Updates won’t matter until Android skins die

Following the (albeit smaller than expected) avalanche of Android phone announcements at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) the first weeks of January, we heard countless numbers of representatives from every manufacturer say the words “…it’s currently running Gingerbread, but we’re updating it to Ice Cream Sandwich…” in regards to phones, and similar sentiments regarding tablets and Honeycomb (although I’ll be focusing on phones).

Now there’s a couple problems with this, the first of which being the absolute absurdity that large multinational corporations - we’re talking LG, Samsung, etc. - can’t even put together a Beta build of ICS to show off at a show months after ICS was released (and arguably they had it even earlier than that). It’s like they’re not even trying at this point.

Secondly, they seem to tout the upgrade from 2.3 to 4 as a selling point, as if we’re supposed to like the phone more because it’s being upgraded, and be willing to buy it over another phone that hasn’t been given the guaranteed go-ahead upgrade path. This shouldn’t be a selling point, it should be an absolute knock against the phone for not just launching with the OS it should have. These CES phones aren’t going to be hitting the market for weeks and months after they’re announced. If 2.3 is perceivably archaic now, how will it look at the end of Q1 and beyond when these are an store shelves?

Those statements aside, let’s get to the real meat of the story, which I suppose is related to the “promised upgrade as a selling feature” argument. Along with the fact that upgrades shouldn’t be considered an extra feature that a manufacturer offers, these upgrades will literally change nothing about the user experience of the device. Recently evidenced by the leaked SGSII ICS builds with TouchWiz 5, and various HTC Sense-laden ICS leaks, these phones will never look like the ICS that users and reviewers alike are raving about on the Galaxy Nexus. In an attempt to preserve their perceived “brand loyalty” and image, every single manufacturer will simply be putting their same skin from Android 2.2 and 2.3 straight onto Android 4 with mild improvements. Not only is this a travesty simply because it is delaying updates and keeping phones locked down, but mainly the fact that Android 4 is really, really good. By all accounts, Google outdid themselves here, and the idea that these manufacturers aren’t even going to attempt to bring that forward to the user is a shame.

This brings me back to referencing the title of this article: updates won’t matter until Android skins die. Every single person who puts emphasis on updates is just spinning their wheels. Whether its running Android 2.3 or 4 really does not matter if the user isn’t going to be getting any benefit from it because the skin is trying to maintain a consistent experience from 2.3 devices. No effort should be made complaining about pushing an update that will not change anything. I think that people seem to have some glimmer of hope that manufacturers will push an OTA and all of a sudden their device will have stock ICS on it. Well, that’s just not going to happen, so spend your energy elsewhere.

The problem with updates and fragmentation is a two parter. The first part is completely removing manufacturer skins - straight up, no ifs ands or buts about it. Only once that is accomplished can we then care about the second part - updating devices in a timely and efficient way.

Wanted: Android, with the Chrome update system

What has bothered me about Google in the past is the inherent disjunct between their products. Until very recently (we’re talking post Google+) the design, mechanisms, and most importantly UI / UX have been different from property to property. For example what we saw as a design language in Gmail was different from Google Voice and GTalk, which was completely different from the Google.com search page.

Fortunately for me (and millions of others, I’m sure), Google really has started to unify their properties. The consistent black bar that first appeared in G+ now continues through ALL Google apps. The simple black/white with red accents provides comfort when tabbing between different apps. The buttons have been standardized, and things actually work as you would expect! Fancy that.

Now this brings me to Android (doesn’t it usually?). Unfortunately, what used to plague Google Apps online properties still exists on their mobile OS. All skins aside (let’s keep it simple and talk about stock Android), design languages are still horribly disjunct. Only the most recent versions of the Market, Google+ and Google Music (which is a Beta, invite only) apps have the updated ‘look and feel’ that they’re going for. Whereas even though several features updates have come for other google properties like Talk, Voice, Maps, etc. they still look the same as they did (give or take) in Android 2.1. And nowhere in Android do I see any connection design wise to other Google properties, even though they’re 100% connected to all of the web-side Google services. You’d think that Google would want to keep a consistent experience between the Gmail Android App, and Gmail.com. They’re not practicing what they preach when it comes to the simplicity of moving between the phone and the web.

Dribble about UI and UX unity aside, let’s get to the point. First off, Google Chrome is updated every 6 weeks, regardless of what features are being worked on or added. If something isn’t ready for this release, it’ll be pushed to the next release (it’s only 6 weeks away, what’s the harm?).  Second, Chrome updates are downloaded in the background, unbeknownst by the user. No prompts, questions, or concerns. Next time they open Chrome, they’ll be on the newest version and not even know it (there isn’t even a popup like Firefox stating there was a new version). There’s something extremely intriguing about this update model. To the average user, Chrome seems to stay the ‘same’, but in reality its secretly getting better, faster, more optimized and feature rich without so much as an extra click. It’s elegant and seamless. Not words particularly synonymous with Google products

Now we bring this together. We understand Android isn’t consistent (understatement of the century). We also know that updates for the Android platform are few and far between. Solve one problem and you’ve nearly solved the other. Fast updates for Android mean Google has a frictionless path to unify design. The first step for Android to follow this release cycle has already begun. Google has removed their Google Apps such as Gmail, Maps, Books, Docs, Voice, Talk (etc. etc. for days on end) from the actual Android OS, and simply made them applications in the Market. When there’s an update to an individual app, the other apps aren’t disturbed, the OS doesn’t have to be upgraded, and they can be updated independently. At this point its really a hack considering what they SHOULD be doing…

In a perfect world, all Android devices would run a version of stock Android, and carriers wouldn’t be involved (no rant this time, see my prior post on removing Android skins).  If somehow these conditions were met, it would surely allow Google to push Chrome-style updates to the OS regularly and efficiently. To be honest I’m not completely sure if users want to be given an update that often, but if it is as seamless as Chrome (and Google has proven they can accomplish this with millions of Chrome users), I see no reason why it wouldn’t be possible. In this perfect world, Google would be able to not only update apps but also fix bugs, add OS features, and improve usability for EVERY user. I would be surprised if Google didn’t want to provide the same thing for their Android customers as they do for Chrome.

I can see that Google is pushing towards consistent experiences with their changes to Gmail, G+, Docs, etc. and I can only hope that they pass on this new found passion to their other products. Creating a consistent experience and ecosystem that people can feel comfortable relying on is one of the most important things when it comes to luring in new customers as well as retaining current ones. Its not a one-fix problem, and it will take a major change in the way Google operates, but I think that it is truly necessary if they want to push on to the next level of customer satisfaction on Android.

Top