Can you imagine the huge stinking mess that ADC2 is going to be if G does ANOTHER o/s upgrade in the middle of the contest? Perhaps that's the holdup -- letting the round-two contestants upgrade to Eclair before the next round of judging begins. If that's the case, round two wouldn't begin until Android 2.0 was deployed.
If developer frustration and alienation is a measure of platform maturity, Android is quickly growing up! :) Disconnect wrote: > ..or they could go the other way and saddle you with 2.0 (on cdma no > less) before even OHA members get access to it. (At this point, > reliable rumours have the release about 2 weeks out. Actual ads have > it NLT end of November, probably much sooner - if you say "Coming in > November" you don't make friends by waiting until the 30th.) > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Peter Jeffe <pje...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The recent experience with the 1.6 release underscores the need for > > Google to take a different approach to future releases. No matter how > > hard you try to make an OS backward-compatible, or an application > > forward-compatible, there will always be breaking changes in an OS > > release. That is why OS vendors typically give developers a good > > amount of time to test on upcoming releases before they're made > > generally available. > > > > It's pretty clear that Android has reached the stage of maturity where > > Google needs to treat it more like Sun, IBM, Microsoft et al treat > > their OSes and less like a freewheeling community development effort. > > Allowing developers two weeks to test on a release candidate before it > > goes GA is, to say the least, inadequate. Google should establish an > > orderly release process, drawing on the decades of experience of other > > OS vendors, that provides developers with the necessary time to ensure > > that their applications work on the new OS level the first day that > > it's released. > > > > In addition, there needs to be a way for developers to have different > > versions of an application available in the Market for different > > versions of the OS. The good news is that we're seeing a marked > > increase in the use of Android on various devices by numerous > > vendors. The bad news is that this ensures that there will be an > > increasing diversity of OS versions being used at any given time. > > Developers need to be able to take advantage of features in newer OS > > levels without shutting out all the users who are not yet on those > > levels (and may never be). This shouldn't be a big change to the > > Market, but it's an absolutely necessary one. > > > > It's crystal-clear to me that the Android release process needs to > > change. I know that a fast-moving mobile OS is different from a > > workstation or desktop OS, but there are many ways in which they are > > the same, and the need to support developers in these two areas is one > > of them. > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
