Search guru Danny Sullivan takes Google to task for Android’s clunky …

Google’s Android is considered the more open operating system than Apple’s iOS alternative because developers are free to customize the code and hardware vendors can build whatever Android-powered device they choose to design. By contrast, Apple tightly controls iOS which only runs on Apple devices and also has far tighter restrictions and review of apps that make it to Apple’s App Store versus Google’s Android Market. 

But Sullivan, the Editor-in-Chief of SearchEngineLand, calls Google’s approach more “Clopen” than open — the “cl” for it’s more closed aspects. As he rightly points out, Android is closed to consumers in the sense that they have no choice as to what version of the operating system they can run on their devices, unless they go through a series of technical hoops to “root” the device themselves. 

Unlike PCs where Microsoft makes the latest version of Windows available (albeit for a fee) to hundreds of millions of PC users to upgrade to or not, Android users have to wait for the manufacturer of their device or their mobile carrier to offer it. 

“It’s as if you owned a Mac but were given no clue from Apple about whether it could run a new version of Mac OS X. 

“Actually, it’s not like that, because Apple would never allow such uncertainty,” says Sullivan. “Even Microsoft, having to deal with people who want to run Windows 7 on thousands of different computer models that Microsoft itself didn’t build, still provides consumers with ways to know how to upgrade, like the Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor.”

Sullivan has a few suggestions for Google including that it require any Android device that wants to carry the search giant’s name be certified and that certification include a “fast update” agreement. 

He also suggests Google and/or the device makers should provide an easy way for consumers to replace a customized version of Android to the latest generic version — Ice Cream Sandwich for example — if they want to. 

Sullivan notes “the fragmentation and inconsistency of Android doesn’t seem to have stopped its success.” He then goes on to detail differences in various Android implementations that prevent certain apps from running. 

And bemoans the general lack of information, e.g.: 

“My Droid Charge Verizon LTE phone can’t run Android 4 now, and perhaps never, because Samsung hasn’t said anything about it.

Which in PC terms Sullivan says would be like: 

“My Windows computer made by Samsung can’t be upgraded to the latest operating system, because there’s no way for me to easily install it, and Samsung and Verizon aren’t helping.”

The blog concludes with a plea to Google to do “more to open things up and still allow hardware manufacturers and carriers to believe there’s value in staying with the platform.”