Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 30th Oct 2011 00:20 UTC
Google "Let's not mince words here: This 'Android and iPhone Update History' chart [OSNews item] is not a good chart. Oh, it's a pretty chart, to be sure artfully illustrated and researched. But this chart - done up by Michael Degusta at The Understatement and reposted by anyone unable to think clearly, apparently - is not a good chart. Or at the very least, it fails to recognize a fundamental difference between Android and iOS and the iPhone."
Thread beginning with comment 494914
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Moredhas on Sun 30th Oct 2011 08:49 UTC
Member since:

When Apple decide they'll release a high, middle and low end device every 8-12 months like Samsung do, then it will become a relevant criticism. Some device makers have a bad history of updating their devices, do your research before you buy and let those device makers drown.

Until Apple are in remotely the same market, this is like comparing apples to the entirety of the frigging green-grocer.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Semi-Relevant
by d3vi1 on Sun 30th Oct 2011 10:31 in reply to "Semi-Relevant"
d3vi1 Member since:

The initial article wasn't an analysis of the cause of the issue with Android. It was just a statement of the effects. My personal issue is that we have 1000 droid phone versions with 1000 software versions, most of them out of date. For which do we do the development? For the least common denominator? What's the point of having new APIs if 90% of the phones don't have access to them?
Otherwise, yes, it's comparing Apples with Oranges.
It's the same issue with Windows vs. Mac OS X. If you develop software for Windows, you need to have Windows XP as the baseline and have no access to Windows Vista and 7 technologies.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Semi-Relevant
by No it isnt on Sun 30th Oct 2011 13:33 in reply to "RE: Semi-Relevant"
No it isnt Member since:

Oh really? How about simply targeting the API you need? When I had a Mac, the one thing that annoyed me the most was that a new OS version made the old ones instantly obsolete as the developers jumped to new APIs for no other reason than the fact that they were new.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Semi-Relevant
by tbutler on Sun 30th Oct 2011 19:00 in reply to "Semi-Relevant"
tbutler Member since:

Well, Apple has a low, middle and high end phone now. Seems relevant to me. There is nothing that requires a company to frequently release variants -- maybe the point should be that is a very bad idea.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Semi-Relevant
by zima on Sun 6th Nov 2011 23:14 in reply to "RE: Semi-Relevant"
zima Member since:

Not anywhere near low, you just show you're tainted by very atypical place. "Low" is something like S30 Nokia 101 (25€ or so without contract, dual sim, radio & mp3 player) or S40 X2-05 (45€ without contract' also camera, apps, browser).

We might of course limit ourselves to arbitrary label of "smartphones" - still, newer & better S40 devices encroach into this territory. Sub-100 (without contract) Android handsets are firmly within it.
Anything iPhone is at most middle. Apple openly boasts its business goal to ignore "lesser" people, to go after high-margins ones, that is why more than few variants is suboptimal.

Reply Parent Score: 2