But Android 2.3 still remains most popular version of Google's mobile platform.
A quarter of all Android-powered devices are now powered by Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich.
During the last two weeks of October, Android 4.0 was installed on 25.8 percent of devices, representing an increase of 23.7 percent in the previous month and 20.9 percent in August.
Android 4.1, otherwise known as Jelly Bean, took a 2.7 percent of the market share in October, which is an increase from 1.8 percent during September.
Version 2.3 (Gingerbread) remains the dominant Android version with a share of more than 54.2 percent. The figure is slightly down from 55.8 percent in October and 57.5 percent in September.
Elsewhere, Android 2.2 Froyo boasts a 12 percent share, while the three versions preceding Froyo cumulatively accounted for 3.5 percent of the market. Android 2.2/2.3 (Honeycomb) is installed on 1.8 percent of all Android devices.
While Jelly Bean still finds its way onto Android devices with just a 2.7 percent share, Google is due to release Android 4.2 on its upcoming Nexus 4 smartphone.
Some people have WinXP on their PCs, some have Win7 and some have already jumped to Win8. No problem, either.
Not witty at all, just a troll. If it hasn't occurred to you they do have version numbers, and most revisions of software and hardware have a codename associated with it. (i.e. Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer and such)
I wouldn't say it's the "most popular" as it's the most common version for folks with slightly-older models to have been locked into. Carriers seem to have a vested interest in preventing older (and sometimes even then-current) models from remaining competative. I'd be interested to see how many phones are still running 2.3 simply because the carrier refuses to approve the next version for that particlar model. Heck, I remember my Fascinate taking FOREVER to get Froyo just because Verizon apparently had no real incentive to test and approve the upgrade. From the carrier's perspective, why would they give you the latest software for something you already own when they can force you to just renew your contract and buy a new device? It sucks, but it's reality (at least as far as my own experience).
Android 3.1/3.2 (Honeycomb) is installed on 1.8 percent of all Android devices.
No, you aren't witty in the least. You are a trolling idiot. Either that or you are about 12 years old. Which is it? Like another poster said, just about every piece of major hardware (CPU, GPU) and every operating system has a nickname. For Microsoft, it's related to landmarks in and around the Seattle or Washington state area. Android selected types of sweets for theirs. If you don't like it, don't buy it, and sit down and drink a tall glass of shut up.
Agreed 100%. The only reason my Fascinate got Gingerbread as soon as it did was because of the amazing devs behind CyanogenMod 7. Granted, the MTD implementation on the Fascinate can still be a bit buggy, but the level of support provided by independant developers vs. that provided by the carriers is mind-boggling.
Each one brings improvements, and not all phones support the latest; these are incremental releases as opposed to competing releases. If you're not rooting your phone, my advice would be to go with the most recent version available as an OTA update from your carrier, but only after doing some research to see how others with the same phone as you are faring. Again, speaking solely from my experience with the Fascinate (Verizon's hobbled Galaxy S SCH-i500), if I remember correctly, the initial OTA Froyo update had some issues that had to be fixed via a subsequent update. Unless you HAVE to be on the bleeding edge and are willing to deal with bugs, I always recommend waiting until the early adopters have had a chance to post feedback before updating your own gear.
But, lets face it, they operate within Capitalism - therefore the incentive to upgrade the OS is not really there especially if they can give you a newer phone that has the latest OS?
As for Jelly Bean - I find it a bit ludicrous that they say its not possible to run it on ARMv6.
It IS - with proper hardware acceleration no less - except in video because Qualcom conveniently never released OMX drivers for it (even though from a pure hardware point of view [technologically speaking] there's essentially no difference between ARMv7 and ARMv6 (except in the numbering - hardware capability though is there).
It's a good thing CyanogenMod was adapted for ICS and JB - I'm running JB on my almost 2 years old ZTE Blade.
Works just fine for the most part - and besides, I don't really use videos on it.
Don't blame the carriers either. Google should put their foot down and make carriers update within a certain time after a new version is out. Blaming carriers/OEM'S is just a cop out. Google has strict rules in place for members of the ZoHA (Open Handset Alliance) which makes Android far less "open " then all the people claiming its "open" think it is.
What would the carriers do? Not sell phones? Yea I'm sure that will go far, a phone service provider not having the phones that are needed to use the service.