Android Orphans: a Sad History of Platform Abandonment

MBCook writes "After seeing the announcement that Nexus One users won't get ICS, Michael Degusta made a chart to show how current the OS version on Android phones was over time... and the results are not encouraging."

This ignores hobbiest support

[mknewman]

There are tons of good builds out there for almost every platform. http://www.xda-developers.com/ [xda-developers.com] is a prime spot to start looking. Heck, my phone started as a Windows Mobile 6.5 and I'm running Android on it. http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ [cyanogenmod.com] runs on a large number of platforms also. Who cares if the vendor continues to support it, most people wipe the stock image as soon as they get it home and put a better build on it. Nothing better than free support.

Re:Like PC's

[BasilBrush]

Because the PC was designed in the early days of micro-computers and IBM made a couple of mistakes.

Re:What?

[benjymous]

I think it should read "highest available version at that time" rather than "current major version" - i.e. for the first three years of the original iPhone's life, it was possible to run what was, at the time, the highest available version of iOS on it.

If by most people you mean 1%

[Brannon]

But that would be a non-traditional usage of the word "most".

Re:What?

[GauteL]

"Second of all, the original iPhone 2G, which I have, is definitely not supported by iOS5, or even iOS4 for that matter. What are they smoking?"

They are simply stating that the iPhone 2G was supported and up to date for the first three years of its life. This is true. Support was dropped with iOS 4.0 which came out nearly exactly three years after the original iPhone.

The same goes for the iPhone 3G. Support and updates was dropped three years after it came out.

Re:iOS5 won't run on iPhone 1st gen or 3G

[Sez Zero]

The chart doesn't lie; you're failing to read it. The original iPhone and 3G were all able to use the most recent OS release three years after their release date, which is what the chart clearly shows.

iPhone 3G: on sale 7/11/08. Plus 3 years = 7/11/11. At that time, the 3G could use the latest iOS version, 4.2.1.

There is certainly a bias by omission. I would like to see more of the high-profile phones included (like the Galaxy mentioned above). But what I don't understand is this: why are phones being sold new that are already one or two OS versions behind?

Android desserts vs. Mac OS X big cats

[tepples]

Android is a fucking mess. Ridiculous nonsensical names. I mean, Froyo. Honeycomb? Really? Who came up with this shit?

Dessert makers. Doughnut, eclair, frozen yogurt, gingerbread, honey, and ice cream sandwiches are all sweet items associated with dessert. Is it any stranger than naming Mac OS X versions after big cats?

How about version numbers so I know that this version is more or less recent than that version

Alphabetical order. Donut is 1.6, Eclair is 2.0 and 2.1, FroYo is 2.2, Gingerbread is 2.3, Honeycomb is 3.0 and 3.1, and Ice Cream Sandwich is 4.0. It's better than Cheetah (10.0), Puma (10.1), Jaguar (10.2), Panther (10.3), Tiger (10.4), Leopard (10.5), Snow Leopard (10.6), and Lion (10.7), which show no alphabetical progression.

Oh no, you can't use Nutcracker on the Droid Extreme Elvis, that phone will only run Chicken Sandwich. To run Nutcracker you need the Droid Incredible.

Oh no, you can't run iOS 5 on an iPhone 1 or iPhone 3G; you need a 3GS, 4, or 4S.