I’ve mentioned before that I use a Google Android phone. Specifically, I use the Evo. I got it during the week it first came out, pumped to using 4G – which turned out to only be available from downtown, not my apartment. Additionally, the battery ran out in about 7.2 seconds. I’ve resolved these issues (settling into a comfortable 3G speed and knowing its limits and getting an extended battery that almost tripled the phone’s time in the world of the living), but one issue remains: I’m still running on Android 2.2.
Now, maybe I shouldn’t be too upset about this. The strong majority of Android users are using Froyo, the version I’m on, and it’s fairly good – to a point. Gingerbread is faster, it conserves the battery more effectively, and it offers a better aesthetic, but it also has one particular advantage that leaves me feeling some pain in Froyo: Gingerbread resolved some critical security issues. So Google did their part in developing it, but six months after Ginberbread’s release, 64.6% of us are still using Froyo.
That’s almost two-thirds, and the remaining percentage is actually more saturated by Eclair users – a version even older thanFroyo – than by Gingerbread users; Android 2.1 has about 21.2% of Androids right now, while Gingerbread has only 9.2%. There are very few options to get Gingberbread at the moment, and while it’s been promised that an upgrade is on the horizon for my Evo (this summer, in fact), I’ll soon be behind the curve again. This winter will provide us with Android 2.4, Ice Cream Sandwich, which will have many of its own advantages – none of which I’m likely to receive until six months to a year after release.
So the OS dessert mix-up is a problem for me, and one that we must sadly blame on carriers and manufacturers (Google has little control here, especially given the wide array of options used). It’s also a problem for many others, however. OS updates are just one of the many factors that contributed the shockingly low 28% brand loyalty that Android currently commands.
[via Ad Age]
