Eh, it's not that bad. If you look at the history of developers, we're already use to having to deal with a lot worse fragmentation issues than Android. Anyone that's ever developed a website correctly knows that supporting the available web browsers is a lot more of a challenge than with Android versions.
Windows, Mac OSX, a ton of server technologies, databases, etc., they all have tons of different versions available to support. Most companies stick with older versions because it is what they have and it is working. When it comes to Android, I've been pleasantly surprised at the efforts Google has gone through to help manufacturers upgrade. Even though 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 are different, they aren't so much different that in most cases you can't treat them as 2.x. It seems to me that Android is more broken up in 1.x, 2.x, 3.x and now 4.x instead of the individual versions themselves. I'd rather a little fragmentation in Android than for them to pull an Apple and everyone is the exact same, right down to the hardware level. Variety is something we need in the mobile market, not a one device fits all concept. Steven Studio LFP http://www.studio-lfp.com On Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:36:24 AM UTC-5, Greg Donald wrote: > > > http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support > > Wow.. I knew it was bad, but man. > > > "most app developers will end up targeting an ancient version of the > OS in order to maximize market reach." > > I totally agree.. It will literally be years before I will begin to > care about the new 4.0. I'm still supporting devices running 2.1 and > will be for some time to come. > > > -- > Greg Donald > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
