Soli, Google Android updates are ready to deliver to stock devices (ie Nexus) within days of their official release, really no different than iOS updates. Even Apple can't release OS updates until the carriers are done testing and sign off on 'em. The difference comes into play with the various manufacturers who don't feel the same urgency. Moto would be one exception, readying some updates within a week or so of Nexus updates.
If Apple licensed iOS they might see some of the same update delays from licensees and higher levels of "fragmentation". . .
Google might have no update delays nor any more fragmentation than Apple if they only sold their own devices instead of licensing.
That's my point. Google has a huge lead in developing Android for Nexus before the carriers and vendors can start to build and test for their HW, networks, and (unfortunately) their bolted on SW. If Nexus was more popular I'd see this as an unfair advantage for Google.
That's my point. Google has a huge lead in developing Android for Nexus before the carriers and vendors can start to build and test for their HW, networks, and (unfortunately) their bolted on SW. If Nexus was more popular I'd see this as an unfair advantage for Google.
I'm not sure if the "huge lead" is true. Moto had KitKat updates out to the Moto G and X within three weeks of release and just a few days after the Nexus models started getting them. Moto says they got the Google updates at the same time as other vendors with no unfair "secret advance". My guess is they're telling the truth since HTC was only a week behind Moto. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/08/the-state-of-android-updates-whos-fast-whos-slow-and-why/
I'm not sure if the "huge lead" is true. Moto had KitKat updates out to the Moto G and X within three weeks of release. Both Google and Moto say they got the Google updates at the same time as other vendors with no "secret advance". My guess is they're telling the truth since HTC was only a week behind Moto, taking about a month before the carrier's signed off. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/08/the-state-of-android-updates-whos-fast-whos-slow-and-why/
1) Didn't Google control Moto during those releases? If so, that negates Moto as an example.
2) If Google's Nexus team(s) aren't getting a head start on Android and the fault resides, say, with carriers and vendors' bolted on SW then that would put more fault on them, but it still comes back to Google designing a poor system that makes for an awful upgrade experience for users.
1) Didn't Google control Moto during those releases? If so, that negates Moto as an example.
Why? The Moto X didn't initially ship with the latest OS version tho it was available. That's evidence that they did not receive preferential treatment over the other OEM's isn't it? Add to that Google's assurance Moto would not receive software updates before anyone else and zero evidence that they've not followed thru on their word.
If you read the link I offered to the ARS article it explains why Moto is able to do a better job on timely updates than say Samsung, and advance access to Google updates isn't mentioned as a reason.
Boy, that sounds like a piss-poor experience. Still on Android? If so, cost-wise?
Could be worse. Still on android, for a bit. Things got tolerable-ish once I got the Kit Kat phone, so I am holding off on an iPhone until I get some other items I need and want (including a replacement computer) and money was a big factor in that decision. $30 for a prepaid smartphone and $45/mo is a big deal when you are low income. I'm just hoping it holds up for a while as it'll take time to save up for everything else then have money for an iPhone.
It does suck. My first Android phone was awesome when it first game out. By the time the contract was up I was very frustrated with the old OS version and the fragmented app support. That's why I switched to t-mobile and a Nexus 4. Now I have the latest OS version the same week that Google announces it, no fragmentation experiences at all, and I'm $30/month with unlimited data and no contract.
My wife's first iPhone experience was much more pleasant than my first Android experience once I'd missed out on a few system updates b/c of carrier/mfgr lameness.
I'd say you made a sound decision by getting the Nexus. Next year I'd get the Silver, instead of some 3rd party phone which won't guarantee any software updates.
Could be worse. Still on android, for a bit. Things got tolerable-ish once I got the Kit Kat phone, so I am holding off on an iPhone until I get some other items I need and want (including a replacement computer) and money was a big factor in that decision. $30 for a prepaid smartphone and $45/mo is a big deal when you are low income. I'm just hoping it holds up for a while as it'll take time to save up for everything else then have money for an iPhone.
It sucks that these phones have become so expensive. Especially if you want or need other CE as well.
I remember my first iPhone: €50 on a 2 year contract which was only €10 more for Internet access (€25 in total per month) boy have things changed.
I'd say you made a sound decision by getting the Nexus. Next year I'd get the Silver, instead of some 3rd party phone which won't guarantee any software updates.
Yeah, that's the plan. I'm sure something will be announced next month and up on the Play Store in October, and I'll likely buy that.
"It sucks that these phones have become so expensive. Especially if you want or need other CE as well."
Isn't it amazing how you can buy a fully-functional Android 4.4.3 tablet with everything but Bluetooth at Walmart for $79 with an 8" screen where everything is the same EXCEPT for the Bluetooth most don't use and, of course, the phone chipset for $500-$800 from any carrier? Somebody's getting screwed and it's US!
Yeah, we'll see. I'm not interested in any other company's spin on the OS, so the Moto is unlikely.
Moto has been staying pretty close to stock, a major reason for their recent exceptionally fast updates, lagging the Nexus by only a couple of weeks. with the previous Moto X. Their other advantage?" Updating Moto specific apps via Google Play, decoupling them from the OS and allowing for more frequent feature improvements.
Yeah, we'll see. I'm not interested in any other company's spin on the OS, so the Moto is unlikely.
Moto just adds some features, but the look and feel is pretty much stock Android. I remember the initial reviews being lackluster, then suddenly everyone was raving about the dynamic notifications.
Moto has been staying pretty close to stock, a major reason for their recent exceptionally fast updates, lagging the Nexus by only a couple of weeks. with the previous Moto X. Their other advantage?" Updating Moto specific apps via Google Play, decoupling them from the OS and allowing for more frequent feature improvements.
Yeah, I'm still not convinced. I just saw stories last week about the Moto getting 4.4.4. I've had it long enough that I'm wondering when 4.4.5 is landing -- I'm kind of disappointed they're this far behind. I had it in mid-July. I would be frustrated when L comes out to wait 7 weeks.
Yeah, I'm still not convinced. I just saw stories last week about the Moto getting 4.4.4. I've had it long enough that I'm wondering when 4.4.5 is landing -- I'm kind of disappointed they're this far behind. I had it in mid-July. I would be frustrated when L comes out to wait 7 weeks.
The Verizon Moto X got 4.4.4 a month after release, the other carrier versions 2-3 weeks later. Not perfect but light years better than other devices.
The Verizon Moto X got 4.4.4 a month after release, the other carrier versions 2-3 weeks later. Not perfect but light years better than other devices.
Exactly. Some manufacturers are on the ball with updates. And we should applaud them.
But we spend a little too much time talking about the big manufacturers (Samsung, LG, Motorola, HTC, etc) and their popular phones.
As it turns out... "Android" is made up of much more than just those handful of manufacturers. Remember how big that "Others" category is?
So when there are reports of "Android" being spread across 5 or 6 different versions... it's the fault of all those other manufacturers who never provide an update.
And there's really nothing Google can do about that. The genie is out of the bottle... with 50 manufacturers making "Android" phones with no requirement to stay up-to-date.
There are tons of phones being sold today with NOT the current version of Android. And they will likely never get an update either.
I have a feeling that "Android" will always resemble the hodgepodge of versions in the pie chart below:
So... does it really matter?
If I understand correctly... Google Play Services can provide all the new APIs featured in the latest version of Android even if you're stuck using an "old" version of Android. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
Are security updates handled the same way? How important are X.X.X releases? I honestly don't know.
There will always be a substantial amount of Android devices (over a billion?) which DON'T have the current version of Android and never will.
If I understand correctly... Google Play Services can provide all the new APIs featured in the latest version of Android even if you're stuck using an "old" version of Android. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
The Android app manifest (created by the developer) has a "min-sdk-version," and will not install on any systems with a lower API level (which is an integer number. Kit Kat is API level 19, for example). Applications are compiled against their min-sdk-version API (binaries) and will be forward compatible with new versions of Android. They will not be able to utilize any API features in future sdk versions though.
The Android app manifest (created by the developer) has a "min-sdk-version," and will not install on any systems with a lower API level (which is an integer number. Kit Kat is API level 19, for example). Applications are compiled against their min-sdk-version API (binaries) and will be forward compatible with new versions of Android. They will not be able to utilize any API features in future sdk versions though.
"Each successive version of the Android platform can include updates to the Android application framework API that it delivers.
Updates to the framework API are designed so that the new API remains compatible with earlier versions of the API. That is, most changes in the API are additive and introduce new or replacement functionality. As parts of the API are upgraded, the older replaced parts are deprecated but are not removed, so that existing applications can still use them. In a very small number of cases, parts of the API may be modified or removed, although typically such changes are only needed to ensure API robustness and application or system security. All other API parts from earlier revisions are carried forward without modification."
Comments
Regardless, none of this is my problem. I have the latest OS and I have Tasker, so I'm happy.
That's my point. Google has a huge lead in developing Android for Nexus before the carriers and vendors can start to build and test for their HW, networks, and (unfortunately) their bolted on SW. If Nexus was more popular I'd see this as an unfair advantage for Google.
I'm not sure if the "huge lead" is true. Moto had KitKat updates out to the Moto
G andX within three weeks of release and just a few days after the Nexus models started getting them. Moto says they got the Google updates at the same time as other vendors with no unfair "secret advance". My guess is they're telling the truth since HTC was only a week behind Moto.http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/08/the-state-of-android-updates-whos-fast-whos-slow-and-why/
1) Didn't Google control Moto during those releases? If so, that negates Moto as an example.
2) If Google's Nexus team(s) aren't getting a head start on Android and the fault resides, say, with carriers and vendors' bolted on SW then that would put more fault on them, but it still comes back to Google designing a poor system that makes for an awful upgrade experience for users.
Why? The Moto X didn't initially ship with the latest OS version tho it was available. That's evidence that they did not receive preferential treatment over the other OEM's isn't it? Add to that Google's assurance Moto would not receive software updates before anyone else and zero evidence that they've not followed thru on their word.
If you read the link I offered to the ARS article it explains why Moto is able to do a better job on timely updates than say Samsung, and advance access to Google updates isn't mentioned as a reason.
Boy, that sounds like a piss-poor experience. Still on Android? If so, cost-wise?
Could be worse. Still on android, for a bit. Things got tolerable-ish once I got the Kit Kat phone, so I am holding off on an iPhone until I get some other items I need and want (including a replacement computer) and money was a big factor in that decision. $30 for a prepaid smartphone and $45/mo is a big deal when you are low income. I'm just hoping it holds up for a while as it'll take time to save up for everything else then have money for an iPhone.
I'd say you made a sound decision by getting the Nexus. Next year I'd get the Silver, instead of some 3rd party phone which won't guarantee any software updates.
It sucks that these phones have become so expensive. Especially if you want or need other CE as well.
I remember my first iPhone: €50 on a 2 year contract which was only €10 more for Internet access (€25 in total per month) boy have things changed.
I'd say you made a sound decision by getting the Nexus. Next year I'd get the Silver, instead of some 3rd party phone which won't guarantee any software updates.
Yeah, that's the plan. I'm sure something will be announced next month and up on the Play Store in October, and I'll likely buy that.
The new Moto X will be announced on September 4th, and the new Nexus in Oct/Nov.
Quoted:
"It sucks that these phones have become so expensive. Especially if you want or need other CE as well."
Isn't it amazing how you can buy a fully-functional Android 4.4.3 tablet with everything but Bluetooth at Walmart for $79 with an 8" screen where everything is the same EXCEPT for the Bluetooth most don't use and, of course, the phone chipset for $500-$800 from any carrier? Somebody's getting screwed and it's US!
Talking about this keeps them from having to discuss the reality of this:
http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ios-vs-android-windows-phone-chart.jpg
What's 81% of the Android 81% 2014 market share??
The new Moto X will be announced on September 4th, and the new Nexus in Oct/Nov.
Yeah, we'll see. I'm not interested in any other company's spin on the OS, so the Moto is unlikely.
Moto has been staying pretty close to stock, a major reason for their recent exceptionally fast updates, lagging the Nexus by only a couple of weeks. with the previous Moto X. Their other advantage?" Updating Moto specific apps via Google Play, decoupling them from the OS and allowing for more frequent feature improvements.
Moto just adds some features, but the look and feel is pretty much stock Android. I remember the initial reviews being lackluster, then suddenly everyone was raving about the dynamic notifications.
Moto has been staying pretty close to stock, a major reason for their recent exceptionally fast updates, lagging the Nexus by only a couple of weeks. with the previous Moto X. Their other advantage?" Updating Moto specific apps via Google Play, decoupling them from the OS and allowing for more frequent feature improvements.
Yeah, I'm still not convinced. I just saw stories last week about the Moto getting 4.4.4. I've had it long enough that I'm wondering when 4.4.5 is landing -- I'm kind of disappointed they're this far behind. I had it in mid-July. I would be frustrated when L comes out to wait 7 weeks.
The Verizon Moto X got 4.4.4 a month after release, the other carrier versions 2-3 weeks later. Not perfect but light years better than other devices.
Exactly. Some manufacturers are on the ball with updates. And we should applaud them.
But we spend a little too much time talking about the big manufacturers (Samsung, LG, Motorola, HTC, etc) and their popular phones.
As it turns out... "Android" is made up of much more than just those handful of manufacturers. Remember how big that "Others" category is?
So when there are reports of "Android" being spread across 5 or 6 different versions... it's the fault of all those other manufacturers who never provide an update.
And there's really nothing Google can do about that. The genie is out of the bottle... with 50 manufacturers making "Android" phones with no requirement to stay up-to-date.
There are tons of phones being sold today with NOT the current version of Android. And they will likely never get an update either.
I have a feeling that "Android" will always resemble the hodgepodge of versions in the pie chart below:
So... does it really matter?
If I understand correctly... Google Play Services can provide all the new APIs featured in the latest version of Android even if you're stuck using an "old" version of Android. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
Are security updates handled the same way? How important are X.X.X releases? I honestly don't know.
There will always be a substantial amount of Android devices (over a billion?) which DON'T have the current version of Android and never will.
I'm just not sure of the severity of that.
If I understand correctly... Google Play Services can provide all the new APIs featured in the latest version of Android even if you're stuck using an "old" version of Android. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
The Android app manifest (created by the developer) has a "min-sdk-version," and will not install on any systems with a lower API level (which is an integer number. Kit Kat is API level 19, for example). Applications are compiled against their min-sdk-version API (binaries) and will be forward compatible with new versions of Android. They will not be able to utilize any API features in future sdk versions though.
Here's the documentation: http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/manifest/uses-sdk-element.html
Updates to the framework API are designed so that the new API remains compatible with earlier versions of the API. That is, most changes in the API are additive and introduce new or replacement functionality. As parts of the API are upgraded, the older replaced parts are deprecated but are not removed, so that existing applications can still use them. In a very small number of cases, parts of the API may be modified or removed, although typically such changes are only needed to ensure API robustness and application or system security. All other API parts from earlier revisions are carried forward without modification."