It can't help that Google hasn't released a phone comparable in spirit to the Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4 and Nexus 5 phones.
We're talking about phones that have a practical size, reasonably good specs, and a $300-$400 price tag.
The Nexus 6 and 6P were impractically sized for many users. Even the 5X was too large.
The Pixel's sizing is perhaps more tolerable, but the price tag is much too high.
People hanging on to a Nexus 5 are out of luck, since it isn't getting Android 7 and beyond. Those with a Nexus 4 are even worse off.
While I'd like to use a newer version of Android, I've yet to find a suitable device on the market. Google filled this niche a few years ago, but their recent offerings are no longer suitable.
The OnePlus 3 is a worthy successor to the Nexus line in terms of quality and price (at $399), though I still wish it were a little smaller at times (like the Nexus 5 I used before it).
I live in Japan. There is still no news about whether the Pixel is coming to Japan. How can I take the ecosystem seriously when Google is telling me "we don't care about your market"?
I liked my 5X until it died from the bootloop issue 1mo out of warranty. Happened to at least two other co-workers and burned me enough to swear off Google phones. I'm not going to drop $700 on something that might last less than a year.
May be worth checking to see if you can get an out of warranty replacement. I bought the phone through my carrier (Google Fi) and they replaced it for free with a refurbished 5X. 6 months out of warranty.
A colleague of mine also got his 5X replaced out of warranty. It did take a couple of months before he got a replacement 5X, but he did get one. Might be worth a try.
And although they said all along they'd do it, Google dropped new development for the Nexus 6. Which is too bad for those of us who want a phablet and would benefit from all the battery improvements.
Hopefully if Google releases another like-sized device it's better than the N6 which becomes unusable as soon as CPU throttling starts. As soon as battery gets below 70% it literally takes seconds for mundane tasks like opening a new browser or keyboard.
I don't expect Google to fix it on the N6 but I really hope they don't recreate that experience on their next offering because it's beyond frustrating.
Also the Pixel updates are still held back by phone companies. If they cared about updates or security they would update their phones directly like Apple.
Updates are all pushed at the same time when Verizon okays it. They don't want to be on the hook for any regulatory issues like E-911 problems so they test it. They also don't test security updates, only major updates.
I've not seen any updates held back by my carrier (unless, I guess, they don't send them out to anyone until all of the phone companies agree on them). As far as I've seen, I get my ~monthly security patches over the air from Google when the rolling updates hit my phone or I get impatient for an important one and just download it from Google myself.
I don't know if they have the direct leverage they need. They'd have to force the manufacturers to fight for it if/when their contract negotiations with carriers occur again.
I look at these previews as an example of things to come 3 years from now.
I keep hoping that Google will figure out a solution to that (restrict access to Play Services, say). Until then, I guess I'll continue targeting API 16.
Until then, I guess I'll continue targeting API 16.
I started targeting API 19 (4.4, KitKat) over a year ago and have never looked back. That encompasses the vast bulk of Android users (>85%) and encompasses almost all of the significant developer improvements. Even using the absolute latest fun such as multiple windows is an absolute breeze from the development side, regardless of many users not supporting it yet.
As a side benefit, the devices that get excluded are often older, often abandoned devices. I previously tried desperately to support all of those older devices and the reward were a barrage of low ratings by people on poor performing old devices.
Android has a planned obsolescence thing. I've gotten use to it.
It's a virtuous circle for sure, however there are very decent sub-$200 devices now with Android 6.0+ (many set to receive 7 in the next couple of months). And on the contract side, many consumers are just accustomed to getting a new device every two years regardless, seeming "free", albeit baked into their service fee.
At some point the market will settle as the pad market did, however right now the lack of pressure on vendors to support upgrades is also a reflection of a user base that is accustomed to constantly upgrading (better cameras, processors, storage, etc).
That would just make them look for alternatives asap.
The basic problem is that updates are an expense once the SKU starts shipping, while spending the same money on a new SKU is an investment.
Apple get around this because they own the whole stack. Thus keeping a device going longer means more exposure to their stores.
Never mind that even though they release a new iOS in name, major new features are left out for the version pushed to the older devices.
Never mind that on Android APIs can be supplied by APKs, and thus we have Play Services.
Frankly the only thing Google can do is adopt something akin to what they have on ChromeOS.
Split the Android VM layer from the Linux layer, so that they can update the VM layer independently of the kernel and userland layer.
Another issue is unless you are looking at white box rebrands, each OEM tailor the Android UI/UX.
Unless Google makes it possible to isolate this tailoring from the core Android code, there will still be lag time between Google releasing a new version, and it hitting devices. And that is reliant on the tailored variant fits inside the storage space of the device.
> Never mind that even though they release a new iOS in name, major new features are left out for the version pushed to the older devices.
This is simplistic and largely wrong. Only when there is a lack of appropriate hardware e.g. noise cancellation in the A5 chip or inadequate RAM has Apple decided not to port to those older devices. It's not a deliberate policy especially since they have been selling older devices alongside the newer ones.
That said for developers it's been about 99% of features available on all devices.
Yes, Apple is much better about it; but there are instances where Apple has limited certain features to newer devices when there was no real reason for doing so. Most recently they blocked trivial features such as content blocking and Night Shift from 32 bit devices in their push for 64 bit adoption.
That is the solution, the contract for accessing Play Services already has quite a few clauses, requiring updates would just be yet another requirement for accessing Play Services.
If you are still targeting 16, you should make sure that you are handling a bunch of pretty serious security changes made between 17-21. There are a lot of ways you can shoot yourself in the foot when using the old APIs.
