Final Words

I think Google really hit the nail on the head with Android Lollipop. It evokes the same sort of feeling that the release of iOS 7 did, without some of the negative experiences that followed. Getting a brand new interface is always exciting, as it can dramatically change how it feels to use your phone. Moving from KitKat to Lollipop still provides you with a familiar Android experience, but it almost feels like getting a brand new phone in a way. There's a brand new UI, and big improvements to performance. But unlike the upgrade to iOS 7, Android Lollipop hasn't plagued my devices with application crashes and other bugs. In fact, I haven't really noticed any significant bugs at all after upgrading to Lollipop, which says a great deal about the work Google has put into testing to make sure things are stable. 

Material Design impresses me, and I think it's going to be around for many years to come. I find this feeling reassuring, as Google has a track record of redesigning large portions of Android with every major release. With the past designs, I never really felt like they were going to stick around for very long, and they never did. Material Design feels like Google has finally gotten Android to where they want it to be, with an interface that doesn't need any OEM overlays to be presentable. Of course, some OEMs will never change their policy of putting their own skin, but that's something Google isn't going to be able to fix. While we may see very iterative changes to Lollipop's interface in future updates, I don't think they're going to be anything beyond changes to the placement of buttons or the color of icons. Material Design also extends far beyond your Android device. It will eventually apply to all of Google's services on all platforms, so that your web browser, your tablet, your smartphone, and even your watch will all look and behave similarly. 

The performance increases are also greatly appreciated. Android hardware has advanced rapidly, and the move to a new application runtime is overdue, but warmly welcomed. The improvements it can bring to a device are actually amazing; it can feel like getting a brand new phone. The interface performance on Android still isn't quite perfect, but to be quite honest, it's not at all alone in this regard. I can name areas of every major smartphone OS that are susceptible to drops in frame rate, it's just not possible to write perfect software. I think what can be said is that overall, Android is pretty much at the same level as Windows Phone and iOS for animation smoothness and general performance. There is still the exception of certain poorly written applications which are up to developers to fix, and some of these even come from Google themselves, but I'm confident that we're moving toward a point where these remaining issues will be fixed simply because they aren't acceptable anymore.  

Of course, the last thing to discuss about an Android update is whether or not you're going to get it. Unfortunately, I still can't answer this question for most users. Android's nature means that Google doesn't have any influence over users receiving their updates, except the users that have Nexus and Google Play Edition devices. Although I can't guarantee you an update, I can say that the situation is looking good for more users than it has in the past. We've seen updates ship in record time from companies like LG, NVIDIA, and Motorola, and they should be commended for putting in the effort to get updates out to users in a reasonable time. Other companies like HTC have made promises to update their flagship devices from this year and last year to Lollipop within a 90 day time frame. While this doesn't cover every Android user in the world, it covers more users than we've ever seen in the past.

Going into the future, there are some improvements Google should make. Continuing to work on the performance of problematic applications is definitely necessary, as they stand out more than ever alongside a library of extremely well performing apps. I think it would be worth it to start creating special landscape layouts for applications, and to introduce more features that take advantage of larger displays. Google has entered the phablet market with the Nexus 6, and they need to create software that provides a reason for having such large devices. The only other thing they need to do is to continue innovating and improving, which they've been able to do time and time again. We haven't yet seen everything that Android Lollipop has to offer, as developers are only beginning to take advantage of the new APIs and features it brings. But with a great new interface, new applications, a new runtime, and new users adopting Android every day, the future of Android certainly looks bright.

Camera2, ART, and Performance
Comments Locked

126 Comments

View All Comments

  • nevertell - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    And no comment on the move to 64 bit target platforms ?
  • Brandon Chester - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    That's just a result of the move to ART. I didn't want to just carbon copy Andrei's article, but it's linked in there and it's definitely worth the read.
  • Maleficum - Friday, December 26, 2014 - link

    It's the other way around: Android absolutely needs AOT-type compiler (ART) to decide between aarch32 and aarch64 prior to starting the process. If an app contains even a single JNI call to an aarch32 subroutine, the whole app HAS TO be compiled to aarch32, because no mode switching is allowed within a process.

    Your saying "apps are primarily written in Java" and Andrei's article are also misleading in just stating what Google claimed: 85% apps are written in Java.

    Google most probably isn't lying with that, but the fact is: most TOP apps AREN'T written in Java.
    I once checked top 25 apps in the US store: only two of them were written purely in Java.

    What this means? 64-bit will remain just a gimmick on Android for the upcoming 4 years thanks to the fragmentation.

    For 64-bit NDK apps, the devs HAVE TO set Lollipop as the minimum requirement since it REQUIRES AOT.

    And will they do that? You know the answer.
  • OreoCookie - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    Also, it seems much less clear whether and how much of a speed boost you actually get (as evidenced by the benchmarks run on the Nexus 9 where basically there is no difference between running Android in 32 and 64 bit mode).
  • Krysto - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    And what benchmarks are those? So far all the benchmarks I've seen are done in the 32-bit mode.
  • kron123456789 - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    Geekbench 3, for example.
  • Martuv93 - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    I haven't seen anyone do an AArch32 vs AArch64 showdown on Android yet.
    The Denver CPU is also a very weird thing so it might not benefit from the move to AArch64 in the same way for example the Exynos 7 Octa will.
  • kron123456789 - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link

    I'm not even sure that Exynos 7 Octa will support AArch64))
    http://anandtech.com/show/8537/samsungs-exynos-543...
    And, yes — Exynos 7 Octa and so-called Exynos 5433 are the same SoC.
  • garretelder - Thursday, December 4, 2014 - link

    Good news! Now it's about time to upgrade to a TOP phone (see rankings such as http://www.topreport.org/phones/ for instance).
  • extide - Friday, December 5, 2014 - link

    Almost the same, the Exynos 7 does not have AArch64 disabled, like the 5433

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now