Does this mean that 3.0 is not going to ship on phones? I haven't seen it demoed on phones at all.
I get the impression that Honeycomb isn't going to be coming to phones. Why Google is doing this is anyone's guess. Things that are deeply important, like graphics acceleration, needs to filter down very quickly, but it looks like Google are solely focused on tablets.
It's a really schizophrenic strategy, and I'm beginning to get the impression no-one is really in charge there. Why does the Nexus One still not have 2.3? Why are features that were slated for 2.3 now in 3.0, which doesn't even look like it's coming to phones?
Google certainly aren't doing well at pleasing their current customers, and they've certainly scared me away. I don't see why I should trust anything about their upgrade path. The argument that you buy a handset for what it does, rather than what it promises, is flimsy, but when you sell phones like the Nexus One, and specifically promise upgrades, you're just lying.
EDIT: To those commenting about iOS 3.2, the difference is that iOS 3.2 didn't really deliver any large features that meant iPhone didn't maintain parity. Honeycomb, with graphics acceleration, overhauled UI etc. etc. will. Apple's strategy was always a unified one, with a little detour to get it going on tablets. Google appear to have completely switched tack.
Google may have a similar strategy in the works. 3.0 will be tablet-only, then some future version will consolidate things. Since they're not as secretive as Apple there may not be as long a break while things are integrated properly.
That said it'd still be nice to hear about such a strategy if it exists.
There's mention of it (multipane UIs) here: http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html...
It's the same strategy that virtually every maker is following now. It's building out a platform, and its what you have to do to compete now.
I get the impression that Honeycomb isn't going to be coming to phones.
Their introductory video specifically says "built entirely for tablets". I don't know what the credibility of it is, but there was the rumor that the next iteration will be 2.4 and will be for handsets. Such a versioning strategy makes sense.
Obviously they would share considerable amounts of code. The "shell" is just a replaceable process.
Google certainly aren't doing well at pleasing their current customers
It's clear that Google and its open handset partnership is perilously understaffed right now, and they need to cut the umbilical going to whoever is screwing up this opportunity.
Android, I think, succeeded far beyond Google's dreams (originally tablets and PMPs were a no-go, but they've become a primary focus), but it seems to be moving far too slowly. A bunch of stuff they promised for 2.2 still isn't there in 2.3, and is only rumored for 3.0. They need to seriously pick up the pace.
Except for the part where 2.4 comes after 3.0...
And at 4.0 they would likely merge.
My guess is that iOS 3.2 for the iPad was a fork of an earlier version of iOS, worked on by a separate group of people than those that were working on iOS 4.0 for the iPhone[1]. The split was because it took a few months for it to all be merged back together in a stable way, not for any big strategic reason.
1. Remember, the iPad was a big secret - even within Apple.
Aside from secrecy, there are other reasons (like product schedules) that Honeycomb may have been developed on a branch, concurrent with Gingerbread development. Previous releases like Cupcake and Donut were developed on long-lived branches, with frequent merges from the AOSP mainline. The end result could be the same, even if the rationale is slightly different.
1. http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/07/exclusive-interview-googl...