Google Can't Ignore The Android Update Problem Any Longer (Op Ed)

[sicom]

Windows is doing something very different from Blackberry. They aren't going to be running what is essentially an emulation of Android to run its apps. Instead, Microsoft is making it very simple to port existing code and compile it into Windows 10's native code.

Microsoft is doing so many amazing things with Windows 10, and after my experiences with Android 4.4 -> Lollipop, I'll absolutely be upgrading to a Windows phone.

 

[trparky]

There is nothing that prevents somebody who has and Android device, out of frustration, going to iOS.

That's exactly what I did. I spent almost five years in the Android camp with various devices and each of them had the biggest issue of them all... no updates. So I went to Apple iOS and that's one the best decisions I've ever made.

 

[pronger44]

Google can not control the update process for phones. The Android Open Source program allows anyone to download the source code for Android and customize it for their own hardware. It is up to the individual companies to supply the proper hardware drivers, not Google. Why are you blaming Google for fragmentation of an operating system they give away for free? Google has tried to enforce some standards by moving their core applications such as Gmail and Maps into the Google Mobile Services Program, which while free forces the phone manufacturer to agree to a certain set of standards in return for access to those apps. As for the bloatware everyone is complaining about, I agree that it should be removable and in fact it can be done on almost any phone. However in order to do so you must root your phone and in most cases void your warranty. This is the real issue here. Who is ultimately responsible for the proper operation of your phone? Google who gave it away for free or the phone company who modified it so it would only run on that device and then quit updating it in favor of their newer models? The phone companies are the real problem. If you want a phone that is not modified and receives regular updates then buy a nexus device. And all those Windows XP users just get over it and buy a new computer all ready.

 

[Albert U]

Microsoft is doing so many amazing things with Windows 10, and after my experiences with Android 4.4 -> Lollipop, I'll absolutely be upgrading to a Windows phone.

This was exactly my motivation when I bought a Lumia 830 two weeks ago (after having used Android for 5+ years) to replace my 6 months old OnePlus One. New Android always come with great promises, but in reality you always suffer. Battery life worse, features gone, less stability, the list goes on and on. If you are lucky enough to actually get updates at all in the first place, that is.

I have had it.

Now, I'm using a snappy Windows Phone 8.1 device and it works great. Fluid, responsive and consistent. To few apps available? Maybe that was a year ago. Now I find all my major apps in the store and they all work. Games are bit more sketchy, but I ain't got too much time for those anyway. Google really are the ones missing the show, since they failed to port their apps to Windows Phone to this date. Too bad... So I switched my main account to outlook.com while I was at it.

 

[SnakeV9]

I believe Android OS fragmentation is not as big as a problem as it was when Gingerbread was still around, I mean JellyBean and Kitkat are very robust versions, with much more features than any iOS out there. And also Apple is just getting started on fragmentation as well with more device sizes and models and with so few people upgrading to iOS 8. Fragmentation is a thing. For any platform. Developers need to deal with it.

<mod edit> "so few people upgrading to iOS 8" 68% use iOS8, 29% iOS7 and 4% other. Leave it to Google to take an inherently secure os in unix and make it the most unsecure os in history with Android. It's never going to change because Google doesn't have the clout Apple does. Apple dictates how it's OS is used and distributed by cell phone providers. When an update come out everyone can download it on day 1 not wait months and sometimes years for an update because providers want to load it up with their uninstallable bloatware.

 

[thedouggle]

My Note 3 has had "Google App Stopped Responding" errors constantly since the tmobile update. Can't use my Google search bar, have to open chrome and search in the address bar. Voice recognition of "OK Google" is completely wonky now with MAYBE 20% accuracy, and the auto-focus on the camera is basically broken. I'm so tired of shitty companies, it's infuriating.

 

[k7aay]

Solution: Buy Chinese Android phones. Cut the carriers off at the knees.

 

[lkcl]

i don't understand why people don't understand what android's software releases by google are: they're *example* source code which is neither the legal nor the actual responsibility of google to install or manage. google does not own asus: it is a separate company. google does not own samsung: it is a separate company google does not own any of the china ODMs or Fabless Semiconductor Companies: they are all entirely separate companies.

so to make *any* kind of suggestion that google should do this or should do that - should make OS updates, should make automatic OS updates, should take responsibility for another company's decisions - it's all absolute total nonsense.

the only products that google is actually legally responsible for is the products that google themselves sell. the nexus range. THAT'S IT. (and even there, even google are screwing up: automatic updates have resulted in people's devices being bricked). ironic isn't it: google provides the nexus, as a leading demonstration to other 3rd party companies.... yet not even they can get it right.

so partly in recognition of this problem, google bought motorola, as a bigger "attention grabber" and a bigger leading demonstration to other 3rd parties of how to get this right: how to create products that use android.

now, the thing is, lucian - the thing that you haven't mentioned - is that all these companies using android - they're all profit-maximising corporations. those automatic software updates you believe they should deploy? that requires that those companies - all of them - spend money. that eats at profits, which are amazingly slim.

so i ask you: what justification, then, is there, for these companies to reduce their profits, *especially* when any "support" for older products - which you would *continue* to use if there were "OS Updates" available! - is *also* a reduction of profits?

why would *any* pathological profit-maximising corporation even *remotely* consider - for one second - the anathemic concept of extending the lifetime of unprofitable older products??

are you starting to get it now??

the laws that forcibly require company directors to enact the articles of incorporation that include profit-maximisation clauses *DIRECTLY* result in the endless cycle of design, sell, abandon, design, sell, abandon.

now, we can see that this is incredibly irresponsible, but there really is absolutely nothing that any of these profit-maximising corporations can do. they're quite literally stuck in the pattern that results from the setup - predictably, too.

how can this pattern be broken? well, the key is that the design of these products ties the SoC (the system-on-a-chip - the main processor) to the Operating System. each firmware release is absolutely and intimately bound to the processor, and once a product is sold with that processor (and operating system) the *entire* product - SoC, OS, firmware - is forgotten about by the manufacturer (to the maximum extent that is permitted by law that does not interfere with profit maximisation).

so surely, then, the solution would be to design products where the *entire computer* - including the OS and firmware - is removable and upgradeable.

this is what i am designing - at http://rhombus-tech.net. modular upgradeable products. the concept you will be familiar with from phonebloks.com, except that phonebloks is an advocacy platform that started a couple of years ago, and i've been working patiently on creating *actual* real-world products for the past five years.

unfortunately, modular product designs are not profit maximising designs when monolithic designs are the "norm". so this paradigm shift is something that, *at the moment*, no profit maximising corporation that creates *existing* tablets and smartphones is *ever* going to be interested in... until such modular upgradeable products have also become the "norm", at which point they will see the benefits and profit opportunities (and happier customers) and will start to commit resources.

but to get over that hurdle, you're going to need to support efforts like mine that pave the way. if you or anyone else would like to do that, here are a couple of links:

https://gratipay.com/luke.leighton/
https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

 

[aldaia]

Despite that the author and probably most comenters (me included) may think that fragmentation is a problem and that a clean path for upgrades is needed, the sad truth is that phone users out there don't care about upgrades, they don't even know wtf an upgrade is. They just get upgraded when they buy a new phone.

Most phone users don't even know that a phone has an OS, for them the OS and UI is part of the phone they buy. Be realistic, we are a tiny and clearly non representative fraction of the smartphone user space. It's not worth to spend money and time on something that 99.9% of users don't care and in most cases don't even know.

 

[hotice]

I 100% agree with this article and anyone who doesn't just has their head in the sand period. It's the one and only reason I would consider going back to an iphone. Google needs to toughen up and take a play from the Apple play book. Cal me crazy, but it has worked out pretty well for Apple.......

Your post is based on your perception of your experience. My experience, which includes over a year of using an iPhone 5s and 18 years of using mobile devices, and 2 years as a contributing editor on an Android blog doesn't bring me to the same conclusion at all. Have you read my previous post? Can you present facts that support me having my head in the sand?

 

[belardo]

So with all of this... HOW can Google make this work? Other than... perhaps making Android 6.0 a non-customization OS in which hardware vendors MUST provide the drivers to Google to add to an update. Each Phone and Tablet maker Can install the OS, but NOT change it. But can only add apps to it, back grounds... and have a SKIN folder... at the most.

Also, 6.0 would only accept updates from Google servers.... that only upgrade the OS and its core APPS.... not skins, or 3rd party apps.

if the hardware maker *BUILDS* a product with an invalid hardware component... then they cannot even install 6.0 on the device or do the upgrade.

5.x and below is a lost cause. But with 6.0, this is their chance to fix the problem. Give the component makers the chance to submit their drivers.

So when an HTC does and OS upgrade - it should work fine... and not effect HTC's top-rated phone App.
And since HTC would have access to a beta-release (lets say 6.2) - HTC can release an app update before the OS is made for the public.

The owner of an HTC with 6.1 would get a "OS UP grade notification" - which should ping HTC servers to check the phone that it has the compatible drivers installed or available for install. If fail... the user gets a message "Sorry, you cannot update your phone because HTC has to update XYZ first". Thus, the customer can bitch to HTC to update the required software.

Also... have the option to over-ride...

 

[Davdana]

Works fine on Android: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqPBX-3m-9k

 

[Norm Walker]

As a long time Android user I just don't care that much. Yes it would be better if Android updated at the same rate as IOS, but that is just not realistic. It costs companies millions of dollars to get a phone ready for the next software update. The bottom line is most of them don't want to keep updating phones that are several years old.

 

[captaincharisma]

Also, iOS on the iPad 2 performs horribly

this is an example of one of the better things about android vs IOS. if you upgrade to the latest version of IOS on an older iphone or pad you cannot downgrade even if you jailbreak so you are SOL. on android if you go to the latest version of android on any device and if you find it is too slow or not liking it you can root and install a previous version. i have a Nexus 7 2012 tab which runs horribly on 5.1 and i was able to go all the way back to a version of jellybean and all the apps i use are still compatible

 

[JimmyMegatron]

While I agree completely that the Android update system is completely broken, the assumption that people would leave because the "updates are better" is completely ridiculous.

Your preceding paragraphs went to great lengths to define Apple and Google as the two big players and that no one (even MS) is willing to strong-arm their way in. Then you said...

"Otherwise, it risks having users (slowly but surely) switch to more secure platforms that do give them updates in a timely manner. And if users want those platforms, OEMs will have no choice but to switch to them too, leaving Google with less and less Android adoption."

Switch to a more secure platform? Which one? Apple? The company that creates larger and larger OS updates so that, literally, older phones run slower and encourage upgrades to newer models? They only put out an update a year as well, much like Google, and their security has been shown to have cracks as well. I wouldn't leave for security reasons. The grass certainly isn't greener in Cupertino.

OEMs switching? Again, to what? An OEM is mostly definitely not going to be allowed into the walled garden of Apple, so what exactly are they switching to? You're never going to see a Samsung running iOS. That entire statement is ridiculous.

Yes, there is a huge problem with fragmented updates on the Android platform, but let's not create imaginary scenarios just to make a point.

 

[John Gotts]

I'm a programmer, and I have three Android devices sitting on my desk right now, in addition to my laptop. I have a Samsung tablet running 4.2.2, a Samsung smartphone running 4.3 and an HP Slate running 4.4.4.

As a developer, I should be salivating over updates, right? In fact, I want these devices to be just like my car, or my graphing calculators, or my alarm clock. All are between 15 and 25 years old and have never had a single software update. I'd love to be able to hang on to my Galaxy S III for another 12 1/2 years. The phone's still perfect after 2 1/2 years. In reality, life takes its toll on a phone so I'll probably replace it after 5 years.

Yes, there are security problems with these releases, but we're in a much different situation than we are with the Windows installation on your laptop or desktop. With Windows, people do a whole lot of stupid things from clicking on attachments and running flash with malware to installing software packages from all over the Internet. Even relatively careful users still have problems with Windows because it has inherent design flaws that make it susceptible to bugs (an extremely bloated kernel, for one).

The Google Play store, while not perfect, filters out most hostile content. Occasionally things slip by, but that's not common. Malware scanners are available for Android for the most paranoid users. Regardless of how old your Android version is, if you do not enable software downloads from outside the Google Play store and you occasionally run a malware scanner, you simply do not ever need the latest version of Android like you do with Windows.

On the flip side, as all Android and iPhone users know, these operating systems have bugs. It's better just to have the device at one version, learn all of its quirks, and use the device until it wears out. I would prefer not to update any of these devices to Android 5.x, although if Android 5.x becomes available I do have the technical know how to handle it. Do I care about new features in these releases? Not really. Do I care about security bug fixes? Not really. Do I care about having to spend 3-6 months learning all of the new bugs and quirks in the upgrades and their workarounds? I do care about that, and maybe I'm getting old because I'd rather not waste the time on any of that.

 

[rayden54]

I wish smart phones (and tablets) had taken their cues from computers instead. Imagine buying a PC and being stuck with that OS for the entire life of the hardware. The PC crowd would riot. The horrible nearly impossible to open up and repair without breaking them aspect sucks too. Unfortunately that part seems to be infecting laptops too if the new MacBook is any indication.

 

[Anim8me2]

I believe Android OS fragmentation is not as big as a problem as it was when Gingerbread was still around, I mean JellyBean and Kitkat are very robust versions, with much more features than any iOS out there. And also Apple is just getting started on fragmentation as well with more device sizes and models and with so few people upgrading to iOS 8. Fragmentation is a thing. For any platform. Developers need to deal with it.

Just a clarification. iOS8 adoption currently stands at 81%.

 

[aldaia]

I wish smart phones (and tablets) had taken their cues from computers instead. Imagine buying a PC and being stuck with that OS for the entire life of the hardware. The PC crowd would riot. The horrible nearly impossible to open up and repair without breaking them aspect sucks too. Unfortunately that part seems to be infecting laptops too if the new MacBook is any indication.

Modern TV sets have an OS, people stick to their TV sets for 5, 10 even 15 years without a single upgrade (some TV sets can upgrade firmware, yet almost no user does that)
The question here is, we consider a smartphone like a computer or like any other electronic device? Obviously people in this forum see their smartphone like a pocket computer, but as I said we are not representative of the average Joe

 

[billstewart]

Honestly, if you target Android 4.1 for your apps you can get almost everyone and still have access to almost everything you'd ever need, especially with the way Google Play Services steps in to provide new features on older OSes.

My tablet is running 4.0.4. It's a no-name (Coby) with no vendor bells and whistles except whatever drivers they might have needed to add, but since Google's apparent upgrade approach is "your vendor or carrier or somebody other than us will handle it", I have no way to upgrade it to anything unless I ditch the OS for Cyanogen (which I assume loses me access to the Google Play Store?).

My current phone is a Samsung with 4.4.2; I have no way as a user to know if it can be upgraded to 5.x, or if it WILL be, or even whether it can be - Google's announcements tend to say "Hey, the Nexus $N can run the new OS", instead of "The new OS needs this kind of CPU or newer and that much memory or more."
I know that my previous HTC phone was pretty much abandoned by the vendor (which was especially annoying, because it's still the smallest Android phone I've seen, and I don't want to carry around a big clunky phablet.)

 

[captaincharisma]

Honestly, if you target Android 4.1 for your apps you can get almost everyone and still have access to almost everything you'd ever need, especially with the way Google Play Services steps in to provide new features on older OSes.

My tablet is running 4.0.4. It's a no-name (Coby) with no vendor bells and whistles except whatever drivers they might have needed to add, but since Google's apparent upgrade approach is "your vendor or carrier or somebody other than us will handle it", I have no way to upgrade it to anything unless I ditch the OS for Cyanogen (which I assume loses me access to the Google Play Store?).

My current phone is a Samsung with 4.4.2; I have no way as a user to know if it can be upgraded to 5.x, or if it WILL be, or even whether it can be - Google's announcements tend to say "Hey, the Nexus $N can run the new OS", instead of "The new OS needs this kind of CPU or newer and that much memory or more."
I know that my previous HTC phone was pretty much abandoned by the vendor (which was especially annoying, because it's still the smallest Android phone I've seen, and I don't want to carry around a big clunky phablet.)

if actually do some research on going to an OS like cyanogen you will find that google apps does not come included but give you an option to download them separably to install them. so yes if you go to another version of android you will still have everything the stock OS offers

 

[lkcl]

if actually do some research on going to an OS like cyanogen you will find that google apps does not come included but give you an option to download them separably to install them. so yes if you go to another version of android you will still have everything the stock OS offers

captain, what you've said is this:

"if you actually do some research". translation: "i'm assuming you're both stupid and lazy, and i'm going to make myself superior to you by feeding you my advice"

"on going to an OS like cyanogen". translation: "and my advice is that you spend your own time and money to risk destroying your device and invalidating the warranty in the process"

captain: the original article was - is - about how to solve the problem of older variants of android still being shipped across a *mass volume* industry, resulting in huge security issues. in another reply here i outline both why that happens as well as why it is something that google cannot [end of story] fix. i then outline a solution - one that requires a paradigm shift in mass-volume manufacturing that is hampered by the status quo.

what you suggest is at the level of *individuals* to take action to "solve" this problem, and that's not only risky and invalidating of manufacturer warranties, but also it's well beyond the average end-user's capabilities.

can i therefore suggest that you take a little more care in your wording? it wasn't very nice to read what you wrote. you could have said this:

bill, have you considered the idea of upgrading to cyanogen? i did, it worked very well, although i found that it does not come with google apps but i downloaded them separately and installed them, they worked fine.

the difference there is that you are saying "i lead by example, i did this, i took the risk, it worked out well for me, i am in no way saying *you* are stupid, *you* are ignorant by not knowing what *i* did".

...you get it, yeah?

 

[RJDZA]

This article was written by someone who is completely (and I mean absolutely) clueless about how this stuff works.

1. For starters, each phone uses different hardware, and unlike Windows, Android isn't generally distributed with a bunch of unneeded drivers - it only has the drivers needed for the specific hardware it's installed on. For google t push upgrades, they would have to maintain an Android distribution for each piece of hardware running Android - thousands of distros. This isn't feasible.

2. Next, Google doesn't actually provide an OS to any phone (except the Nexus, and even then not really). The OEM provides the OS on each platform (including non-phone platforms). They source the base unmodified OS from Google, but they modify it for their needs and hardware, and put it on the phones and distribute the phones to carriers and retail stores. Some f the vendors don't even have agreements with Google, and they do not need to - Android is free and open source.

3. Finally, many carriers will further modify the OS on each phone model, adding features and functionality they see as important. So the OEM will have many versions of the phone - per carrier for many carriers, and a vanilla version. This is the only part of the chain that can be optimised, with each carrier running an OEM vanilla version of the OS. But all that accomplishes is an easier deployment from the OEM, leading us to...

Epilogue: OEMs need to be held responsible for keeping the OS on their phones updated, or at least indicate at purchase time which models will be updated and which will not (we need entry level smartphones, and they currently don't really have the resources to handle OTA upgrades). Expecting Google to do it is not only impractical and unreasonable, it's effectively impossible.

As to the clam that people will move away from Android - absolutely pure rubbish. People will continue to buy the smartphone that excites them or fills their needs. And OEMs will continue to make smartphones that sell. If we, the consumer, make it clear that we want security, then OEMs will keep their phones updated or lose sales. If we instead prioritise features and price over security, then phones will get more features or reduced prices.

People who don't understand these simple facts shouldn't be allowed to write for technical magazines.

 

[lkcl]

This article was written by someone who is completely (and I mean absolutely) clueless about how this stuff works.

People who don't understand these simple facts shouldn't be allowed to write for technical magazines.

RJDZA, i absolutely agree, and i said so (in a less clear way) in an earlier post. articles such as this one basically mislead people very badly. what can you do?