A single source of vetted apps is fine but Google has already demonstrated that allowing expert users to use alternative app sources doesn't hurt. And I don't see how anybody can argue that required a full review cycle for every minor bug fixes benefits users. I see more and more mobile shops iterating on Android first because there are just fewer hassles.
Also, Apple's refusal to allow developers to do lower-level things like create alternative keyboards means Android users get to use modern input technologies like SwiftKey while iOS users are still pecking away at a 2007 keyboard.
I see more and more mobile shops iterating on Android first because there are just fewer hassles.
Hmm, more like different hassles, I'd have thought: having to support thousands of screen size/hardware/OS combinations must be a huge pain, and less of the UI is given to you for free. Though I speak as someone who's done very little Android dev, and rather more iOS.
It's true that the Mac model (App Store PLUS third-party apps) is preferable for me. But then again, I do like the idea that my parents' machines won't run any unsigned code. I'm thinking of Windows virus support nightmares past.
I've been doing Android dev for the last six months or so after doing iOS for about two years and actually accommodating different screen sizes really isn't hard at all as long as you have a designer that understands it's not a fixed layout environment like iOS. Actually the dynamic layout tools on Android make things a lot easier in many cases, certainly far, far easier than AutoLayout on iOS (an API I absolutely loathe).