updates to itself and then forced
them on carriers once a year? I'm assuming you don't think iOS (or Android) is
more than say 6 months ahead of the competition or you'd just have given that
as a reason for switching rather than the manner in which you get the latest
functionality.

~~~
vibrunazo
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. You seem to imply that somehow I
prefer iOS over Android, when in fact I never owned any Apple product. I still
prefer my 2.3 Nexus S over any iDevice I could have.

I'm simply responding to a post where someone assumed that buying a Nexus
device will guarantee you the latest OS update. This isn't true as I showed
that the Nexus S, which I bought essentially for faster updates. Still didn't
get the official 4.0 in my region/carrier even 4 months after it's available.

------
zrgiu_
Android 2.2+ is not that bad, feature-wise. And with the release of several
compatibility packages, it's rather easy to make app that run on more than 90%
of the available Android devices.

APIs haven't changed that much from 2.2 to 4.0, for the design you can easily
implement your own, and with the introduction of Fragments it's even easier to
make apps that look good on both phones and tablets for Android than for iOS.

Yes, you can't negate that Android has a fragmentation problem, but it's not
as bad as it used to be, or most people would like you to believe.

~~~
ricardobeat
Android apps that look good on tablets? With 2.2?? Dream on.

~~~
rogerbinns
Android supply a compatibility library that lets you use new functionality
even on older Android platforms. You can read about and download it here:

<http://developer.android.com/sdk/compatibility-library.html>

If you want to use the ActionBar UI style then there is a library that will
work on Android 1.6+ using the native one when available else an emulated one.

<http://actionbarsherlock.com/>

~~~
veeti
> If you want to use the ActionBar UI style

More like "if you want to design your app according to standards". ABS is a
necessity for any new app.

------
qxcv
There seems to be a lot of discussion here about Android v. iOS, but I feel
like people are neglecting to discuss a key part of the article:

> what's wrong with Android from the perspective of someone planning a long-
> term 1:1 deployment in a school

There's nothing wrong with Android. The problem is that you're trying to throw
expensive toys at school students in the hope that you'll win the award for
"Digital Curriculum Innovator". As a student and 1:1 program participant, the
notion that tablets are even remotely useful as educational tools makes me
incredibly frustrated. These devices are designed for light web browsing and
viewing images and videos, not the sort of tasks that students actually _need_
portable devices for like writing down notes, typing up assignments in class
and communicating with their instructors via email.

> My question was then, and remains this: where are the apps to challenge
> iMovie, GarageBand, Keynote, OmniFocus, OmniGraffle, Soulver, Flipboard,
> iThoughts, Noteshelf, Collabracam, The Elements, Brushes and ArtRage?

This sounds an awful lot like the sort of thing you would use a laptop for.
Perhaps a more useful question would be:

> Where are the apps to challenge Geogebra, Mathematica, CMap, AutoCAD,
> Photoshop and Office?

or

> How am I going to interface my expensive light sensors or CNC machine with a
> tablet?

The applications mentioned in the article give me the impression that there
isn't much serious work being done on these things. Students need technology
skills which will be useful in the workforce, which usually means using the
same hardware and software which you are likely to encounter in the workforce.
Nowadays you have relatively advanced topics like robotics and video editing
being taught to 4th-graders, meaning that by the time they are twelve they
have already started learning how to use music composition software (think
Sibelius) and commercial CNC machines. Tablets and smartphones just aren't
capable enough.

Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, but sometimes I feel like educators need to
spend more time educating and less time reinventing the wheel.

~~~
cmsj
Photoshop has a tablet app. iWork is on tablets. iMovie and avid are on
tablets. You could make a CNC controller if you wanted to

------
thought_alarm
You are not Samsung's customer.

Phone manufactures sell phones to carriers, not consumers. Success in the
phone industry depends entirely how well you meet the demands of the carriers.
RIM knows it (or knew it), Nokia knows it, Samsung knows it.

Android is merely a platform that allows Samsung to tailor their devices to
the carrier's requirements, in a way they couldn't do when they were selling
Windows Mobile devices.

So how does Android 4 help Samsung better meet the demands of the carriers?

It doesn't. Carriers want devices that show off their network, they want
devices that compare well against the iPhone, and they want you to buy a new
phone and sign a new contract in 2 years. They obviously have no trouble
selling Samsung devices with outdated software to the unsuspecting public; it
made Samsung the largest smartphone manufacturer in the world.

Neither the carriers nor the manufacturers will spend a dime to rush out
Android 4.

~~~
dman
Calling everyone one who buys a samsung device "unsuspecting public" is
patronising. There are real reasons to buy a non apple device. I have listed
some such reasons on an earlier thread -
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3642152> . I also managed to miss one
important reason in that list - 4G.

~~~
zht
He's not calling everyone who buys a samsung device "unsuspecting public".
He's specifically referring to those who wouldn't mind buying a 2.2 phone when
2.3 and 4.0 are out.

~~~
kamjam
I bought a 2.1 phone when 2.3 was already out.

Mind you, I knew what I was buying and it would be rooted and flashed to 2.3
within about half hour of purchase :)

------
vibrunazo
_> "I'm talking about fragmentation of the basic operating system as deployed
in the field.[...] I'm talking about APIs. [...] Apple is deploying and the
installed base is rapidly upgrading to much more powerful APIs on the devices
in consumers' hands"_

The article says iOS newer APIs are better than Android older APIs, but he
doesn't seem to back it up. I'm not very familar with iOS as I am with
Android. So I would like to learn what exactly am I missing in the iOS API
that is better?

As far as I know, Android 2.3 still have many useful APIs for us that iOS 5 is
still missing, such as intent filters. And many of the great newer APIs were
made backward compatiple, such as tablet/phone layout templating on the same
app, and fragments. You can develop with these even if you support older
devices. But I personally don't know of any features that the iOS puts
available to us that developing for Android 2.3 does not.

If that is true. Then, for the developer perspective, OS API fragmentation
only hurts Android when compared to "how much better Android could be". But
it's not a problem when compared against iOS, if even Android 2.3 has better
API than iOS 5?

So am I wrong here? If I am, could someone point me to a few examples of which
awesome API features that iOS offer us that Android doesn't? I'm curious to
learn that. Or is the article just full of it?

~~~
mattparcher
I'm not qualified to compare Android APIs to those on iOS. I believe the
author's main point in this regard is simply that old Android devices don't
usually get any new Android features (and APIs, for improved apps), because
the manufacturers/carriers don't update the old devices very often.

~~~
chrisrhoden
I think that the point of this comment is that that's mostly incorrect. There
are support libraries which basically mean that any device can run at any API
level. This is fact, it has been for a while. Suck it up.

------
gbaygon
> _where are the apps to challenge iMovie, GarageBand, Keynote, OmniFocus_

About GarageBand, there is a known problem with sound latency in android that
prevents real time audio apps to be developed and it doesn't seem to be fixed
in ICS.

This stops developers from writing musical apps that could compete with those
available on iPhone or iPad.

iOS latency is around 6ms, in android devices it varies between 100ms and
400ms.

~~~
redacted
I believe this is the bug report in question

<http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=3434>

Note that this issue has been open for more than 2.5 years

~~~
gbaygon
Yes, that's the bug. I have tried to use NDK with OpenSL and it doesn't get
any better. I wonder why google doesn't fix this, hardware limitations?

------
TeeWEE
The OS versions fragmentation issue is always exagerated. Looking at the list
it is tempting to come to the conclusion that android is fragmented:
<http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/api-levels.html>

However as a developer there are actually three big different category of
versions:

    
    
      A) Android <= 2.0
      B) Android 2.0 and higher
      C) and android 3 & 4.
    

It is very easy to develop for either A&B, or B&C. But developing for all of
them is indeed harder.

However that is not really needed since you have a majority in B&C. With the
compatibility packages you can create a full blown android 4.0 app that also
works on Android 2.2.

And the cool point is: Your app will also work on Tablets! (Yes 1 app, for OS
2.2 2.3, 2.4 3, and 4.0 that works on different phone resolutions on phones
and on tablets) IOS is inferior compared to this point.

So as a developer: _It doesnt really matter!_

As a user: I can understand that you want the latest version of your OS. Well
basically: in Android you have choice. Choice a manufacturer that gives steady
updates.

At a certain point old phones will not be upgraded anymore. But the same is
true for any platform, including IOS. (iOS5 doesnt run on 1st gen IPhones)

My last point:

    
    
      Android is a much broader platform than IOS.
      Android runs on TV's, range of tablets,
      range of phones, and even in your car (New Audi A3).
      And supports a range of hardware characteristics
      (single core, quad cores, big screens, small screens, hardware keys etc)
    

This comes with some kind of "fragmentation" as people call it. But its better
to see it as diversity.

------
padobson
From the perspective of an app developer, I was motivated to build Android
apps by the section about lack of quality apps. It seems the Android app
market is bigger, has fewer barriers to entry, and is more easily penetrated
because of lacking quality competition.

------
rlpb
"You're either buying into a platform or you're buying gadgets."

This is it. Manufacturers are still in the mindset of selling gadgets, not a
platform. Each gadget ships with featureset that doesn't change after it is
shipped (ie. they don't expect to upgrade the OS).

On the other hand, we're buying into a brand that represents a platform. We
expect apps written after the phone was released to work.

I think it's interesting that this is exactly what a Linux distribution
solves. The "gadget" (ie. computer) does not matter any more.

My laptop is the same as your laptop, except perhaps in the specs. But we can
run the same version of the same OS if we choose to. But my Android phone
probably isn't running the same version of Android as your Android phone, and
we would probably struggle to achieve this if we tried to.

What we need is a vendor-independent Android distribution. Is CyanogenMod the
future?

------
Shank
As an Android user and developer, there are really good points made here.

> Fragmentation \- This is a huge issue. The thing now is that at the last
> Google IO, Google made it clear that you must agree to update your devices
> in a timely fashion to the latest OS rev if they can run it.

> Backups \- This is also a big issue, although 4.x supports a secure,
> encrypted backup (as well as entire phone encryption) system

> Security \- This argument can be made for both platforms. Sure, Apple has an
> approval process, but they've had that slip before, and on apparently the
> worst possible things (most notably tethering apps and such) \- Unknown
> sources is turned off by default and usually discouraged from the end user
> toggling it

> Apps \- Agree. There isn't near as much effort put into designing solid apps
> on Android as there is on iOS.

------
marquis
This leaves a really good space for the Android manufacturer who gets this
right. I'm due to upgrade my phone and am seriously considering between iPhone
and Android. The fact that my current Android phone, just a year old LG that
only now runs 2.2, so quickly went out of usability makes me wonder exactly
the same thing. If someone can deliver to me solid technology that keeps
working with Android as it evolves (to a reasonable degree of course, I'm
happy with a 2-3 year window), I will be a life-long loyal customer to that
company. Right now I'm not even sure who to guess buying a new Android from
and that's a shame on the industry that my choices are between several not-
amazing options.

~~~
ericabiz
Already been done. The Nexus line of phones have the latest software directly
from Google, and no carrier bloat. Really, anyone technical enough to read HN
should go with a Galaxy Nexus or Nexus S vs. ANY other Android phone.

~~~
marquis
Does this apply to their small phones? Perhaps it is _because_ of reading HN
that I am of the perception that only the larger more feature-full phones are
maintained well (or perhaps just that my friends who have bought these just
got the big version, having large male rucksacks). The Nexus that I am aware
of doesn't fit in my purse.

~~~
te0x
I can't even think of a good Android phone out on the market today that anyone
would consider small. These days decent Androids generally range from 4.3''
screens to the 5.3'' found on the Galaxy Note.

~~~
marquis
Right, so that effectively keeps me out of the good-phone market. It really is
a shame that they can't make a smaller phone (iPhone size is ok but smaller
would be better). I'd be a customer for life.

------
jsight
2.2 and 2.3 currently represent about 90% of the market. From an API
standpoint, these are very similar. Is iOS really that much less fragmented in
real-world terms?

The dramatic variations in hardware are actually a much more interesting
problem than the supposed issue of OS version fragmentation, IMO.

~~~
rimantas

      > Is iOS really that much less fragmented
      > in real-world terms?
    

<http://pxldot.com/post/18754186750/ios-ebb-and-flow>

~~~
nextparadigms
So it takes about a year for near 100% adoption of the iOS version, too? So
what's the complaining about Android, then? In a year the new version can get
about 75%, which is not that bad.

~~~
rimantas
The complaining is because of this:

    
    
      > iOS 5 captured approximately 75% of all iOS users in the same
      > amount of time it took Gingerbread to get 4% of all Android
      > users. Even more astounding is that 15 weeks after launch
      > iOS 4 was at 70% and iOS 5 was at 60% while Ice Cream Sandwich
      > got to just 1% share at the same age.
    

So 60% vs 1% at the same age since release.

------
colig
The issue with backups is understated. Titanium Backup is a crutch where I
expect a cloud solution from Google would have been obvious and easy to use.

------
beloch
Google needs to do one thing before anything else:

Build a reference phone chipset.

Every Android phone consists of a patchwork of vendor specific hardware. The
chips in Samsung's phones are not the same as the chips in HTC's or LG's,
etc.. It gets even worse, since the same model of phone made by the same
manufacturer may have different chips for different cell carriers. This is a
big reason why the second most recent "reference" google phone, the Nexus S,
has yet to receive an official ICS update more than 3 months after ICS was
released. If google is this slow, how can anyone expect other vendors to be
quick? Hell, it's starting to look like other vendors may be _faster_ than
google. That's also not good.

~~~
wmf
Google does have reference designs; if you use the same chips as the latest
Nexus then you don't have to do any porting to get the latest Android release.
This was especially apparent with Honeycomb where all the tablets used Tegra 2
(despite its tablet-unfriendly low fill rate). But unlike Microsoft's
"chassis" concept, Google won't force anyone. It is open source after all.
Also, Google likes to rotate their favor among all the chip and phone vendors,
using a different vendor for each generation. Phone makers who are loyal to
one SoC line find themselves advantaged with one release but disadvantaged
with the next. As much as Android would benefit from Microsoft/Apple-style
tighter control, Google seems philosophically opposed to it.

------
edderly
I think by the end of the year this will be less of a problem. Consider that
last year two OS versions were released and the first was Honeycomb which had
a very binding legal agreement associated with it so as not to appear on phone
form factor devices. Then Icecream Sandwich comes out and as usual most of the
Android ecosystem does not see _any_ of the codeline until the AOSP release.
So now it's 3 months down the road.

In the biz. I haven't heard of any significant handset vendors starting a
Android phone or tablet project in 2012 on anything but 4.0. So with the
growth in the market expect 4.0 to grow very quickly and perhaps consider 2011
to be a oddity.

~~~
herge
How are we supposed to believe that the same phone manufacturers will not have
the same problems with fragmentation with 4.0, 4.1, 4.x in the future?

~~~
edderly
The only relationship between the version of the OS and fragmentation is that
a new OS rev usually introduces an additional API level. So if you write an
app to API level 15 (4.0 IIRC) that will be available and work on subsequent
revs.

~~~
runako
I think you're missing the point. Putting it another way: When the 4.1 APIs
are released, how long do you need to wait to add 4.1 as a dependency for the
core cool new feature in your app? Obviously you can use the 4.0 APIs that are
still there, but you have to admit that your ability to push new features to
your whole user base is impeded by the rag-tag update schedule.

~~~
edderly
Yes I agree that you cannot target the the latest API, and there is a lag,
which has been exceptionally long because of the Honeycomb blip.

But it just means that, form factor and to a certain extent performance
differences are more likely to be a problem than perceived platform level
fragmentation IMO.

------
ZeroGravitas
Maybe I'm crazy, but why is it bad to release a phone with 2.3 and update it
to 4.0 a month or two later?

Apart from the blog reviewers and the early adopters who actually even gets to
see the old version? Would they really be served by delaying the hardware?
Just to satisfy some neat-freak OCD tendency? How is this different from
someone buying an iPhone a few months before the new one comes out with an iOS
bump? Is that a horrifying experience too?

~~~
gnaffle
There's nothing wrong with that. The problem is that Sony Ericsson (and
others) have made many promises on upgrades that they have been unable to
keep. If Apple released the iPhone 5 running iOS 3 while promising to update
it to iOS 5 later, at the very least people would be thinking that Apple could
use some improvement in their development process.

If Google had been more open in their development of Android, all members of
the OHA would have had repository access before release of a new version, and
manufacturers would outside of the launch partner would have been able to
develop their new hardware on the latest OS release.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
You're begging the question. Apple doesn't do it for iOS, but why does that
make it unthinkable? Apple don't perfectly sync up their Mac OS X and hardware
releases, you buy your hardware and then shortly afterwards you pay(!) to
upgrade.

If Apple can do it for laptops (and the first iPad), why can't Sony do it for
phones? Because a third party has released a device with a fourth parties
updated software? I understand that Google's releases schedule is different
from Microsoft Windows and Apple's Mac OS X and iOS, I'm looking for reasons
why a consumer should care. Personally I see benefits to their approach e.g.
rapid evolution.

(Note, I understand that making promises and breaking them is bad, it just
seems most of the comments focus not on the breaking of a promise, but the
very thought of disjoint hardware and software release dates)

~~~
gnaffle
The focus of the comments is not the disjoint between software and hardware
releases, but rather that manufacturers are very slow to update to newer
software releases. That's what everyone's complaining about. Sony Ericsson
releasing a new phone with an old operating system is just another indication
of that.

For your comparison to be accurate, Apple would have had to release a new Mac
that didn't run Mountain Lion, two months after Mountain Lion was released.

Or, HP would have had to release a new laptop that didn't run Windows 7 after
Windows 7 was released. There's nothing wrong with doing that, but it's
unlikely to happen simply because Microsoft is providing HP with prereleases
way before a new Windows version is announced, while Google is currently only
providing that service to their Nexus launch partner (at least that's the
excuse that Sony Ericsson had).

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Other people not doing it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it (as you
yourself have pointed out twice) so... what makes it bad?

Google lets consumers use products that it labels as "beta"? Is this bad? Why?

Google only let people with invites into Gmail at first. Is this bad? Why

Google tests changes by pushing them to random subsets of web visitors. Is
this bad? Why?

Google pushed the last version of the market to 2.3 devices before it pushed
it to 2.2 devices. Is this bad? Why?

Android updates seem to roll out by country over a period of weeks. Is this
bad? Why?

A lot of Android functionality is in Apps rather than the OS and the trend is
to increase this (e.g. Chrome on a 6 week update schedule). Is this bad? Why?

You could have interesting, enlightening debates about any of these decisions
and reasonable people could argue either side of each of them. But it seems we
skipped that step for Android updates and decided that if it wasn't the same
as Apple it must be bad. I'm just looking for an actual reason why an average
consumer (or indeed any particular subset of consumers) would prefer everyone
to adopt Apple's model to justify these strongly and loudly held opinions.

Note that "not having the latest version of the OS" is _not_ a reason why not
having the latest version of the OS is bad, it's just restating the question.

~~~
gnaffle
This is not really about "Android vs Apple" or Apple fanboys trying to push a
certain view on others. What it's about is carriers and cell phone
manufacturers being used to shipping phones with a single OS release, and
never having to provide any updates at all (except for serious bugs).

The only thing special about Apples software update policy is that it's more
similar to how things are done in the PC industry, where you get OS updates as
long as your hardware supports the new operating systems (although Apple is
quicker in discontinuing iOS devices, something I don't like).

I can't think of a single reason why delaying, or not shipping a software
release for a capable (but discontinued) handset is _good_ for the customer. I
can think of many examples of why it is bad.

If your theory is right and a year from now I'll be able to upgrade an Android
4.x phone to be feature equivalent with Android 5 through app downloads, then
great, why would anyone really complain about that?

An example of the PC and mobile worlds colliding: When Nokia discontinued the
770 with the Tablet OS 2007 release, do you think the outraged 770 owners were
rabid Apple fanboys? No, they were PC users that expected the expensive toy
they just bought to be supported for more than a year and two months with
software updates.

------
AznHisoka
The slow speed at which consumers upgrade their devices can be a good thing..
for developers.. once you finish making an app stable that works across most
popular versions. You don't have to worry about future versions breaking it,
or feel the need to upgrade your app to take advantage of newer features.

Compare that to iOS. Now if you download the new XCode, you gotta worry about
ARC. A few years back, you had to make retina versions of all your images...
and if you just had 1 version of those images, you were screwed. I compiled an
app I made a year ago using iOS 5.0. It's breaks. I have no clue why.. As
consumers we want the latest, but as a developer, sometimes I get really
annoyed that Apple keeps changing so much so fast.

------
pinaceae
this is why android will not succeed in the corporate space. might not be
their target anyhow, but who knows.

IT departments in big companies love stable, homogenous platforms. buy an
iphone anywhere on this world, it is exactly the same. same OS, same apps,
etc. the upgrade path is known, predictable and again, completely global.

hence the success of the iPhone in that space, killing off RIM. hence the
success of iPads, killing off classic Windows tablets and even notebooks. and
suddenly you see macbook airs popping up in meetings and airport lounges.
because once you're on iPhone and iPad - why not take the plunge? a macbook
air is the same anywhere on this globe...

~~~
bad_user
Your comment is kind of funny because I remember when people bitched about the
iPhone not being suitable for the enterprise.

What people are missing is that when a product gets really popular amongst
consumers, the enterprise will follow regardless of its shortcomings.

Plus, Android does have advantages for the enterprise. Like its integration
with the other Google services. For instance I love that my whole contacts
list is backed-up in Google Apps. And the Gmail app on Android is the best
Gmail app available on mobile phones.

It's a pity that I'll have to wait for an Android 4 upgrade for my Galaxy S. I
blame Samsung for this as I buy from them for the hardware (which is awesome),
not for their shitty "additions" to Android. This is why my next phone I buy
will be a Nexus, or whatever Google's next blessed phone will be called.

~~~
chrisbolt
_What people are missing is that when a product gets really popular amongst
consumers, the enterprise will follow regardless of its shortcomings._

Do you have any other examples of this? I hadn't really heard this before the
iPhone or iPad.

~~~
bad_user
I can think of Mac OS X, Gmail, Windows 95, Firefox, Chrome, GitHub.

Of course, such a thing only happens when there's overlap. There's not much
use for an XBox or a Wii in a company, with the exception of having a fun and
games room as an added benefit to employees.

But when a product is useful for the enterprise and popular amongst consumers,
it will enter that space, simply because enthusiastic employees can move
mountains. See for instance Linux's growth in the ninties, in spite of
Windows, IBM AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, or other OSes that were definitely more
ready for the enterprise. Basically an immature Unix clone, that can't even
keep binary compatibility between versions, is killing all proprietary Unix
distributions, except OS X.

------
pmarsh
After doing some research on security it seems that Android's problem is
overblown. The malware I've come across mostly stems from people downloading
random apps from the web and then granting full privileges to that app. Which
in turn does things with the permissions the person granted it.

That doesn't really seem to be a security hole as much as it is a user
problem.

I guess it's simple to say Android is insecure, but it doesn't seem to be the
case. Any more so than a rootable iOS device.

Am I mistaken? Are there reports of apps gaining root access?

------
bitcracker
Android 2.3 is good enough for most smartphone users. Android 4.x will be good
enough for most Pad users.

These are the two distributions I expect to be successful in the long run.

------
andyfleming
I've been dealing with the fragmentation issue directly as of recently. I was
completely oblivious to the situation until I found out I needed to test for 4
versions of the Android OS for a project (after the fact)! No fun!

------
shingen
The endless parade of fragmentation discussions regarding Android all prove
one thing: a lot of people don't understand what wins a market. Customers
lacking in technological savvy make up the radical majority of Android owners,
they are never going to care about this issue so long as their smart phone
functions at 85% good enough.

85% good enough, is more than enough to win a market if you have substantial
other advantages in your favor.

Windows has always suffered fragmentation, and has rarely been better than 85%
good enough. Circa 2002 they had '95, 98, ME, and XP spread across over half a
billion units. With further varied patch configurations and service packs. The
total global varied combinations are in the hundreds in that context.

But, you say, that's just so horrible! Welcome to reality, where markets are
never dominated by perfection and fairy tales. You don't have to like it, you
can rail against it the rest of your life, and fight the good fight; and
Android will continue to dominate, and it will have absolutely nothing to do
with issues related to fragmentation.

~~~
elithrar
> Circa 2002 they had '95, 98, ME, and XP spread across over half a billion
> units. With further varied patch configurations and service packs.

It's worth pointing out that this comparison isn't the same. You could, in
2002, run the latest version of Office on all of their operating systems. With
Android, there are situations where even Google's own software (see Chrome on
Android) only runs on the absolute latest version.

Further, in 2002, all the big name vendors were generally shipping Windows XP
on their machines. With Android, vendors are still shipping devices with 2.3.
It's still a good OS, but it has to be frustrating as a non-tech user to
understand why your brand new Android device can't run software released last
week.

~~~
bunderbunder
And Microsoft was pushing updates and security patches to all those XP
machines. Still are, over 10 years after initial release.

Whereas Android users are lucky if they're still getting updates and security
patches after 10 months.

~~~
ajross
Handset vendors and carriers push security patches routinely (though not
commonly, the sandbox architecture makes it a lot less needed than on a
desktop OS). It's OS upgrades that are slow. Holes get closed.

~~~
nodata
Can you flesh out your statement a bit?

You distinguish between security updates and OS updates. I'm not aware of any
difference, an update is an update. I've never seen an OTA update that wasn't
a point release. How are these deployed differently?

~~~
dagw
My old SE phone got random OTA updates regularly, but non of them changed the
android version number. I have no idea what those updates where though.

------
huggyface
Guy who prominently displays "Apple distinguished educator" proudly on his
site doesn't like Android. Who would have thought?

There is nothing that they say that we haven't heard one thousand times
before. Well the single and only thing that I might say is unique is the
backup bit, though is this really such a problem? What are people backing up?
My contacts are in the cloud. My email is in the cloud. My documents are in
the cloud. Even my game save state is in the cloud. What's left? I'd rather
that I _don't_ have to backup anything, which is generally exactly how Android
operates. I've jumped between six devices having never backed up or restored a
thing, yet there it is.

Further it's interesting that the fragmentation discussion reaches its maximum
volume shortly before the solution appears. Many tens of millions of devices
will see 4.0 updates within the next 30 days (anyone want to take a wager?).
What then?

------
ktizo
How does having consumer level devices deployed to a school help educate
people at all, regardless of things like platform fragmentation?

~~~
ugh
I do not understand you. What should schools deploy other than consumer level
devices? That’s what schools have been doing for years, they usually bought
consumer level PCs. It’s just normal.

~~~
ktizo
Things being normal does not mean they are a good idea. How will teaching a
class of 30 be improved with the addition of 30 tablets or smartphones, apart
from in the rare occasions that you are teaching how to program the things?

~~~
ugh
It’s a tool like any other, like pen and paper. Why shouldn’t students be able
to use up-to-date tools?! I certainly would have loved to have been able to do
just that.

It’s funny how you seem to imply that the only useful thing you can do with a
computer is to learn how to program things.

It’s not going to be a revolution or a huge improvement (better teachers are
the most important thing above all else), but being able to use modern tools
seems kinda important to me.

(Do you have any idea how much Grapher† helped me understand math when doing
my homework? I wasn’t programming, I was using a modern UI – no stupid
graphing calculator that’s a pain to use – to fool around with equations. That
was tremendously helpful. Having that kind of power always with you, instant
on, with a battery that lasts forever, man, that’s living the dream.)

—

† <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grapher>

~~~
ktizo
There is a huge difference from using these devices to help with homework and
using them in the classroom though. Also, pens and paper are an extremely
cheap, robust, high-resolution, non-volatile, display, computation and memory
technology that are amazingly resistant to EM interference and works even in
situations of extended power loss.

And given the distractions that a group of schoolkids can create using just
pen and paper, I don't see how devices that are primarily designed for
consuming media and gaming are really going to help much. Half of them will
get broken or stolen and the other half will be hacked.

