Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

91% of the Android market is covered by 3 major versions (2.2, 2.3, and 4.0). 72% is covered by just two major versions (2.3 and 4.0).

This problem isn't quite as severe as its made out to be. Dealing with the diverse hardware ecosystem and implementation bugs are both much larger problems, IMO.



"91% of the Android market is covered by 3 major versions (2.2, 2.3, and 4.0). 72% is covered by just two major versions (2.3 and 4.0)."

Disingenuous. 65% of that 72% is 2.3. And now, yet another major version has been released.


This report disagrees with you rather strongly:

http://opensignalmaps.com/reports/fragmentation.php

It claims 2.3 and 2.4 make up for ~75% of the installed base, and the remaining 25% is just a mess.


The official dashboard is http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html and has been updated fairly often - maybe once a month or so - since ICS released.

According to that chart, about 84% of devices that have accessed Google Play are on Froyo or Gingerbread, and another 7% are on ICS.

Pretty much all of the phone market is concentrated in Gingerbread and Froyo. I think fewer than 10 types of phone are on ICS.


Sony alone moved about 10 differen models released in 2011 to ICS about two weeks ago, mine among them.


This is true, but typically you will decide your minimum API level. A lot of apps moving to 2.0+ API level minimums in order to reduce the clutter.

However, compared to hardware variations and manufacturer/carrier modifications, API level is a piece of cake to handle.


That's like saying 91% of the Windows market is 3 major versions, XP, Vista, and Windows 7.

2.x and 4.x are very different beasts.


Yes, it's exactly like saying that. Windows has several years between each version and each version still has like 30-40% each, so it's quite fragmented, too.


It is fragmented. But not in the developer sense.

Microsoft has always been quite good in backporting their developer libraries. So even you did have users on XP you could simply bundle these with your app e.g. .Net, DirectX.

Google may have to look at doing something similar for 2.3 users in particular.


You're obviously not a Windows or Android developer :)

Backported to XP APIs have always been limited and just building software for XP is becoming increasingly difficult (probably as it should be, but the reality is that there are a lot of XP machines still out there), whereas building for both Android 2.3 and 3.0 is laughably simple. You lose out on some APIs, but most of the best stuff is in the support libraries. The "fragmentation" for OS updates (IMO) is really only a serious negative for the end user not getting new stuff, bug fixes, and security updates, not a real negative for developers (yet).

The bigger fragmentation problem for developers is different hardware and different drivers, but OS updates would not generally help with that since the vendors are probably worse with fixing driver bugs than they are with updating their phones (and that "fragmentation" is rather overblown, in any case).


> [Windows] is fragmented. But not in the developer sense.

We develop windows applications and have to support XP and up. We certainly notice fragmentation "in the developer sense".

To give some examples, we can't use true filesystem transactions[1] or the ribbon UI[2]. These aren't available as "backported developer libraries". Sometimes we run into bugs[3] which were never fixed in earlier versions.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_NTFS

[2] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd37...

[3] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/617253/is-anyone-successf...


Yea there is big differences between XP and Vista in particular.


They are, with the Android Support Library: http://developer.android.com/tools/extras/support-library.ht...

It provides support for features from Android 3.0 (namely fragments) for all versions down to 1.6. IMO it's essential for Android development.


The platform fragmentation is still fairly poor for game development, even with the support libraries.



Microsoft has been good at backporting their developer libraries? And we are talking about phone right? So...Windows Phone 7 (silverlight) to 8 (WinRT), or even from Windows Mobile 6.5 (WinForms, OpenGL) to Windows Phone 7 (Silverlight) . How much backporting was/is being done?


No, they're talking about the desktop OS. Look about 2 or 3 levels up and you'll see the context is fragmentation between XP, Vista, and 7.


Right, but the original topic was about phone and Microsoft's great back porting reputation just hasn't shown up there. There is something hard about the problem and none of the major players are taking that approach (Apple doesn't backport, just supports old hardware with new versions until it unsupports them).


Downvote for disagreeing. Classy.


Seems pretty horrible to me. Why don't their users upgrade?


It's not the users, it's the manufacturers and carriers. Updates aren't available for most devices.


If Google would only release 1 major version of Android per year, like everyone else, they would bring those numbers for only 1 version of Android before the next one is released, instead of 2.

I understand why they had to showcase Android 4.1 now - to release with their brand new tablet. And Android 5.0 will be released this fall. But next year they really should just release Android 6.0 at I/O (their biggest and most professional event), and be done with it. Then Android 7.0 at I/O in 2014 and so on.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: