Growing pains?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Operating systems are supposed to be small and fast.

 

And they are not supposed to 'bump off' existing apps when they are upgraded without notice of the incompatibilities.  Bloatware beware?

[TekindusT 3,809]

On the consumer electronics and consumer software world, one has to think in two mantras:

 

Never buy a phone just when it is released, it has failures.

Never download an update just when it comes out, as it is full of minor bugs.

 

No time for beta testing anymore, in a world where apps or smartphones hardly last one year. Companies know well that beta testing is made by the users themselves, who buy the product and then they whine all over the Internet about the failure. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

I don't think is a matter of beta testing.  I believe that they are so busy chasing the buck down the street they don't even try things out with their own people even in as a release candidate.

 

Programmers who work for these outfits must be very frustrated.

[LexusInfernus 908]

I installed it today. I thought the update was out for longer already. 

 

But in any case, I haven't really noticed any significant performance issues on my Nexus tablet. 

[Xenocity 343]

Google isn't entirely at fault here for Android 5.0.

 

The main reasons for 5.0 being buggy are:

 

1. Google was forced to replace all the Java code in Android with its own code or pay a massive licensing cost to Oracle on top of the massive legal judgement Oracle won against Google over the previous Android versions. 
2. Google are under a lot of pressure from the OEMs to get Android updates and versions out quickly or have the OEMs jump ship to competitors OSes such as Tizen (Samsung) and Windows Mobile (Microsoft)
3. Samsung holds between 75% - 80% of the global Android market share, and ~52% of the global market share for tablets, phones and PMPs (based on shipments to retailers, not sold to consumers). This makes Samsung #1 phone, tablet, and PMP maker globally (they produce more than everyone else... Sales tell a different story). Google is beholden to will of Samsung
4. Tizen! Samsung has been threatening to jump ship from Android to its operating system, Tizen for all of its mobile devices. Samsung has been slowly helping and paying Android developers to port the most popular apps to Tizen to ensure Tizen can compete fully. When Samsung is fully ready to launch Tizen globally, Android will be left with less than 20% market share literally overnight. Oh Samsung produces most of the parts in the other Android phones. One last note Samsung accounts for 95% of all the profits made on Android hardware. 
5. OEMs also modify Android to their liking, which causes many of the issues Android faces. 
6. Competition! Windows Mobile and iOS8 are seen as blowing Android out of the water feature and UI wise. Apple is selling iPhone 6 and 6+ faster than they can make them (yes they are still in short supply).  This forced Google to rush it to market.
7. Updates... Android OEMs control which of their phones and when those phones get the updates (if at all). They also modify the Android patches to fit their version of Android. 

 

*note of interest: over 70% of Android devices run 4.1 or earlier, due to OEMs refusing to release the update software for their phones that can run them. 

Android OEMs typically withhold new Android updates from their existing hardware to force users to buy new hardware. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Google isn't entirely at fault here for Android 5.0.

 

The main reasons for 5.0 being buggy are:

 

1. Google was forced to replace all the Java code in Android with its own code or pay a massive licensing cost to Oracle on top of the massive legal judgement Oracle won against Google over the previous Android versions.

 

<snip>

Which is a very good argument for computer languages not being 'owned' by anybody.  Oracle belongs in the dust of history.

[Xenocity 343]

 

Google isn't entirely at fault here for Android 5.0.

 

The main reasons for 5.0 being buggy are:

 

1. Google was forced to replace all the Java code in Android with its own code or pay a massive licensing cost to Oracle on top of the massive legal judgement Oracle won against Google over the previous Android versions.

 

<snip>

Which is a very good argument for computer languages not being 'owned' by anybody.  Oracle belongs in the dust of history.

 

Oracle provides key software to businesses that only a few other companies do. 

With that said, the issue with Google and Android predates Oracle's buyout of Sun Microsystems.

 

You are required to get a commercial/business license if you are decent sized company building a product for sale.

• Google stated they didn't have to have a license because they believed it should be "open sourced" and they shouldn't have to pay Sun Microsystems because "reasons". 
• Android makes a few billion in ad revenue for Google and Sun Microsystem demanded Google pay up.
• Google kept refusing because "reasons".
• Sun Microsystems took them to court for stealing Java and other IP related stuff. 
• Sun went bankrupt and Oracle bought them continuing the lawsuit. 
• Google then claimed the bankruptcy of Sun, constituted nulling all IP protection of Java. 
• Oracle pushed the issue and won. 

 

The U.S. Federal Courts agreed with Oracle/Sun that IP law and patents are still enforce during the duration of legal protection and patents. 

Google was found guilty of IP theft and among other things.

Google appealed claiming it was the OEMs who were at fault and lost for good in over a billion dollar judgment.

The courts told them to either rewrite Android to remove Java or license Java like everyone else. 

 

With this all said, Inventors have the right to profit of their inventions even if it is a new programming language. 

Without this right of profit very few things would be inventor 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Patent arguments aside, Android is having the usual problems of an operating system that is really not ready for people.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Meh, again, Ive used my tablet extensively yesterday and I have not noticed any performance drops. This is simply what happens when you have open source software where everyone can make apps. You get a lot more software combinations and far less strict software standards making it impossible to test for every software combination and far more likely that once an update gets released results in problems. Its not so much that Google rushed it as it is that Google can't take every software combination into account. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

^ Tell that to the Linux users.  Not only are there multiple differing decors, but there are differently operating distributors.  Linux has a world-wide consortium of developers, and seems to survive without all this fooferaw.  Maybe the problem with Android is that it is closely held by one company.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Linux users are pretty much all computer enthusiasts. They don't go on forums complaining that their particular Linux update causes problems. Instead, they solve it themselves. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Android - based on Linux - is just another distribution of the system.  If the distributor can't handle it, it is high time they beefed up their resources.

[Xenocity 343]

Linux users are pretty much all computer enthusiasts. They don't go on forums complaining that their particular Linux update causes problems. Instead, they solve it themselves. 

Actually you can go on most PC forums and find people complaining about Linux

People complain literally about everything to a certain degree. 

 

Android - based on Linux - is just another distribution of the system.  If the distributor can't handle it, it is high time they beefed up their resources.

Technically Google only issues Stock Android, which their phones and tablets run. 

The OEMs heavily modify Android in conjunction with the U.S. Carriers (You need to meet Verizon, AT&T, & Sprint's demands to get your Android phone on their network), they also add tons of bloatware/proprietary software to Android to meet their needs and one up the competition. 

 

Google openly states they are not responsible for what OEMs due to Android and how it performs on their devices (the same policy Microsoft uses for Windows). 

 

The OEMs really don't care if you have an issue running Android as long as you don't sue them or bring regulatory action against them.

 

With that said only Apple is facing regulatory investigation in both the U.S. and EU for not support their older phones with new versions of iOS (Regulatory action began over iOS7 and now includes iOS8) after users filed numerous complaints about their iPhones, iPhones 3G, 3GS, not being able to run iOS7, and 4 users not being able to fully run iOS7 and not being able to run iOS8. 

 

Both cases should head to court soon, with  both governments debating on whether or not Apple should be force to refund their purchases. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Proprietary software is a curse.  When it was first unbundled, I was working in the industry, and I thought the idea was appalling.

[Xenocity 343]

Proprietary software is a curse. When it was first unbundled, I was working in the industry, and I thought the idea was appalling.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with either.

In many cases proprietary is better than its counterpart.

This is why I love IOS and OS X!

I hate buggy and unoptimized software with a passion to the point I've come to appreciate proprietary hardware/software.

Plug and play all the way!

I'm not opposed to customizing software, but I don't enjoy having to go all out to get it to work as intended.

To each their own...

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

if the software purveyor can show that he has followed the quality assurance rules and that the software complies, then I have no argument.  However, many so-called software engineers think that testing can only be done with custom designed test suites made by them.  The true test of qualify software is that it conforms to requirements, which are often unknown to the software engineers.

 

First principle of software design: The system is for the end user.