> You know how all Android developers complain about fragmentation? Yeah, this is what fragmentation looks like.
This is some of the most insulting garbage out there. I'm an Android developer. I don't complain about fragmentation. Ever. Don't you dare lump me into a group of people you hear complaining loudly. I'm not one of them!
I know it can be hard to get apps to work across all phones. The variety of available hardware is part of what makes the ecosystem so amazing. Of course there will be difficulties that arise from the range of devices (dynamically positioning text to align with a set image background across every screen size and resolution can be difficult, I'll admit) but those problems are not something to complain about, and frankly, they're not any kind of showstopper.
The variety in devices allows me to build apps like pressureNET, which uses barometers built in to some phones. I could never be building a groundbreaking, innovative weather network without different ideas and different manufacturers trying things out. As a developer, I love the variety available in Android devices. It's what makes the ecosystem thrive and it's what makes me thrive as a developer.
I hate this "all Android developers complain about X" bullshit. It's wrong, insulting, and counter-productive to everyone who's trying to build the next great app. Stop it.
Even the Animoca CEO who is cited in the article exclaims in the end that he is a fan of diversity and doesn't believe in an one size fits all approach[1].
In fact, nowhere do we find Mr. Slu complaining about the ecosystem. The only person putting forth the we are in a horrid state of affairs line is the author of the article.
I suspect that the picture from Animoca was taken as a statement of the company's quality, asserting that "Our company takes the time to QA on all these devices. You the consumer can be assured that our apps will work on your phone, no matter what you use." The picture, to me, is a statement of pride, rather than a display of frustration.
So it looks more like the author had an agenda, and tried to put a square piece into a round hole.
[1] “We like fragmentation as users prefer choice. We are not big believers that one size fits all.”
I completely agree. I was on a project to develop an extremely complex Android app and we survived just fine by testing on one tablet and one phone per developer (roughly 6 or 7 different devices total).
The developer tools do an excellent job helping test for and deal with errors on the different in the Android ecosystem.
Hey, I'm the author of the article and I don't really have an agenda in the Android/iOS platform debate. Both are necessary platforms to build on at this point.
Yat also wasn't really complaining about the state of affairs on Android at all. He's happy to QA test with 400 devices and he thinks it's why his company performs well relative to other game developers who don't do as comprehensive a job.
I just thought it was a hilarious photo about the lengths that one Android developer will go to make their apps work. :)
When they say "all Android developers" you can be pretty sure they mean "most Android developers".
Working on several high profile apps here in Denmark I have felt the pain of not having enough real devices to test on.
A bank just wont accept that you don't support one of the most common phone on the market because it has some problems with the camera.
Another project ran into the BigInteger.modPow is not thread safe issue way too late in the development process because we didn't test intensively on pre 2.3 devices.
After facing all these issues, my current project run automated test on 20 physical devices daily. It also helps us keep the UI looking sharp on all devices.
> but those problems are not something to complain about, and frankly, they're not any kind of showstopper.
Only if you want to try to make great apps instead of just good apps. As someone who has made both (i.e. really polish vs. just get it out there), if you want to make something really good it needs to be pixel perfect. Unfortunately that is something that is infinitely harder to do on Android than iOS. It is also why in general iOS apps look better than their Android counterparts.
Same with me. I'm working with cross platform technologies for 15 years now. Python,Java,Ruby,HTML and now Android.
I don't complain that I have to target different systems. I use this stuff because I want to target many different systems.
Take a closer look at all these devices in the article, and imagine for a moment that every single one of these would be as incompatible to one another as iOS is to Windows Phone.
That is: Imagine you had to write a complete new App for every single one of these devices. Android is a defragmentation tool.
Yes, indeed. All android developers have 400 phones (neatly and photogenically arranged on a conference room table, no less).
Look, fragmentation has costs. Outside the core APIs (and especially with hardware-facing interfaces) you need to expect to do some testing. Screens have different resolutions. PVR and Mali have different rendering bugs. Different cameras have different quirks. But to baldly pretend that this requires exhaustive testing on hundreds of devices is just sensationalist nonsense.
I agree. Hundreds of devices is ridiculous. But if you are trying to build an app that must work on as many possible you are still look at 10-20 tablets+phones. It's still very expensive.
Windows does a good job of abstracting the hardware away and preventing the OEMs from tweaking the APIs so this isn't an issue in most cases. The major exception is for the large game developers who have to buy tons of various configurations of GPUs and motherboards in order to test various configurations. Basic hardware accelerated graphics works well across platforms but AAA games use complex shaders and heavy optimizations which are based on the incomplete and broken implementations of GPU vendors.
I'm not an android developer, but I am curious. Why is it that testing on dozens/hundreds of platforms is considered essential for cell phones, but not for PCs? Is android just that much worse at abstracting hardware than traditional OS'es?
Because it is early days for Android still (don't forget Android is less than 5 years old), and manufactures are still doing wacky things, and people are still uncovering bugs and edge cases.
In the early days of MS-DOS compatibility was a big problem too. Magazines used to use MS Flight Simultor to test how compatible PCs were - plenty failed that.
Since when do developers for PC applications reach 100% compatibility with any hardware/OS combination out there without testing on dozens of platforms? (The guy in the article with the 400 devices is trying to achieve 100% compatibility)
We use about 6-7 different devices in our Android team and cover 95% of our target audience with that. (its a VoIP/messaging app with millions of customers)
For graphics-heavy apps, a common problem is that the OpenGL hardware and drivers on many Android devices are crappy, so some graphics problems or crashes might only happen on a specific combination of device and OS version.
I think that one reason is that the handset manufacturer thinker more with Android than they do with a traditional OS. One example is the vendor specific themes.
Another reason for the higher focus on QA is "user ratings". Before companies didn't have to worry much about not supporting all users. With mobile a small percentage of users can give you a bad rating.
The bosses are terrified about bad public ratings! :)
I'm not sure either, but I think screen size/resolution/aspect ratio and different hardware "tools" (ie cameras with different resolutions, does it have one led or 2 for flash, etc) have potential to be problems.
As an Android developer I have about 5 phones and an extended group of friends with another dozen or so. Along with the emulator it's more than enough. This article is ridiculous flamebait.
And (per the article) this is what using android looks like: “Unlike iOS users who throw up their hands in frustration, write bad reviews and just leave, Android users tend to be delighted when they find apps that work even if they have a glitch or two.”
I'm going on my 12th device this week and expect at least two more next month. My partner has 6 devices at his place.
Part of the problem is Google is releasing OSes faster than devices can keep up, and in a few cases I'm buying simply because the prior's OS is stuck yet I have to satisfy new devices users too. For example, I have Galaxy Tab from IO which is stuck on 3.1, but all new tablets use 4.0 and there's unexpected differences between them.
The killer reason for us is the dreaded 1-star review because we missed a particular combo (screen/OS). We have > 1M users between 2 apps w/ 4.2+ ratings each as a result.
Once you're making some good $$, you really can't afford not to have a device library.
Why a web-based emulator? Just use the one that's included with the Android SDK. You can simulate any combination of memory, screen size, screen resolution, and various hardware characteristics. Sure it can be slow, but it's getting better and is actually emulating the system you're developing for.
Some of the comments here have gotten me thinking about access to test devices. I've never worked on android, so I don't know if installation of lots of unfinished software would be logistically sane, but what about meetup groups where local devs could test out each other's beta apps on their phones and tablets?
If I develop software for a PC I don't have 1000+ PCs with every conceivable combination of CPU, graphics card, monitor, sound card, and Windows version. That would be absurd and unworkable. And yet that's what this article would have us believe you should do when developing for Android.
So this is just the precursor to all app developing cycling back to the web right? I suppose it will take time for browser tech to catch up to what PCs have on offer and hardware apis but this is obviously what HTML exists for.
Why are you supposed to test on all device types? Couldn't be possible to find the one or few devices that combined have all the properties that all other devices has and test on them only.
[+] [-] cryptoz|14 years ago|reply
This is some of the most insulting garbage out there. I'm an Android developer. I don't complain about fragmentation. Ever. Don't you dare lump me into a group of people you hear complaining loudly. I'm not one of them!
I know it can be hard to get apps to work across all phones. The variety of available hardware is part of what makes the ecosystem so amazing. Of course there will be difficulties that arise from the range of devices (dynamically positioning text to align with a set image background across every screen size and resolution can be difficult, I'll admit) but those problems are not something to complain about, and frankly, they're not any kind of showstopper.
The variety in devices allows me to build apps like pressureNET, which uses barometers built in to some phones. I could never be building a groundbreaking, innovative weather network without different ideas and different manufacturers trying things out. As a developer, I love the variety available in Android devices. It's what makes the ecosystem thrive and it's what makes me thrive as a developer.
I hate this "all Android developers complain about X" bullshit. It's wrong, insulting, and counter-productive to everyone who's trying to build the next great app. Stop it.
[+] [-] hkmurakami|14 years ago|reply
In fact, nowhere do we find Mr. Slu complaining about the ecosystem. The only person putting forth the we are in a horrid state of affairs line is the author of the article.
I suspect that the picture from Animoca was taken as a statement of the company's quality, asserting that "Our company takes the time to QA on all these devices. You the consumer can be assured that our apps will work on your phone, no matter what you use." The picture, to me, is a statement of pride, rather than a display of frustration.
So it looks more like the author had an agenda, and tried to put a square piece into a round hole.
[1] “We like fragmentation as users prefer choice. We are not big believers that one size fits all.”
[+] [-] yellowbkpk|14 years ago|reply
The developer tools do an excellent job helping test for and deal with errors on the different in the Android ecosystem.
[+] [-] ktothemc|14 years ago|reply
Yat also wasn't really complaining about the state of affairs on Android at all. He's happy to QA test with 400 devices and he thinks it's why his company performs well relative to other game developers who don't do as comprehensive a job.
I just thought it was a hilarious photo about the lengths that one Android developer will go to make their apps work. :)
[+] [-] jonasmaturana|14 years ago|reply
Working on several high profile apps here in Denmark I have felt the pain of not having enough real devices to test on. A bank just wont accept that you don't support one of the most common phone on the market because it has some problems with the camera.
Another project ran into the BigInteger.modPow is not thread safe issue way too late in the development process because we didn't test intensively on pre 2.3 devices.
After facing all these issues, my current project run automated test on 20 physical devices daily. It also helps us keep the UI looking sharp on all devices.
[+] [-] clarky07|14 years ago|reply
Only if you want to try to make great apps instead of just good apps. As someone who has made both (i.e. really polish vs. just get it out there), if you want to make something really good it needs to be pixel perfect. Unfortunately that is something that is infinitely harder to do on Android than iOS. It is also why in general iOS apps look better than their Android counterparts.
[+] [-] robocat|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bookwormAT|14 years ago|reply
I don't complain that I have to target different systems. I use this stuff because I want to target many different systems.
Take a closer look at all these devices in the article, and imagine for a moment that every single one of these would be as incompatible to one another as iOS is to Windows Phone.
That is: Imagine you had to write a complete new App for every single one of these devices. Android is a defragmentation tool.
[+] [-] cncool|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] taligent|14 years ago|reply
Most want their apps to work on ALL phones.
[+] [-] pierreten|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ajross|14 years ago|reply
Look, fragmentation has costs. Outside the core APIs (and especially with hardware-facing interfaces) you need to expect to do some testing. Screens have different resolutions. PVR and Mali have different rendering bugs. Different cameras have different quirks. But to baldly pretend that this requires exhaustive testing on hundreds of devices is just sensationalist nonsense.
[+] [-] taligent|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greggman|14 years ago|reply
"This is what developing for Windows looks like".
I'm sure it would be an order of magnitude bigger, maybe 2 or 3 depending on how far back you decide to go.
Or even add up all the mac models from the last 5 years. Heck, I have friends still using power PC macs.
[+] [-] sigmaxipi|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gregable|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nl|14 years ago|reply
In the early days of MS-DOS compatibility was a big problem too. Magazines used to use MS Flight Simultor to test how compatible PCs were - plenty failed that.
[+] [-] notJim|14 years ago|reply
I'm pretty sure it's not. Do you really think everyone who's written a successful Android app has a full stable of hundreds of phones?
[+] [-] DominikR|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cullenking|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cpeterso|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jonasmaturana|14 years ago|reply
Another reason for the higher focus on QA is "user ratings". Before companies didn't have to worry much about not supporting all users. With mobile a small percentage of users can give you a bad rating. The bosses are terrified about bad public ratings! :)
[+] [-] radley|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ImprovedSilence|14 years ago|reply
I'd like to hear more on this issue though.
[+] [-] salem|14 years ago|reply
This sounds about right from my experience: http://techblog.netflix.com/2012/03/testing-netflix-on-andro...
[+] [-] zmmmmm|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Macha|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alanh|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] radley|14 years ago|reply
Part of the problem is Google is releasing OSes faster than devices can keep up, and in a few cases I'm buying simply because the prior's OS is stuck yet I have to satisfy new devices users too. For example, I have Galaxy Tab from IO which is stuck on 3.1, but all new tablets use 4.0 and there's unexpected differences between them.
The killer reason for us is the dreaded 1-star review because we missed a particular combo (screen/OS). We have > 1M users between 2 apps w/ 4.2+ ratings each as a result.
Once you're making some good $$, you really can't afford not to have a device library.
[+] [-] robocat|14 years ago|reply
This is very obvious when looking at app ratings - users seem to blame model even if problem is entirely unrelated.
Hell, the Play Store ratings shows the user's model/device name under each user's review... that leads users to quickly blame their model type.
[+] [-] rokhayakebe|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wtracy|14 years ago|reply
http://www.perfectomobile.com/portal/cms/android.html http://testdroid.com/product/testdroid-cloud
The solutions are already out there! Quit whining and get back to developing cool apps. :-)
[+] [-] yellowbkpk|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tszming|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sparknlaunch12|14 years ago|reply
Why not test on the must common devices or top device in each main category?
Is fragmentation a real issue? First time I have heard about it. Is this like browser compatibility for web developers?
[+] [-] cageface|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eta_carinae|14 years ago|reply
Yes, fragmentations make it a bit harder on developers, but that's why we get paid the big bucks.
Choice is good for users, you won't hear a lot of Android users complain about fragmentation.
[+] [-] pavedwalden|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mavrik|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gazrogers|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dools|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] majmun|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] user23409|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bane|14 years ago|reply