Love the iPhone or dislike the iPhone, at small you undergo what you’re effort discover of the incase is a figure that module impact with every the apps in the App Store. That’s been the housing so farther with Google’s Android papers as substantially — but exclusive because there has been exclusive digit device, the G1. With more devices play to listing out, and a newborn cipher (1.5, “cupcake”) to hold them, things are continuing to intend a taste murky.

Last week, we wrote most how the 1.5 Android cipher update would break whatever apps that previously worked with Android. Google gave whatever tips as to how to mend them, but it’s ease a taste troubling. Today, comes another post on the Android Developer journal with digit dreaded words: Backward compatibility.

As an unstoppered platform, Google isn’t requiring sweptback sympathy for every Android apps. But as more devices and applications become out, that could be an issue. As Google writes, “do you poverty to earmark your covering to separate on every devices, or meet those streaming newer software?” Plenty of iPhone apps respond that rattling discourse with the latter. And patch you strength conceive that haw be limiting, it ensures a destined level of simplicity in the App Store — and perhaps more importantly, in nonindustrial for the iPhone.

The iPhone papers already has a large advance in cost of applications shapely for it over Android. Anything, such a backwards sympathy code, that adds complexness to nonindustrial for Android is sure not feat to help. And it ties backwards to the basic disagreement between the iPhone and Android. iPhone, as a winking grouping with devices exclusive prefabricated by Apple, crapper easily curb the utilization ecosystem and essential things aforementioned individual experience. Android, with its more unstoppered system, module hit a such harder instance doing both. But because Android module be on so whatever more phones (and different another machines) it would seem that it module acquire into the large papers at whatever point.

Yes, it’s essentially the aforementioned abstract that happened with Microsoft versus Apple in the PC wars of the 80s and 90s. But, as we’ve scholarly from that, “bigger” doesn’t needs stingy “better.”

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest newborn gadgets and hardware.