Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There's no incentive for Google to provide backward compatibility for Android, hence they don't.


Well, it would make people feel more confident about buying Android devices. I am not happy to discover that I am going to be stuck with a browser that chokes on most newspaper webpages (a lot of them keep reloading some 3rd party widget that renders the page unusuable after about 30-40 seconds).


What prevents you from using firefox or opera?


I like the way the stock browser renders normal webpages. I don't care for the 3rd party browser interfaces, and I don't think it's too much to expect the stock browser to be reasonably robust - for the same reason that I expect the default wheels on a car to be sufficient for normal driving.


You should give Dolphin Browser a try. The best mobile browser. Period.


I did. It's great. I still think the stock browser should 'just work,' considering that Google also makes Chrome. I want to evaluate competitors' offerings in terms of added functionality, not basic stability. It's a bad advert for Android, just like inferior wheels on a car would be a bad advert for the car manufacturer.


Very true. Since Google makes Chrome, which is excellent on the desktop, there's no excuse to let us deal with the 'Browser'. Android has always been a 'work in progress' and it's been too long now.


Then what's the incentive for Apple to do just that? IOS5 runs on the iPhone 3GS, which is older than the Nexus One.


The difference is that 3GS is still being sold. N1 wasn't available on shelves well over one year.


People who purchase iOS devices are Apple's customers. People who purchase Android devices are not Google' s customers


Google sold thousands (millions?) of N1 phones at a significant price. Those buyers certainly are Google's customers. Well, they were, until Google blew them off 5 minutes after purchase.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: