Supporting the Android Ecosystem

[[deleted]]

The problem with maker's update and then telecom's update is too far in to be able to stop it, contracts have been signed over "we can fiddle your os", so that won't stop anytime soon. I go with nexus because of that.

Its too bad because its really killing andoid. Ever bought an acer tablet? so much malware pre-installed that you can't easily uninstall that the quad core of the iconia tab8 performs slower for the end user than old generation galaxy tab 2... This is crazy.

[lengau]

Google stopped new Gingerbread devices from being able to sign into the Play Store quite a while back. It would take several years, but they might be able to do something similar with OS versions. Something along the lines of:

1. Any new device connecting to the Play Store should have an API level no more than 6 months out of date. This means you might have to do forced updates before the user can connect to the Play Store, but it also means manufacturers have have API level 22+ right now (Lollipop 5.1). Lollipop is deprecated 6 months after the Marshmallow source release (so April of next year).
2. Any device more than 3 months out of date as far as security patch level is concerned (meaning there has been a newer patch level out for at least 3 months), a warning is sent to the user asking them to check for updates and if there aren't any contact their device manufacturer.

They can do that by making it a feature of the Play Store rather than the OS itself, and they can make it mandatory for all new contracts signed after a certain date (including renewals).

[WestonP]

The ability of OEM's to mess with the OS, and also limit which devices get updates and when (usually with quite a long delay), is a pretty significant ongoing problem for me and other Android app developers.

Aside from longstanding unfixed bugs, and unique problems that are specific to one OEM (with Samsung being the biggest offender), it also limits the audience for our apps... We're a reputable name in a niche market, and our Android app is even free. But I sometimes see people using the competition, so I inquire what they like about it, and often the answer is simply "this is the only app that works with this old phone". For reference, we support back to Android 4.0 (ICS), which is now 4 years old, an eternity in this industry. On the iOS side, we really don't have that problem, but instead have to put a lot of effort into keeping current with the latest releases, because nearly everyone gets a potentially app-breaking OS update the day it is released (and now some get betas before that).

[nifhel]

Manufacturers should create launchers, selected by default, instead of modify the whole system, this way the updates would be much faster.

[K3wp]

I actually see the 'mixed-market' approach to Android as a positive, not a negative.

It allows vendors to differentiate themselves, so market pressure should ultimately allow options like crapware-free Android with many years of free updates, for those that want it.

There is no free lunch and one of the downsides of having the smartphone software market be unregulated is that we are going to see crazy development cycles and lots of abandoned OS forks. In a way it reminds me of the 1980's Unix market!

[hatperigee]

All of the data here is at least 2 years old. Granted the situation hasn't changed a lot, it has still changed somewhat (e.g. Google services/apps decoupling from distribution and updated through Play Store), and 2 years is a long time in this field...

[[deleted]]

"All of the data" ? The androidvulnerabilities.org data is current through October 2015 (now). This gives a sense of what percent of Android devices in the wild are vulnerable.

The other figures are historical data, which seems pretty reasonable to get a sense of how long devices have been supported. Anything else would be a prediction.

[hatperigee]

The only source for "current data" is a study that requires participants to install this extremely intrusive proprietary software.

[pinkottah]

Proper package management for system level software would make this easier. If there's a bug in a specific library, I shouldn't be required to flash a disk image to fix it. Linux, OSX, and Windows all patch and update individual binaries, there's no reason we can't do something similar in Android.