Google playing catch-up to hardware

[Ngmasterj]

Anyone noticing that Google is starting to play catch-up with hardware? First tablets come out and Google was unprepared, so it took them a few months, nearly a year actually, to get an optimized OS version specifically for tablets (Honeycomb). And again, here we are eagerly awaiting Ice Cream Sandwich that's supposed to be optimized for dual-core phones. Is this a pattern that we'll be seeing a lot more of in the future? It worries me a little bit that software is playing catch-up with hardware, and even disappoints me more that Google is as short-sighted as they have been with the pace in which hardware technology is increasingly improving.

ICS needed to be released MONTHS ago. I'm still scratching my head as to why the Atrix 4g, the first dual-core phone shipped not just without ISC, not just without Gingerbread, but with FROYO.

And as a proud owner of an Evo 3D, it definitely feels like an upgrade from an Evo 4g, but doesn't feel like a true dual-core phone to me. And by the time ICS does come out, Tegra will have released their quad-core chips into the wild. I hope Google can keep up, and more importantly, the damn OEMs that want to take an extra 4 months to a year to skin the crap out of it.

I'm worried that we'll get to a point where we will have awesome, ground-breaking new hardware in our phones that we simply can't use because Google isn't foreseeing ahead of time technological advances in the coming future. I don't want to feel like I'm downgrading or leveling out when I'm upgrading a phone, otherwise, what's the point in upgrading at all?

 

[tyrelian]

Good point,I feel that we haven't tapped into the power of dual core

Sent from my Evo 3D!

 

[strat1227]

Sorry but that's just logic ...

Nobody will EVER develop software, especially not a fully fledged operating system, for hardware that may or may not catch on. it's not until it's released and successful that apps, games, OS's, and other software will BEGIN development

There will always be about a 3-4 month lag between hardware catching on and a large source of software for that hardware

Imagine if Google spent all their time developing honeycomb before tablets came out, and then nobody liked/used them. Then it's hundreds of thousands of wasted dollars in development and man-hours, that could have been going towards things that actually are used

I'd rather wait 3 months and know that all their time is used wisely than have them guess and waste time/money, that means the stuff you get won't be anywhere near as good

(at least that's the logic my friend in the valley feeds me, I trust him since he's a manager for Google *shrug*)

 

[Ngmasterj]

Sorry but that's just logic ...

Nobody will EVER develop software, especially not a fully fledged operating system, for hardware that may or may not catch on. it's not until it's released and successful that apps, games, OS's, and other software will BEGIN development

There will always be about a 3-4 month lag between hardware catching on and a large source of software for that hardware

Imagine if Google spent all their time developing honeycomb before tablets came out, and then nobody liked/used them. Then it's hundreds of thousands of wasted dollars in development and man-hours, that could have been going towards things that actually are used

I'd rather wait 3 months and know that all their time is used wisely than have them guess and waste time/money, that means the stuff you get won't be anywhere near as good

(at least that's the logic my friend in the valley feeds me, I trust him since he's a manager for Google *shrug*)

Well, I hate to be the Devil's Advocate in this one, but take a look at Apple's Ipad for example. Their first dual-core tablet didn't release without support for dual-core processors. Had they done that, there would be a huge outcry and a general disapproval from their buyers as to why on earth they would release a product when there is pending hardware support for it. IOS 4 was released months earlier to developers to adapt their apps to the new operating system. Google is known to work closely with their OEMs for flagship devices to ensure that whatever new firmware update that they're ushering into Android, that the software will support whatever hardware is being released.

The Xoom does in fact have dual-core optimization thanks to Honeycomb. But that was a year after Android tablets were already released. Rumors of dual-core processors in mobile devices isn't brand new, they've been out for a while now and I feel as though they are not sure which direction hardware is moving towards.

Google simply just does not have an accurate concept of how quickly hardware innovations grow. Take a look at the Nexus S, the successor to the Nexus One. It still has a 1 ghz processor, a slight upgrade from the Nexus One. There's nothing new on the device except NFC and an improved graphics chip (and one could argue that it was a step back eg. no LED, no SD card, etc.). And this was done in collaboration with an OEM. Either they didn't expect dual-core processors to pick up as quickly as they did, or what, but clearly Google's research and development department or whatever it is isn't on the ball on hardware, whether for software support or for their own flagship devices.

 

[Ngmasterj]

You also mentioned that they wouldn't develop the software let alone a full fledged OS if it doesn't pick up with consumers. But take a look at the current tablet marketshare of Android tablets vs. competitors. Last time I checked, Android has about 3% marketshare where Apple has 37% or more. Saying that hardware innovations aren't worth their time investing due to lack of customer interest is not taking a step forward, its taking a step back. We need dual-core optimizations whether or not they are "popular" if we want to continue innovating.

 

[strat1227]

Well, I hate to be the Devil's Advocate in this one, but take a look at Apple's Ipad for example. Their first dual-core tablet didn't release without support for dual-core processors. Had they done that, there would be a huge outcry and a general disapproval from their buyers as to why on earth they would release a product when there is pending hardware support for it. IOS 4 was released months earlier to developers to adapt their apps to the new operating system. Google is known to work closely with their OEMs for flagship devices to ensure that whatever new firmware update that they're ushering into Android, that the software will support whatever hardware is being released.

The Xoom does in fact have dual-core optimization thanks to Honeycomb. But that was a year after Android tablets were already released. Rumors of dual-core processors in mobile devices isn't brand new, they've been out for a while now and I feel as though they are not sure which direction hardware is moving towards.

Google simply just does not have an accurate concept of how quickly hardware innovations grow. Take a look at the Nexus S, the successor to the Nexus One. It still has a 1 ghz processor, a slight upgrade from the Nexus One. There's nothing new on the device except NFC and an improved graphics chip (and one could argue that it was a step back eg. no LED, no SD card, etc.). And this was done in collaboration with an OEM. Either they didn't expect dual-core processors to pick up as quickly as they did, or what, but clearly Google's research and development department or whatever it is isn't on the ball on hardware, whether for software support or for their own flagship devices.

Ok using your own example, Apple used an almost IDENTICAL operating system to their iPhone! If you don't remember, everyone complained about the fact that the OS didn't fully take advantage of the iPad's capabilities for around (like I said) 3 months! Now it's obviously a lot better but when it first came out, they did practically ZERO software work for it! They developed the hardware, put it out there with a very lightly altered version of their pre-existing OS, and waited to see if people bought it! Once they did, they released a unique OS for it

So if anything your example works towards my point

 

[gabbott]

64-bit processors came out before 64-bit OSes were prevalent, when multi-core processors for the mainstream PC came out, a lot of applications weren't multi-threaded and took a while to be updated....

Software takes time to catch up/mature to the hardware release cycle. Nothing unusual.

 

[Ngmasterj]

Ok using your own example, Apple used an almost IDENTICAL operating system to their iPhone! If you don't remember, everyone complained about the fact that the OS didn't fully take advantage of the iPad's capabilities for around (like I said) 3 months! Now it's obviously a lot better but when it first came out, they did practically ZERO software work for it! They developed the hardware, put it out there with a very lightly altered version of their pre-existing OS, and waited to see if people bought it! Once they did, they released a unique OS for it

So if anything your example works towards my point

Right, but we have no idea how different ICS is going to be compared to all the other Android versions previous. Gingerbread has hardly any differences from Froyo. Adding support for new APIs and doing more incremental updates like they did from 2.2 to 2.3 would alleviate this frustration with upcoming hardware innovations. I understand that Google wants to make updates much more substantial to alleviate fragmentation, so I guess there's also that that's holding everything up.

And I'll have to disagree with you on the differences between IOS 3 and IOS 4. There were significant improvements added. Significantly enough that the iPhone tasted its first at fragmentation by excluding the iPhone 3GS and older iTouches. It added multitasking(kinda), folders (lol), and uh wallpapers? And even after testing the waters with IOS 4, IOS 5 by this comparison isn't that much newer either.

 

[bdGDL08]

Not to mention, Apple makes both the hardware and software (OS) for their product.

~Drew

 

[crzycrkr]

Did you really say that the Hummingbird in the Nexus S is only a slight improvement over the Snapdragon in the Nexus One? Really? Do you know how fast the Nexus S is?

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk

 

[Saneless]

Hardware that is too advanced for software drives improved software.. That's the way it works.

 

[aznmode]

I kinda agree with the OP but probably not googles fault since there are so many android hardware manufacturer pushing out products every 6 months with already upgraded hardware. Apple has it easy since they control both. But if you look at Nexus phones they are always pretty much up to date but doesn't necessarily have the latest and greatest hardware.

 

[cj100570]

Anyone noticing that Google is starting to play catch-up with hardware? First tablets come out and Google was unprepared, so it took them a few months, nearly a year actually, to get an optimized OS version specifically for tablets (Honeycomb). And again, here we are eagerly awaiting Ice Cream Sandwich that's supposed to be optimized for dual-core phones. Is this a pattern that we'll be seeing a lot more of in the future? It worries me a little bit that software is playing catch-up with hardware, and even disappoints me more that Google is as short-sighted as they have been with the pace in which hardware technology is increasingly improving.

ICS needed to be released MONTHS ago. I'm still scratching my head as to why the Atrix 4g, the first dual-core phone shipped not just without ISC, not just without Gingerbread, but with FROYO.

And as a proud owner of an Evo 3D, it definitely feels like an upgrade from an Evo 4g, but doesn't feel like a true dual-core phone to me. And by the time ICS does come out, Tegra will have released their quad-core chips into the wild. I hope Google can keep up, and more importantly, the damn OEMs that want to take an extra 4 months to a year to skin the crap out of it.

I'm worried that we'll get to a point where we will have awesome, ground-breaking new hardware in our phones that we simply can't use because Google isn't foreseeing ahead of time technological advances in the coming future. I don't want to feel like I'm downgrading or leveling out when I'm upgrading a phone, otherwise, what's the point in upgrading at all?

Google makes an OS and not the hardware that it runs on. The manufacturers are the ones putting out hardware that isn't supported by the OS. The situation should be the reverse. That's not Google's problem though. Writing code for an OS isn't an easy task and writing it for what hardware may or may not come down the pike would lead to sever code bloat. With Android every manufacturer is doing something different as far as CPU, GPU, Screen Resolution is concerned and Google would be a fool to alter their road map to accommodate what the manufacturers are doing. Google has put out an Android road map that clearly spells out what features are coming and the manufacturers are putting out hardware that'll be ready for it.

 

[mkozak]

OP,

We all love to see technology advance but what are these missing features that you feel google is letting you down with by not catching up to the hardware? Icurrently use an Evo 3G and see no reason to upgrade to a 3D yet because it does everything very fast already. Yes I could shave 1 second off of the loading times by moving up to the 3D but the difference is so minor I just dont see the value in it(I'm well aware of 3D, additional memory and Sense 3.0). The problem is everyone is obsessed with benchmarks and shaving 1 second off while Google is trying to focus on making some real tangible differences for their OS. Personally, the ONLY thing I want Google and manufacturers to focus on right now is BATTERY LIFE. You hear me GOOGS????? GIVE ME BETTER BATTERY LIFE.

 

[Insp_Gadget]

OP,

We all love to see technology advance but what are these missing features that you feel google is letting you down with by not catching up to the hardware? Icurrently use an Evo 3G and see no reason to upgrade to a 3D yet because it does everything very fast already. Yes I could shave 1 second off of the loading times by moving up to the 3D but the difference is so minor I just dont see the value in it(I'm well aware of 3D, additional memory and Sense 3.0). The problem is everyone is obsessed with benchmarks and shaving 1 second off while Google is trying to focus on making some real tangible differences for their OS. Personally, the ONLY thing I want Google and manufacturers to focus on right now is BATTERY LIFE. You hear me GOOGS????? GIVE ME BETTER BATTERY LIFE.

Battery life is a limitation of the hardware that is used: CPU, GPU, memory type, power relays, capacity, etc. The OS's efficiency has a very small impact on overall battery life.

Battery manufacturers have to come up with a technological breakthrough for there to be any significant improvements in battery life. That has nothing to do with Google or Android.

The more a phone can do (these are miniature personal computers after all), the faster it will burn through a battery charge.

Lead-acid, alkaline, nickel-cadmium, nickel-medel hydroxide, lithium-ion, etc. These are all various battery technologies that have been developed over the past century. Battery technology has always lagged behind the technology that it powers. If battery technology had kept up with processor technology, we would have batteries the size of a grain of rice that would power a smartphone for a year on a single charge.

 

[strat1227]

Besides, AOSP has much better battery life than all the HTC garbage. It's not google's fault that companies add proprietary bs

 

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

It wasn't too long ago that hardware was underpowered compared to the operating system. Remember the Hero? The Palm Pre? I would rather have awesome hardware and have the OS catch up than the other way around.

 

[r-nice]

Besides, AOSP has much better battery life than all the HTC garbage. It's not google's fault that companies add proprietary bs

Why buy an HTC phone then?

 

[youngzayiles]

You have to remember apples hardware comes from a controlled environment... So comparing Google to apple is actually a very bad comparison... Think about it... Apple supports one processor one Gpu etc thats it and oversee all the hardware manufacturing... Google does not.. The chips in the Evo 3d and Galexy S 2 are dual core but very different chips... Gaming will have to be handled totally different on the GS2.. So Google has alot more to account for.. They cant write code guessing what hardware the manufacturers are going to go with next which may or may not go as planned..

 

[Daedalus]

Well, I hate to be the Devil's Advocate in this one, but take a look at Apple's Ipad for example. Their first dual-core tablet didn't release without support for dual-core processors. Had they done that, there would be a huge outcry and a general disapproval from their buyers as to why on earth they would release a product when there is pending hardware support for it. IOS 4 was released months earlier to developers to adapt their apps to the new operating system. Google is known to work closely with their OEMs for flagship devices to ensure that whatever new firmware update that they're ushering into Android, that the software will support whatever hardware is being released.

The Xoom does in fact have dual-core optimization thanks to Honeycomb. But that was a year after Android tablets were already released. Rumors of dual-core processors in mobile devices isn't brand new, they've been out for a while now and I feel as though they are not sure which direction hardware is moving towards.

Google simply just does not have an accurate concept of how quickly hardware innovations grow. Take a look at the Nexus S, the successor to the Nexus One. It still has a 1 ghz processor, a slight upgrade from the Nexus One. There's nothing new on the device except NFC and an improved graphics chip (and one could argue that it was a step back eg. no LED, no SD card, etc.). And this was done in collaboration with an OEM. Either they didn't expect dual-core processors to pick up as quickly as they did, or what, but clearly Google's research and development department or whatever it is isn't on the ball on hardware, whether for software support or for their own flagship devices.

Not to sound like an A$$ but obviously you have never developed software before. Fisrt and foremost you can not develop software that is to take advantage of a piece of hardware that is not on the market unless you are developing that hardware yourself.

Google does not develop hardware period... and Android OS being an open source project for the most part it would fall on the developers to build and support a Kernel that took full advantage of their unique hardware, or possibly the user community but you can not test and dev on something that you have never touched let alone seen a schematic layout for.

That is like expecting microsoft to Dev an OS that will take advantage of the Core i12 Processors without them ever actually knowing about it.

So apple has the advantage they build all in house and design OS' for hardware they select.