Many have asked us how much of updated is a terminal, both its placing on the market as at present, causing the known fragmentation when a terminal does not receive official support by the manufacturer to have the latest version.
Well due to hardware, a few reasons totally plausible and coherent, or by negligence of manufacturer, risking future purchases by the most demanding users. Which company is better or worse in the remediation? Which terminals have more pampering received? Out which out of date?
In this infographic recovered from our sister page which is Engadget, we can see at a glance which terminals have been really a sign of care and which have been a warning of where there is no to follow. You can see the time that was on sale and how much had official support.
As you can see, it only collects data from terminals until the middle of last year, but its function is to analyze at a glance how to upgrade a terminal. You can see that Apple, one of the good things that can be said about it is always has updated its terminals to the latest version, although it plays with advantage, since they are themselves who decide what terminal goes and monitor them constantly.
You can see that not many started on the right foot, seeing a HTC Hero which is desfasó quickly and for a very short time was a day then move to forgetfulness or the Motorola Cliq, which quickly became old. In 2010 the things meroraron a little with the Nexus One, although it was not until the HTC EVO 4G that you would start to see more seriously. Now we have many good intentions with Ice Cream Sandwich, although we allow ourselves to doubt your dates.
And is that is not the same create an operating system only for terminals that you ask yourself (remember that the manufacturer of Apple is Samsung) to do an operating system than any manufacturer want it can implement and make changes according to your convenience in wins. This gives more market and variety, but does not ensure that a newer version reaches all the temrinales, and less the oldest
Is this a strategy wrong for Google? No, since smain business is to promote the use of Google applications to provide more advertising, its main business, and is being enclosed in a single type of market is not the right strategy if you want more people to use your services.
My colleague Guillermo Juián has focused the problem to Google make greater control over updates of the manufacturers, but this can be a problem, since many have jumped on the bandwagon of Android for their freedom, for not having a grip and having something easy
What would I suggest? Rather than forcing update, would propose a few bonuses in the form of access early code to those companies that make sure make good practices with their users make sure the latest version of the software whenever possible