I read that when it was published. I'll reply to each one of them for your entertainment. And before you say "this was someone else's opinion", know that you are the one sharing the link and saying "I'm not the only
person saying this". I am treating this as if it were your opinion directly considering you seem to be submitting this exactly for that reason. If not, then provide your own distinct opinion. Now that I hope that's cleared up, I'll proceed.
1: Android has API Levels. If you want to use the newest stuff, you will exclude older OS versions. This isn't something specific to Android. In any system that uses a system API (like Windows, for example), you can't just use the newest thing unless you want to exclude older versions. Windows upgrades come through much slower, but Windows has also been around for much longer. But that doesn't change the fact that there are a ton of Windows XP users even though XP is bordering on ancient. Windows Vista and Windows 7 introduced a ton of new APIs that won't work in XP. It's not an Android-specific problem.
2: Yes, there are a ton of hardware configurations. Desktop computers have a ton of hardware configurations, too. Web clients (phones, desktops, laptops, tablets) have this too. If your app needs a camera, then obviously your app won't work right if the device doesn't have one. If a laptop doesn't have a camera, it'll fail in quite the same way. This isn't an Android-specific problem. And the fact that there can be so many configurations is a good thing for end users, no matter how much you think otherwise.
3: Why is this a problem? No app controls those buttons nor do they need to know which button is which. And with new devices running ICS, those buttons are removed altogether and are drawn on the screen instead by the OS. I reject this as anything to even consider as a problem.
4: I hate that device manufacturers and carriers make changes to the stock OS build, but I'm glad that they have freedom to do so. I'd rather them make changes than for them to come out with their own OS each. But with that aside, I don't see an example of how this is a problem for developers. Are they removing or altering the available APIs? Or do they just make the UI different? If it's UI-only, then this isn't anything of interest.
5: They're more strict now. They issued UI guidelines and a good number of developers are following them. The biggest offenders these days are folks porting from iOS and keeping the iOS UI guidelines which makes their apps look like they belong on an iPhone not on an Android device. I do prefer that Google keeps their hands out of actually approving applications, though. If someone wants a controlled store, they can go shop in the Amazon Appstore or some other vetted store I don't already know about. Or if they want to be nannied, they can buy an iPhone. The way Google runs their shop right now is a good balance of developer and end user freedom.
6: I don't see examples of actual malware with regard to breaking through security, though there are apps that claim that they do one thing while they do something else. This is no less secure than any desktop or laptop out there. The user must approve the app's list of requested permissions before they are able to install the app and they must approve the permissions again if those permissions are changed in a future app update. If the user wants to install a game but it wants access to the user's contact list, the user shouldn't approve it. If they approve it anyway, they have little right to complain. Yes we live in a world where most users just click "ok" to everything. I'm okay with it biting them in the ass once in a while. Most of us are adults here and we can pay attention to what's going on. For the few apps that claim to do something legit with the permissions requested but then do something different, that's a different problem. You still need to be able to trust the app developer and their intentions. If you don't trust them, don't install. This is the same as any other computing platform, even the iPhone. Users should be reading reviews and reading the permissions list before they install. Android is not Fisher-Price and I will be very angry if it becomes it.
7: What? If you're just looking for stats, there are plenty of sources. Why is this an Android problem?
8: Apple has been attacked for patent issues just the same as Android-using manufacturers. I refuse to pay any attention to this until a real patent issue arises that will affect anyone that isn't a manufacturer directly. Bringing up patent issues are nearly always just FUD and this time is no exception.
9: Apps written for Android phones run on Android tablets too. If the developer is following recommended guidelines (which do exist), a problem with tablet-specific development is reduced greatly. Or simply don't even worry about Android tablets. If you are going to exclude Android altogether only because iPad is more popular than other tablets then I think you're making a decision based on a strange metric. But if that's how you do business, then by all means just go cater to the folks you want to cater to. But the fact that iPad is popular being a reason for a person to not like developing for Android seems like an excuse, not a reason.
10: This is much better now. The old market wasn't nearly as usable as the new Google Play Store (I haven't warmed up to the weird name yet) is. And the play.google.com
website is also very usable. And no iTunes required. And you can choose to remote install an app via the web browser without even having the device in-hand. I'd say that this issue doesn't exist anymore at all.