Tech Broiler

Jason Perlow and Scott Raymond

Android Virtualization: It's Time

By | January 19, 2011, 10:32am PST

Summary: With device update lag seemingly becoming an epidemic on the Android platform, there’s only one answer to nip this problem in the bud once and for all: Virtualization.

With device update lag seemingly becoming an epidemic on the Android platform, there’s only one answer to nip this problem in the bud once and for all: Virtualization.

James Kendrick, our new Mobile News columnist has a serious beef with the mobile carriers and the device manufacturers. It’s taking them way too long to get updates out for all of the Android handsets out on the market.

The Android platform is extremely successful and it’s only becoming more so. By this time next year, it will almost certainly eclipse the BlackBerry as the leading smartphone platform in overall market share.

That’s great news for Android, but there’s a downside to this rapid expansion. There’s a vast array of handsets currently on the market, not to mention all of the devices that were released in the last year or so, all of which have unique “Value Add” in their modification of the Android OS, a.k.a platform fragmentation.

The downside of having such a successful Open Source platform like Android is that we’ve got multiple manufacturers building devices based on a development source tree coming from Google, and those manufacturers are on completely different schedules and their level of effort varies from company to company when it comes to testing and developing Android for their own hardware. This includes releasing updates to Android for their handsets.

Packaging up a release of Android for a single handset or even a family of similar handsets is no trivial matter, as it requires building the platform from source, integrating device drivers and also performing carrier-specific customizations. Every single manufacturer of Android devices has to undergo this process, every single time an update to Android comes out.

They may have some automation for building and testing in place, but this is still a huge pain in the butt to do. And this process of regression testing and quality assurance takes time.

Apple (and to a similar extent, RIM) doesn’t really have this problem because they are only building their software for a limited target device group. There’s only one major revision of iPhone and one iPad out at any time, and keeping legacy models updated is much less complicated because there are far fewer models to deal with.

Apple and RIM also own the OS and platform in question, so there’s a much tighter integration of the workflow and integration processes when a new version of iOS or Blackberry OS comes out.

So what’s the solution to the Android mess then? Do we just throw our hands up and accept that the process is never going to be as efficient as Apple’s or RIM’s? Or can we leverage technology and processes/methods to alleviate it?

There is an answer and I’ve discussed this before: Device Virtualization.

Also Read: Wind River, Tasty Embedded Linux Treat

Also Read: I want an iPhoneStormDroid

Also Read: Virtualization, an easy way to kill Apple’s HTC lawsuit

Now, I realize that I am something of a Virtualization fanboy. No, scratch that, I’m a HUGE virtualization fanboy. But Virtualization is the only answer to the Android fragmentation and updates problem.

How so?

First, let’s understand what benefits virtualization on smartphone devices brings to the table. Assuming that the Android ODMs and OEMs can agree to standardize on one or two hypervisor platforms which abstract the hardware from the operating system, the process of developing ROM updates for Android smartphones and even tablets becomes a great deal easier.

The benefits of virtualization have already been realized in the datacenter on the x86 server platform, as well as with mid-range UNIX and even mainframe systems.

For example, when Microsoft or Red Hat releases a new version of Windows Server or RHEL, there’s much less activity that goes on now to certify that OS against new x86 server hardware made by IBM, HP and Dell because on a virtualized platform, those vendors are putting less emphasis on developing specific hardware device drivers for Windows.

As a result of virtualization becoming much more de rigeur, and due to of the economies of scale afforded by data center consolidation and increasing server density using technologies such as VMWare, fewer and fewer organizations are running the majority of their servers “On the metal” now.

The low level device drivers which used to be in the OS are now integrated into the Hypervisor, and it becomes a group effort to by the vendors to integrate that support there instead of the OS.

Instead, the hypervisor vendor creates “virtual” device drivers that expose common services to the virtualized OS, such as networking, display and I/O. No matter whose hardware that virtualized version of Windows or Linux is running on, it runs exactly the same, provided the same hypervisor is used. Doesn’t matter if the Windows or Linux is running on IBM, HP, or Dell.

In fact, that image can be transferred between different vendors and run without any changes at all.

In virtualization parlance, this abstraction of the OS from the hardware using pseudo-devices is referred to as “Paravirtualization”.

For datacenters, that hypervisor means VMWare ESX, Microsoft’s Hyper-V, Citrix’s XenServer or Linux’s KVM. On Android, this could mean Wind River’s embedded hypervisor, another vendor’s embedded hypervisor (such as VMWare’s Mobile Virtualization Platform) or possibly something that Google buys or creates in-house.

One such possible acquisition target for Google to integrate this functionality into Android is Open Kernel Labs, which has a functioning “Microvisor” that already has been demonstrated on partner handset platforms and is shipping in selected devices today.

As seen in the first demo, shown below, the OKL4 Microvisor permits even the weakest ARM9 200Mhz processor to run a Linux smartphone fully virtualized with no loss of performance.

With built-in virtualization in Android, the very same benefits that companies like IBM, Dell and HP derive from hypervisors in the datacenter could also be enjoyed by HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung.

Regardless of which hypervisor gets chosen, the result is the same: Google builds ONE master Android image that is guaranteed to run on the hypervisor, which in turn runs on a multitude of handsets.

So from the perspective of the handset manufacturer and the carrier, the customizations are done to the master image — no need to build from source every time, no device driver debugging, et cetera. And as seen in the second Open Kernel Labs demo below, it allows for a much more secure architecture for enterprise use as well.

So instead of customizing an OS to run on specific vendor hardware, it becomes generic, and “templates” of that generic image can be built which can then be further customized as needed. That’s where the carrier and manufacturers come in with their value add, and where the speed of getting OS updates out to the end-user is realized.

Virtualization on the device’s time has come. It’s now up to Google and the Android handset ODM/OEMs to agree to move forward with it.

Does Android need a hypervisor to get out of the update cycle mess? Talk Back and Let Me Know.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet, is a technologist with over two decades of experience integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies.

Disclosure

Jason Perlow

My Full-Time Employer is IBM. I write as a freelancer for ZDNet.

Disclaimer: The postings and opinions on this blog are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions.

I own no investments or direct financial instruments in the companies I write about.

Biography

Jason Perlow

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet is a technologist with over two decades of experience with integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies. A long-time computer enthusiast starting the age of 13 with his first Apple ][ personal computer, he began his freelance writing career starting at ZD Sm@rt Reseller in 1996 and has since authored numerous guest columns for ZDNet Enterprise and Ziff-Davis Internet. Jason was previously Senior Technology Editor for Linux Magazine, where he wrote about Open Source issues from 1999 to 2008.

In his spare time, Jason is an avid amateur chef and food writer, where his work reviewing New Jersey restaurants has appeared in The New York Times. He is also the founder of the popular food web site eGullet and blogs about restaurants and cooking at OffTheBroiler.com.

75
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
asleton 4th Jan
don't focus on Android OS itself for fixing fragmentation
0 Votes
+ -
interesting
bnlf 19th Jan 2011
very interesting but i wonder how these devices can handle the loss of performance and even using virtualization i think there will still be a problem regarding oems and operators customizing android the way they want.
cheers
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@bnlf If we're talking about Wind River's platform for example, the overhead is minimal. Probably less than 5 percent performance loss for using a hypervisor, if that.
0 Votes
+ -
And even better
LiquidLearner 19th Jan 2011
@jperlow

If the entire platform were standardized on with a hypvervisor it would be far superior to Wind River's performance. You'd be looking at a Type 2 hyperviser like the server platforms you mentioned which are all capable of hitting pretty close to 99% performance. Especially since you'll only have one VM running on the hypervisor.

I think it's a terrific solution for those of us who use Android. The problem is it takes a huge excuse for developers to not do updates, which makes it harder to sell that mobile upgrade constantly. It's bad for the manufacturer and carrier so I doubt we'll see it happen anytime soon.
0 Votes
+ -
Standard platform
jparr 20th Jan 2011
@jperlow, I'm not familiar with Wind River, but it seems to me that you wouldn't even need true virtualization, from the standpoint that all hardware functions are EMULATED in software. A standard API layer should suffice -- similar to Java, where there are deep hooks in to the hardware (now), but an app is expressed as a general set of APIs that bind to and exploit those hardware hooks similarly on different hardware platforms. In other words, things like file system, timer ticks, cpu and memory allocation, as well as IO would NOT need to be virtualized, ASSUMING they all performed the same way on HTC vs. iPhone vs. Moto.

I will continue to push this: The main thing we HAVE NOT SEEN and sorely lack in the mobile (handset) world is adequate virus protection. I feel that multi-core architectures will be conducive to antivirus, where it has traditionally been viewed as too expensive from a CPU / memory standpoint on conventional handsets.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
DevGuy_z 20th Jan 2011
@bnlf Typically the overhead is very small
Jason Perlow investigates.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@urbandk I'm looking into global warming and world peace, I'll get back to you on that.
0 Votes
+ -
@jperlow Ha ha!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Habiloso 19th Jan 2011
@jperlow
As far as I am aware, Second Life has neither global warming nor war - and it is a virtual world wink
0 Votes
+ -
@jperlow

virtualize war by having both sides decide by playing halo.

virtualize CO2 by turning us all into computers via that xfiles brain upload episode.

We just saved the world!
0 Votes
+ -
@jperlow:

Could not resist wink

Global Warming: is a function of 22-year solar cycles coupled with the amount of saturated water vapor in the atmosphere.

World peace: requires a point of equilibrium, but a man named Lorentz showed that an equilibrium point within a chaotic system can act as an attractor without ever resolving to that single point. So the best we can hope for is normalized behavior between nations that exists in predictable patterns, yet does not escalate.

LOL, NOW GET BACK TO WORK!
0 Votes
+ -
@urbandk - only problem not solved by yet another layer of abstraction are the ones that it creates....

now - where are my cloud virtulaization tools, you know, the one that allows me to virtualise all the cloud providers together into one big metacloud with one management console (and in 5 years time - my metacloud virtualisation tools)
0 Votes
+ -
First the JIT has to be good enough to ensure impact on battery life is minimal.
Maybe in a few years when Android is mature.
0 Votes
+ -
"So what?s the solution to the Android mess then?"

Package Managers seemed to work well for the Linux community, in my opinion. Maybe what Android needs is an RPM or an APT equivalent to ease the pain of it's so-called "fragmentation" that the media keeps reporting on.

Virtualization is also an interesting concept, however, I think that you seem to have made a poor assumption here:

"Assuming that the Android ODMs and OEMs can agree to standardize on one or two hypervisor platforms..."

If agreement on standardization was possible, there would be no "fragmentation" issue to begin with. Am I right?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
dave@... Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@Linville79 It's not really a package manager issue.. Android apps come in packages, but the whole OS does not.

This isn't a problem on a PC because you have the PC's BIOS. Any new Linux install or OS upgrade can boot the PC, load their installer, suss out the hardware, install the new kernel and necessary drivers, etc.

On Android, the drivers are, apparently, just merged into the whole boot image by the OEMs... no modularization here. What's needed is abstraction (as I mentioned in another post)... there's the piece Motorola touches, there's the piece that's Android proper, and there's a very thin API between the two. Any new version of Android would plug into that Motorola HAL; any new phone would present a HAL that accepts all of Android. This would also mean than Cyanogen(mod) and other custom builds could be made just once, and they'd run on any device. While that might take out some of the fun, think of all that spare time available for actual improvement to Android by the good people at Cyanogen.
0 Votes
+ -
why? apples going to have
Ron Bergundy Updated - 19th Jan 2011
100% of the smartphone market by 2012 so what does it matter if android is updated or not!?!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
ItsTheBottomLine 20th Jan 2011
@Ron Bergundy You are definitely true to your avatar... what a JW.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
dave@... 20th Jan 2011
@Ron Bergundy Apple is past their peak on smart phone share. This was made very obvious in 2010 by how quickly Android surpassed iOS... 2-3 quarters ahead of where most pundits predicted it would happen.

Don't fret... Apple will continue to rake in more profits than any other smart phone company. But they lack the will to compete across the board with Android; they only want to be the Mercedes of the smart phone world. Mercedes makes a great car, but most folks can't afford one. And if Mercedes made something to compete with a Ford Fiesta or Honda Civic, they'd actually damage the brand.

Apple has exactly the same problem. At this point, the only way to grow iOS faster is to lower the bad, which would hurt their profits. Same thing with Macintosh computers.. they can't keep selling Macs at 2x-3x the price of comparable non-Mac PCs and expect to take more than a small share of the desktop market. And yet, if they really tried to compete with HP and Dell and all those guys, they might well be successful in growing the Mac market, but they're lower their profits to match the other commodity PC vendors.

Apple will never do this. So they are guaranteed a shrinking percentage of smart phone and before long, tablet markets. Their PC market has shifted a bit, they sell more units, but fewer high-end units, thanks to a boost in lower-end Macs driven by the iPhone and iPad. However, that coattail effect is so far only in the USA.
@dave@... Not worn out but in the process.

Right now I suspect that iPhone are only considered to be a little bit superior and that's arguable.

Even on the PC side other than the look and feel, I don't think they have much of an edge, either in performance or reliability. Even the OS doesn't appear to remarkably better or more secure.

The iPad on the other hand...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
dave@... 20th Jan 2011
@DevGuy_z I'm not so sure. And are we the ones to be correct about public perception? As a hardware engineer and all around computer nerd, I know that under the nice aluminum case, Macs are just plain old everyday PCs, made the same factory by the same people from exactly the same parts as Dells or HPs or Sonys or Toshibas or anything else.

But marketing is never all that much about reality. And Apple's profits tell me that they're pretty much maintaining their position.

I'm not sure they have much of an alternative, either. If they directly competed with HP or Dell, could they really grow their market THAT much? A good deal of Apple's success is based on buyers drinking the Kool-Aid -- they have accepted that Apple's way is THE way.

There is no performance advantage on Macs... they're running the same hardware, and there's nothing magical about the Mach kernel versus the NT kernel, they're both decent kernels, with the ability to function as microkernels, and a bunch of "but, if's" that avoid some of the microkernel things for efficiency's sake.

On the display side, the MacOS's graphics, the offspring of display postscript and acrobat, is more accurate than the typical Windows graphics toolkit, but also slower. That's back to Jobs' belief that 60% of the CPU should be devoted to the GUI (a thing he avowed back in the 80s).

The iPad had its day, and while it's not vanishing, there's definitely competition coming. Maybe. There were actually a few dozen tablet computers shown at CES 2010, several weeks before the iPad materialized. Some have shipped, many seem to have been sent back to the drawing board. Samsung has sold several million, though... and I think there's is nice, but nothing amazing. I have see a few that border on "amazing", and I really want one. But it's got to be viewable in bright light... something Apple's not going to offer, given their preoccupation with IPS displays (which certainly have their place, but given the extra power demands, and the unlikelyhood of my running Photoshop on my tablet for serious work, not needed).
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
tcunningham4 20th Jan 2011
@Ron Bergundy You apparently missed the whole discussion of updating older phones -- I, for one, don't swap phones every two months just because a new feature comes out...and the new 'version' of android won't work on my hardware, because the vendor doesn't care anymore...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time.
MichaelADeBose 19th Jan 2011
Firstly, lets be honest. It's only referred to as "lag" if the vendor actually intends to upgrade the device to the latest version of the OS. For some of the vendors in question not doing so is part of their business model. If the user gets frustrated enough they'll go out and purchase another phone. Who knows how effective this is as an incentive for consumers and its really hard to say how big an issue this is for the average consumer anyway.

Phone OSes didn't get upgraded until recently so most consumers may be happy with whatever comes on their phone at purchase. Virtualization barring any performance degradation is the way to go. On the other hand, if Google were magically successful at driving their unlocked phones into the mainstream vendors would certainly take notice.
0 Votes
+ -
@MichaelADeBose
"For some of the vendors in question not doing so is part of their business model." And then the user realizes that the vendor sucks and switches vendors. The vendor thereby loosing consumers. Not upgrading is a bad practice in regard to smart phones, period. There is no excuse for vendors not to update if they want to use android. they knew what they were getting themselves into.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
OffsideInVancouver 20th Jan 2011
@MichaelADeBose

"Phone OSes didn't get upgraded until recently so most consumers may be happy with whatever comes on their phone at purchase."

Exactly, the iPhone OS major version updates are once a year. If you're on a contract you usually get a free upgrade on your handset once a year, so why bother upgrading the OS when you can just get a new phone?
0 Votes
+ -
Android and Microsoft
tomtazz 19th Jan 2011
This is a similar issue that Microsoft has when it builds an OS that has to work on other vendor's hardware. If either Android or Microsoft decided to only build their OS for their hardware that they control, like Apple, then Microsoft and Android products would blow Apple products out of the water.
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong, wrong wrong.

* VMs require more horsepower than phones have. Look at the current crop of phones, most of them are too slow for the Android OS they have on the bare metal, let alone one running in a hypervisor.

* Doesn't solve the fragmentation issue at the hardware level. A big part of the fragmentation puzzle isn't that each phone has, say, a different driver for the video or CPU; those are issues that virtualization handles well. No, the problem is that different pieces of hardware have completely different capabilities altogether. Some phones have slideout KBs, some done. Some have little trackpads or five-way buttons, others don't. Some phones have gyros and GPS, others don't. Every phone seems to have a different screen resolution. See where this is headed? Android *already* virtualizes the hardware pretty well; the problem is that the developer has no clue how their app will run on future phones because there is no baseline hardware.

* The fragmentation will STILL exist, because makers will still be able to add their own layers, remove/replace standard components, etc. Again, this is not a problem that virtualization can solve.

J.Ja
0 Votes
+ -
@Justin James
"No, the problem is that different pieces of hardware have completely different capabilities altogether."
Then allow for multiple virtual drivers. This will cause spatial storage requirements to go up, but reliability shouldn't take a hit if the driver isn't in use.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Justin James 20th Jan 2011
@KBot You don't understand what I said. The drivers *are not* the problem. The *capabilities* are the problem. The Android OS already virtualizes the hardware (for example, if you have a hardware keyboard, your app does NOT need to know about it to support typing...). The problem is that app writers don't have any way to anticipate the hardware capabilities. That's why you see so many Android apps with so much wasted screen space, because they design for the smallest screen resolution and scaling up is a hassle.

J.Ja
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
snoop0x7b Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@Justin James

Scaling up isn't that hard. You just have to not be lazy and hardcode positions of elements. Plus at some point you need to impose a minimum screen size, that's what your manifest is for.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
jperlow Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@Justin James "VMs require more horsepower than phones have. Look at the current crop of phones, most of them are too slow for the Android OS they have on the bare metal, let alone one running in a hypervisor.
"

I encourage you to research the space further. Smartphones have ALREADY been virtualized on existing smartphone hardware. VMWare has technology for doing this with its Mobile Virtualization Platform and LG is partnering with them on it. Open Kernel Labs (www.ok-labs.com) has an open source hypervisor and has proven the technology, they have several demos on their site to prove it and they have partners that have shipped product using it.

Gartner already made a prediction in 2008 that half of all smartphones shipped in 2012 would be virtualized. I think we're right on target for that to happen.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Justin James 20th Jan 2011
@jperlow Jason, I have no doubt that it has been done before and that it is technically possible. My issue regarding the hardware capabilities is the SPEED. Virtualization always imposes a speed hit, sometimes big, sometimes not so big. Android is a slow OS to begin with, even phones that I hear described as "snappy" are noticeably slower than iPhones or WP7 phones. To make it worse, Android phones are often budget phones and the CPU is a big source of that cost savings.

I note that you did not address the other points I raised at all; were they valid, in your mind, or simply not worth responding to?

J.Ja
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
snoop0x7b Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@jperlow No matter what you're adding latency. The situation on an android phone is generally such that latency is to be avoided at all costs. You're over complicating the problem. It's been solved thousands of times in every OS, including the underlying Linux kernel. It's called a hardware abstraction layer, developers need to be more intelligent about checking capabilities by defining what they need in the application's manifest and by abstracting UI elements such that you can use different instances of an abstract class to represent the UI for different device types.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
dave@... 20th Jan 2011
@Justin James If these actually are problems on Android, it's due to a flaw in the OS's UI abstraction. For example, no application should care where input comes from... the OS should be cooking the input event queue, the application receiving the kind of events it needs. Apps shouldn't know or care whether a key event comes from a hard keyboard, a virtual keyboard, a Bluetooth keyboard, or something else... that's an OS job, just as it's been on the desktop for decades. Same with buttons.. an "up" event is an "up" event, doesn't matter if it's a keyboard or a trackpad or whatever. This isn't difficult... Linux with X at least has done this since the 70s.

No GPS... then no GPS. An app that just needs GPS will not run, an app that just needs "locale" will call the OS's locale function, and get WiFi-based locale info if the GPS is unavailable.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Justin James 20th Jan 2011
@dave@... This is actually how it works already, for the most part; apps have a manifest which declare what capabilities they need to run, and the market won't show the app if the device doesn't meet the requirements. So it's not like an app just blows up if there's no GPS. Likewise for input. But it *does* make writing apps that take maximum advantage of the hardware (ie: if a 5-way button is present, use it for control in addition to the touchscreen) extremely difficult. And the screen resolution stuff is a huge problem if you want an app to look great on both big and small screens. No amount of UI abstraction can get an app to scale up nicely to a big screen if the designer hardcoded positions.

J.Ja
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
snoop0x7b Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@dave@... Justin is exactly right. He's clearly read the documentation on android development and has developed apps. This is how I develop for android, this is similar to how we develop java GUI applications for multiple platforms. You think about what the different possibilities are, try to use math whenever possible to position UI elements, and sometimes you need to use the lowest common denominator. Nothing I've written so far has really had the need for anything other than a keyboard, GPS unit, and a camera, so I can't really speak to what I'd do with a 5-point button device... If it's presented as a key on the keyboard, I'd just use the keyboard event listener, and add code that handles that particular key-code.
0 Votes
+ -
@Justin James

Every phone is going to have this issue. The only reason the iphone doesn't is because there is only one manufacturer of the phone, only one model at a time. There are tons of blackberries, there will be more wp7's and there are tons of android phones. This is not an issue that is relevant to the point of this article, although very valid in terms of OS abstraction, although the same could be said for the web. websites typically favor resolutuions like 1024x768. smart phones and netbooks don't fit and the website doesn't look right. So the problem has existed for a while, it isn't just a result of the smart phone scene.

In the grand scheme of things, smart phones are new. It's goping to take a while to sort some of this stuff out.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Justin James 20th Jan 2011
@KBot@... You are quite mistaken there. There may be tons of BlackBerries, but a closer inspection of their specs will show you that there is a ton of similarity between models. In reality, a developer has to take into account very little. Ditto for WP7. Microsoft has severely restricted what manufacturers can do with WP7 (for example, there is only 1 screen resolution). Where hardware is allowed to differ is in things that won't affect application development in the slightest.

Android's open nature is its greatest advantage and worst enemy.

J.Ja
0 Votes
+ -
Since Nov of 2009 my Droid has gone from 2.0 to 2.1 to 2.2 to 2.2.1 or three major updates and one minor one in a year. How is this a "lag"?
0 Votes
+ -
@cornpie
what phone are you using? When was the last time that the Motorola Droid had the latest update? there are a lot of devices that are simply not being updated. For instance, I have an Archos 5 internet media tablet. It is still running Froyo. Why? Probably because Archos is too lazy to give me gingerbread. I know Archos is a bit different, but the idea is still valid.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
Xenia Onatopp Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@KBot
First of all, when you bought the Archos, did Archos promise you an OS update? Second, if you don't get an OS update, will your phone stop working, or stop being able to download apps? Third, is your Archos affected by a critical bug in the OS that is impairing its normal operation? If the answer to these three questions is "no", then there is no reason why you should either demand or expect Archos to supply you with an update -- especially a minor update such as Froyo to Gingerbread.

You do realise, I hope, that the main difference between Android 2.2 and Android 2.3 is that 2.3 includes support for screens larger than 7", and resolutions in the 300 DPI range? Obviously, such a feature is completely useless to you if your device is 7" or smaller. The other changes are very minor -- a couple of cosmetic tweaks, and a couple of changes designed to make your battery last a few minutes longer.

Why go through the hassle (and indeed risk) of a minor OS update, when (a) you're barely going to notice the difference, (b) there's a major new version of the OS due in a couple of months' time, and (c) you're probably going to get a new device within two years of purchasing your current one.

This fuss about updating is a fuss about nothing. Someone elsewhere on the thread called it a "red herring", and I agree. Makes me wonder if ZDNet is not merely trying to stir up some FUD about Android.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
jBundy.com-23888787227187618789222526229331 7th Feb 2011
@cornpie Motorola makes your phone. Good for you that you've gotten your carrier and OEM modified updates. Did you get em when Google released them, though? Either you're feeling yourself right now and/or you are missing the point. The concern here is the absence of a direct link between Google and the end-user for Android updates and if you will continue to get updates in the future should your device still be capable of supporting newer features introduced to the platform. As fast as the platform is moving, it won't work itself out of a device within a two year phone contract period. But Google needs to continue pushing and evolving its Nexus series plans, open it up to more OEMs so long as Google CONTROLS the update channel regardless of device, and open it up to all communication frequencies (us CDMA/WiMax users are feeling left out)
Are you kidding us?

The real problem is the OS isn't separated into proper layers. The hardware layer and hardware-related api should be the domain of the OEM. Google should be free to issue updates for the user environment that sits on top.

But of course we all know that Linux and "stable api" are like oil and vinegar....
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
snoop0x7b Updated - 20th Jan 2011
@croberts Not really... Some parts of the kernel's driver API change, but in the 2.6 branch the last major all encompassing change was a couple years ago, most drivers that worked in 2.6.21 will still compile and run in 2.6.32 (that's years of compatibility).

The problem is actually the fact that most developers for the platform are amateurs and/or don't know how to take advantage of what OOP can give you in terms of abstracting things. Some developers went to class on the day in CPS-101 when they explained abstract classes and interfaces and said this is pointless, those are the people who don't understand what to do.
0 Votes
+ -
What a waste...
james347 20th Jan 2011
...of time, money, effort, energy, time, resources, money, did I already say 'time'?
0 Votes
+ -
You're assuming that porting to new hardware is what takes the time.

I suspect that it may take more time for the phone manufacturer and carrier port their *enhancements* to the new OS build, and then for the carrier to test the new build with enhancements on their network - to check for potential issues.

I know most of us don't appreciate the *enhancements*; however this is part of the business model - so unless you buy a Nexus, you're going to be stuck with them.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
snoop0x7b 20th Jan 2011
@andybryant9 Yeah, especially due to the fact that the kernel API hasn't really changed over the past year or so... You can probably compile most any driver you wrote for 2.6.29 for 2.6.30 or 2.6.31.
0 Votes
+ -
It's not in the vendor's best interest to upgrade the OS on their smart phones. Why should they? It costs money & 99% of their customers don't know & don't care about OS upgrades. They just upgrade their phone. Only a techie would care, and a techie can root the phone & put whatever they want on it.
Try & find someone who isn't technical. Ask them what OS is on their phone. Heck, just ask them, "Is that an Android phone?" They'll either say it's an iPhone, or a Droid, or, most often "uhhhh, what?"
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
The Star King 21st Jan 2011
@jred That's true, but then they want to install a cool game they've heard of and find they can't because their OS version is too low. That's when OS version becomes an issue for non-techies.
0 Votes
+ -
Smartphones will need to be udpated
John J. Jordan 20th Jan 2011
As exploits are bound to be found on all smart phone platforms, it will become more and more important to release timely updates. Eventually, the ability to respond to this will make or break a platform. Apple and RIM controls their entire platform so updating will be relatively simple. Microsoft controls their OS and so assuming that hardware vendors follow their hardware specs, they should be able to make updates somewhat quickly. Android is all over the place and I think this will be the single largest challenge in the future. There are many forks and many different hardware specs. Making timely updates could be extremely cost prohibitive for phone manufacturers. They spent a lot of time and money trying to differentiate themselves. I wonder if this will come back and bite them in the end
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Android Virtualization: It's Time
jBundy.com-23888787227187618789222526229331 Updated - 7th Feb 2011
@John J. Jordan

Microsoft replicated it's desktop update policy and minimum spec policy on Windows Phone 7 so that it can push updates to ANY device regardless of carrier and OEM. This will eventually make Windows Phone 7 similarly progressive in comparison to its desktop parent. I see THAT as the way to go. iOS is similar, but you're just dealing with one OEM. When you have multiple OEMs and carriers, you MUST keep control of the update process if you want to retain your userbase. I'm on Android RIGHT NOW. I don't see that staying the same in the future once Windows Phone 7 or iOS release new updates that touch all their capable devices or OEM vendors' devices. In my opinion, Google is still to blame for this whole problem. No matter if the OEMs and carriers are allowed to install their apps, Google should maintain control of patches. Even though no updates have come yet, Microsoft has a great way of handling its own updates and OEM and/or carrier updates through its own update service, providing the end user with updates right away instead of allowing interference from the carrier and manufacturer. See this: http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/20/leaked-slides-show-windows-phone-7s-update-strategy-windows-li/
0 Votes
+ -
don't focus on Android OS itself for fixing fragmentation

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix