A big mainstream consumer market isn't going to be so forgiving. Can't really expect them to carefully research which handset is likely to get quick software updates or hack on a custom ROM. My bigger concern is the disparity in hardware. The slower Qualcom based Android phones are still going to be shipping brand new throughout 2010 while the higher end is likely to ascend into multi-core 1Ghz+ CPUs with 4-5x as much RAM as the low end models. I'm not sure how a developer can target all those devices successfully over the next few years.
For those that do (e.g. 3D games), you simply state that it requires a snapdragon or whatever CPU. Customers will soon be more familiar with their phones specs, as they are with their computers.
As long as customers understand that their low-end phone won't be able to run the sexiest games out there, I don't see too much of a problem.
The developers just need to figure out how many people have the highest-end phones (and what they'll pay for games that utilize them).
"As long as customers understand that their low-end phone won't be able to run the sexiest games out there, I don't see too much of a problem."
INT. WHITE ROOM
We see two men -- (pudgy but adorable comedian, wearing a robot costume) and (douchey hipsterish guy) -- standing side by side.
DOUCHEY HIPSTER
Hi, I'm an iPhone.
ADORABLE COMEDIAN
And I'm an Android.
DOUCHEY HIPSTER
Hey, Android, have you played this great new game?
You can fill in the rest of the script from here, and perhaps in so doing you'll realize how quickly this could become a major marketing problem for Android...
That already exists with the iPhone today, where the 3GS often runs CPU-intensive apps much better than the earlier models. Segmentation is unavoidable as long as hardware is improving.
"3GS or better required" is much more understandable than "1Ghz Snapdragon or better required", since the package the customer buys says "3GS" prominently - it's even in the name of the device. In fact, customers already are faced with the decision of "3G" vs "3GS" when they buy an iPhone.
What this suggests is that the solution for Android will be to have some easily-understandable number or naming scheme to roughly classify the power of the phone, so apps don't have to list compatible phones en masse. For desktop software, most people basically used the required and recommended CPU speed as such a number. Even though it didn't really capture the full nuances of whether an app required more RAM or more CPU, it was a good enough rough metric.
I'm not so confident that it is that much of a problem. Customers seem to know that a Core 2 beats a Pentium 4.
Once 'can this device support x game' becomes enough of a question, users will start paying attention.
And most "normals" are way way happier gaming with their Xbox, PlayStation, or Wii than with their PC, in part because of that very reason. Some user start paying attention, lots of others leave.
