or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple now charting App Store iOS fragmentation just like Google's Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple now charting App Store iOS fragmentation just like Google's Android - Page 2

post #41 of 93
Apple obsoletes old devices in an interesting way. Even long after you can no longer update an older device like the original iPhone, it can still access the App Store. However there is no way to find apps that run on an original iPhone on the App Store. You can't just list compatible apps and at this point the only apps that would still run on that device are ones that have not been updated in several years to use newer versions of iOS. Even knowing that, finding apps that work is extremely difficult. Even if you have purchased apps in the past, chances are that they have been updated to require a version of iOS that no longer runs on your iPhone. The App Store is particularly unhelpful in this case telling you to update your version of iOS to one that does not run on your iPhone. They should just go ahead and tell you to update your iPhone.

None of the above is really a complaint. While I would love it if the App Store had an option to show only apps that run on your device and version of iOS, I recognize that one way or another old iOS devices will become obsolete some day. I keep waiting for the App Store to reject older versions of iOS. I am a bit surprised this has not already happened. Apple has chosen to go the route of obsolescence by neglect.
post #42 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by binex View Post


Apple are not making the comparison, AI is. If you follow the Apple Developer link in the story you will see Apple only show the iOS distribution. Even the graphs are different; Google use white lines to separate the pies, Apple don't and they use different legend styling.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

 

Does it say that Apple provided the comparison? Looks to me like AppleInsider is the source of the side by side comparison. And the article highlights the fact that this data is even available at all and then compares it to the sad state of affairs on the other side. 

 

 

I may a bit confused but wasn't this a comparison that Tim Cook had made at the WWDC 2013 Keynote? It may not be the actual pie charts, but he did say something about how more than 90% were on the latest iOS, but only a third were on the latest Android.

post #43 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I'd prefer if Apple just focus on marketing its own strengths. Comparison marketing simply draws attention to the competition.

You don 't understand, Apple was marketing this to the developers and these facts are important to them. Developers know all about Android being out there.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #44 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post

 

 

I may a bit confused but wasn't this a comparison that Tim Cook had made at the WWDC 2013 Keynote? It may not be the actual pie charts, but he did say something about how more than 90% were on the latest iOS, but only a third were on the latest Android.

This is an updated pie chart on Android since the keynote. It looks better, but still stinks.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #45 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_l_uk View Post

The first iPad was introduced in 2010 and was 'wildly successful', ditto iPod Touch, therefore there are millions out there unable to upgrade to the latest OS, so presumably they've either been chucked away in despair or just written out of the equation. I cant believe that they represent such a small percentage of that pie chart! I am very disappointed that I can't update my original iPad in any way even if the limitations of the device prevents access to certain features.

The reason you can not update your stuff is that it lacks the horsepower to run the new iOS or current apps in a satisfactory manner. It's not like Apple is punishing you, it's a protection. 

 

I have a friend with an older iPod Touch. The apps he bought when the iPod was newer still run fine and he can add all the songs he wants. Nothing about the device is a problem running the older iOS, he just can't do things with it that he couldn't do when he bought it. What's the big deal!?

 

The biggest point is, that people that buy BRAND NEW Android devices can't run apps that their hardware would support because (A) their Android OS is an older version, or (B) developers are writing for the older OS because that's where the bulk of the crap still is at.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #46 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl View Post

The longer Apple can keep a device updatable, the better. My MacBook 2007 (fall edition) just missed Mnt Lion. Apple released four versions of the MB that year and had I purchased three weeks later . . . 

Apple released two versions, not four, of the MacBook in 2007, the MacBook (13-inch Mid 2007 or 2,1), released in May 2007, and the MacBook (13-inch Late 2007 or 3,1), released in November 2007, which both can run up to and including Mac OS X 10.7.5.

 

Mac OS X 10.8 is not supported until the MacBook (13 inch, Aluminum, Late 2008 or 5,1), which was released in October 2008.

 

Between those models Apple released the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008 or 4,1) and the MacBook (13-inch Late 2008 or 4,1), released in February and October 2008, respectively. Technically these are one model, the 4,1. The MacBook (13-inch Late 2008) was actually a speed bumped version of the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008) released at the same time as the MacBook (13 inch, Aluminum, Late 2008).

 

Unless you purchased your "MacBook 2007 (fall edition)", which I assume is the MacBook (13-inch Late 2007), in September 2008, seven months after the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008) was released, something is not adding up. Maybe you purchased the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008) just before the MacBook (13 inch, Aluminum, Late 2008) was released. This would make more sense.

NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
Reply
NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
Reply
post #47 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

True, but melodramatic.  How about:

 

100% of Android users with access to a market can download a Google Now or Siri equivalent.

 

100% of iPhone 4 owners cannot use Siri... even though their device would've been able to if Apple hadn't bought it.

 

~40% of iOS devices ever sold can't use Siri.  (Even more have been left out of Airdrop, panoramic photos, etc.)

 

~85% of iPod touch devices ever sold are left out of iOS 7 upgrade.

 

See. Anyone can come up with fun statistics.

 

What's important is, does your device do the things you want it to do?

 

The OS version doesn't matter.  Especially with iOS, where the same number on various devices might or might not have major features included.

Around 90% of mobile viruses are on Android.

 

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Q1-2013-Game-Changer-for-Android-Malware-1790298.htm

post #48 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Werner View Post

as for stelligent's comment. Normally I would say yes ... concentrate on strengths ... but isn't the fact that there isn't such fragmentation a strength (for the platform and developers) unto itself?

Compare the following:

You're so short.

I am tall. You're short.

Look at what I can reach - high, higher and highest.

Compare, " Hey developers, here are the versions of software users are using," to what you said and tell us where it fits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


What he's saying is don't point out the speck in another's eye when you have a plank in yours.

You clearly have that upside down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

That's rich. But are you admitting you are the same troll as Korea rling, or are there two disingenuous Android master baiters here? 

So they're trolls because they don't agree with you? Trolls are the ones with one line posts that are pure Apple hatred with no substance nor rhyme or reason. You may not agree with KDarling or DroidFTW but that alone doesn't make them a troll. Difference of opinions that are well written and with respect is what makes a thread interesting. We can politely and respectively agree to disagree.

Seriously? The user joined Appleinsider using the name DroidFTW. You question calling that peron a troll? That's not enough for you? Read the posts. It is not about disagreement.
post #49 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel View Post

Compare, " Hey developers, here are the versions of software users are using," to what you said and tell us where it fits.
You clearly have that upside down.
Seriously? The user joined Appleinsider using the name DroidFTW. You question calling that peron a troll? That's not enough for you? Read the posts. It is not about disagreement.

Yea I'd agree it's upside down and while DroidFTW would indicate a troll he hasn't spewed pure hatred like some that have Apple centric names.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #50 of 93
so instead of competing, apple is taking a page from microsoft's book.

apple wants to be Just Like Mic
post #51 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Well, that's hardly "just like Google's Android" as the headline says. There's a world of difference between the levels of fragmentation.

 

You forgot the /S, or maybe you just missed it.

 

Apple literally just added this to their developer site. Prior to this you never really knew the numbers unless you got them from Chitika (or similar) or if Apple provided a press release stating xxx million downloads in only yyy weeks.

 

This is an obvious barb pointed towards Android. They could have represented the data in a number of ways but chose to copy Google's pie chart (except for the color change). They even copied the text stating the data represents the last 14 days ending on "insert date here".

 

Apple also copied Apple in that these numbers represent people accessing the App Store (just like Google changed their numbers to reflect people accessing Google Play). So in reality there aren't 93% of users on iOS 6. Instead, of the people who visited the App Store, 93% of them were on iOS 6. Apple is cheating just like Google is, but they really had no choice. They have to use the same methods to make the comparison fair. And it really shows how bad Android fragmentation is.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #52 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post


First off: if your point is thoughtful and interesting, you don't need big type or all caps to get attention.

Secondly: you conflate a series of ideas together in trying to make your point. Are you arguing that old hardware should support new features? Are you arguing that devices like the iPod touch should be supported for many. many more years of future iOS updates, or some specific multiplier of Android's "less than one year, if that"? What's fair, an expectation of Apple that is 4-5 times better than Google in every respect? How many times better than Google does Apple have to be to satisfy you? Just curious.
 

 

I think KDarling is asserting that it's more meaningful to think of fragmentation in terms of functionality instead of version number. With this perspective, IOS is more fragmented than the pie-chart might suggest because there are effectively several versions of IOS6, each supporting a different set of features. Similarly, android is somewhat less fragmented because key apps like Gmail are decoupled from the core system and updated through google play. Neither KDarling nor the original article make any claim about the underlying reasons for the fragmentation, such as genuine lack of hardware support or artificial obsolescence.

post #53 of 93
Windows RT takes the IOS no fragmentation model even further by only allowing IE. Android, like Windows XP has that fragmented browser system that allows Firefox, full Opera and suchlike. IOS only allows browsers to use the Webkit frame but strangely IOS does seems to have two versions of webkit installed.
post #54 of 93

"Around 90% of mobile viruses are on Android."

 

Sadly 'around 99.9% of IOS malware goes unreported'.

post #55 of 93
While iOS 5 is only a small percent - it is still a significant piece that isn't going to just disappear like iOS 6 should. I can't think of any device that iOS 6 is running on right now that can't move to iOS 7, but that isn't the same with iOS 5. iPad 1 is stuck at 5 and there are still a lot of iPad 1s out there that are still in use. As a dev myself I wouldn't drop support for it.
post #56 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Yes but it's the manufacturers job to get the ball rolling. I'd agree with you if there were instances in which a carrier blocked an update that a manufacturer proposed. If it has happened I'm unaware of it.

 

typically each carrier will only release the update after 'approving' it, i.e. adding their bloatware and branding, the only way around it is acquiring an alternate image and manually updating, which is beyond most people - some carriers never release the update, even though the manufacturer made it available long ago

 

it's exacerbated by some carriers having contractual terms blocking the release of generic updates to sim-free phones until after they, eventually, deploy their own update to their sim-locked user base

 

it's not a new problem and it's not only android that suffers, except for the iphone, pretty much every phone with update capability has had the same issue, it goes waaaay back, it's the carrier's fault, not samsung/nokia/motorola/etc.

 

one of apple's best moves was to treat the iphone as a computer, manage update release availability itself and resist all demands, i'd bet there were a lot, by carriers to have control

 

presumably the first carriers were sufficiently desperate to offer the iphone that they caved on this, after that the steamroller was in motion and resistance by new carriers was futile

post #57 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_l_uk View Post

The first iPad was introduced in 2010 and was 'wildly successful', ditto iPod Touch, therefore there are millions out there unable to upgrade to the latest OS, so presumably they've either been chucked away in despair or just written out of the equation. I cant believe that they represent such a small percentage of that pie chart!

 

I also don't believe earlier versions of iOS are such a small percentage. Girlfriend's iPod Touch (2nd gen) can't upgrade past v4.0, but it's still perfectly useful. I'm sad it can't be upgraded any further, but not angry at Apple. It's old enough that I understand suporting it would be prohibitive.

 

What I find truly unacceptable is app developers who disable their earlier versions when they release new apps which require iOS 5 or higher. We've had more than a few media outlets here do that. You want to show off the best and newest? Fine. Don't penalize those who can't take advantage of it. Frankly, I'm surprised Apple allows that.

post #58 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


So they're trolls because they don't agree with you? Trolls are the ones with one line posts that are pure Apple hatred with no substance nor rhyme or reason. You may not agree with KDarling or DroidFTW but that alone doesn't make them a troll. Difference of opinions that are well written and with respect is what makes a thread interesting. We can politely and respectively agree to disagree.


You appear to be in the minority here as a moderate.  Anyone espousing anything but Apple on this site is branded a troll and Apple hater.  Outside of this site, they would merely be informed individuals who are trying to educate others on how things are in their world but here it is different.   Pulling away the passion from most of the posts you can get to the point that most people are trying to make but sometime it is hard.   That being said, I'm actually surprised that the number is not 100%  I thought users were forced to upgrade.  Glad to see that Apple is finally publishing this data though.

post #59 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

Does it say that Apple provided the comparison? Looks to me like AppleInsider is the source of the side by side comparison. And the article highlights the fact that this data is even available at all and then compares it to the sad state of affairs on the other side. 

I do wonder a bit about the Other category - could it be there are few devices prior to a given version because those devices just cant access the store? I have an original iPad which is limited and most stuff on there I either bought way back or tried out on higher devices first then put it on the old iPad, does that show up on the chart or is second download of same title not counted? In other words, this may not really be an accurate look at devices in the wild or even a fully detailed comparison of Apple and Android, especially if Android allows older versions to connect to the store even if there is little or not content available for them to use. So the co-requisite grain-o-salt applies here. 

On the other hand it is a good story I think and certainly helps the developers - on the other - other hand it will no doubt offend SOMEBODY that their 5 year old devices can't use the latest App. 

There is no 'Other' category. If you mean 'earlier iOS' then it is referring to individual devices running iOS 4 or earlier which accessed the App Store within the dates indicated. Downloading apps has nothing to do with it (or at least it shouldn't.) I can only assume (because this would be the best way to gather the data), that Apple counted each unique device which accessed the App Store between the dates indicated - also noting the iOS version - then amalgamated this data. Anything which (a) can't access the App Store (because its running a version of iOS which doesn't have the App Store) - or (b) didn't (ie the App Store wasn't used during this time on a particular device) - wouldn't be included in 'earlier iOS' as 1) there is no possible way to determine the number of (a) and (b) and 2) this isn't what 'earlier iOS' means in this chart.
post #60 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by fahlman View Post

Apple released two versions, not four, of the MacBook in 2007, the MacBook (13-inch Mid 2007 or 2,1), released in May 2007, and the MacBook (13-inch Late 2007 or 3,1), released in November 2007, which both can run up to and including Mac OS X 10.7.5.

 

- - - 

Unless you purchased your "MacBook 2007 (fall edition)", which I assume is the MacBook (13-inch Late 2007), in September 2008, seven months after the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008) was released, something is not adding up. Maybe you purchased the MacBook (13-inch Early 2008) just before the MacBook (13 inch, Aluminum, Late 2008) was released. This would make more sense.

 

Thanks Fahlman, for the help. The purchase was October 2007:
I think I used http://www.apple-history.com/mb_late_07 to check this out, many moons ago, and I remember 'seeing' four editions for the year- However:
 
Why I make such memory blunders will be my first question at the pearly/furnace gates. Obstinance keeps me trying to be a perfectionist.) But the lame duck that is my memory keeps me humble, and I am heralded for my patience- two good attributes of character, so I am told, but I really have no choice. 
 
My MB is buggered, Nov 2012, so I bought a Mac mini. The back of my MB says 2007 and on Apple-history I see that the largest hd at the time was 160 GB and that is what I got, the 2.20 GHz/1 GB RAM/160 GB HD/SuperDrive/Black 
 
My MB was a nightmare. Three hds went kaput until I asked at the Apple Store the reason. I thought the MB parked the hd when put to sleep but was told that was not so. I upgraded to a 360 GB drive and methodically shut down before transport thereafter-prob solved-my fault.
 
The superdrive never worked, even when replaced: CDs were difficult to get out. I had constant other probs (most of which I have dismiss from memory- holding onto anger is not healthy) and visits to repair (three yr warranty) never resolved them. I lived in the far north so only on holidays could I get it in to be fixed. - sudden shut downs were frequent, apps that suddenly wouldn't work properly, lost cursor, freezing, - I have dismissed most all the horrors. I ran a Mac lab three years just prior the iMac (80+ Macs in the school: from Classic to last All-in-One "molar" ) and have serviced Apples 'forever'; only the 6400s ever gave me problems- built by escaped criminals was my explanation. I do know my way around a Mac. I'm just glad the pain of that Black Beast is over.
 
However, I do like to get the facts correct and appreciate your time and assistance.
Namaste & care, Fahlman,
mhikl
 

 

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #61 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

I think KDarling is asserting that it's more meaningful to think of fragmentation in terms of functionality instead of version number. 

 

Yes, exactly.  For the user, functionality is far more important, and on iOS that often depends more on the device model year, than on the OS version or the actual capabilities of the hardware.

 

For the developer, API support is important... and on Android, that's not always dependent on the version number, since Google distributes back compatible libraries for many new features.  

 

Articles should not conflate these two needs.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

First off: if your point is thoughtful and interesting, you don't need big type or all caps to get attention.

 

Ironic, since I was using the same typeface that you used for the same point in your article. 

 
As for the immature troll comments (which would not even be allowed on other, more adult populated, forums), let everyone be clear that it is you and AppleInsider who constantly create threads about Android, to get more readers.

 

It is the height of irony and disingenuity to claim that anyone who replies to such intentional instigation is a troll.  In fact, it is all the replies and other traffic that are the whole point of doing these articles in the first place!   If everyone ignored you, you'd be out of a job pronto.

 

--

 

Now what would be great is if, instead of always dragging in comparisons to the competition, you'd actually use your investigative abilities to give us more info on the Apple topic itself.

 

For example, the topic here was Apple's new graphic.   So why did I, the reader, have to go research how many Apple products do not fit into that graphic?   Why did I, the reader, have to research how many Apple products cannot be upgraded?

 

Those seem like bits of information that would interest Apple users, instead of making us read about Android all the time.

 

Is it because it's too difficult?   Is it because that would not bring in the clicks?   Are you paid by the word or by the view?   We're not the shills here.  You're being paid to get readers, not us.

post #62 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post

 

 

I may a bit confused but wasn't this a comparison that Tim Cook had made at the WWDC 2013 Keynote? It may not be the actual pie charts, but he did say something about how more than 90% were on the latest iOS, but only a third were on the latest Android.

 

Yes it was a slide in the keynote, and presented in direct contrast to Android's numbers. Apple has since added the pie chart to its dev website, using the same appearance and date style as Google's for Android. One would have to be pretty willingly obtuse to think that Apple doesn't expect people to draw a comparison.

post #63 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

the killer point here, which most are still missing, is that many Android phones are still be sold with the hopelessly crippled old OS versions that will never be updated. that is shameful, right?

 

except of course, many buy those "free" phones with no intention of using any advanced OS features anyway. it's just another cellphone to them with some basic smart stuff. texting, Facebook, and celebrity gossip web sites mainly. so their built-in obsolescence doesn't matter. and you know ... that's ok.

 

the delicious irony instead is the droid fanboys won't ever admit their big user stats are comprised of mostly tabloid readers. and people wonder why their app revenues are so low?

 

I don't really see any irony in it, but your post is pretty spot on. Gingerbread is still selling like hotcakes and will probably continue to do so for quite some time.  It really doesn't require much in terms of resources and allows manufacturers to build super cheap phones capable of web browsing.  If Apples new cheap phone is going to support iOS7 there really isnt going to be a way for it to compete on price.  

 

 As a developer if you want to target Gingerbread users your choice is obvious.  The data shows there are indeed still a lot of Gingerbread users.  

 

On the flip side it also shows the majority of users are on ICS or higher.  If you account the data covers about 900m android devices and 600m iPhones its just about even.  Target ICS and you will reach about the same number of users as targetting iOS7.

 

As a relatively price insensitive Android user I actually prefer Androids more honest version of leaving fragmentation on the developer side.  I bought my phone about a year ago with ICS ditching my iPhone 3gs.  My iPhone was ´unfragmented´ running the latest OS version, it just couldn't actually use any of the features.  I would have been more annoyed if my ICS device had been immediately upgraded to Jelly Bean in name only without being able to use the features in Jelly bean-such as Now.  Instead my phone was left 'behind' for a few months- but once upgraded to Jelly Bean, I can actually use all the main features of Jelly Bean.  Amazing concept.

post #64 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Another 25.6 percent are still on Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich, which was released the same month as iOS 5. Only 33 percent are running the latest major version, Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, which was announced last summer alongside Apple's debut of iOS 6.

Two thirds of Android users can't use Google Now


Then potentially 300 million Android device owners can use Google Now using the figures you quoted in the article. How many iOS users can take advantage of Siri? Do you know? Neither of them serves a small number of users but perhaps there's more people using Google Now on Android than Siri on iOS? They both would appear to be pretty successful to me.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #65 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

 

I don't really see any irony in it, but your post is pretty spot on. Gingerbread is still selling like hotcakes and will probably continue to do so for quite some time.  It really doesn't require much in terms of resources and allows manufacturers to build super cheap phones capable of web browsing.  If Apples new cheap phone is going to support iOS7 there really isnt going to be a way for it to compete on price.  

 

 As a developer if you want to target them your choice is obvious.  The data shows there are indeed still a lot of Gingerbread users.  

 

On the flip side it also shows the majority of users are on ICS or higher.  If you account the data covers about 900m android devices and 600m iPhones its just about even.  Target ICS and you will reach about the same number of users as targetting iOS7.

 

 a relatively price insensitive Android user I actually prefer Androids more honest version of leaving fragmentation on the developer side.  I bought my phone about a year ago with ICS ditching my iPhone 3gs.  My iPhone was ´unfragmented´ running the latest OS version, it just couldn't actually yse any of the features.  I would have been more annoyed if my ICS device had been immediately upgraded to Jelly Bean in name only without being able to use the features in Jelly bean-such as Now.  Instead my phone was left 'behind' for a few months- but once upgraded to Jelly Bean, I can actually use all the main features of Jelly Bean.  Amazing concept.

 

Google Play data is not 900 M Android devices. You're counting every Android device ever built, because equating "white box" junk to a Nexus/S4 is the only way Android can appear to be a viable platform.

 

We also know what happens when deveopers target even the lowest common denominator of Android: they can't make any real money on apps because a) nobody pays for them b) the majority pirate their apps. Even if you could produce a great Android app (and test it against scores of hardware variants), as soon as it began getting attention there'd be dozens of rippoffs, and Google Play does next to nothing to stop this counterfeit tailgating. 

 

As for being pleased to run an outdated, insecure, old version of a platform because it "protects" you from not gettting features you can't run, what horseshit! I doubt any iPhone 4 users are even aware that it can't do 3D maps or take panos. And unavailable features they've heard about like Siri are perhaps disappointing, but there's no "benefit" to running an older version of the platform that not only can't do Siri, but can't do a lot of other things either. 

 

Your logic is so insane it reminds me of the delusional alcoholics I've dated. Such a flurry of upside-down excuses to condone and excuse your addiction. 

post #66 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Well, that's hardly "just like Google's Android" as the headline says. There's a world of difference between the levels of fragmentation.

I think the ´ just like Android' part references Apple counting via the App Store method- the same method Google.switched to and which some Apple users tried to flag as misleading.  Granted in Apples case it will be somewhat more accurate since Apple doesn't give users permission to shop anywhere other than the Apple store.

 

droid looks like it would have about 94 percent Jelly Bean adoptation if it simply released an update changing the names of Gingerbread and ICS to Jelly Bean.  Of course users would then have no idea what features their phones could and couldnt use, but on a chart they would indeed appear unfragmented.

post #67 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Then potentially 300 million Android device owners can use Google Now using the figures you quoted in the article. How many iOS users can take advantage of Siri? Do you know? Neither of them serves a small number of users but perhaps there's more people using Google Now on Android than Siri on iOS? They both would appear to be pretty successful to me.

 

No, the article doesn't say there are 900 million Android devices actively hitting Google Play. You're pulling in crazy talk to try to equate a hobbyist platform that is failing with iOS.

 

Ask yourself: why did the Google One fail? And then every other Google-branded phone up to the Nexus 7. Fall short of optimistic expectations. Why is that happening, when Android is such a global success?

 

It's because Google is not an Apple, and its products are not like iPhones. Android a reincarnation of Linux/Java, and has many of the same problems (and huge market share) that "platform" had. It's shipping on millions of junk phones.

 

Samsung is the closest thing to Apple. Last year, it sold almost 385 million phones, but over 53% were not even smartphones. That's 180 million, some of which were not Android. But a large number of those were junk phones running really old software that can't even run typical apps, let alone something like Google Now.

 

Do the math and you realize that a) the Android phones comparable with the iPhone 4/4S/5 are a small minority, and most of even those are running a version well behind the latest version. That's why developers aren't taking advantage of the "new" Jelly Bean features from last year. 

 

Every argument you make goes back to conflating market share of crap with the small minority of high end Android phones. It's essential to your religion. But it's incorrect, and once you grasp rational facts, you'll have to agree that Android is a hobbyist platform, and the reason there's no good apps is because Jelly Bean 4.2 its nearly as small of a target for developers as WP8 and BB10. It probably has even fewer exclusive titles.  

post #68 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

No, the article doesn't say there are 900 million Android devices actively hitting Google Play. You're pulling in crazy talk to try to equate a hobbyist platform that is failing with iOS.

Do the math and you realize that a) the Android phones comparable with the iPhone 4/4S/5 are a small minority, and most of even those are running a version well behind the latest version. That's why developers aren't taking advantage of the "new" Jelly Bean features from last year. 

How many Android smartphones are actively hitting Google Play? How many Apple smartphones are actively hitting the App Store with iOS6 and capable of running Siri (Heck, how many iPhones are actively hitting the App Store period, regardless of OS version)? I suspect you don't know a solid answer to either of those questions so it's perfectly conceivable that there are more Android devices making use of Google Now than iOS devices making use of Siri isn't it? Do the math.
Edited by Gatorguy - 6/21/13 at 1:10pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #69 of 93
Let's see what the iOS chart looks like after iOS 7 is released. Lots of people are disappointed with iOS 7 look & feel. I am not planning to upgrade any of my devices to iOS 7.
post #70 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atul Patel View Post

Let's see what the iOS chart looks like after iOS 7 is released.

Exactly the same, but with each of the numbers incremented by one.
Quote:
Lots of people

Sure they are.
Quote:
iOS 7 look & feel

Because DP1 is obviously a shipping product¡
Quote:
I am not planning to upgrade any of my devices to iOS 7.

Enjoy missing out for no reason other than fogeyness.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #71 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

 

I think it's the carriers as much as the manufacturers (if not more so) who are blocking updates.

 

Wrong.

 

In almost all cases, it is the Device Manufacturers who are the ones who do not want to spend money, effort, resources to update the OS for their devices. Remember, Android base is free but it still needs to be modified to make it work on different handsets. One analogy is Windows which, while have the basics but still needs the Hardware Drivers to work on specific PCs. Currently Windows have almost all the drivers but still we all experienced the 640x800 resoltion because the driver needs to be downloaded and installed.

 

Android is free and hence you cant expect it to support every hardware. Device manufacturers needs to develope the required versions. Unfortunately, they have little incentive to do it. May be the big vendors, but the smaller ones where profit is razor thin, why should they bother?

 

The carriers have neither the expertize nor the motivation to spend on developing the updates. Frankly, it should be done by the device vendors and not everybody is doing it.a

post #72 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

100% of Android users with access to a market can download a Google Now or Siri equivalent.

 

 

 

 

 

Directly from Google Play: 

 

Quote:
Google Now is only available on Android Jelly Bean 4.1 or higher

 

 

 

Here's the kicker, and it's as hilarious as hell. Google Now on iOS needs iOS 5 or later. This means more iOS devices have access to Google Now than Google's own Android operating system.

 

How's that fragmentation working out for you?


Edited by Technarchy - 7/8/13 at 12:15am
post #73 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post

How's that fragmentation working out for you?

He DID say 'equivalent'. Not that I'm saying the equivalents are any good (nor am I saying the original is any good). But he'll worm his way out that way.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #74 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

He DID say 'equivalent'. Not that I'm saying the equivalents are any good (nor am I saying the original is any good). But he'll worm his way out that way.

There's equivalent virtual assistants that iOS users can download as well, which makes the original statement that much more idiotic.
post #75 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post

There's equivalent virtual assistants that iOS users can download as well, which makes the original statement that much more idiotic.

 

That's why I included "equivalent", so that iOS users could use the same reasoning.

 

As I said when I wrote those stats, anyone can come up with truthful statements that sound amazing or terrible, but in reality are not so much either one.

 

It's not about Android or iOS per se.  It's about yellow journalism... or click-bait as it's called nowadays.

 

Cheers!

post #76 of 93
This whole Android fragmentation issue is being resolved by Google now releasing core OS functionality as stand alone apps. Welp, at least they're trying, but it might be because they could face charges on competitive advantage as they can release Android updates to the Nexus quickly, but other hardware supposedly needs to be updated from their respective carriers. Don't know if true...

http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/08/22/googles-focus-on-in-house-apps-is-making-the-android-fragmentation-problem-irrelevant/?fromcat=apple
post #77 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

This whole Android fragmentation issue is being resolved by Google now releasing core OS functionality as stand alone apps. Welp, at least they're trying, but it might be because they could face charges on competitive advantage as they can release Android updates to the Nexus quickly, but other hardware supposedly needs to be updated from their respective carriers. Don't know if true...

http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/08/22/googles-focus-on-in-house-apps-is-making-the-android-fragmentation-problem-irrelevant/?fromcat=apple

 

That only helps fragmentation for users to a degree. It does not help fragmentation for developers.

post #78 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akac View Post

That only helps fragmentation for users to a degree. It does not help fragmentation for developers.

Would this help you as a developer?
http://developer.android.com/google/play-services/index.html

"The Google Play services APK

The Google Play services APK contains the individual Google services and runs as a background service in the Android OS. You interact with the background service through the client library and the service carries out the actions on your behalf. An easy-to-use authorization flow is also provided to gain access to the each Google service, which provides consistency for both you and your users.

The Google Play services APK is delivered through the Google Play Store, so updates to the services are not dependent on carrier or OEM system image updates. In general, devices running Android 2.2 (Froyo) or later and have the Google Play Store app installed receive updates within a few days. This allows you to use the newest APIs in Google Play services and reach most of the devices in the Android ecosystem (devices older than Android 2.2 or devices without the Google Play Store app are not supported)."
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #79 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Would this help you as a developer?
http://developer.android.com/google/play-services/index.html

"The Google Play services APK

The Google Play services APK contains the individual Google services and runs as a background service in the Android OS. You interact with the background service through the client library and the service carries out the actions on your behalf. An easy-to-use authorization flow is also provided to gain access to the each Google service, which provides consistency for both you and your users.

The Google Play services APK is delivered through the Google Play Store, so updates to the services are not dependent on carrier or OEM system image updates. In general, devices running Android 2.2 (Froyo) or later and have the Google Play Store app installed receive updates within a few days. This allows you to use the newest APIs in Google Play services and reach most of the devices in the Android ecosystem (devices older than Android 2.2 or devices without the Google Play Store app are not supported)."

 

Not at all - its just a collection of Google services such as the maps API, not actual core OS APIs.

 

As an example our flagship app - Pocket Informant - relies on the calendar APIs included in Android 4.0. On previous OSes we had to reverse engineer Google's code. Or another example are widgets - resizable widgets were not supported in specific Android platforms. I can go on and on.

 

On iOS we have to write our software to gracefully limit functionality on older OSes, but there are major foundational features in certain OSes that cause us to simply drop old OS support and we feel OK with that because those functionalities are important enough. On Android we can't do that without dropping most of the market and so instead we have a larger team doing more work to get an app that runs well on a multitude of devices. I can't tell you how badly we want to drop Android 2/3.

post #80 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akac View Post

Not at all - its just a collection of Google services such as the maps API, not actual core OS APIs.

As an example our flagship app - Pocket Informant - relies on the calendar APIs included in Android 4.0. On previous OSes we had to reverse engineer Google's code. Or another example are widgets - resizable widgets were not supported in specific Android platforms. I can go on and on.

On iOS we have to write our software to gracefully limit functionality on older OSes, but there are major foundational features in certain OSes that cause us to simply drop old OS support and we feel OK with that because those functionalities are important enough. On Android we can't do that without dropping most of the market and so instead we have a larger team doing more work to get an app that runs well on a multitude of devices. I can't tell you how badly we want to drop Android 2/3.

2.3 and older is only on about a third of active devices now. With probably 70% (63% at the beginning of the month) on Jelly Bean 4.x, perhaps it will make sense to discontinue support for the old 2.x "Gingerbread" by the end of the year.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple now charting App Store iOS fragmentation just like Google's Android
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple now charting App Store iOS fragmentation just like Google's Android