mystilleef

gatorguy said:

tmay said:

gatorguy said:

tmay said:

dick applebaum said:

tallest skil said:

gatorguy said:

Here's what I suspect will be a surprising list of the Android enhancements t gethat have been made available in just the past four months, totally independent of any OS update and available to almost any Google Android user regardless of OS version.

So… even more massive fragmentation than anyone could have ever otherwise imagined. Because not only can’t you guarantee they have the newest #.0 release of Android, you can’t guarantee they have any of these supplemental updates, either. How long before Android starts needing installs of the 400 versions of DirectX to get things done? 

Good point, TS!

IDK how Android/Google handles matching their app store app installs to the Android version on the devise...

It appears that in iOS 11, the App Store won't [even] allow apps to be downloaded to an iDevice that does not have the requisite iOS version and hardware to run the app.

When Apple releases a new major iOS version, it is giving the developer an added set of tools, a spruced up workbench to use them on, a roadmap of deprecated devices and the rules by which supported devices will be able to use the new tools. Apple also updates old apps and provides some new ones that may or may not be dependent on the new toolset. Apple provides this yearly, for the most part, and also provides updates and enhancements in-between major releases as appropriate. It is relatively straightforward for both user and developer to differentiate support by app and by OS version.

Whatever benefits updating apps incrementally in old and deprecated OS versions is for Google and the user, it is, for the most part, a fragmented mess for developers, and likely the reason that develop first on iOS is a thing

I don't recall you mentioning that you are a developer. I think I do remember an actual developer saying that what you supposed is a big issue really isn't. But I could be wrong. If I am I'm sure a developer will chime in here pretty soon and say so. 

I welcome any comments, from any of the millions of  developers out there, your anecdote being a single data point.

Here's a link; there are plenty of others. 

https://theappsolutions.com/blog/development/ios-vs-android/

Oh I agree with you. I just can't remember which one of our members has posted a few times that he develops for both IOS and Android. In the meantime here's another "Data point" that says it's not all that difficult to develop for Android in addition to iOS.
https://thenewstack.io/scoring-comparison-android-ios-development/

Sure it probably is easier for iOS, but I still stand by my comment that it's not too much more effort to do Android (too) according to what I've read both here and on other sites. But like you I don't speak from personal knowledge. 

From the perspective of a developer, there's no fragmentation on Android at all.

I recommend some of the folks on this thread familiarize themselves with this thing called the Google Play Services and Android Support Libraries. Between those two frameworks, an Android developer can write an app targeting the latest version of Android while being seamlessly backward compatible all the way back to Android Gingerbread (Android 2.0). In other words, Android developers that plug their apps into those frameworks, with virtually zero effort, automagically support 90% of Android devices out there. 

The folks that crow about Android's fragmentation are not only clueless, they are drunk on Apple's marketing Koolaid. Google over the years sneakily and systematically decoupled core Android and Google frameworks, interfaces, and services from the OS. The result is that today these parts of the OS are regularly updated independently of the OS. 

From day one, Google was smart enough to ensure that on Android developers wrote strictly to an interface and not hard-coded assumptions about screen size, processor architecture, form factor and so on. The benefit of this architecture decision is that a well-designed Android app, sourced from a single source code, can run flawlessly on a multitude of devices regardless of screen size, SoC architecture, form-factor, or hardware configuration.

The caveat, of course, is that the developer must make no assumptions about the environment or device the app is going to run on. This is very important because it leads to my next point. (Exception: Android APIs that are not properly abstracted from low-level hardware specific stuff will give inexperienced developers headaches. The Camera API comes to mind.)  

For an iOS developer delving into Android development, this is a massive cultural shock. On iOS, hard-coded assumptions about everything has been the norm until very recently. Therefore, it's no surprise the many iOS developers find Android development overwhelming. I've read too many ill-informed rants on blogs entertaining the misguided notion that Android developers have to tune to their code for every type of Android device. This forms the foundation of the Android fragmentation theory. The theory gains legs when you add the reality that for numerous unfortunate reasons Android updates on none-Google Android devices are unreliable. Connect the dots sloppily, and you can make a convincing argument that it's a waste of time to support new OS features because FRAGMENTATION.

Apple, through ingenious marketing, has perpetuated this baseless argument. The tech media, practically Apple's echo chamber, hardly needed any incentives to help birth and nurture the myth of Android fragmentation. The comments in this thread alone bear witness to this fallacy. It's the same regurgitated PR nonsense that has no bearing on reality.

If you pick up a phone running Android 4.0 and another one running Android 8.0, you'd hardly notice any difference worth talking about. There might be minor tweaks and superficial enhancements here and there. But for the most part, the experience using either device is largely the same. The compatibility shim in Google Play Services and Android Support Libraries ensure that apps don't behave any differently on Android 4.0 versus 8.0.

This is the miracle of Android. It's a feat of engineering that any this even works.

With Android O, Google takes Android another giant leap towards world domination. Not surprisingly, the tech media is too preoccupied debating dessert names, as opposed to, I don't know, documenting a well-research exposition about the fact that Android O is the most significant update to the platform since its birth. With Project Treble, Google rearchitected Android's gut to make its core components independently deployable. The goal is to push OS updates to any Android user, regardless of device, carrier, OEM, skin, or silicon. It's the last piece of the puzzle in making Android completely modular. This new-found flexibility will allow Google to develop Android independent of OEMs, Vendors, and Carriers. It won't surprise me if Android P or Q doesn't even run on Linux, but instead Fuschia, Google experimental OS.

gatorguy is right. Android and iOS are fundamentally different OSes. One OS has to cater to every conceivable use case while remaining open, flexible and customizable, the other has to cater to Apple. Anybody claiming Google and Apple face the same challenges in how they manage, design, and deploy their respective OSes, is simply entertaining a false equivalence. 

The engineering challenge for Google is monumental given the inconceivable amount of variables they have to deal with, as well as the ubiquity and heterogeneity of devices that Android has to run on. The debates about update percentages are pointless in light of the fact that each OS is layered, designed, and deployed differently. Wake me up when Apple can push iOS updates to 24,000 unique devices with disparate SoCs, form factors, and hardware architectures. Then we can have a serious talk about iOS vs Android updates. Until then, enjoy your penis wagging contest.

WWDC is not going to be about the iPhone, or iPad, or Mac, or the Apple Watch.

It better not be!

WWDC is going to be a referendum on where Apple stands in relation to Google with respect to Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence.

This is the conversation Google is forcing everyone to have, ready or not. And it's a conversation Apple would rather not have.

The future isn't the iPhone, or iPad, or the Mac, or Apple Watch, or any iDevice. Google made all those devices irrelevant at I/O 2017.

The future is AI that is ambient and pervasive.

And Apple's sole job at WWDC is to convince us that it can remain relevant in that future.

Note to the Author: Tensor Flow models can run locally on mobile and IoT devices. In fact, Google already runs Tensor Flow on some Android devices. They use it in GBoard for example.

All that "bionic processing" and the iPhone still can't take better pictures than Pixel phones. The so-called "state-of-the-art" hardware of the iPhones does not camoflage the reality that Siri is still 5 generations behind the Google Assistant. Apple is bringing superficial hardware flourishes to an Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning fight, and Google is showing the world their ass for it. "You've been told that you think need 2 phones lens and supercomputing image processing to create a bokeh effect in photos. Well that's bullshit. With AI, Machine Learning, one lens, and significantly less computing power, we've destroyed that myth forever with the Pixel 2." --Google Google's hardware event embarrassed Apple beyond repair. It showed just how far behind Apple is in AI and Machine Learning. And it showed the world that future is not hardware at all, but ambient computing powered by AI. And it showed Apple is not ready for that world. So, is not surprsing the author of this article is not only salty, but is also scared straight out of his delusion that Apple's hardware prowess matters. Especially in a future where the battle has shifted to AI.

Am I reading this right? The most dominant operating system on the planet, that is primed and ready to take over the world anytime now, is a failure?

sog35 said:

mystilleef said:

sog35 said:

mystilleef said:

sog35 said:

mystilleef said:

Specs don't matter. User experience does.

The Pixel is a vessel for Google's AI and Machine learning prowess.

And right now, you'd be hard-pressed to find a phone with a better AI and multimedia experience than the Pixel.

This is why the Pixel is better than any phone Apple has created. And will continue to be better than any Phone Apple will create moving forward.

Unless of course, AI and Machine Learning is just a fad.

We shall see.

People vote with their wallets. 

You can make up all the high sounding jibberish you want. But ultimately its the consumer who decides which phone is the best for the 'real world'

We shall see how many $650 Pixel phones Google sells vs the iPhone7.

That will be the answer to which is the better phone.

The Pixel is not going to sell better than the iPhone 7. It's a new brand. And Google doesn't have the retail and supply chain expertise that Apple has.

However, if Google continues to be at the forefront of AI and Machine Learning, then within the next couple of years, the Pixel will become a serious and formidable contender to the iPhone.

Google with the Pixel brand is the only company that can topple the dominance of the iPhone. Apple should be very worried, considering that they're behind in AI and Machine Learning.

Google over the years has avoided directly competing with Apple, but now, they've just dropped the gauntlet. People are underestimating the Pixel based on specs. That's misguided.

The Pixel's nuclear bomb is AI. It has better smarts than any smartphone. Period. And those smarts are only going to get deeper and more profound as the months and years pass by.

Are you telling me the AI in the Pixel won't be available on $99 Android phones?

And stop acting like Google somehow discovered the AI god-child. Give me a break. Apple already has a huge AI team. IBM, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon.

Stop acting like Google has a monopoly on AI. They don't.

And please explain to me why the average consumer would choose a Pixel phone over an iPhone based on AI? Why?  90% of iPhone users don't even regularly use Siri. Why the hell would they abandon a brand they trust for AI? Give me a break. 

AI on its own is useless. It's how you use it that matters. Google is at the forefront of AI not because they're good at it, but because they've figured out how to harness it in ways that has left plenty of the industry flabbergasted and flatfooted.

A car that drove itself was in the realm of science fiction just a couple of years ago, until Google made it a reality. A computer that could defeat Go was supposed to be many decades away, until Google demolished that myth this year. Indexing the worlds knowledge and making it accessible to all made for a nice corporate mantra, until Google made it happen.

Google has consistently delivered on the promise of AI in a manner that is accessible to anybody, and in a way we take for granted today. That's why Google is better. It's no longer research for Google. They're now ready to unleash it to the world.

If you look at Google's hardware event through the lens of just specs, then yeah, there's nothing to impress. But if you dig deeper and look closely, the specs really don't matter. Google is transitioning from the web to hardware. And hardware is just a vessel for their AI.

Google Home is not out yet, and it's already better than the Amazon echo without even trying. Mind you the Echo probably has the better specs. But specs don't matter beside smarts.

Uh....Since when did Google release a self driving car? The only semi-automous car I see being sold is Tesla.

So people are going to buy hundreds of millions of Pixel phones because its AI can beat an advanced Go player? LOL.

come on dude. Just stop. AI is impressive but it doesn't sell phones.


Your bias is really ridiculous. You have not spent a single second using Google Home and you already say its superior to a well established Echo line. Really? People call Apple fans sheep. I should start calling Google fans zombies. 

Google has been working on AI for over  decade. And the only thing they figured out is how to sell more ads.

And why the hell are  you wasting your time here?

You basic message is Google will use AI to destroy Apple, Amazon, IBM, Facebook, Tesla, ect. Sure dude.  Go preach your message in an Google forum.

AI isn't the end all be all. Look at Maps. I think you would agree that Google Maps has better AI than Apple Maps. Yet 80% of iPhone users use Apple Maps. PEOPLE. DONT. CARE. 

Calm down. No need to bust a vein. You seem very upset, so this is my last response.

Google Home has been shown to demonstrate capabilities that the echo can't match. There are numerous hands on videos on YouTube. So even before release, Google Home seems to be much better and smarter than the Echo.

Yes, it is true that Google has better software and services than Apple does (e.g. Maps). However, the default services on Apple's platforms are often Apple services. Many times there's often no way to change the default service on Apple's platform. Hence, why Maps is more popular on the iPhone instead of Google Maps.

I'm confident if there was a level playing field, Google Maps on iPhone would be more popular than Maps. But there isn't a level playing field. Google Maps is after all, by far the largest mapping service in the world.

Either way people who are looking at the Pixel through the lens of just pure specs, like the author of this article, are just not seeing the bigger picture. Google is, finally, taking hardware seriously. And that's a big freaking deal for a hardware company like Apple.

Are they going to topple Apple overnight? Nope. Apple is better at supply chain management, retail and marketing. They should be. They've been doing this for decades. There's no way Google can match Apple overnight.

But if they can build a powerful brand image against their AI chops via their hardware, it won't be before long before consumers start seeing Google not only as a great software and service company, but also a great hardware company.

The Google Home is going to be the proving ground for this theory, not the Pixel.

sog35 said:

mystilleef said:

Specs don't matter. User experience does.

The Pixel is a vessel for Google's AI and Machine learning prowess.

And right now, you'd be hard-pressed to find a phone with a better AI and multimedia experience than the Pixel.

This is why the Pixel is better than any phone Apple has created. And will continue to be better than any Phone Apple will create moving forward.

Unless of course, AI and Machine Learning is just a fad.

We shall see.

People vote with their wallets. 

You can make up all the high sounding jibberish you want. But ultimately its the consumer who decides which phone is the best for the 'real world'

We shall see how many $650 Pixel phones Google sells vs the iPhone7.

That will be the answer to which is the better phone.

The Pixel is not going to sell better than the iPhone 7. It's a new brand. And Google doesn't have the retail and supply chain expertise that Apple has.

However, if Google continues to be at the forefront of AI and Machine Learning, then within the next couple of years, the Pixel will become a serious and formidable contender to the iPhone.

Google with the Pixel brand is the only company that can topple the dominance of the iPhone. Apple should be very worried, considering that they're behind in AI and Machine Learning.

Google over the years has avoided directly competing with Apple, but now, they've just dropped the gauntlet. People are underestimating the Pixel based on specs. That's misguided.

The Pixel's nuclear bomb is AI. It has better smarts than any smartphone. Period. And those smarts are only going to get deeper and more profound as the months and years pass by.