Related
Hi XDA-Samsung Users,
I've been a member of XDA since Jan last year. I went from owning a Nexus One to a Samsung Galaxy S i9000. The reason for the change was for the better specs and superior hardware of the Samsung Galaxy.
The phone is an incredible piece of machinery, but is severely hampered by the modifications that Samsung makes to the Android OS. I admit that the codec support within TouchWiz is impressive, but too much of the core framework of the phone is inefficient and sluggish.
Even using the latest release of unofficial firmware Samsung, Android 2.2.1 (JPY), there is still the occasional hang and the missing RAM (which is there somewhere, but not for user applications).
Samsung is mostly to blame, but there is also a quality control element that Google should be responsible for.
I have prepared an open letter that I sent to Android via Google Press and then forwarded on to Samsung for their reference. This were all through publicly available channels so will have to filter through customer service centers and the like.
I'm not expecting much, Google appears to use Amazon's customer service approach, "No customer service is good customer service".
But would like to post it here to hopefully get it out into the wilderness.
I tweeted it here http://twitter.com/#!/ibproud/status/27528781828722688
and would appreciate if you agreed with the content to retweet it. Hopefully it should give it a bit more weight.
It would be interesting to get the communities feedback on how mature they believe Android is.
Do they need to keep trying to make everyone happy or can they start to use the weight of their OS to get manufacturers to align the user experience?
Dear Android Team,
I am writing this letter to air my frustrations and to hopefully get some peace of mind that your strategy for Android will resolve some of the main issues plaguing the platform.
I have now been with Android for over 12 months. I used to be an iPhone user, but couldn’t stand the walled garden that Apple put me in. I couldn’t download directly to the phone, replace the messaging app or sync wirelessly. I went to Android because I wanted the freedom to use my phone more as a desktop replacement than as a phone/mp3 player.
When I joined the Android family (January 2010), I started with the Google Nexus One. I was so keen to get into the Android community I didn’t even wait for it to be on sale in Australia to get it, thus I hit eBay and bought it outright.
I was very pleased with the platform but could still see a few rough edges around the Operating System. It had the usability I was looking for but was lacking the polish I had grown use to with Apple. There was good news on the horizon with an Éclair update that would give the already beautiful phone a nudge in the right direction. As I was in Australia and the phone wasn’t here yet, I had to push the update through myself, after seeing how easy this was and getting the feeling of being a little phone hacker, I was hooked, I started preaching Android to the masses. Australia is still building momentum for the platform and it’s taking some time. Most of the major carriers stock between 4-6 Android devices, most of which are low end or outdated in the overseas markets.
I follow all the key players in the industry through Twitter and have a majority of Google News trackers picking up articles with android related words. I have also now converted my Wife to Android (HTC Desire Z, also not available in Aus) and I picked up the Samsung Galaxy S and gave my sister the Nexus One. The problem I face now is that I’ve run out of money and can’t go out and buy a new Android phone just to be up to date with the latest Android OS (Gingerbread), this would also be the case for most consumers. The Nexus S is so similar to my current hardware that I must be able to leverage the extra performance from the update.
But alas, we reach the major problem with the platform. Fragmentation. I’m not referring to the Fragmentation of the various app stores and apps available based on different OS versions but more to the Fragmentation of the OS based on the custom skins and manufacturer update cycles. The open platform that is closed at 2 levels, Manufactures and Carriers. I will continue to buy my phones outright as it gives me the freedom and flexibility to upgrade my plans as better ones become available. This always guarantees that I’m free from the bloatware that is preloaded on most Carrier bought phones and free from 1 of the barriers to the true AOSP experience. The next barrier is one that is running rampant in the interwebs rumour mill at the moment and that’s manufacturer updates and in my case I refer to Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy S phones come loaded with Android 2.1, most of them internationally are running Android 2.2 and just recently as select group of the devices is getting Android 2.2.1. This is now a month after Android 2.3 was released. For Samsung I would consider this largely negligent, considering they had the opportunity to work with Google to build a Google Experience Phone (Nexus S). The specs of this phone are so similar to the Galaxy range that a port shouldn’t be too difficult. I understand that there are a lot of constraints and dependencies in the development cycle that could cause delays as well as manufacturers agendas (mostly in unit sales). It is great that Samsung have sold so many devices globally but at a cost of the user experience as well as potential damages to long term retention.
I understand the Open nature of Android and the push to encourage manufacturers to put there own spin on the platform, but Android is getting bigger and more mature, it doesn’t need to be High school girl bending to the whims and peer pressure from the carriers and manufacturers.
There are a team of Devs in Germany who are working to port CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread) to Galaxy S i9000, but these guys have now spent over four months just trying to get through Samsungs drivers. The team didn’t start just to customise the phone but to actually make the phone work properly, I of course refer to the RFS lag issue and Samsungs modification to the framework that slowed it down. The goal of the team is to maximise the potential of the hardware and operating system.
It would be great to see some muscle from Google thrown into the mix, there doesn’t need to be requirements dictated, but maybe ethics encouraged.
There seems to be a few options here:
- Encourage device manufacturers to share their drivers, if it is too sensitive to share at least work with the community to help them do it themselves.
- Start to break down the way the platform is customised so that way the manufactures (Samsung/HTC/Motorola) skin the platform can sit a layer above the core code, thus be a quick implementation/customisation to get their skins working.
- Get each manufacturer to offer the AOSP experience to advanced users. This can be done through an agreement between the user and manufacture that states this will void the warranty and have its own terms and conditions.
- This last one is a long stretch, but how about taking all the manufacturers drivers into a repository, the way Windows do updates. When a new Android version is developed the drivers can be updated or incorporated and be packaged out through the Android SDK.
I may be completely off the mark. I’m not a developer and couldn’t pretend to know what effort is involved at any stage of the process, from building Android to rolling it out into the latest and greatest phone. The one thing I am though is an End User, a person that wants my phone to do more, to get close to being a desktop replacement.
Maybe I’m also being a bit idealistic.
I hope the Android platform continues to flourish and for it to become the Windows of the mobile era.
Sincerely,
Irwin Proud
E: [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really an excellent summary. Consider there're even more black sheeps out there. For example Sony Ericcson which ones recently made a statement like Android is their favourite Smartphone OS and left Symbian in Nokias hands.
But we found also the good ones like HTC, which every Manufacturer should have HTC as its Paragon concerning Android Software Development.
Great write-up; I agree 100%
I agree with your post fully, and concur that the Windows Phone 7 model for OS updates is more efficient, and strikes a happy medium between iOS and Android's approach to upgrades. However it is also more restrictive in terms of handset hardware limitations
I suppose the idea is that customers should vote with their wallets and buy from companies with good software and firmware support. The problem with that is a majority of phone users (android or otherwise) are technically savvy enough to take such support into consideration when looking at the latest and greatest fancy phone in a store. We could all buy the Nexus One or Nexus S only, but this too is restrictive to the customer as other phones offer more/different features
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
What Google should do?
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please allow me to politely disagree. Google can do a lot about this and they have done this also. When I say they have done this - I am talking about not having Market application on Android OSes which come on non-phone hardware.
Google should put similar restrictions for loosley coupled skins, upgradable drivers. I had been giving this a lot of thought lately. I will sum up my thoughts with above letter as above:-
i) Device manufacturer skinning - Google should mandate that it should be just another APK within AOSP and users should be given a choice to turn it off.
ii) Device Drivers - Google should mandate there should be a better way of installing device drivers - similar to what we have in MS Windows (MS Windows is an excellent model of how hardware device should be handled - this lead to the exponential growth Windows is enjoying now).
iii) Android OS Update - If Google can achieve the above two, then the choice to upgrade the OS should be at user discretion. Of course, Google should mandate that there is OTA availble as an option. And obviously this OTA would be served by Google, not by device manufacturers. This would also free up time, effort and cash spent by device manufacturers in upgrading the OS.
So this is in the best of interest of everybody.
These restrictions if put in place, would free us all from this phenomena of running outdated OS.
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Thank you so far for the feedback.
poundesville said:
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember most members of XDA would be a cut above the average user. The reason this letter was written the way it was, was to demonstrate that I am a typical end user. Although I would consider myself leaning slightly to the more advanced side I wrote the letter based on a very general experience of the platform, an experience a lot of consumers would go through.
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What am I trying to achieve with this letter?
I really don’t know, but it helps to just get the thoughts out there.
With approximately 300,000 activations daily, I don’t think Android sees the true reflection of how their platform is received.
When the Galaxy range of phones was released in the US, they would have been seen as the closest thing to an iPhone that non-AT&T customers could get. So sales and activations shouldn’t be seen as the indicator of clever consumers or consumers wanting an open platform, but of consumers who wanted an iPhone but for the various reasons didn’t want to go with AT&T.
Remember: The international Samsung Galaxy is the only Android phone I know of that looks more like an iPhone than any other phone.
What I would really like to see is, that annually google will release a major version of Android. So V1, V2, V3, etc…. the mobile manufacturers commit to any minor or incremental updates per major version. So if Google says they are releasing Android 2.4 then they are saying to the manufacturer that this version will also work on any phone that currently supports v2.1 to v2.3.
As more and more people move to smartphones and tablets, more and more will we see hackers, spammers, botnets and so on attempt to access our devices. If we can’t have the latest updates that close any open holes then our phones become a huge liability.
Pierreken said:
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure if Samsung has failed as such, but have put too much focus on unit sales rather than quality control and great user experience. They started releasing different iterations and modifications to the same phone without considering that each minor tweak to the hardware would mean more resources to develop updates and maintain each device.
I also agree that without Samsung I would know very little about linux filesystems, kernel and custom roms, but shouldn't all of these be more to push the phone above it's limits and not to just get it working properly?
There's nothing wrong with knowing the advanced stuff, however it shouldn't be a necessity.
The problem ironically is that Android is open source. I agree wit the letter above, but I can;t see how you can stop manufacturers doing what they want.
Also the Drivers being proprietary isn't going to change and device manufacturers aren't going to suddenly start releasing their closed driver sources.
Agreed Google should stand up and restrict the Skins to a single APK that can be removed, this would stop all the associated problems with HTC and Samsung skinning too deep in to the OS that it becomes impossible to remove it. The problem with that is, then any manufacturers APK will be installable on any phone. Which is something we know they don't want.
We already know Androids biggest downfall and so does Google. Fragmentation.
I believe once Google has the strong position they want and users demand Android when they buy a new phone, they will start to put their foot down and try to enforce standardisation across Manufacturers, but until they get to what they feel is that point, we're stuck.
Anyway much luck with the letter, I hope someone who matters get's to see it.
Logicalstep
Does anyone knows netflex works on Android? Because I have found an netflex.apk but I didn't log in because I don't have an account yet. If you guys want to try it I post a link to download netflex.apk. later when I get.off work.
no it doesn't.
Unfortunately netflix doesn't work for android just yet, most of us have tried all the apks out there that were pulled
dirkyd3rk said:
Unfortunately netflix doesn't work for android just yet, most of us have tried all the apks out there that were pulled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I just wait until they official release netflex for.Android.
culua said:
Well I just wait until they official release netflex for.Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem is, Netflix will be limited to phones with specific DRM protection. Here's a statement on the Netflix site: (link too - http://blog.netflix.com/2010/11/netflix-on-android.html)
"We regard Android as an exciting technology that drives a range of great devices that our members could use to instantly watch TV shows and movies from Netflix. We are eager to launch on these devices and are disappointed that we haven’t been able to do so already. The hurdle has been the lack of a generic and complete platform security and content protection mechanism available for Android. The same security issues that have led to piracy concerns on the Android platform have made it difficult for us to secure a common Digital Rights Management (DRM) system on these devices. Setting aside the debate around the value of content protection and DRM, they are requirements we must fulfill in order to obtain content from major studios for our subscribers to enjoy. Although we don’t have a common platform security mechanism and DRM, we are able to work with individual handset manufacturers to add content protection to their devices. Unfortunately, this is a much slower approach and leads to a fragmented experience on Android, in which some handsets will have access to Netflix and others won’t. This clearly is not the preferred solution, and we regret the confusion it might create for consumers. However, we believe that providing the service for some Android device owners is better than denying it to everyone."
So... that's new devices, unfortunately the EVO isn't one of the devices (sad face ) but maybe with a little fairy dust, magic, and developer power... you never know
What is netflex?
When your internet does workouts?
mattykinsx said:
What is netflex?
When your internet does workouts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.........lol.
via EVO.
Recently, there’s been a lot of misinformation in the press about Android and Google’s role in supporting the ecosystem. I’m writing in the spirit of transparency and in an attempt to set the record straight. The Android community has grown tremendously since the launch of the first Android device in October 2008, but throughout we’ve remained committed to fostering the development of an open platform for the mobile industry and beyond.
We don’t believe in a “one size fits all” solution. The Android platform has already spurred the development of hundreds of different types of devices – many of which were not originally contemplated when the platform was first created. What amazes me is that the even though the quantity and breadth of Android products being built has grown tremendously, it’s clear that quality and consistency continue to be top priorities. Miraculously, we are seeing the platform take on new use cases, features and form factors as it’s being introduced in new categories and regions while still remaining consistent and compatible for third party applications.
As always, device makers are free to modify Android to customize any range of features for Android devices. This enables device makers to support the unique and differentiating functionality of their products. If someone wishes to market a device as Android-compatible or include Google applications on the device, we do require the device to conform with some basic compatibility requirements. (After all, it would not be realistic to expect Google applications – or any applications for that matter – to operate flawlessly across incompatible devices). Our “anti-fragmentation” program has been in place since Android 1.0 and remains a priority for us to provide a great user experience for consumers and a consistent platform for developers. In fact, all of the founding members of the Open Handset Alliance agreed not to fragment Android when we first announced it in 2007. Our approach remains unchanged: there are no lock-downs or restrictions against customizing UIs. There are not, and never have been, any efforts to standardize the platform on any single chipset architecture.
Finally, we continue to be an open source platform and will continue releasing source code when it is ready. As I write this the Android team is still hard at work to bring all the new Honeycomb features to phones. As soon as this work is completed, we’ll publish the code. This temporary delay does not represent a change in strategy. We remain firmly committed to providing Android as an open source platform across many device types.
The volume and variety of Android devices in the market continues to exceed even our most optimistic expectations. We will continue to work toward an open and healthy ecosystem because we truly believe this is best for the industry and best for consumers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source: http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2011/04/i-think-im-having-gene-amdahl-moment.html
I've been reading up lately and I had a question about the Iconia that I haven't been able to find an answer for. Does the Acer Iconia, or Tegra 250 chipset in general, have any kind of hardware DRM? I've been reading up on the upcoming netflix app and it seems like it will only run on android devices that have some type of Hardware DRM incorperated. Does the Iconia have any type of DRM hardware? If not, does that mean we won't ever be able to use the Netflix App when it is made available?
From what we've heard, Netflix will only be working with Intel chipsets at the moment.
When I first read about this news, I was pissed. I even tried to rally a few people to write and protest Netflix because of this. It's a delicate thing. I want to support Netflix because of the great price and the great service, but I don't want them telling me what device I can and cannot use their service on.
It's funny because the CEO was just talking about not being a cable company...yet here they are talking about limiting their exposure on devices.
I really wish we could get a petition going or have everybody with an Android device send them an e-mail telling them we don't want this type of precedent set and that we won't accept it. I could live without Netflix...I just don't want to.
Until we scream and shout for what we want, we'll have to settle using PlayOn to get our Netflix and Hulu fix on your non-Intel tablet.
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
beebop483 said:
I've been reading up lately and I had a question about the Iconia that I haven't been able to find an answer for. Does the Acer Iconia, or Tegra 250 chipset in general, have any kind of hardware DRM? I've been reading up on the upcoming netflix app and it seems like it will only run on android devices that have some type of Hardware DRM incorperated. Does the Iconia have any type of DRM hardware? If not, does that mean we won't ever be able to use the Netflix App when it is made available?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know Tegra 2 has no inherent DRM technologies, thus the Iconia A500 isn't blessed with any DRM hardware...HOWEVER, DRM can also be exclusively software based and I'm pretty sure Honeycomb has some keen DRM tech and will be getting updates with even more secure DRM. Of course, Netflix (or moreso, it's partners) may not settle for that so it's still up in the air.
At this point, and though I don't like being pessimistic about things - I'd advise against looking forward to an Official Netflix app on the Google Market (for now). If you want Netflix badly enough, I'd say wait for a tablet that is released with the app built in or wait until an App comes and see what the requirements are. The requirement will either be hardware, eg: requires snapdragon xxxx or Exynos based device or software, eg: requires Honeycomb 3.1.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my questions, I'm surprised people aren't making a bigger deal out of this. I like the idea of having a petition or email campaign to netflix, not to chastise or threaten them, but rather to express that as educated consumers we would like to know that our money is being spent wisely, and that products we buy today will not be outdated within weeks. I've taken the liberty of drafting a letter that can be sent to netflix. Feel free to copy the letter and send it, or post it somewhere on XDA so that we can try to collect signatures and support.
Dear Netflix,
First and foremost, we would like to take the time to express our gratitude towards your company, and the fantastic service that it provides. Even with the current state of the economy, most companies that provide media and entertainment to consumers charge outlandish fee's, provide poor support, and overall, do not seem concerned with offering customers a quality service at a reasonable price.
Netflix has been one of the very few exceptions to the status quo, and continues to offer great content at a great price, much to the dismay of large cable corporations, who seem content on increasing prices while not improving infrastructure, or providing more content to their customers. We also applaud your companies willingness to provide content on a large variety of devices. Netflix is one of the only companies that seems to actually want to provide an excellent affordable service that users can enjoy on their own terms, on whatever hardware they prefer.
It is because of this, that we would like to reach out to Netflix and open a dialogue concerning the future of the company, and it's plans for Android implementation.
A large concern among the public right now is whether or not Netflix plans to release its Android application in a state that will only allow it to run on devices that contain integrated hardware DRM. As you may already know, a large amount of tablet PC's are being released into the market right now, the majority of which are running on the Nvidia Tegra 250 chipset, which has no native hardware DRM. This puts consumers in a difficult position, on the one hand these devices are very powerful, and offer a good user experience for the price. On the other hand, consumers are unsure about the future of these devices. There have been rumors that new versions of the Honeycomb operating system will contain software DRM, but that still leaves consumers with a lingering question. Do we spend five hundred dollars on hardware that may not be compatible with Netflix, or do we wait indefinitely to see if the devices will be able to utilize Netflix services?
We realize that Netflix is involved in a very competitive business, and for obvious reasons, it is in the companies best interest to not explain it's entire game plan to the world. On the other hand, as consumers, we like to know that we are making wise purchases that will meet the expectations we have.
We are requesting that Netflix reveals more information about it's future plans for supporting the Android operating system. More specifically, we would like to know if the Netflix Android application will work on devices that only have hardware DRM, or if the company has any plans to support software DRM integrated into future releases of the Android operating system.
Any information you could provide on this subject would be of great help to the Android community, as well as consumers who value the service that Netflix provides. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this request, and we hope you will consider releasing information that will clarify the future DRM requirements for the Android Netflix Application.
Thank you.
Makes no difference unless Acer were to pay to have the A500 as a device to work on Netflix servers (assuming the chipset qualifies). LG Revolution is the only device so far.
I wonder if Google will spare a very small fraction of their billions to give blanket approval for Android devices that have the approved chipsets? Nah.
I'm pretty sure the tab's HDMI supports HDCP. For what that is worth.
Having Trouble with USB ports and speakers
Hi, y'all,
I have been around computers software and hardware wise for years. I am new to the Acer a500 Iconia Tab world. But I can not get my acer to acknowledge my computer to root or to upload and now my speakers are gone. Is there someone who can help me on these issues? I think the problems are hardware related. I tried searching the internet but no luck. I hope y'all have a good one.
I have the 2012 Note 10.1 for personal use and have come to the unfortunate resolution that Android just isn't going to cut it from a business perspective. I am not putting the full blame on either the manufacturers or Android itself but without timely updates to a specific platform, I can not justify the use of these in a production environment. There is no way company can justify replacing their hardware yearly, or regularly, in order to get the latest features and security fixes that are provided in updates. Ignoring the additional features for the time being, from a security stand point there has to be a way to patch the devices in a timely manner. The additional features being provided drives the developers to migrate to the newer operating systems and leaving the old systems behind. A lot of times this creates a huge disadvantage in the fact you can run a particular application on one Android device but is unsupported on another.
Now to be fair. I am focusing on Android in this post but have tested Microsoft and iPad devices as well. All have certain advantages and disadvantages but the clear loser so far has been Android. If Android is going to survive in the business world, the manufacturers are going to have to step up and maintain their products actively for at least the full two years of their life expectancy.Android itself will have to hold the manufacturers accountable for keeping their devices maintained. From a personal use perspective, I think it is a great platform and love my Note 10.1. Would I like to see it get updated, I would love to see 4.4.2 on the device to allow me to run application I need that are no longer compatible with 4.1.2. However, I require vulnerability patches in a timely manner and that just isn't happening.
My last job had hired a full time developer to build a custom ROM and patch or update when needed for all the tablets being used on the floor. This approach worked for them because there was only one model in use across all departments.
You should blame Samsung for the late major update for GT-N80XX.
Android actively pushing regular update (minor & major).
Actually Samsung also pushing regular update, but it's only 1 major update (ICS to JB) & some minor/security updates.
If a business used the nexus tablets, they wouldn't have this problem.
theatomizer90 said:
If a business used the nexus tablets, they wouldn't have this problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not necessarily true. Most current android version is 4.4.4 while my N7 LTE still sits at 4.4.3 with no update even spoken of. So if a business has data enabled tablets, they're still behind current version.
What OP posted doesn't really apply to large businesses. Between KNOX and other third party equivalents sensitive data is sandboxed and doesn't rely on the core B2C version of the OS to protect it. As much as Google may see Android's potential in the business environment no one I know in IT at a bunch of Fortune 1K companies is looking at mobile OS's (either Android or iOS) to replace desktop/laptops as "standard" issue. Tablet and smartphone apps have niche opportunities (commercial pilot manuals and logs, flight attendant passenger service tools, gate agent/hotel staff roaming terminals, sales people inventory access, remote staff automated forms, etc.) but migrating the entire enterprise to mobile architecture just doesn't make sense. So Android can't lose anything it never had and, outside Google's wishes, isn't seriously considered for. The lack of Chromebook adoption by the enterprise demonstrates their disinterest.
BarryH_GEG said:
What OP posted doesn't really apply to large businesses. Between KNOX and other third party equivalents sensitive data is sandboxed and doesn't rely on the core B2C version of the OS to protect it. As much as Google may see Android's potential in the business environment no one I know in IT at a bunch of Fortune 1K companies is looking at mobile OS's (either Android or iOS) to replace desktop/laptops as "standard" issue. Tablet and smartphone apps have niche opportunities (commercial pilot manuals and logs, flight attendant passenger service tools, gate agent/hotel staff roaming terminals, sales people inventory access, remote staff automated forms, etc.) but migrating the entire enterprise to mobile architecture just doesn't make sense. So Android can't lose anything it never had and, outside Google's wishes, isn't seriously considered for. The lack of Chromebook adoption by the enterprise demonstrates their disinterest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure if I totally agree with the application only being a niche market. I work for a call center and find that the tablets are becoming an indispensable tool. We have people walking the floor with these devices and using them to keep track of various statistics as well as using them to report potential issues. The ability to pull up data about current client information to respond in an almost instant manner has shaped things drastically. Having a sandbox is really great for protecting certain information, such as email, etc.. but can not protect the device data in flux, such as web browser content. If the system is compromised and access to the file system is obtained then all the data previously obtained becomes available to the attacker. Some measure can be made such as requiring Citrix as your primary form of connectivity but you are only pushing the security back to another device. The focus of this article was to point out the shortcomings of the this tablet as it pertains to the lack of updates.
Don't get me wrong, I truly love Android and will continue to use it as a personal device. However, there is no way I can risk releasing these devices into a production environment without the proper support. And yes, I blame the manufacturer for release and forget, and I blame Android for not enforcing the manufactures to keep these update. It is crucial to both parties to work together and produce something that is not just desirable but maintained for a reasonable amount of time. If Android could come up with a way to provide updates to devices directly and bypass the manufacturer they would have an unbeatable platform.
Zeab said:
Not sure if I totally agree with the application only being a niche market. I work for a call center and find that the tablets are becoming an indispensable tool. We have people walking the floor with these devices and using them to keep track of various statistics as well as using them to report potential issues. The ability to pull up data about current client information to respond in an almost instant manner has shaped things drastically. Having a sandbox is really great for protecting certain information, such as email, etc.. but can not protect the device data in flux, such as web browser content. If the system is compromised and access to the file system is obtained then all the data previously obtained becomes available to the attacker. Some measure can be made such as requiring Citrix as your primary form of connectivity but you are only pushing the security back to another device. The focus of this article was to point out the shortcomings of the this tablet as it pertains to the lack of updates.
Don't get me wrong, I truly love Android and will continue to use it as a personal device. However, there is no way I can risk releasing these devices into a production environment without the proper support. And yes, I blame the manufacturer for release and forget, and I blame Android for not enforcing the manufactures to keep these update. It is crucial to both parties to work together and produce something that is not just desirable but maintained for a reasonable amount of time. If Android could come up with a way to provide updates to devices directly and bypass the manufacturer they would have an unbeatable platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anytime a serious security breach that can be used from without to effect changes on a device have come to light I have seen updates come out on all my tablets and phones, which is blessedly rare. Android does not operate in the way you are thinking. There is no need to constantly shove out security updates like windows. The system is pretty well secure unless you unsecure it yourself, new versions of the OS usually just add functions, however there is a current (when is there not?) RUMOR of a adobe bug on all versions of android lower than 4.0. Personally I still prefere windows for business simply because of ease of function and with baytrail cpu's and even more promising hardware coming this year I find no reason not to use windows for hard business needs if your business can benefit from tablet use. There are a plethora of cheap windows tablets coming and the current hp omni 10 is powerful enough to suit any light tablet buisness needs for just 299.00 if your business needs more power pay the premium for a surface pro with a full on i3,5,7 cpu fully capable of doing the work of a high end laptop. All that said, I feel Android is if anything more secure than a windows machine. Nothing comes in unless you invite it. Updates not needed until such time as Android can add base functionality in the realm of windows 7, and it is close imho.
Check the trends
Have to agree with Zeab. The university I work for is now supporting apple mobile devices but not android. And despite my having pressured for some support, what support is was for android devices is disappearing. Why ?
Android from one device to the next is different enough to make support difficult if not impossible. Providing advice on connections to secure servers and use of common software falls foul of the same issue.
Android device manufacturers have attempted to sequester their market by creating difference, but all they'll achieve is failure. Add to that the early obsolescence they have engineered and android is dying, even as its market share grows!
We now as a family have windows, apple and android devices. If I include TVs and media devices the list lengthens. The only option that provides continuity of operating system and software, and longer term support with updates is Apple. Given the way Microsoft has gone off the rails with windows 8.1 (I really do believe that OSs should make my computing experience easier, not harder), I think we will be going Apple in the future.