Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

iOS Vs. Android: Which Has the Crashiest Apps?

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the best-of-class dept.

Android 358

First time accepted submitter creativeHavoc writes "Forbes author Tomio Geron takes a look at data accrued by mobile app monitoring startup Crittercism. After looking at normalized data of crashes over the various mobile operating system versions he compares crash rates of apps on the two platforms. He also breaks it down further to look how the top apps compare across the competing mobile operating systems. The results may not be what you expect."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Bad apps crash. News at 11. (1, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934367)

I've decided to opt for a Samsung Galaxy Nexus Android 4.0 device from SaskTel when I eventually get a smart phone (subject to new models coming out from Samsung or HTC and sold by SaskTel), but that's because it's a Java-based system I already have the tools to program, not because I'm concerned about app stability overall.

In fact, the odds are I won't use the thing to run too many apps if what I need is already included: email/web, GPS mapping and routing, and Java applications (including one I'll be working on myself some time in the next year or so.)

In the short term, I'll probably opt for a BASIC voice-and-text flip-phone of some kind, because I can't afford (nor stomach!) spending $600 on a PHONE whose MAIN purpose is to MAKE CALLS when I can get a $70 model that will take care of that primary function just fine for now.

Missing the point? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934455)

The $600 device's main purpose is NOT to make calls. It's an internet communications device that just happens to make phone calls. The people who insist that basic phones are just fine need to figure out this slight, but important, distinction. Buy an internet device if you want internet, but don't compare it to a phone.

Re:Missing the point? (0)

s4ltyd0g (452701) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934599)

Agreed. There are no "smart phones" that provide decent telephony function. Basic phone is one of the worst aspects of these devices an afterthought really. Anybody saying they won't be running many apps should consider just a basic phone and not one of these. I hate my Google phone it sucks. I have a Galaxy Tab though that I use often and I enjoy using the android platform. I bought the device and never installed the SIM. I don't need the SIM as there is no phone functionality on this device. I use it on wifi. It has a bigger screen than my Milestone and gets better battery life.

Really? No decent telephony (2)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935033)

So is a BB 9810 or 9900 not a smartphone? I went down this route because many of our customers are of an age that they still use voice when I wouldn't, and the telephone functions on BB are still excellent. I have quite bad hearing, but my 9810 works perfectly for me.

Re:Missing the point? (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935109)

I'm not planning to buy a smart phone because I need or want one, but to have a device to program to support at least some segment of the smart phone market. Hence putting it off for now.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (0, Troll)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934457)

You have nobody to thank for this but a: the carriers and b: apple.

It is they, who in collusion, raised the price of buying a phone to astronomical levels. Remember when the highest price for an unlocked phone was usually $200? What phone broke that trend? Iphone.

It ended up making the carriers a ton of money even though the consumer gets screwed.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (5, Informative)

dreold (827386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934527)

Sorry, just not true. Before the iPhone, an unlocked Treo 650 cost about USD 650 (without contract). Some fashionable dumb or feature phones - like the Matrix Nokia chromed slider - retailed up to USD 1000 at the time - with contract and all.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (5, Informative)

kqs (1038910) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934575)

You have nobody to thank for this but a: the carriers and b: apple.

It is they, who in collusion, raised the price of buying a phone to astronomical levels. Remember when the highest price for an unlocked phone was usually $200? What phone broke that trend? Iphone.

Well, either that, or you didn't notice expensive phones before the iPhone, since unlocked Treos were $600 in 2006. But sure, you dislike Apple so it's probably Apple's fault.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934687)

i have a piss boner

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (3, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934581)

You have nobody to thank for this but a: the carriers and b: apple.

It is they, who in collusion, raised the price of buying a phone to astronomical levels. Remember when the highest price for an unlocked phone was usually $200? What phone broke that trend? Iphone.

It ended up making the carriers a ton of money even though the consumer gets screwed.

And of course other vendors jumped on the chance to offer similar products for a lower price, right ? There are vendors out there getting killed and yet they don't offer smartphones for significantly lower prices in order to scoop up marketshare. That seems to indicate they can't undercut current prices.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Informative)

Cimexus (1355033) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934659)

What? There have been >$1000 unlocked phones as long as I can remember. Hell, I remember the Nokia 8 and 9 series phones cost over a thousand bucks way back in 1997 or so...

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (5, Informative)

milkmage (795746) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934953)

but the most popular phone leading up to iphone was the RAZR (2004). initial price in the states was $600 bucks.

http://gizmodo.com/270353/the-razr-taught-us-that-the-iphone-is-priced-juuust-right [gizmodo.com]
It was 2004 when the RAZR launched in the US as a high-end design clamshell. It was $600, with a $100 dollar rebate from Cingular. yes, soon after launch the price dropped precipitously much like smart phones now. today you can get an android or ios phone (NEW) for just about every price point from free to 800 bucks.

oh, and don't forget the venerable StarTAC. 1996 - ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_StarTAC).. a primary selling point of which was support for OMG.. wait for it.. SMS. ...a free iphone 3GS is as capable as a laptop of the StarTAC era. Apple didn't set the bar, Motorola did - TWICE. Together the StarTAC and RAZR sold over 100M units.

so poett, you either forgot or are too young to have ever known ;)

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (-1, Redundant)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935031)

+1, informative

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935157)

I don't think the prices are unreasonable -- it's an extremely compact device with a lot of FLASH memory, a screen resolution better than many laptops, and better battery life than most laptops. The Apple devices sold by SaskTel are marginally cheaper in many cases, more expensive in others, depending on which model you get.

But for me, the main purpose is to develop for the phone, not to use it as a phone, so when you add in the cost of a Mac and software to program for iOS devices, the Android platform wins by a HUGE margin.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Funny)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934463)

I'll probably opt for a BASIC voice-and-text flip-phone of some kind

What is the command in BASIC for calling someone?
The closest I can think of is GOSUB, but I'm afraid that's not going to pull the trick.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934661)

CALL maybe?

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (1)

msk (6205) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934675)

DEF FN
FN

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Funny)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934775)

What is the command in BASIC for calling someone?
The closest I can think of is GOSUB, but I'm afraid that's not going to pull the trick.

I think if you want to be pulling tricks, then you need to get people to be calling you. So you'll need to advertise your number with something like a "PRINT". And then repeat that lots of times to try and get past all the people flagging you on CL

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Informative)

darjen (879890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934489)

It's more than just bad apps. I got an iPad a couple weeks ago and safari has crashed several times. I never have more than 5 tabs open. I have also had Skype crash as well, but I don't know how well that code is written.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (1)

Soporific (595477) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934833)

Safari is crashing for me quite a bit recently with just one or two tabs open. In fact most of the other apps appear to be quite a bit more stable than Safari. I realize that rendering pages from many different authors is probably difficult, but it's happening pretty frequently now.

~S

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (2)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935077)

I agree, safari crashes quite a bit, but it seems to be on particular websites. I'm on my iPhone now typing this, iPhone safari works great on /., but some ad heavy sites cause problems. From my experience it's usually smaller blogs and such, most of the Internet works fine. Besides there's several other browsers available for iPhone, opera probably the best IMHO

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (5, Insightful)

Bohiti (315707) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934551)

In the short term, I'll probably opt for a BASIC voice-and-text flip-phone of some kind, because I can't afford (nor stomach!) spending $600 on a PHONE whose MAIN purpose is to MAKE CALLS when I can get a $70 model that will take care of that primary function just fine for now.

Its a common perspective, but first of all most people (at least in the US) buy their phone subsidized with a contract renewal, so the price for even a top-tier phone is $200-$300. Second, for me personally after using smartphones for a few years, I view it as the most significant personal (non-work) computing device I use daily. I definitely use it more than my home PC and tablet combined, and can therefore justify spending top dollar on a quality "phone". I won't make assumptions about you, but I know many people who found, when they get a smartphone, that its main purpose is NOT to make calls.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (4, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934895)

but I know many people who found, when they get a smartphone, that its main purpose is NOT to make calls.

That is so true. And let's not forget that, at least in Android's case, there's a built-in SIP stack so you can make cheap data calls. Of course, you could also run Skype on Android and iOS. There are a couple of VoIP providers (I understand that VOIPO [voipo.com] is one) that let you use your SIP credential on your phone. In any event, even if your main thing is making voice calls, a smartphone can help save you money there.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935125)

Oh, sure, if I want to lock in to a $150+/month contract for 3 years to get unlimited local voice, text, data, and 10 hours of North America long distance/month, I can get the same device for under $100. But that's one HELL of a contract to lock in to in order to save a few bucks now.

I phone should be a tool not an accessory (2)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934671)

Going to spend $600 just to be cool? Ok. But lets be honest here, the iPhone makes phone calls just fine. Using the default Apps is also just fine. A beautiful user experience. It's only when people go totally gaga with the apps downloading every spammy, game demo, half-assed implemented app, by the dozens (or even hundreds)....then its not wonder things start crashing. As for QUALITY apps, there are arguably more of them available for iphone than android...then again, most major apps have versions for each. In other words, pick your poison and have fun. If you want to just make reliable phone calls, buy a $30 Nokia choco bar phone and be done with it.

Re:Bad apps crash. News at 11. (1)

Will.Woodhull (1038600) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935093)

I understand the logic. But my reality is not as limited as that suggested by parent post.

1) I kayak in estuaries ("you are in a maze of twisty channels that are all alike...") and bicycle in towns that I do not know well. I needed to get a personal GPS as soon as I could afford one.

2) My primary computer is my netbook because I can take it everywhere so it sees much more activity than my desktop workstation. Having secure wifi access at any park bench or cafe table I set down to has become important to my life style.

It turns out that my Android w/ Google's tracking app and Verizon wireless was the lowest cost hardware I could find that would give me both of these. And does so in one gadget-- very nice. Also, the built in camera is good enough to take reference photos (I do some 3D modeling), and the barcode reader app has proven to be a convenient way to do pre-purchase research when in Staples or at the grocery store. The wifi router function is good enough that I have dropped my wired connection and run my 3 computer household on it. Cost of basic phone service and 7 GB/mo (enough for my needs) is lower than the combined cost of my old cell phone and Comcast subscriptions.

Oh yeah, I sometimes make phone calls with the thing. For that, it is... adequate. I would probably be happier if I got a bluetooth ear dangle but I cannot justify the added cost and hassle of yet another gadget.

There are a tonne of apps and gizmos available for this thing and I guess that's fine for the kids. I ignore them; not part of my lifestyle.

Long Story Short (5, Informative)

Alicat1194 (970019) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934379)

iOS crashes more than Android (for those who don't feel like trawling through the (not brilliantly formatted) article.

Re:Long Story Short (4, Funny)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934423)

iOS crashes more than Android

Can we sue them?

Re:Long Story Short (0, Troll)

Anthony Mouse (1927662) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934801)

I expect Microsoft has probably got a patent on 'crashes more often than Linux-based operating systems' so maybe they could.

Re:Long Story Short (4, Funny)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934829)

No, they've made it quite clear with their motto: "It *just* works".

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934851)

Are you talking about suing Apple for making iOS crash, or suing the article author for pointing out that iOS crashes?

Re:Long Story Short (1)

Swannie (221489) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934425)

Yes, buy a whopping 0.75% according to the bar graph. I'd call that's statistically equal.

Re:Long Story Short (4, Informative)

MtHuurne (602934) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934487)

0.75 percent point. The relative difference is quite large.

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934499)

And also, anyone buying that is a f**** idiot.

Re:Long Story Short (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934549)

And also, anyone denying that iOS is wondeful and perfect and magical is a f**** idiot. ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOSTEVE

FTFY

Re:Long Story Short (3, Insightful)

dwightk (415372) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934837)

Right... because what really matters is the total number of crashes reported, not the crashes per application launch.

Re:Long Story Short (5, Interesting)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935163)

0.75 percent point. The relative difference is quite large.

Can't be that bad, otherwise why would 94% of iPhone users buy another iPhone but only 47% of android users would buy another android? [thenextweb.com] Honestly I don't care if apps on one phone crash 0.75% more than on the other, the real question is would you buy another model of that phone? If the answer is yes then obviously the crashes aren't bad enough to want to switch.

Sent from my iPhone

Re:Long Story Short (4, Interesting)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934547)

iOS crashes more than Android (for those who don't feel like trawling through the (not brilliantly formatted) article.

* for apps which use Crittercism's [crittercism.com] crash reporting component. That's important since we do not know which apps those are and if they are representative for the whole software catalog for the devices. Only Apple has all the crash reports across all iOS apps (and even then only for people who haven't disabled the sending of crash reports.) Maybe the jailbreak guys could compile some interesting stats, since they've released a tool to upload your crashlogs [greenpois0n.com] (Cdevreporter) to them to aid in jail breaking.

Re:Long Story Short (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934735)

You would have to opt into error reporting in iOS to allow Apple to collect that info. It is not enabled by default.

This report isn't particularly useful since it only represents a small subset of those apps that leverage Crittercism. It says nothing about those that don't, or what percentage of typical apps on a phone this data represents.

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934553)

iOS crashes more than Android (for those who don't feel like trawling through the (not brilliantly formatted) article.

Skype for iOS 5 might have skewed the stats somewhat. Immensely popular and crashes continuously.

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934591)

Yes, and that's because Apple recommends against exception handling as a way to implement your algorithms (sorry, this doesn't make much sense for non-programmers) while in Java you're forced to catch exceptions. Personally I like the Apple model most because as consumer I prefer an app crashing than becoming unresponsive or worse and as developer I dislike having a jungle of try/catches.

Anyway, if you want to be on neutral ground, you should rather ask which platform has more apps that actually do their job.

Re:Long Story Short (5, Informative)

swillden (191260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934645)

Personally I like the Apple model most because as consumer I prefer an app crashing than becoming unresponsive or worse

As a consumer, I notice that I see far fewer unresponsive apps on my Nexus than I did with my iPhone 4. This is probably partly due to the fact that the Android OS is so quick to intervene and offer to forcibly close an app -- which turns an unresponsive app into a crash and would contribute to Android apps crashing more than iOS apps.

as developer I dislike having a jungle of try/catches.

Then structure your code so you don't have a jungle of try/catch blocks. If your exception handling code is complex, it's often a sign that the code in general is too complex and needs refactoring. It's a code smell [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Long Story Short (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934779)

My strategy on this is pretty simple. I refuse to put any try catches in a function (obviously not talking about Java here) until it is written and does roughly what it is supposed to do. Then I test is as well as I can and when it crashes unexpectedly I FIX THE CODE. Then when I've done that as much as I can stand, I might throw (get it?) In a try at a critical point to keep the program from crashing but I only do that if I feel there is a reasonable chance the application might fall over due to something that I completely can't anticipate.

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934685)

It is much worse, Android runs on low spec. hardware, has a wider deployment now and apps crash there due to programming bugs and not OS caveats.

Re:Long Story Short (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934787)

Slightly longer, but infinitely more correct version

Apps on iOS that use some random 3rd party crash report tool crash
more often the Apps on android that use some random 3rd party crash report tool

And they are talking about app launches, not individual apps, so a single really popular
app that crashes will inflate the percentages.

Android ftl? (4, Insightful)

metalmaster (1005171) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934387)

I was expecting android to outdo iOS in the crash department due to all the variables in the android world hat iOS just doesnt suffer from. Namely, android has a wider range of handset support.

Re:Android ftl? (4, Insightful)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934411)

And Linux should crash more because it supports more architectures than Windows.

Re:Android ftl? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934441)

I get your sarcasm, but for those who don't, it's worth pointing out that supporting multiple platforms usually makes a platform more robust.

Re:Android ftl? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934573)

And Linux should crash more because it supports more architectures than Windows.

If you have bad drivers, it does. Which is the overwhelming reason for Windows crashes too, and the background for this argument. (Nvidia drivers were alone responsible 30% of total Vista crashes [engadget.com] , which is quite staggering)

Re:Android ftl? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934809)

In the role of User, I don't give a flying fuck why Windows crashes more than Linux. All I know is that it does.

Re:Android ftl? (5, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934919)

In the role of User, I don't give a flying fuck why Windows crashes more than Linux. All I know is that it does.

A User? A User! Hey guys, we got a User here! Which one of you let him in?

Re:Android ftl? (-1, Troll)

metalmaster (1005171) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934669)

this isnt about architecture. As far as I know, today's smartphones run on some variant of ARM. Manufacturers do their best to make the processor their own but the core instruction set is the same.

FWIW, many apps on Android crash due to inane things like screen resolution issues, storage handling, and at the more complicated end of the spectrum is RAM handling. This is where phones differ. Screens vary between 3 and 5 inches with resolutions somewhere between 320x240 and 800x400. Ive seen phones with as little as 256MB of RAM up to 1GB of RAM. There are times when using an ill fit image crashes everything. I dunno how iOS works, but on the Android platform the user has to clear RAM manually. Otherwise apps will consume it til theres none left which leads to a crash. Apple probably handles this a bit more elegantly.

Re:Android ftl? (5, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934931)

I dunno how iOS works, but on the Android platform the user has to clear RAM manually.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you probably don't know how Android works either.

Re:Android ftl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934933)

on the Android platform the user has to clear RAM manually. Otherwise apps will consume it til theres none left which leads to a crash.

How much is Apple paying you to write such epic bullshit?

Re:Android ftl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38935115)

Unless you analized a ton of buggy applications for exact reasons of crashes, you seem to imply that variance in hardware contributes to Android's crashiness (because all iOS devices from iPod Touch to iPad has same resolution and RAM size, right?).

And then there's this beautiful snippet about "the user has to clear RAM manually".

Re:Android ftl? (-1, Troll)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934471)

IOS is for faggots.

Re:Android ftl? (4, Interesting)

MtHuurne (602934) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934481)

Objective C vs Java might have something to do with it. In Objective C the programmer has to take care of more low-level stuff so the potential for errors is larger. Also the compiler will catch fewer problems.

Re:Android ftl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934597)

I believe you have a point there. Java's garbage collection at it's best!

Re:Android ftl? (4, Informative)

WankersRevenge (452399) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934693)

We'll be probably being seeing the numbers shift as more ios developers start incorporating ARC into their code. For those not in the know, ARC is compiler optimization that handles object deallocation for the developer thereby preventing the most common kinds of crashes. People often get it confused with garbage collection and while the end results are similar, ARC occurs only occurs at compile time so there is no runtime performance hit. It's a big win for developers and end users.

Re:Android ftl? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934897)

ARC isn't a silver bullet, and there are actual performance benefits to modern garbage collectors that ARC won't be able to take advantage of. Its really just auto-generated retain and release statements at all the most obvious points where you'd need it in code. It doesn't protect against circular ref leaks, and there are ways to structure your code that confuse it, requiring you to turn it off for the entire source file. It is nice that you can turn it off for one source file but leave it on for the rest of your codebase. And unless I'm mistaken, its still deallocating objects individually when their refcount hits 0, not giving you any of the bulk deallocation speedups that a generational garbage collector gives you. Garbage collectors have come a long way. The runtime cost of performing collection has gone way down, and for all but a few workloads is more than offset by the more efficient allocation schemes it gives you access to.

Re:Android ftl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38935153)

Garbage collectors have come a long way.

Too bad that the Android Dalvik VM still has a non-moving GC... At least it is mark&sweep and not ref-counting.

Re:Android ftl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934497)

The bit about "One other point that this made clear to me is that many people apparently take their time updating their iPhone software or never update it at all." kinda kills the iFag delusion that iOS is easy to develop for because Apple pushes out new versions quickly so you don't need to bother supporting old ones, doesn't it?

Sheldon Cooper Spooned Penny with a Wookie Mask (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934437)

Inigo Montoya: That Vizzini, he can *fuss*.
Fezzik: Fuss, fuss... I think he like to scream at *us*.
Inigo Montoya: Probably he means no *harm*.
Fezzik: He's really very short on *charm*.
Inigo Montoya: You have a great gift for rhyme.
Fezzik: Yes, yes, some of the time.
Vizzini: Enough of that.
Inigo Montoya: Fezzik, are there rocks ahead?
Fezzik: If there are, we all be dead.
Vizzini: No more rhymes now, I mean

iOS crashes more often than article states (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934439)

Since iOS 5.0.1 I cannot browse (Safari) for more than a few minutes on my iPad before it crashes. I tried other browser Apps: they also crash 5 - 10 times a day. I don't need iPad 3. I need Apple to fix their horrible firmware. Apple is clearly a hardware company. Software is Apple's Achilles Heel. Google is way better at software.

What, pretell, are the websites crashing yer ipad? (1)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934683)

Honestly, Sarfari for iPad is the best mobile experience out there, what is causing it to crash?

Re:What, pretell, are the websites crashing yer ip (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934999)

facebook.com and www.esprit.nl crash daily. I have an iPad 1 with iOS 5.0.1.

Just browse for a while on www.esprit.nl (click on a few links) and Safari (or Atomic browser) will crash.

iOS 4 crashed a lot less.

Re:iOS crashes more often than article states (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934745)

That's either bullshit or you have managed to seriously bork your installation.
May I suggest 'restoring' the software from within iTunes.

Missing analysis (4, Interesting)

geogob (569250) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934485)

I would be very interest to see the impact of jailbreaking in this analysis. Do apps crash more often on jailbroken devices? How does it compare between Android and iOS?

One of the main argument for closed down system, putting aside the money factor which no one gives as an official reason, is stability. I do not believe stability is considerably affected by jailbreaking or by the subsequent modification one could do to the OS, but it would be nice to have statistics and some analysis on this.

Re:Missing analysis (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934959)

I would be very interest to see the impact of jailbreaking in this analysis. Do apps crash more often on jailbroken devices? How does it compare between Android and iOS?

One of the main argument for closed down system, putting aside the money factor which no one gives as an official reason, is stability. I do not believe stability is considerably affected by jailbreaking or by the subsequent modification one could do to the OS, but it would be nice to have statistics and some analysis on this.

Depends. In the Apple world, "jailbreaking" is simply to allow users access to system services and data that they would otherwise be prevented from using. In the Android world, "rooting" is primarily to permit the installation of third-party firmware, something which Apple would never permit since iOS is closed-source anyway.

It's been my experience that some of the better alternate ROMs out there are substantially more stable, and have fewer runtime issues, than the stock firmware provided by Google or the carriers. I didn't see any reference to that in the Crittercism data. My personal favorite, for some years now, had been Cyanogenmod [cyanogenmod.com] . Their current release is still Gingerbread, but they're working on a ICS release. I'm hoping it will be soon. The thing is, the "many eyes" principle works very well in open source projects like this, especially when the eyes are as talented and capable as Steve Kondik and his crew: Android is a much better, faster, more stable product because of them.

Cooperative multi-tasking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934493)

So IOS 4 used cooperative multitasking (http://forums.pcworld.com/index.php?/topic/89287-apple-ios-4-vs-android-multitasking-which-approach-is-better-for-users/page__st__160) while I believe android uses a modern pre-emptive multitasking approach. I know IOS 5 has updated multtasking but it is unclear to me if they have gone to a full pre-emptive multitasking scheme.

It doesn't surprise me that Android is better in this area. To my way of thinking it doesn't make much sense not to have full pre-emptive multitasking and I have an iPhone. It wouldn't significantly affect battery life. The fact that a ton of processes can be running in the background on android is a significant contributor to the android battery woes. While that wouldn't be possible without full pre-emptive multitasking, I think there are better ways to manage that than simply relying on third party apps to manage background activities.

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (2, Insightful)

TC Wilcox (954812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934539)

So IOS 4 used cooperative multitasking (http://forums.pcworld.com/index.php?/topic/89287-apple-ios-4-vs-android-multitasking-which-approach-is-better-for-users/page__st__160) while I believe android uses a modern pre-emptive multitasking approach. I know IOS 5 has updated multtasking but it is unclear to me if they have gone to a full pre-emptive multitasking scheme.

iOS has always had a full multi-tasking kernel. It is Unix for crying out loud. I would write more, but obviously you don't care because otherwise you would have typed, "iPhone Kernel Multitasking" into your favorite search engine and found and read any of the top articles that the search engine provides. Go on, try it out, if you care at all, which I doubt.... .... And really, for "proof" you grabbed post #161 from random post on some article?

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (2, Informative)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934629)

despite all of your rambling bullshit, you cannot write apps that will properly multitask for ios AND will get listed in the official market.

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934651)

you are talking rubbish. kernel multitasking != sandboxed app multitasking..

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934997)

And yet, somehow iOS supports both.

Go figure.

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38935097)

And yet, somehow it's impossible for apps to take advantage of full preemptive multitasking, so it may as well not be there.

Re:Cooperative multi-tasking (2)

TC Wilcox (954812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935075)

you are talking rubbish. kernel multitasking != sandboxed app multitasking..

The anonymous that I was responding to was the one that used the term "cooperative multitasking" to describe iOS. Cooperative Multitasking has a very specific definition in regards to operating systems and iOS is definitely not a cooperative multitasking operating system. Once again, if you cared you could type, "cooperative multitasking" into your favorite search engine, click on the wikipedia link, and then read all about it.... If you cared..... Which you must not since you haven't already....

Multiple mobile operating systems? (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934513)

One of the reasons for app crashes is the proliferation of mobile operating systems on iOS and Android. As Apple and Google have released more new operating systems...

Apple has multiple mobile operating systems? Here i thought they just had iOS? Oh wait. According to this "professional" Google has multple mobile operating systems too! I must really be out of the loop. Maybe they should stick with just one OS and update it when they find bugs. Oh that would be cool! They could like call it the same thing but increment a number next to its name to show which updates have been applied.

Wait! What? Why are you marking this as flaimbait? The article was flaimbait based on a bunch of hair splitting conjecture and the assumption that each update of the OS was some kind of new OS. Why shouldn't I get to join the fun?

Re:Multiple mobile operating systems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934639)

You shouldn't get to join the fun, because you're a fucking idiot.

The article sucks, no lie. But they make a distinction between a crash on different versions of iOS and Android because OSes have different features in different versions, not just different bugs and glitches.

There are 5 major versions of iOS and 4 major versions of Android. Or maybe you're browsing from a 15 year old Windows install wondering what all the fucking fuss is about with Windows 7. After all its the same name, with different numbers. Clearly, its the same operating system, just with different updates applied.

Breaking the data down further to minor version and patch number is even helpful to demonstrate that within the same major version there are wildly different performers. Which you wouldn't know about, because they're all the same to you.

Re:Multiple mobile operating systems? (1)

Alunral (2477578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934731)

If you bothered reading the article, they're calling different versions of each base version a "different OS". In the same way that Windows XP is a bit different from Windows 7. Android 2.1 compared to Android 4.0. They are both Android, and are relatively compatible...but they are not the same. What works on one will not always work on the other. Not to mention not all phones run the same version of that software. When you have to flash a different ROM to update, that's not considered just updates. It's a whole new system. So yes, both Apple and Google have multiple mobile OSes. Microsoft as well, as they do count.

Re:Multiple mobile operating systems? (1)

ganjadude (952775) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934743)

right, and microsoft only has one OS as well, windows! Nevermind the different versions, service packs mobile, server editions.......

Removable battery (1)

John Bresnahan (638668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934595)

When I owned a Motorola Droid, there were several times when I had to remove the battery to recover from the phone completely locking up.

I don't have that option with my iPhone, but fortunately I haven't had the phone crash.

Re:Removable battery (2)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934695)

I've had to remove the battery on the Blackberry quite a few times to recover. annoying!

Re:Removable battery (1)

KazW (1136177) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934713)

Motorolas are horrible, I had a Milestone for five days before going back and getting an HTC Desire. I had the same problem with the phone completely locking up. So while your point is valid, I would argue that it only applies to certain manufactures, and I have seen iPhones completely lock up as well.

Re:Removable battery (1)

ganjadude (952775) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934751)

I have had to pull the batt on my droid 2 before and i love having that option. Lets face it sometimes things go wrong. I have an ipod touch in my car and every now and again it will lock up and freeze on me. but the worst part is the only way to recover it that I have found is to wait for the batt to die and start over

Re:Removable battery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934791)

You could always just hold down the power button for 30 seconds for the droid to hard reset (similar to how you hard reset an iphone, except on the iphone you hold down two buttons). However you have the option to pull the battery, which only takes 5 seconds.

So you are complaining that you had an option to reset your phone faster?

On the other hand I use the droid3 now for about 6 months, never had to even reboot it. So I think it would be more fair to compare a same generation phones, as I assume your iphone's newer than your droid was.

Re:Removable battery (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934979)

When I owned a Motorola Droid, there were several times when I had to remove the battery to recover from the phone completely locking up.

I don't have that option with my iPhone, but fortunately I haven't had the phone crash.

That's Motorola. If you want a stable phone, try an HTC next time. I still have a G2 I bought a couple of years ago and it's never locked up (except once when I flashed the wrong firmware, but that was my fault.) And I overclock the thing from the stock 800 Mhz. to 1.2 Ghz with no problems.

Version of iPad matters (2)

blindbat (189141) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934705)

iPad 1 "crashes" a lot compared to iPad 2.

All testing by Apple is now done on iPad 2, which has more memory. So some of the "crashing" is iOS telling the app to free up memory, and shutting it down too quickly.

This has made the iPad 1 experience much poorer than it used to be.

Re:Version of iPad matters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38935131)

Indeed, my iPad is crashing all the time after "upgrading" to iOS 5. Safari is the worst, it is almost impossible to surf the web and it has been like that for months now. Even with all other programs closed.
It just works. lol :D

One of the tradeoffs i was expecting to get from a closed platform was stability. It was really good until iOS 5 but now it is garbage.
I might be buying a new tablet later on this year and i really liked the iPad and wasn't really considering any other. But I think I will take a look at a android based tablet and see if anyone have made a cool one now.

It boils down to managed vs non mananged language (1)

postmortem (906676) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934719)

As many know, it is possible but tought to make C-based apps that have perfect memory management and no chance of crashing. My own applications, and hundred professional ones written in C/C++ do crash. Sometimes. And it is often hard to figure out where they crash. It could be array out of bounds, some NULL pointer de-referencing, some dependent library doing the same, etc.
While Java-based ones never do. They do throw exception, at which point you know what/where to fix.

Re:It boils down to managed vs non mananged langua (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934761)

... Or you don't, at which point exception flies up through exception handlers stack all the way to the top level EH and the app gets killed with "Application was forced to close" message (on Android) or something like that.

Java compiler just buggers you more about uncaught and not rethrown exceptions, as this is declared and checked statically.

Re:It boils down to managed vs non mananged langua (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934969)

I disagree

You really don't get much more protection with Java then you do with native code on iOS. Exceptions only help you when you know you need to catch them. Null pointer dereferencing is pretty much a non-issue in ObjC/Cocoa because of the way messages are passed(at least no more than java.lang.NullPointerException [crittercism.com] ). When you are multithreaded in Java it's trivial to make the simplest code throw a ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException or NullPointerException when you hava your logic wrong.

The data we are looking at is from the small subset of apps which use Crittercism [crittercism.com] rather than TestFlight [testflightapp.com] (why is anyone not using TestFlight?). It's not meant to be representational of the real-world. It would be interesting to know what iOS-based and what Android-based apps use Crittercism.

Every OS Sucks (2)

fwarren (579763) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934741)

Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie said it best. Every OS Sucks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPRvc2UMeMI [youtube.com]

Re:Every OS Sucks (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934991)

Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie said it best. Every OS Sucks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPRvc2UMeMI [youtube.com]

A friend of mine who used to be a car mechanic said something similar once: "All cars are garbage."

For those interested... (5, Informative)

Ender_Stonebender (60900) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934755)

I was bored this morning, so for those interested, since the article makes it hard to extract this information:

All iOS versions total 84.36% of crashes; all Android versions total 15.49% of crashes. The worst offenders for iOS are version 5.0.1 at 28.64% and 4.2.10 at 12.64% (with seven other version listed at above 1% of crashes). The worst offenders for Android are versions 2.3.3 at 3.86% and 2.3.4 at 3.65%, with 4 other versions listed at above 1%.

GIGO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38935177)

I saw no evidence that crittercism was normalizing their data. What they called "normalizing" was just breaking crashes down by version.

I felt that I knew less about the problem after I read the article than before, and not in a good way.

hmmm (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38934943)

I would wager 5 quatloos that there are more "coding newbs" on IOS than Android therefore more poorly written apps on IOS.

How about recent versions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38934961)

I notice the complete lack of a "versions in common use" chart, for those looking to know what we'll actually see in the real world instead of a controlled testing environment.
Anyone care to try to eke that out of the pies?

State of software quality (4, Insightful)

mysterious_mark (577643) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935053)

I don't think this has as much to do with Android and iOS as it does with the state of software quality in general. The current state of software quality is abysmal, since the shift to scripting languages and web apps as the primary platform about ten years, the science and art of writing robust and reliable software for OO, event driven, asynchronous platforms like iOS or Android has become an almost lost skill. Unfortunately failure modes for these platforms are more dramatic than for web apps, in that you'll likely get a crash rather than 'error on page' message. The situation has been further exacerbated by management's insistence an always hiring the lowest quality developers they can find, outsourcing, H1 B's etc. If you use low quality and inexperienced devs, you'll likely get an unstable and and unreliable application on these types of platforms. This should be a wake up call to the industry in general in that we need to focus and engineering, quality and reliability, and not just minimizing cost.

3.66% WTF? (1)

ninetyninebottles (2174630) | more than 2 years ago | (#38935065)

Wait, this study shows 3.66% crash on launch rate on iOS? I realize maybe my personal experience will not align with the data and all, but I have had iOS crash on me once and six times I've seen apps crash or screw up to the point I had to relaunch them. That is over a period of several years. I'm guessing there is something weird with the methodology here, perhaps not a representative sample? Am I truly that much of an outlier?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?