Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Releases Android 9 Pie as Previous Oreo Release is Installed on Just 12% of Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Perhaps buy a OnePlus device to see how well Android can be done. It's lightning fast and responsive.
It's android. Everything is backwards on android to what i'm used to, 99.9% of apps are worse than iOS versions, spyware is actually a real threat, I avoid google as much as possible.
It's shocking that just 12% of Android users received the Oreo update. Even fewer will be eating Android Pie.
I moved from Android to iOS back to Android. There are an abundance of excellent apps on Android, so perhaps you just needed to take the time to Google what they are. Spyware is not a threat, especially if you use an ad blocking browser like Kiwi or Brave. I don't use Google services very much, and no one is required to.
Good for you. As a Mac user I have no business using android regardless.
I know plenty of Mac users with Android phones. MKBHD is a Mac user and has always used an Android as his daily driver. There's no compulsion to use an iPhone just because you own a Mac.
Well you can dig a hole with a spoon if you want, I’m not going to stop you. I also couldn’t care less what some dude on YouTube whose sole purpose is to generate channel traffic uses or does.
You'd be hard pressed to find an instance where the majority of people are right about anything. Most of the world uses the metric system and guess what, the metric system is stupid.
Or you can just get an iPhone, restore from a backup and your done.
I meant your comments. Your list is good, but it only applies to a Pixel, and only for 2 years (that's taken directly from Google). Your comment about manufacturers being bad, I felt, glazed over that in a lot of cases getting an update especially if you have a carrier locked phone was abysmal at best.
There are a lot of people that choose Android because they can get very cheap or even free phones. These people are also likely to use the same phone until it won't turn on anymore. It shouldn't be a surprise that there are some out there using very old phones with a very old OS on it.
[doublepost=1533737826][/doublepost]
Why wouldn't you get a Pixel if your main concern is updates? Samsung is a terrible choice if that's what you're after. Even my OnePlus 3 from 2016 will probably get 9 before any Samsung.
"Android Pie introduces a new gesture-based system interface that's similar to the interface of the iPhone X"
Yeah sure, but unlike Apple, with Google Pie you can turn that off and then you have the Home, Back and yes an actual Menu button instead of the gesture based system.
With Apple it'a all forcing all the time.
Yeah sure, but unlike Apple, with Google Pie you can turn that off and then you have the Home, Back and yes an actual Menu button instead of the gesture based system.
With Apple it'a all forcing all the time.
This is such a silly metric. If you do it by hardware manufacturer instead of Android as a whole (which would make far more sense given Android's open source nature), you could instead say that "Previous Oreo Release is Installed on 90something% devices" as, unless a user is intentionally not installing updates, then every Nexus and Pixel phone from 2015 onwards would have Oreo installed. Similarly, every Pixel phone (as the cutoff is now between the original Pixel/Pixel XL and the last Nexus phones) would be in line to get the Android Pie update.
If you're looking at it, instead, from a development standpoint, that's something different. That's what you get for open source software that is at the mercy of hardware manufacturers. If the whole point of this object lesson is to point out how slow some otherwise compatible devices are at receiving a major Android upgrade release, then really, this should be a Samsung shaming party as Samsung is, by far, the slowest Android device manufacturer to release upgrades to their TouchWiz Android OS variant for Galaxy phones as well as security updates to the Android platform itself (which, nowadays, ARE separate from actual OS updates).
[doublepost=1533739704][/doublepost]
There's actually a decent reason for this. Android is installed on MANY devices, not just consumer smartphones and tablets (if any). There are a plethora of specialty devices (think barcode scanners that integrate directly with business management software or hubs for fancy conference room video/phone systems) that run a pretty much un-upgradable version of Android. I have come across two such systems in my IT travels. One was capped at Android 2.3 Gingerbread and the other was capped at Android 4.1 Jellybean.
In both cases, there was no Google play store or functioning dialer or messaging apps. Even e-mail and the gmail app were missing. But that's because Android wasn't there to be used as a consumer device OS wherein you install a bunch of apps and personalize your device. Instead they were solely being used as single purpose devices. And so long as those versions of Android were locked down and you were unable to venture out into the Internets or Google Play to install something nefarious, the fact that you were on an old version of Android did not matter one bit.
So yeah, plenty of devices out there probably still running Android 2.3 or 4.x. I guarantee you most of them aren't actual phones or tablets and/or have a reason why them being at that version and not newer actually matters.
Then again, another way to look at this is that Android 2.3 debuted in December 2010. The contemporary version of iOS at the time was iOS 4. Nothing capable of running iOS 4 is able to run any version past iOS 9 today. In fact, of the devices that could've ran iOS 4, only the Fourth Generation iPod touch, iPhone 4 and 3GS, and iPad 2 even made it past iOS 5, and only the latter-most of those devices even made it past iOS 7. At least Android 2.3 can be still made to do something actually practical in 2018.
If you're looking at it, instead, from a development standpoint, that's something different. That's what you get for open source software that is at the mercy of hardware manufacturers. If the whole point of this object lesson is to point out how slow some otherwise compatible devices are at receiving a major Android upgrade release, then really, this should be a Samsung shaming party as Samsung is, by far, the slowest Android device manufacturer to release upgrades to their TouchWiz Android OS variant for Galaxy phones as well as security updates to the Android platform itself (which, nowadays, ARE separate from actual OS updates).
[doublepost=1533739704][/doublepost]
There's actually a decent reason for this. Android is installed on MANY devices, not just consumer smartphones and tablets (if any). There are a plethora of specialty devices (think barcode scanners that integrate directly with business management software or hubs for fancy conference room video/phone systems) that run a pretty much un-upgradable version of Android. I have come across two such systems in my IT travels. One was capped at Android 2.3 Gingerbread and the other was capped at Android 4.1 Jellybean.
In both cases, there was no Google play store or functioning dialer or messaging apps. Even e-mail and the gmail app were missing. But that's because Android wasn't there to be used as a consumer device OS wherein you install a bunch of apps and personalize your device. Instead they were solely being used as single purpose devices. And so long as those versions of Android were locked down and you were unable to venture out into the Internets or Google Play to install something nefarious, the fact that you were on an old version of Android did not matter one bit.
So yeah, plenty of devices out there probably still running Android 2.3 or 4.x. I guarantee you most of them aren't actual phones or tablets and/or have a reason why them being at that version and not newer actually matters.
Then again, another way to look at this is that Android 2.3 debuted in December 2010. The contemporary version of iOS at the time was iOS 4. Nothing capable of running iOS 4 is able to run any version past iOS 9 today. In fact, of the devices that could've ran iOS 4, only the Fourth Generation iPod touch, iPhone 4 and 3GS, and iPad 2 even made it past iOS 5, and only the latter-most of those devices even made it past iOS 7. At least Android 2.3 can be still made to do something actually practical in 2018.
I doubt the system is active enough in the average case to warrant the massive CPU and RAM improvements, else the battery life would be a disaster. But either way, if an OS is requiring double the CPU speed every 2 years and double the RAM every 4 just for its background tasks, there's something seriously wrong with it.
They are straightforward though. And all my apps are cloud based anyway so I couldn't care less if a backup failed. And again, this has nothing to do with the discussion.
True, but I was under the impression that this chart is only for devices that access the Google Play Store. So wouldn’t these devices not count?
Evidence is that devices become so slow after iOS upgrades, they basicly become useless.
If your device, no matter which one, is compatible with and up to a certain iOS version, it should’t get so slow.
[doublepost=1533747930][/doublepost]
But they’re still usable.
Not like obsolete Apple devices that becomes virtually so slow they’re useless.
[doublepost=1533748118][/doublepost]
Really. I’m on iPad Air 2 with iOS 11, and there are plenty of games that’s not compatible. Even many on the front page of the AppStore right now.
Okay, got it. So no evidence at all. I can only speak for myself, but I've owned every iPhone (except from the 5c) and this hasn't happened to me. I think you're taking a small minority of people in a tech forum and equating that to the masses. Lucky for you, iOS 12 is supposed to resolve the performance issues from iOS 11 and continue to support devices from 2013. This is something that makes Apple much much better than Android, long term support.
Try iPad 2 on iOS 9. Useless. And all other complaints about both iPads and iPhones becoming slower and laggy. It’s really hard to miss this, and say it only affects a small minority.
Happy you mention iOS 12. The few performance tests I’ve seen of iOS 12 beta on older devices are really just pointing out what I’m saying.
[doublepost=1533752790][/doublepost]
Just the Racing category alone, which is of my interest, there are 4 games on that page that I can’t play.