Outlaw71
Android Expert
I love Android, I love my DX, I love this forum.... however I have to say that I feel Google has made a very big, glaring mistake in one area. I realize that all they do is write the software, and it's up to OEM's to implement it into thier lineup of devices. But I think Google should do more than just sit back and let the OEM's do this on their own time frame. Because it's hurting the reputation of Android if you ask me.
I was just reading the article about how Google says only tablets will ship with Honeycomb, and that other devices will see some of Honeycombs features show up eventually, though it's not known how much of it, or when exactly this will happen. I see this as seeming VERY unorganized, even to a huge fan of the Android OS like myself. Being in direct competition with the iPhone Google has to look at the strengths Apple has over them and try to match those strengths at the very least. And one of Apples strenghts is, when they come out with an update, EVERY iPhone gets it.
But of course you say, there's only one iPhone. It's only natural. Well I know that, and it seemed to me that perhaps I was overlooking the fact that it may actually be an advantage to have a full range of devices, from those that carry 'top of the line' support (currently 2.2.1), to those devices which are still on 1.6. It's an advantage because it gives the customer a choice. If you don't have $200 bucks to get one of the higher end Android devices, at least you can get one of the cheaper ones that might not get all the updates, but at least it's an Android smartphone, and it saves the customer money!
Ok so yes, it is somewhat of an advantage to have a host of choices out there for consumers. But what is missing is that there is no structured tier system of Android devices. In other words, when a customer buys an iPhone, he knows what he's getting. But when a customer chooses an Android device, it's not clear what he's going to get out of it. Those of us like me who bought the DX last summer thought we were getting one of the 'top of the line' Android models. And so far it has been, but so far all we have is speculation when it comes to the question of whether or not we'll be getting Gingerbread. We think we will... we don't know we will... and we certainly have no clue at all if we'll see ANY of the Honeycomb features down the line.
Then you have all the poor saps who bought into Samsung Galaxy devices who figured, "hey this is Samsungs premier Android handset... of course they're going to upgrade it to Froyo ASAP".... WRONG! None of them have, and that has to be disappointing to those who bought them. And that's exactly what I think their biggest problem is... ok sure we get that not every Android device is going to get the same support as the rest, but we should know when we purchase an Android phone, what level of support we can expect.
It would make shelling out $300 bucks (with a $100 dollar rebate) a lot more comforting if we knew that paying that money would ensure us that we'd be getting top level support, and the quickest updates available... those would be considered 1st tier devices. Then perhaps you could have a 2nd tier level of devices that were up do date at the time of purchase, but was limited to slower updates, and maybe limited to only one guaranteed update during it's life. They could sell those for $150 or so. 3rd tier would be something like the Samsung Galaxy series that weren't up to date, and may never get an update for all those customers knew. Sell them for $100... and on down the line. I mean the tiers wouldn't have to be exactly like this, I'm just throwing out examples.
The most important thing to me is, I think over the past year a lot of Android customers have been frusterated and let down when the found out that their device wouldn't be updated as soon as some of the other devices were.... IF they were updated at all. And I'm pretty sure that there would be a lot of people interested in shelling out a little extra cash upon purchase to get a device that would be considered a 'top tier' device. It would sure beat having to guess which phone will get the quickest/best support.
The fact that there is no such structure in Android I think is a major failure, and a black mark against them. But I don't think the OEM's would ever implement such a program themselves because they're already making plenty of money selling devices for two an three hundred dollars, and then have no obligation to live up to supporting them quickly or at all even.
And since in the end it's Google reputation that's on the line, only they can really do something about it. They should do something about it for their own sake.
I was just reading the article about how Google says only tablets will ship with Honeycomb, and that other devices will see some of Honeycombs features show up eventually, though it's not known how much of it, or when exactly this will happen. I see this as seeming VERY unorganized, even to a huge fan of the Android OS like myself. Being in direct competition with the iPhone Google has to look at the strengths Apple has over them and try to match those strengths at the very least. And one of Apples strenghts is, when they come out with an update, EVERY iPhone gets it.
But of course you say, there's only one iPhone. It's only natural. Well I know that, and it seemed to me that perhaps I was overlooking the fact that it may actually be an advantage to have a full range of devices, from those that carry 'top of the line' support (currently 2.2.1), to those devices which are still on 1.6. It's an advantage because it gives the customer a choice. If you don't have $200 bucks to get one of the higher end Android devices, at least you can get one of the cheaper ones that might not get all the updates, but at least it's an Android smartphone, and it saves the customer money!
Ok so yes, it is somewhat of an advantage to have a host of choices out there for consumers. But what is missing is that there is no structured tier system of Android devices. In other words, when a customer buys an iPhone, he knows what he's getting. But when a customer chooses an Android device, it's not clear what he's going to get out of it. Those of us like me who bought the DX last summer thought we were getting one of the 'top of the line' Android models. And so far it has been, but so far all we have is speculation when it comes to the question of whether or not we'll be getting Gingerbread. We think we will... we don't know we will... and we certainly have no clue at all if we'll see ANY of the Honeycomb features down the line.
Then you have all the poor saps who bought into Samsung Galaxy devices who figured, "hey this is Samsungs premier Android handset... of course they're going to upgrade it to Froyo ASAP".... WRONG! None of them have, and that has to be disappointing to those who bought them. And that's exactly what I think their biggest problem is... ok sure we get that not every Android device is going to get the same support as the rest, but we should know when we purchase an Android phone, what level of support we can expect.
It would make shelling out $300 bucks (with a $100 dollar rebate) a lot more comforting if we knew that paying that money would ensure us that we'd be getting top level support, and the quickest updates available... those would be considered 1st tier devices. Then perhaps you could have a 2nd tier level of devices that were up do date at the time of purchase, but was limited to slower updates, and maybe limited to only one guaranteed update during it's life. They could sell those for $150 or so. 3rd tier would be something like the Samsung Galaxy series that weren't up to date, and may never get an update for all those customers knew. Sell them for $100... and on down the line. I mean the tiers wouldn't have to be exactly like this, I'm just throwing out examples.
The most important thing to me is, I think over the past year a lot of Android customers have been frusterated and let down when the found out that their device wouldn't be updated as soon as some of the other devices were.... IF they were updated at all. And I'm pretty sure that there would be a lot of people interested in shelling out a little extra cash upon purchase to get a device that would be considered a 'top tier' device. It would sure beat having to guess which phone will get the quickest/best support.
The fact that there is no such structure in Android I think is a major failure, and a black mark against them. But I don't think the OEM's would ever implement such a program themselves because they're already making plenty of money selling devices for two an three hundred dollars, and then have no obligation to live up to supporting them quickly or at all even.
And since in the end it's Google reputation that's on the line, only they can really do something about it. They should do something about it for their own sake.
