It's that time again - Google has updated the developer dashboard with new platform distribution numbers. Following a predictable trend, KitKat has eked out its own 1.1% niche, Jelly Bean (API version 16-18) is going strong at 54.5%, putting it further over the mark it reached last month, running on over half of all devices that have checked in to the Google Play Store in the past two weeks, while Gingerbread's grip continues to slip, decreasing to 24.1% from 26.3% last month.


Honeycomb meanwhile is sticking at a negligible 0.1%, while ICS has dropped 1.2% to 18.6% from last month. Froyo has made another tiny decline, now running on an unlucky 1.6% of devices, down from 1.7% last time around.

As always, the page also includes helpful charts measuring screen size and Open GL versions on devices included in the distribution chart.

Source: Google Developer Dashboard

Liam Spradlin
Liam loves Android, design, user experience, and travel. He doesn't love ill-proportioned letter forms, advertisements made entirely of stock photography, and writing biographical snippets.

  • icyrock1

    Froyo; the desert that just won't die.

    • Mike Reid

      It will appear to die when they remove it from the stats.

      Like eclair and earlier.

      • Lumi

        To be fair, most eclair phones probably have broken down by now. My old HTC running Donut still function as a dumb phone (just barely), but it's got a bloated battery, and can't connect to Wifi or 3G

      • Thomas’

        Or rather removed from the updated Play ecosystem, since they're now stuck with older app versions from Google.

        Following the trend curve there should be still 0.5% Eclair and below out there (with 1.x below 0.1%).

  • polesmoker99

    I don't know why, but I will dance a jig of joy when Froyo and Honeycomb fall off this chart.

    • http://404err0r.com/ Henry Park

      Sorry won't happen anytime soon I love my Flyer

  • Kitkat :p

    Wait for the 4.4 roms to start pouring out, lol This chart will be mostly kitkat soon
    I think CyanogenMod just ended cm10.2 today and is starting cm11 nightlies soon

    • keincc

      custom roms make up a tiny fraction of overall devices. i bet there are more devices activated in a couple of days than all custom roms combined

      • ins0mn1a

        i choose to believe he/she was being sarcastic. i mean, nobody can be that delusional as to think that custom ROMs would so significantly affect this statistic, right?

        • KilpiBan

          Oh, you have no idea.

  • http://404err0r.com/ Henry Park

    Sorry guys I'm still using my HTC Flyer...... I will get rid of it soon so you don't see honeycomb anymore :P

    • BlackBoy88

      So made that HTC never updated to Icecream Sandwich. Oh well it their own loss because I will never buy a new HTC device.

      • PhoenixPath

        Samsung's done it, LG's done it, Sony...you name it.

        Good luck finding that one magical OEM that won't ever let you down...

        • BlackBoy88

          I know but Honeycomb was a beta OS.

          • PhoenixPath

            I'm sure you are correct...in some other time-line of some other reality where that statement is not completely false. :)

          • BlackBoy88

            If I'm wrong about something please tell me?

          • PhoenixPath

            "Honeycomb was a beta OS"

            I think that's the bit there that diverges from what is generally considered Reality.

            (Nice edit, by the way. Original post:
            I know but Honeycomb was a beta OS.
            2:35 p.m., Tuesday Dec. 3)

          • BlackBoy88

            Then what was honeycomb?

          • PhoenixPath

            I almost think you're actually serious....

          • BlackBoy88

            And I think you are being a jackass.

          • PhoenixPath

            Welcome to the Internet.

          • pfmiller

            Honeycomb was the first official Android release for tablets. Where do you get the silly idea that it was a beta?

          • BlackBoy88

            It was a few reasons why I though(incorrectly) Honeycomb was a beta os. First, I got it mixed up with the beta Honeycomb that was used for Google TV. Second, a lot of apps at the time seem to have a beta version for Honeycomb. Third, it wasn't ready to use on a wide array of devices in Google eyes. For example, Honeycomb was not ready for 7 inch tablets until 3.2 was completed and given to members of OHA. Fourth, Google didn't release the source code for Honeycomb until the release of 4.0. Finally, I thought that Honeycomb was a stop gap measure until until 4.0 was complete.

          • PhoenixPath

            Most of that is actually correct...

            I'm impressed. ;-)

            Unless there's a "beta" tag on it...it ain't. (For future reference)

            Oh, and if Google has a statue of it. That's a pretty good indicator as well. :)

          • BlackBoy88

            Now, I'm trying to recall where did I hear the term beta os for honeycomb.... maybe someone on xda or a bloger was joking or something.

          • PhoenixPath

            Possible, definitely; in fact, a lot of folks who "defended" the lack of source on HC (if I recall correctly) tried to do so on the basis that "it wasn't finished", or that "google hacked it together and it wasn't really ever meant for prime-time".

            But anyone who called it a beta while knowing better should be strung up. *grin* (even if it should have been perhaps a "limited release")

          • didibus

            Beta is just marketing term. It's a subjective qualifier, Google kind of abuse it a lot, how many things it keeps in beta for way too long. I think turn by turn navigation is still beta lol.

            Google has an iterative approach, so the reality is everything it releases is beta. While it stabilises features it always add new one or ignore others, making it perpetual beta.

          • PhoenixPath

            I think your use of "way too long" is a bit more subjective than "beta"...

            " so the reality is..."

            ...apparently whatever people want it to be today. Ya us... /s

            Software evolves over time. Every program, every platform, every OS. The devs release new versions. Obviously, they have new features and fixes (or what would be the point). By your logic *EVERY* piece of software that's ever existed has been a beta...

          • didibus

            My point is that as a software engineer myself, I know very well what a Beta was, can be, and is today. Read this entry on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_beta and this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_software#Impact_of_the_World_Wide_Web

            Google's products are often released following the perpetual beta template. Open Source software often also follow this concept, which is why things like nightlies and release candidates turn into the most downloaded version of some android forks.

            A traditional beta should be akin to an early access, it should be the time where you hand out your code to willing users for them to test. At that stage, the software is normally feature complete, meaning you have a set of features that you think all work, but you need to know if it will work on users environments and with their use cases. Sometimes, user feedback of betas can make you alter features, but you hope it won't.

            This kind of testing scenario makes sense for mission critical software. A bank won't agree to work with a perpetual beta system for example. Banking is mission critical. It also makes more sense for hard to upgrade software. So everything pre-internet was hard to upgrade. It's also better for paid software, the beta phase will often be free to users. It is a more top down approach to development and testing.

            Perpetual Beta is a more agile form of development. It works very well in an internet driven world and for free software. The software is free (less expectation of quality, maintenance and support), users can test it often, and updates can be provided quickly.

            So my point is that, android is always beta. It follows the perpetual beta concept. Marketing wise, they do not put the beta tag on it, but that is only a marketing decision. Technically, each Android version is a new iteration of the previous. Iteration must be interpreted in the context of agile development here. Why do I say that, because Android is rarely feature complete, and Honeycomb especially was not. Feature complete means that the code contains all intended functionality of the final version. Things like KitKat releasing without the new camera API is an example of non feature complete. Google went on record saying it was intended to be released as part of KitKat, but missed the deadline. Missing the deadline is an agile iterative perpetual beta approach. A missile control system can not miss a deadline, the deadline will be moved back until a feature complete and stable build of the code exists.

            So, my logic is simply the logic of software development. Not every piece of software ever is beta. I hope that I explained it well enough so that you can see the distinction now.

            Source: My own authority as a software engineer. If you are also a software engineer, well, lol, I guess we find ourselves at the divergence of two engineering school of thoughts. I think in accademia they call it doxastic disagreement lol.

          • PhoenixPath

            "Technically, each Android version is a new iteration of the previous. Iteration must be interpreted in the context of agile development here. Why do I say that, because Android is rarely feature complete, and Honeycomb especially was not. Feature complete means that the code contains all intended functionality of the final version."

            I'd grudgingly agree to a point, though I would posit that there is a huge difference between traditional software "beta" and Operating System software "beta".

            Operating systems by nature, are constantly in development. None are *ever* feature complete...(until dev stops and the project is abandoned). There's always some indication of where they're going from the current version to the next. It's why we have versions. This is true of Windows, OSX, Linux, QNX...you name it.

            So perhaps by standard software design, we'd call all OSes "beta"...but I'd argue there are multiple standards for "beta" depending on the type of software.

          • didibus

            Hum, it's true that OSs, due to their complexity and them being a foundation layer they are often implementing features at a kind of early access preview, to get app developers, admins, etc. used to the new way and to give them time to adapt their apps and systems to it. Those features are generally hidden from the average consumers though.

            But I wouldn't go as much as saying that beta is different for OSs. Windows follows a conventional pattern. They release a new version every 4 to 5 years, it is always feature complete. They have betas, they call them release candidates. The RCs, just like a beta should be, are free. Windows update never provide additional features, they only provide bug fixes and security patches.

            I'd personally argue that each version of Windows prior to Windows 8 were not beta releases. And all Windows RC releases prior to Windows 8 were beta releases of windows.

            Google never took such an approach with Android. They were agile from the start, and hence the perpetual beta state of the OS. It's also why a new version of Android is released so often, and why each new version brings new features.

            Microsoft recently changed their development cycles, to make it more iterative. This started with Windows Blue, aka, Windows 8, 8.1, 8.2, etc. The change was that they will now release feature updates, an update to windows that adds new features. And they will release them more often. This is what all the .x updates are. I guess it gets a bit complicated here, because they still have beta releases, Windows 8.1 preview for example.

            Feature completeness is based solely upon the plan of the company making the software or the client commissioning the development. The question with Windows 8 would be, did Microsoft plan to have the features of 8.1 as part of 8, but since they now use an iterative approach to development, decided to release Windows 8 with features missing, to later add them through an update, the 8.1 release? I can't really say so without being in their head.

            Honestly, it's a subtle debate of little importance lol. But in iterative development, the mantra is that, software is ever changing, requirements differ over time, therefore you should release as often as possible, even when parts of some features are missing, as long as things are functional. Let the client continuously try out features, and give you feedback on them as early as possible. This way, you can adapt quickly, and make a product that is more tailored to the users need. It means you have the client be an integral part of the design process. In traditional development, you fix precise requirements, make up a list of features, and work towards them all until they are fully done and working, then you release.

            I'd say that the multiple standards of beta are not so much related to the type of software, but to the type of development. In google's case for Android, taking an iterative approach, software is always in a "beta" state, it is like you say, the OS is never finished, it is an infinite work in progress that will end only when they drop the project. Everyone is part of this process, devs at Google, the open source community and users of Android. In Microsoft case before Windows 8, it was the opposite. They'd come up with features they believed would work out for the next 5 years, and forced them on users. The users had to adapt to the software, as opposed to the software adapting to the users.

            So you can see it either way, Android is never in beta, or it is always in beta. Windows is either in beta, or not. In a sense, we're probably both right.

          • PhoenixPath

            "In a sense, we're probably both right."

            ...I was lead to believe this was not possible on the internet. *grin*

            Thanks for the rational discussion, by the way. Rare stuff. :)

          • didibus

            I appreciate it, thanks to you too.

      • Simon Belmont

        It started with Gingerbread. So, an update to HC was pretty good considering the Flyer never really took off (pun intended).

        ICS (or Jelly Bean) would have been nice, though. Ah well.

        • BlackBoy88

          HC was a beta OS. But I feel really bad for the Jetstream owners. They really got a raw deal...

          • PhoenixPath

            "HC was a beta OS."

            There it is again...

            Do you know anyone named, "The Doctor"? Did they take you somewhere in a spinning blue box (...and forget to bring you back?)

          • BlackBoy88

            You didn't have to be snarky. Just say I was incorrect in calling Honeycomb a beta os.

          • PhoenixPath


            Sure thing. I mean, it's not like you were lying or anything... /s

          • BlackBoy88

            I'm sorry for being wrong. I didn't intend on lying. But you didn't have to be rude about correcting me. I though it was a beta is because Google didn't release the source code and it only work with tegra 2 processors and on larger displays in the beginning.

          • PhoenixPath

            Rude is subjective. It was merely a reference to Dr. Who. Take as you wish. :)

            If you did not intend on lying, one simply has to ask: Where on Earth did you get informed that HC was a "beta"??

          • BlackBoy88

            What is "Dr. Who"? And "Where on earth did [I] get informed that HC was a 'beta'? " would have has suffice.

          • PhoenixPath

            Google it.

            Yes, yes... I realize asking you to try and consider where you first received that information is rude. Please forgive me for trying to make you consider where you get your information.

            ...or was it the reference to lying that you are again taking offense to? Own it, man. You were wrong. It happens to everyone. Heck, I was even trying to give you an out by asking you to name the source of your misinformation.

          • BlackBoy88

            No, it wasn't clear that you was asking for my source.

          • PhoenixPath

            "No, it wasn't clear that you was asking for my source."

            Right. The fact you were able to clearly paraphrase it above doesn't contradict that at all.

            Are you ready to just move on yet, or do you need some more incentive?

          • BlackBoy88

            You took offence to me saying that I didn't understand what you was saying? Please read this sentence in place of someone that isn't familiar with your "Dr. Who" " Do you know anyone named, "The Doctor"? Did they take you somewhere in a spinning blue box (...and forget to bring you back?)" what would you think this would imply to that someone?

            Yes, it was you calling me a liar is what I did take offence to. That would be pretty evidence.

          • PhoenixPath

            "You took offence to me saying that I didn't understand what you was saying?"

            Not exactly sure what you are saying here. It looks like you think I've been offended. I can honestly say I have yet to be offended by anything today. I just the way I am...lucky me, I suppose.

            "what would you think this would imply to that someone?"

            ...er...that someone was referencing something I was unaware of and thus...ignore it? But then, that's I suppose part of the whole "I don't easily offend" business I alluded to earlier. It happens a lot, actually. I didn't watch "The Anchorman" until just a few short months ago and was clueless when folks made reference to some of the lines or characters.

            Ya shrug it off and move on. Life's rough, and missing a cultural reference sure isn't a reason to make it harder on yourself.

            "Yes, it was you calling me a liar is what I did take offence to."

            A liar is someone who spreads untrue information. Guess what, sparky? You is that. At least it wasn't intentional, as I had originally believed. Pat yourself on the back...if you must.

          • BlackBoy88

            According to Wikipedia, "A lie is a false statement to a person or group made by another person or group who knows it is not the whole truth, intentionally" and a liar tells lies. So, how am I liar? I didn't know Honeycomb wasn't beta os and you could have clear just stated, "Honeycomb wasn't a beta os" but you didn't.

          • PhoenixPath

            wiki. Cute. Fun.

            Try Merriam Webster. Try any number of "actual" dictionaries. Almost all of them do not include the specificity that it must be intentional.

            The funny bit is; I didn't actually call you a liar until my fourth or fifth response to you. (...and now you're throwing wikipedia at me...my how this has devolved...)

            I know: Are your pants on fire? If they aren't, you're good. You're not a liar. (This is another cultural reference you probably won't understand, but the gist is: if you pants are not currently engulfed in flames, you must not be a liar.)

            Feel better now?

          • BlackBoy88

            This is what Merriam Webster have on it's website

            a statement known by its maker to be untrue and made in order to deceive


          • PhoenixPath

            Oh for the love of....


            I gotta ask: Why is it so important to you that you convince me? Why do you care so much about *my* opinion? Doyou hold me in such high regard?

            I am *nothing* to you. Get over it. Some anonymous guy on the internet giving you a hard time is not something to get all upset about. It's not the End of the World.

            Future reference: When someone on the web annoys you: stop responding. There's a lot less stress involved. Trust me. Now, I've been extremely bored today so I've been egging you on because, well, boredom makes me Evil. I'll stop now, because I actually have things to do (Yay me!), but honestly:

            don't let people drag into discussions like this. While it may just be "passing the time" for the other person, for you...it seems to be causing a bit of stress.

            chill out, cheer up, believe what you want to believe and maybe watch some Dr. Who (it's good stuff!).

            Have a nice night...sorry if I ruined your day, man.

            oh, and HC isn't a beta. :p (sorry, couldn't resist...Like I said, I'm a jerk.)

          • BlackBoy88

            It is call standing up for myself. It is something I need to start doing, even if it is on the internet.

          • PhoenixPath

            Winning an argument on the internet is not all it's cracked up to be. no one cares who wins...not even the winners. Most posts are forgotten moments after they are made.


            But props on the goals, man. Gotta want stuff; keeps us motivated.

          • Simon Belmont

            Oh, man. What sort of fresh hell did I open up with my comment? :O

            You guys have been arguing back and forth over it all this time? Yikes. :(

          • PhoenixPath

            This is boredom on the internet.

            Look upon it and shudder... *grin*

          • Simon Belmont

            Ha. Must be the holiday doldrums.

            The post Thanksgiving funk. The Black Friday let down. The....ah never mind. Hahaha.

          • PhoenixPath

            Holiday season slump here at work...nothing goin' on.

            Can't watch movies or play games, so....Yeah.

            My descendants are going to be so proud.... :-/

          • BlackBoy88

            Why couldn't you be clearer in asking where I got my information? Why use a cultural reference and why assume that I would know what is Dr who. I have no problem admitting that I was wrong.

          • PhoenixPath

            "Why couldn't you be clearer in asking where I got my information?"

            I'll try and stick to one syllable words in our future parlays. As you were able to clearly paraphrase it a comment later one has to wonder why it is suddenly so unclear...

            "Why use a cultural reference"

            Because I am part of a culture. (We tend to relate to our cultures. It's a human thing.)

            "why assume that I would know what is Dr who."

            I make no such assumption, but rather assume they won't so I can be pleasantly surprised by those that do. Makes life easier to assume the worst...and also by extension, probably why I assumed your ignorance above was intentional and not legitimate. (Oops, my bad...but in my defense you were going on and on about it...)

            "I have no problem admitting that I was wrong."

            Yet you'll span dozens of posts pissing on about it. Here's a thought: If being wrong doesn't bother you...move along. You certainly are not required to stick around for my sterling conversational skills. :)

          • BlackBoy88

            You was the one that started it by being snarky and you are still being snarky. All I ask of you to be clear in what you was saying? Why couldn't you own to the fact YOU WASN'T CLEAR.

          • PhoenixPath

            *shakes head"

            I said: "Where on Earth did you get informed that HC was a "beta"?"

            How is that not clear?

            Especially considering your response restated it (in nearly the exact same words) in what I can only assume is what *you* consider to be "clear":

            "Where on earth did [I] get informed that HC was a 'beta'?"

            Honestly...I don't see the confusion. The question is simple, clear, and concise. If you are having trouble understanding it due to syntax or some language barrier....It is OK to ask someone to restate it! (without accusing them of being unclear...your lack of understanding is your fault, not theirs.)

            Question restated: Where do you get your information?


            "and you are still being snarky."

            Welcome to the internet. Either learn to not take it personally (as I don't know you from Edward Howard Hughes the Third, a person that may or may not even exist), or choose not to participate. Oh, and I'm kind of a jerk.

            ...so there's that.

          • BlackBoy88

            You know what, I don't get people like you. Nor will I. You could have had posted my whole statement: "... And "Where on earth did [I] get informed that HC was a 'beta'? " would have has suffice." I wrote that after I fail to get your Dr. Who reference.

          • PhoenixPath

            Ah. You're saying I should not have included the Dr. Who reference?

            This is the internet. There's a lot of cultural references floating around. Might want to not let it get to you so much. :)

          • BlackBoy88

            I know. I try not to use my urban/African American cultural references on androidpolice.com...

          • PhoenixPath

            Why on earth not? That's half the fun!

            If you can't beat 'em, at least you can confuse the ever-lovin crap out of them... ;-)

          • Simon Belmont

            The Jetstream was a nice tablet, but HORRIBLY overpriced and screwed over by carrier pricing in many markets, too. Pretty sad.

            And, oh wow, I didn't think my above comment would start a huge fight below. Ahhhhh.

    • Thomas’

      Even my Galaxy Tab 10.1 is now on 4.2 :-P

      • http://404err0r.com/ Henry Park

        I could've put custom rom on it but the process didn't seem worth it since the tablet already runs fine for what i need

        • Thomas’

          Yeah, but even Samsung did update the GT10.1 to 4.0.3.

          3.x really slowed down my GT badly. I don't know if it's a problem of the software or some bad flash memory used in the hardware, but it sure became unusable after a year or so.

  • deltatux

    My old phone which I converted to an in-car GPS device is still on Froyo, can't help it =P

  • http://dabuxian.com/ Dabu

    So I assume we can read that as only 1,1% of the Android market are Nexus devices. They really deserve more than that.

    • Ygor Vaz

      There are some people using 4.4 unnoficial ROMS too

      • Max Thomas

        Still keeping with the bleeding edge on my Nook Color. KitKat works like a dream! (Well, compared to laggy Jellybean...)

    • Ryuuie

      Nexus devices simply aren't that popular. The Galaxy Nexus, for example, barely sold at all compared to other smartphones at the time.

      The Galaxy line of Android phones are FAR more popular than anything with the name "Nexus" in the title will ever be. This is because of Samsung's marketing and brand power.

      I'd say the Nexus 7 is more popular than the Nexus 4 and Nexus 5. This is because Google pushes it everywhere. I'd be surprised if the general public even knew the Nexus 4 existed.

      Nexus 5 has the benefit of being on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint. They'll be in their respective stores but you can bet they won't talk about them or advertise them except online (and even then, quite sparsely).

    • ssj4Gogeta

      I'm pleasantly surprised that one in every hundred devices sold is a Nexus (or probably more like half of that, since that 1% also includes other devices running 4.4).

      • PhoenixPath

        Probably much less than half that considering the other devices and custom ROMs.

        • ssj4Gogeta

          By other devices I meant custom ROMs. But you're correct that it may be much less than half.

          • PhoenixPath

            Other devices also includes the Moto X and the HTC One and Samsung S4 GPE devices (which together may actually equal more than the Nexus devices...who knows?)

    • Karlo

      Find 5 here whit OmniROM KitKat

    • http://www.stevenmattera.com Steven Mattera

      Nexus 4, Nexus 5, Nexus 7, Nexus 7 2013, Nexus 10, Moto X, HTC One GPE, and the Galaxy S4 GPE are all the devices officially with Kit Kat. I could see a large number of these most likely coming from the Nexus 7, and Nexus 7 2013. Then there are custom roms out there, which probably make up for < .4% especially seeing as these roms are fairly new and most likely not suitable as a daily driver. Then you also have the non GPE variants running the GPE roms; for example my AT&T Galaxy S4 is running Kit Kat using a GPE Rom. (Which is stable and suitable as a daily driver.)

  • SxperiaS

    It will be interesting to see how Christmas will affect the chart

    • John Smith

      Hopefully a lot of Gingerbread devices will be tossed to the curb

      • Paul

        Doesn't look like the Z1s is released by then and i'm holding on to my Ray, so... nope ;P

  • http://steamcommunity.com/id/metallinatus Metallinatus

    And I am happily helping KitKat with my-- Oh, wait, Google didn't update the Galaxy Nexus....
    Sorry guys, I really tried to help with the fragmentation issue :/

    • Gabernasher


      • Sahil Chaturvedi

        Not that easy yet, lol.

        • PhoenixPath

          ...incredibly easy.

          fastboot flash recovery openrecovery_2.6.3.3.zip
          fastboot reboot-bootloader

          select recovery - hit power button
          select ROM
          boot ROM.

          • Sahil Chaturvedi

            Poor choice of words; my bad. I didn't mean that it's "not easy" to flash.
            I meant that because of all that "missing driver" business (I don't know the real reason), Galaxy Nexus might not get Kit Kat any time soon, AFAIK.

          • PhoenixPath

            Check out Shiny by baldwinguy77. Nexus-like/OTA like AOSP ROM for the Galaxy Nexus (toro only at this point).

            They've fixed just about all of the issues the first builds had (including the graphic glitches).

            As easy as outlined above and working great on my son's Gnex.


        • Gabernasher

          Sarcasm or not knowing how easy ROMs on a Nexus are?

    • PhoenixPath

      No, you didn't. They're called ROMs. They work really well on the Galaxy Nexus...almost as though it was made for them. /s

  • Muhammed Nafay

    I am Proud of being 1.1% however i use Xperia Sola.

  • Kweku Adams

    Doesn't it bother anyone else that they're only collecting and posting data over a week instead of two weeks now?

    • Thomas’

      Nope. Shouldn't have any negative impact on the statistics.

  • gargamel

    just switched back to GB on my old SGS. it works great :-)

  • agl82

    My Sony Internet TV (Google TV) is still rocking Honeycomb. Nearly all of the legacy Google TV devices are still using it.

  • Simon Belmont

    Two of our household devices are running KitKat. Four are running Android 4.3.

    The rest are Gingerbread and below. The ones running Android 4.3, I expect to see KitKat fairly soon (either via official update, or ROM support). Oh, and my EVO 3D, too. Can't forget that.

  • Habs Killa

    I've done my bit. I replaced my HTC Z and upgraded to a Galaxy Mega.

    • http://twitter.com/anishbhalerao Anish Bhalerao

      Galaxy Mega.

  • Bronislav Shtrom

    I would have been in the Ice Cream Sandwich group, but accidentally accepted the upgrade to Jelly Bean 4.1.2. My phone feels slower, and stuff freezes sometimes or runs slow. Really sad