Android and Wear OS don’t need a new version every year

Android has an annual release click from version now 9 Pie: every year, between August and September, Google releases its major update, and about 6 months later work begins on the developer preview of the next version. In reality the situation is even more confused than that, because then there are the Quarterly Platform Release, ie intermediate releases, theoretically quarterly, between one major release and the next. We had already talked last spring about how Android is always a work in progress, and now that Google has announced that Wear OS will also have the same annual frequency, we can’t help but wonder: but is it really necessary?

It is useless to go around so much: the marketing plays a fundamental role in this regular frequency of updates, especially since Google usually plays slightly earlier than Applewhich also in September unveils the new iPhones, with which the new version of iOS will arrive for the current year.

The problem is that if, from a media point of view, it makes sense to contrast the two operating systems, from a practical point of view there is no reason.

Android, unlike iOS, always has less need of operating system updates to bring new functions to its users, because Google has “unbundled” all the unbundled. From project treble to mainline, Google’s aim has been to update as many components as possible via the Play Store / Play Services, and for as many users as possible at a time, regardless of their smartphone manufacturer or Android version in question.

On iOS, however, it is different, and sometimes even to update some apps and features it is an operating system update is required. Apple also produces both software and hardware, and often the former is tailored to the specificities of the latter, just think of the dynamic island iPhone 14, so very often new iPhones really need a new operating system.

In short, the reasons for the Cupertino house are different from those of Google / Android, and chasing Apple in this regard … it makes no sense!

Android is beautiful because it is diverse. There are many different manufacturers (although, needless to say, Samsung counts more than all), and each of these has its own custom interface that tries in some way to improve Android or otherwise make it more personal for its users. Too bad that, especially since Google has given annual updates to the operating system, the impression is that the various OEMs are increasingly struggling to keep up with their news.

In fact, between one major release of Android and the next, there is not much room left for manufacturer X to get in the middle and pack something new for its interface; at most it will do so at the release of the next version of the OS, but adding further news (in addition to those brought by Google and which then need to be implemented or not) easily causes delays that the most loyal users will not look favorably upon.

The various MIUI, One UI, Color OS, etc. in short, they are less lively than in the past, partly because they too certainly cannot reinvent the wheel every year, partly because they have to keep up with fast pace to come out every year with their version of the new Android; which often then introduces changes that maybe they were already present for some time in the skin on duty, and therefore perhaps need to be reengineered.

Don’t get me wrong, updates are important, especially those of safety, which represent an additional brick on the back of each manufacturer. Having said that, the utility of having to release an Android 13, which in the eyes of users is only a 12.1 (we had already talked about it, remember?), forcing in a certain sense the various manufacturers to worship you behind as quickly as possible, honestly escapes me.

And the same reasoning can also apply to Wear OSwhich has had a more troubled history than that of Android, but which, however, has been renewed in relatively recent times.

Perhaps in your case it may be worthwhile to insist more on the new versions, given the overwhelming power of Apple Watchbut not for this they should necessarily become annual: it would be enough that Google did not forget to push on him too, and given that the company’s first smartwatch came out just in these days, the past does not speak in its favor. .

It takes novelty, it takes new functions, but it also takes the right time to implement them, and that time cannot be dictated by the solar calendar, especially if you have nothing really new to say. The sooner Google takes a step back, the better it will be for the entire platform, which will be able to progress even more independently between the various OEMs, who may find the time to get a little more competition even on the software, to the full advantage. of users.