Why Windows fragmentation will blow Windows to smithereens (cough)
Summary: Android fragmentation will wreck Android for smartphones and tablets just as much as Windows fragmentation ruined Windows for the PC.
The Windows operating system has been plagued with fragmentation ever since the 3.x branch of the OS was released on multiple PCs. (Ahem)
(Image: Google)
The transition from XP to Vista, to Windows 7, and, most recently, both iterations of the newest version of Windows, 8 and RT, as well as all patch iterations and dot versions in between, has left a scattered landscape of PCs in various states of OS upgrade version malaise. (Cough)
This has created problems for Windows developers when coding applications, and when they test against different versions of the OS and different target devices. (Oh my!)
The introduction of multiple versions of PCs, as well as Windows virtual machines and emulators running in Mac OS X and Linux, has further complicated this situation by creating additional "forks" of Windows, which have their own unique application issues that developers need to address. (The horror! The horror!)
In case you haven't figured it out by now, I'm not being serious. While I have no fondness for Windows, I know quite well that — even though there are, for example, six major versions of Windows 7 — Windows is now and has been for years the number one desktop operating system.
Why, then, must the fact that there are multiple versions of Android lead to its being blown to smithereens? It seems like hardly a week can go by without someone proclaiming how terrible Android fragmentation is. Somehow, just like Windows back in its early days, Android keeps getting more and more popular.
Why? Because while operating system fragmentation is indeed a pain for developers, it's not nearly as much of an annoyance as some people would have you believe. Just like you can run pretty much any 32-bit Windows application — save Metro and RT-specific apps — on any version of Windows, you can run pretty much an Android app on any Android device.
Mind you, the app won't always work well. Anyone who runs smartphone-specific apps on tablets knows that, but they will run. Smartphone and tablet vendors know that and they like it. So long as they stick with Android as a foundation, they're guaranteed to have tens of thousands of applications from day one with every new device. Even companies that don't use Android, like BlackBerry, know that this is a smart move, which is why BlackBerry 10 comes with support for Android apps with its Dalvik implementation.
I can't see Samsung, HTC, or anyone else that matters in the hardware business trying to fork Android. For customers, there's just too much value in the common operating system foundation and the Google Play apps and store for vendors to ignore.
Software developers see it the same way. Sure, they're willing to support Apple iOS and Android. That's where the customers are. But support Tizen and Firefox OS and Windows Phone 8 and BlackBerry 10 and Ubuntu? That's asking a lot more. Do you really expect them to rush to support Amazon Android, HTC Android, Facebook Android, and Samsung Android? I don't think so!
Look at the numbers today. According to ABI Research, 58 percent of 2013's 56 billion smartphone app downloads will be Android apps. Apple iOS will have 33 percent, and far, far behind, Microsoft's Windows Phone will have not quite 4 percent and BlackBerry will get 3 percent. So, who's going to write apps for less than 3 percent of the market? Nobody, that's who.
Let's be practical. The market can support two, maybe three major smartphone and tablet operating systems; after that, you're looking at marginal players.
Maybe there's room there for small players in some niches. Firefox and Ubuntu, for example, are aiming at the low-end range between feature phones and smartphones. I can see that. What I can't see is the successful Android ecosystem being carved into progressively smaller, more labor intensive, and less profitable portions.
The one company that might fork Android, but I doubt it would bother, is Amazon. It has a unique business model. For it, Android is not so much an operating system as it is a sales channel.
But, again, why would it bother? It has already tuned it to use Amazon Kindle Store instead of Google Play, so it has already accomplished its mission-critical goal. What on Earth could it have to gain by forking the operating system? Nothing, absolutely nothing.
Look at the PC market. For years, Windows has dominated, Mac OS X has had a significant single-digit stake, and Linux hangs on at about 1 percent of the marketplace. There are a lot of reasons that it's worked out this way, but Windows "fragmentation" was never a problem.
For both hardware OEMs and software programmers, the minor nuisance of supporting multiple versions of Windows was never a real issue. Supporting multiple, incompatible operating systems, however, is a problem. Which is why Mac OS X and Linux have remained niche desktop operating systems and why I suspect Windows RT, which is incompatible with other Windows versions, will never be successful.
So, with all that, do you really think Android hardware and software companies will break compatibility when there are many solid business reasons to keep using Android as their base? The Windows ecosystem companies weren't that foolish, and I don't think the Android ecosystem businesses are any dumber than they are.
Related stories
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
not to mention
Exactly
Juvenile as usual
Whilst I'm not a fan of the 'troll' terminology
I didn't get the last bit... Amazon are most likely to fork android? No they aren't; as listed they achieved their goal; why do extra work maintaining their own store??
I think everyone know Samsung are most likely to fork or replace android. The have the biggest incentive. I Assume they have accountants? Well one of them is bound to ask why, if 90% of android sales are for them they need someone else's store? Is there motive? You bet... In several incarnations you could fork it to the point where the play store will not work. Then all that app money and ad revenue is yours, all yours.
I'm not saying I think they'd do it. I don't really see it happening just yet, but they definitely have the most to gain.
*edit
Master Joe says...apple
I realize taht, with Moore's Law coming to an end, this may change, as phones won't become so rapidly more powerful as they have over the past couple of years. But, if you're running ICS, and your phone isn't getting Jelly Bean, you are left where you are, while the rest of the smartphone world moves ahead of you, with the wonderful and shiny new features of each new release.
Yes, Windows si fragmented. However, major releases are much more few and far between, and the only limitation on your PC upgrading is whether or not you have the hardware to support it, whi9ch hasn't changed much since Vista came out. That said, the choice is also yours. With android, you don't always have a choice as to whether or nto you get a new version of the OS. HTC or Samsung might decide taht for you. With Windows, you can upgrade when you want, again, as long as you have at least the minimum hardware specs to support it. A PC might last you three to five years, at least (with some going upwards of seven to ten). A new smartphone, on the other hand, might only be good for a year or two, before people are getting antsy for an upgrade. When they can't get one, they get upset because they see the people around them getting their hands on the wonderful new toys that come bundled with each iteration, and that is part of why custom Android ROMs have appeared on places like XDA-Developers.
One mroe thought on the matter is that Google tends to do this with all their products. Look at Chrome. It has been out for a short time, and hwo many versions has it gone through? Firefox did the same thing for a short time, and people got frustrated. Microsoft is moving to a more rapid release cycle, and it will likely be a difficult transition to make. But, there is a fine line between rapid release and just upping the version for no reason. If Google really put enough new features into each iteration of Chrome to justify it being a whole new major version upgrade, it didn't do much testing, to say the elast. Again, Microsoft stuck with IE 6 for how many years? The company has to become more agile, but there isn't a major tech player out there that has it down yet. I'd suggest that maybe apple is the closest to having a model taht works perfectly, but ti is also, by far, the msot restrictive. Comparing Android to Apple's iOS is a somewhat skewed apples to apples (no pun intended), as android runs on hundreds of handsets, while iOS runs on one. Windows Phone 8 has the same advantage of running on different handsets, which means taht HTC, Samsung, Nokia, etc. can "make it their own." If you want iOS, you MUST buy an iPhone. If you want OS X, you MUST buy a Mac, unless you are lucky enough to get your hands on one of the clones, before Apple sues the small company making it into oblivion.
--Master Joe
Have to object to this statement
Lots of people like their Android 2.1 - 2.4 phones after a couple years. A new version does not make your old version stop working, and there are still many thousands of apps available. In fact, I doubt that many people are even aware that their phone has been "at the end of its life" for a couple years now.
Interesting
RE:
1. Use a spell checker. They are usually included in word processors.
2. When you use parenthesis, do not write a paragraph between the beginning and closing parenthesis.
3. There is no need to write a text wall for something which could have easily been done in less than 1/4 of the space.
htat's where proofreading comes in.
I have a phone with 2.1, but the biggest problem is that for the local weather applications, I need 2.2 or above. I upgraded it to 2.1, but don't know if it can go higher w/o performance issues, or even if it is possible.
My home PC is running XP and is at least 6 years old, and was doing just what I needed until a Java update boke my Windows Media Center, I have not tried to go back to an earlier date yet, I did try changing the Java version to no avail. That is one reason I have considered moving on up to W7. I see no need for W8, what little I have seen of it doesn't look like anything I want to mess with.
I haven't used a UNIX base OS since I left AT&T over 20 years ago. A lot of things have changed since then.
proofreading
It should have read 'proofread' instead of proofreda.
If Windows is fragmented, then so is OS X :-|
Very nice article
Yes there are fragmentation issues about android but they are not as important as many want to make them.
Part of the stuff that as made android huge, is what also fragments - diverse hardware, fast development, multiple hardware makers, resolutions going from 320x200 to full HD, ...
This bloated blogger can't write w/o bringing MSFT into it.
What a dolt.
He's been doing this for his entire career (COUGH) and continues to use a very, very, very old picture of himself that is far from flattering.
Why not show what you look like now there SJVN? Speaking of fragmentation....i believe your brain cells started the process a long, long, long time ago.
How many actual IT professionals actually read this clown's ramblings? Does less than 3% sound about right?
You trolls can't tell when someone is being sarcastic?
Sarcasm
Re: Well, when there's no indication of sarcasm...
So you admit not reading the entire article?
"In case you haven't figured it out by now, I'm not being serious."
Spelt out in black and white, and you *still* didn't get it?
@ xuniL_z then why are you reading it?
DOH
lol...
None so blind as those who will not see