18 
You’ve probably read about Android market fragmentation and wondered just how big a deal it is. This visualisation spells out the problem quite clearly: there are almost 4,000 unique Android devices out there running a single app available on Play. That, right there, is fragmentation.
The image was put together by Open Signal Maps to visualise the distribution of devices using their app. It includes data from 681,900 users, and breaks them down into almost 4,000 devices. Admittedly, that number is artificially high, because custom ROMs report identities differently.
But, the point here is that developing for Android is no longer as straightforward as it once was. With so many devices and an ever-expanding catalog of operating systems to cater for, it’s hardly surprising that Android support is shaky at best. By contrast, a similar image for an iOS app would only feature a handful of devices.
Oh, and if you were wondering, yes, that big green block occupying a 10 per cent share is the Samsung Galaxy S II. [Open Signal Maps via The Verge]
But that’s not… I don’t… It can’t…
I’m not even gonna go into the 1,000,001 ways that this article sent me into uncontrollable rage…
There may be some points of contention, but there’s nothing wrong with the underlying message.
It is easier to develop applications (and particularly stable, properly-rendered, bug-free applications) for iOS because there are very few Hardware/Software permeatations that need to be accounted for.
The same is true of Windows Phone, because the rules around adhering to the reference design are so very strict.
This extends to phone manufacturers taking a comparative age to release Official upgrades to the latest version of Android for their handsets. It’s comparatively difficult (when compared to iOS or WinPho) to optimise the OS to the handset to the point that the upgrade doesn’t break the user’s experience in some way.
In many ways, Google is a victim of it’s own success. Indeed, it wants to AVOID the situation Windows developers find themselves in today due to the diversity of the platform. Microsoft spends an absolute fortune fixing vulnerabilities and incompatibilities (not to mention driver issues) on their Desktop OS that wouldn’t be there if not for fragmentation.
I’m not saying that having such an Open platform is necessarily a BAD thing, but it’s certainly an important consideration for Google, Handset Manufacturers & Developers moving forward.
derpy derpy derp
Have you built an application for Android? If so, you understand API levelling. If I want my app to be compatible with >=4.0.3 then I work with API Level 15 – equally if I want it to be compatible with >=2.2 then I work with API Level 8. Heck, I can even make improvements to the APK available for newer phones and still keep the core functions within a lower level so that it’s compatible with everything else. As far as I’m aware, this is how UNIX-based systems are developed at the moment too, so there’s absolutely no chance that developers can claim it’s too much to consider – it’s been an aspect of programming for generations.
Once you account API level, all you then do is make sure your format looks fine on the four standard resolutions. Obviously there’s still a couple bugs here and there, but no system is perfect. Once you’ve taken these things into account when developing your application, you have backwards compatibility mastered. TWO factors, COMPLETE compatibility.
Then you’ve got the fact that ALL Android phones are capable even of running ICS (I’ve seen a video of the G1 running it, admittedly choppy but still functional, so I make the statement based on that fact). Granted, it takes some fiddling, but the OS was actually MADE for you to change it. You might well be able to get your original iPhone running iOS 5, but it’s not legit and most likely take a fair bit more effort to boot.
This wasn’t even the point I was making, however. I don’t see fragmentation an issue personally, but I can understand that it puts other people off the system. My problem with the article is that it claims there’s 4,000 fragmentations of Android. This is a complete fallacy, and I’m sure even you can understand that.
My understanding was that Fragmentation is about the version of Android… not the handset?
No, it’s generally considered to be all the various permutations – e.g. a top of the range quad core 720p phone running ICS will be a very different beast from a 256mb qvga phone running the same OS version.
Hopefully, though, people will just forget about this, sooner or later, considering it’s not a new issue at all – Think Mac vs “PC Compatible” – there’s always been a small set of Mac varieties available vs millions of different PC configurations, yet people still develop applications for PCs, since they happen to be the most common machines.
My understanding was the very same as yours….
But what about the Windows market fragmentation!!!???
You beat me to it
Yeah, PCs have been fragmenting for 30 years, whereas Apple has only released a few different Mac models. Nobody seems to be bothered by that.
Yes, you get the game incompatibility issues with old PCs, or weird hardware configurations, but that’s why you have hardware abstraction layers like DirectX, so that well written games shouldn’t care what hardware they’re running on.
Actually, this illustrates natural selection beautifully – see the devices on the left? HALF of android runs on about 32 devices. If you develop for these, shouldn’t be too much of a problem, and I’d be willing to bet the vast majority of decently written apps will work on most of those on the right too. Don’t you just love a more open system? Aren’t infographics pointlessly fun?
This article is Completely misleading either deliberately or through writer stupidity.
“This visualisation spells out the problem quite clearly: there are almost 4,000 unique Android devices out there running a single app available on Play. That, right there, is fragmentation.”
BOLLOCKS
Not 4000 devices, many different ROMS on many devices ALL OF WHICH are 100% compatible with a given level of the Android API’s and any previous version. Yes there are a things you can do on ICS that you can’t do on Gingerbread or have to do in a different way but the difference is mostly trivial and can be handled with a few lines of code.
Since Mr Condiffe is not an idiot I can only assume that this article was designed to provoke an indignant response to blatant scaremongering. (Mission accomplished)
Frankly (in my opinion) this turd of an article is stinking up Giz UK and should be flushed.
Mate. You didn’t have your Weetabix did you?:
“Admittedly, that number is artificially high, because custom ROMs report identities differently.”
It may be an understatement, but it shows he at least understands that the visualisation is an exaggeration. The fact remains though, compared to its “competitors” Android is a fragmented platform. It doesn’t mean that Android is worse, indeed Android has benefitted massively from being such an open canvas to handset manufacturers and developers.
And certainly the “few lines of code” you speak of (itself a massive under-reporting of the work involved in supporting OS Versions and Handset permeatations) is a problem Google is all too aware of.
I don’t eat Weetabix, so no.
The point is this graph says nothing about fragmentation. There are several others in the source article that report the screen size variations and API levels of those same phones. Those show real differences between handsets not the above. If they counted each separate combination of API level,screen size & screen density then they would be closer to talking about differences that programmers have to deal with and even then for a lot of Apps that can be covered by having resizing your graphics for the different densities and having different layouts for tablets, exactly as you would for an app that was to run on iPhone and iPad.
So why not introduce that as an interesting point of contention, rather than attack the writer or Gizmodo UK? You clearly have a view and some knowledge that would add to some spicy discussion around the topic of fragmentation that might make for an interesting read for people stumbling across the piece.
You are clearly biased to some degree (you’ve described yourself as an “Android Lover” elsewhere and been less than complementary about Apple in the past). This is all fine…it’s just not cool to be so irrationally angry about an opinion piece that really isn’t all that controversial, it just makes you look like a mindless fanbois.
I know you’re better than that…and come in peace!
It’s ok, I have calmed down now, but still consider this article to be a strong misrepresentation of the truth. Yes I am Android biased as that is my mobile OS of choice, but while I do like to poke fun at Apple and am critical of certain of their behaviours I consider myself generally fair in my dealings with all sides.
As do I, which is why this particular outburst surprised me!
I’ve said it below, but I’ll reply here, you’ve got to accept that sometimes the headline is going to be a little sensationalist, and personally (as somebody who is looking to purchase an Android Phone in the near future due to all the reasons why you don’t favour iOS) I would have liked to have seen the piece develop more into a discussion about the Pros and Cons of “Open Source” platforms…but that’s what the comments section is for, we can fill in the gaps in a reasonable and intelligent manner, provoking discussion.
Weetabix does help (unless you have an intolerance).
Much more of a Crunchy nut cornflakes man myself, but I am happy to accept your point of view on breakfasts as well as other things. I am more that happy to discuss the pros & cons of the different platforms (and regularly do so here & elsewhere).
Sensationalist headlines are one thing, a headline that is factually incorrect is another.
As Darrell stated, stating “When People Discuss Android Fragmentation, This Is What They Mean” and displaying a chart showing the number of ROM’s one particular (very useful for pre-release testing) App is installed on is very misleading, regardless of whether Jamie has admitted this is number is artificially high.
The chart simply does not show fragmentation, just the number of ROMs available. My HTC desire has now had a total of 5 ROMs installed on it, from the initial HTC Sense 2.2 through to ICS. All (other than one build of ICS, that is currently classed as beta) ran all of my Titanium backed up Apps perfectly, and I’m certain that the programmers of those Apps did not even consider what future ROMs, custom or otherwise, would be built.
I tend to go for muesli, though Weetabix is my fall back should the muesli run out.
spot on, less the muesli. I prefer a diet of silicone and gold plating.
Posts something bad about Android everyone goes into uncontrollable rage.
Posts something bad about Apple everyone goes into uncontrollable enthusiasm for the article.
Actually that’s just your perception. There are plenty of people here who will stand up for Apple and do if something bad is posted. The problem with the above is not that it is bad, but that it is wrong, it draws erroneous conclusions from the data and, since we know the writer is not stupid, we can only assume it is a deliberate slur.
You can’t accuse Gizmodo of Apple Fanboism and then so blatantly display Android Fanboism in the same post! They’ll find out your secret…
Far from being a slur, I thought the piece largely reported in fact. Take the visualisation out of the picture (something he caveated in his text) and it’s all fairly uncontroversial to the neutral’s eye.
Yes, he could have gone on to say that having such an Open Platform played a major part in Android becoming the success it is today to balance it all up, but that wasn’t the point he was trying to make, and we can’t have every blog-posting exist as a well-balanced and intelligently concluded 1500 word essay…
Excuse me but I have not accused Gizmodo of anything. as for the fact that he supposedly “caveated” the visualisation he only did so after saying “That, right there, is fragmentation.” How is that an acceptable excuse? If I posted a graph that I said “Showed iPhone users were a bunch of morons” and actually made that my headline, how is it then acceptable for me to say (at the end of the second paragraph) actually this data was gathered from Android users and may not be reliable.
The problem (to your eyes) appears to be the visualisation (and what it represents) being coupled with the headline. Strap-lines are supposed to be sensationalist, and usually refer in some way to the content of the article rather than the accompanying image. If you’ve chosen to tie the Headline to the image, that’s your prerogative, but it likely wasn’t the contributor’s intention that you do so, and it certainly doesn’t read to the neutral as slanderous or controversial in any significant way.
At least the article attempts to present the accompanying image in as fair and balanced way as possible by introducing the idea that there are variables that will skew the statistics. If you disagree with the content, by all means question it…but to me, you’re just coming across as cranky and unreasonably biased.
I will happily own up to “cranky”. I would also accept that “Strap-lines are supposed to be sensationalist” if I thought that Giz UK was a cheap tabloid. Personally I expect better of it.
It is true that I can be “over defensive” towards Android, this is probably a result of having spent a lot of time in the other place reading articles written by people who can’t understand anything that isn’t done the Apple way.
Reminds me all the world of MS Windows.
Different hardware spec, software versions and apps running all the time.
How’s Microsoft doing these days ? Seems to co-exsit fine with Apple and Linux.
MS have set tons of standards to keep the apps backward and forward compartable. They introduced even more when vista was released.
One just can’t compare Windows ecosystem to Android.
1. In the past 10 years, MS only released 3 OS (two of which are identical)
2. Users have access to the OS via MS, which means users are free to upgrade or downgrade to their choice of OS
3. MS provides updates and support for years (in the case of XP more then 10 years)
4. Despite the massive hardware variations, the majority of software (apps) function without any major problems
And so on…
With Android, the majority of users are stuck with the pre-installed (often modified) version.
Most likely in few years, MS would have grabbed the mid-range and high-end phone and tablet sector from Google.