Database Develop

Question for developers 2.0>G1?

So the blogger over at 'Android and me' has speculated that older devices will not receive the 2.0 update.
This guy has done this before, he also said 1.6 was too big for the G1 OS partition and of course we all know this was wrong.
I want to know what the dev's think, once all the bull**** is striped and the 2.0 source code is at stock for the G1. How large will it be? And how much room will be left over for downloading apps?
Thank you for your time.

And how much room will be left over for downloading apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shouldnt be too much of an issue if you are running apsd.
They already have 2.0 running on G1's, i havent used it myself, but it is running, so I presume it fits.

vixsandlee said:
Shouldnt be too much of an issue if you are running apsd.
They already have 2.0 running on G1's, i havent used it myself, but it is running, so I presume it fits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I know... I had 2.0 running for a time and it was great. I used apsd and linux-swap. What i want to know is conclusive evidence that the guy over at Android and me is full of ****.
He always speculates that the G1 will not get updates and is usually wrong. What i am wondering is how large the stock 2.0 for the G1 will be. The Dev's may have an idea.

the guy at androidand me is EXACTLY CORRECT.
What you are failing to see is the guys over there are writing for non-rooted phones. They have said in previous posts that this was a moot point for rooted phones and admitted they were already running the upgraded OS.

Both htc and t-mobile have officially stated that the dream is still getting the 2.0 upgrade. As somebody else said, the point is moot for rooted users because we can always port the newer code to our aging phones, but there's a hitch: the moment htc stops supporting the device, we're on our own.
I've yet to see somebody build the android code for the dream without help from the pre-configurations found in the aosp for dream, and now that the sapphire is officially the adp2, i smell the demise of the dream near.
The biggest enabler of the custom firmware movement was the fact that the dream was also the adp1, so there was a lot of interest on making building the platform easy. We just piggybacked on that.
Take one look at has been accomplished with the hero so far. I still remember the whole "let's make htc give us our hero kernel code" because all thought it would open the door for custom hero firmware. they couldnt have been more wrong. without htc's support, all they got was a fancy linux kernel that they had no idea what to do with, and also discovered how little the kernel had to do with android.
There's now a grand total of two aosp roms for the hero, and they're both so broken that they're really just novelties.
What I'm going at is that once htc drops the dream, people are going to realize knowing linux will only take you so far and you'll have to know android if you plan to get at least a botched android build working on the device.
So eventually, even being rooted will not be enough to ensure continued ability to run the best and latest, unless, ofcourse, we get real devs (again, I'm not claiming to be one myself) in here.
Oh, and.... a bigger android install wont mean less app space... learn to android...
The android system belongs in the 70 mb system partition and, on a factory, official build, doesnt spill into the /data partition where you install your apps. And if you do have root and a2sd, what do you care how big the system is, you can always make your ext bigger, so it should't be a worry for a rooted user.
Really... learn 2 android...

s15274n said:
the guy at androidand me is EXACTLY CORRECT.
What you are failing to see is the guys over there are writing for non-rooted phones. They have said in previous posts that this was a moot point for rooted phones and admitted they were already running the upgraded OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know that the guy at Android and Me has been wrong on this exact issue before right?
When 1.6 was still in the pipes he had a pie chart and everything explaining why it was physically impossible for 1.6 to fit on a G1 (non-rooted). Then 1.6 was pushed to everyone....
http://androidandme.com/2009/08/news/t-mobile-g1-owners-dont-expect-any-future-android-updates/
^^

He was using his best guess at the time after speaking with t-mo, htc and the lead developer from google. He also assumed we would get a VERSION of OS 1.6. Everything he stated then seemed logical... don't fault the guy for not predicting the future man.

What it all boils down to is this;
Whether a device will get an update or not has virtually NOTHING to do with the device specifications and/or storage space. There is LOTS of space available on the device, despite what some chicken little's speculate based on a moronic look at the "free space in /system" (which has VERY little meaning). What determines whether a device will get a particular update or not has everything to do with what the MANUFACTURER WANTS TO DO.
In other words, this is *all* in the hands of HTC. Even tmobile has hardly anything to do with this since tmobile themselves don't have the source for the proprietary binaries (which happens to be the stumbling block) -- although tmobile can say "not for ours" if they want, HTC can still build the binaries and/or system image for DREAM/ADP1. Fully in their hands and nobody else's.
Which leads to a couple of options for updates;
1) modify the current state of AOSP to remain compatible with existing HTC binaries,
2) reverse engineer HTC proprietary binaries so they're no longer needed.
I vote for #2. The replicant project seems to have this aim, but I don't know if they are still alive or if they died along with the open android alliance... http://trac.osuosl.org/trac/replicant/wiki

(discussion) Rom development for Galaxy

Or rather lack of it.
I start of by saying, i am not a dev.
But i see that the way rom's is made for Galaxy lack's most of the things that makes custom rom's good, SGS's rom's seem more themes than proper custom rom's.
I have used Nexus and some of the great rom's to that device.
The SGS way to update FW seems to stop all real development?
What do you think?

samsung's drivers are encrypted and this makes developing roms pretty difficult. there can only be roms based on samsung releases. at least this is what i understood .
i am sure that the growing user base of this great phone will bring more attention from great developers ( hi paul ! , who will be able to overcome most of the problems and give us great roms.

The final non-beta firmware from Samsung hasn't even arrived yet! Give it some time!
Custom roms now would be obsolete within one week because of a newer official beta Firmware.

I was aware that a few days ago paul obrien was having a conversation to cyanogen about creating a vendor tree for the sgs which would enable us to use cyanogen mod. If someone can confirm this with paul this would be very good news for us sgs owners.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
The only reason I ditched the N1 is because Google have said there would be no N2 so I figured I find another phone.
Now I realise how bad fragmentation is, the iPhone really doesn't look so bad again ... (previous to the N1, I was on a iPhone 3G)
It's a pity vendors can't be mandated to supply optional vanilla ROMs - I know Samsung have released a bunch of source code, maybe that's a start.
I guess I'll give it six months. I'm an end-user who wants an easy life, but appreciates the potential and integration with google services that Android provides - moreso in its vanilla form.

Did anybody try compiling the sourcecode that was released by samsung to create a flashable working version of the manufacturer Android version that is currently running in our phones?
If that is possible, and we do have the source code from samsung, I don't see why it would be impossible to get at least a vanilla AOSP 2.1-update1 running on our galaxies.
The encrypted (or closed source drivers) can be linked as binaries to the new AOSP build running on top of Samsung's kernel (which we do have the source code to).
Side question, anybody knows how to flash the phone once you got all source code by samsung compiled ? I know we end up with a zImage, possibly a system.img.. can you create Odin files with these easily ? any thoughts?

miker71 said:
Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
The only reason I ditched the N1 is because Google have said there would be no N2 so I figured I find another phone.
Now I realise how bad fragmentation is, the iPhone really doesn't look so bad again ... (previous to the N1, I was on a iPhone 3G)
It's a pity vendors can't be mandated to supply optional vanilla ROMs - I know Samsung have released a bunch of source code, maybe that's a start.
I guess I'll give it six months. I'm an end-user who wants an easy life, but appreciates the potential and integration with google services that Android provides - moreso in its vanilla form.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same here. previous n1 user, got sgs just after google announced no n2 wil be available.
just took some actions to make things smoother for me :
1. launcher pro
2. dialer one
3. handcent sms
i used them all on n1 and now i do on sgs. its all good again . still, untill froyo hits us i think i will still miss n1's speed. also, i think after froyo hits us, we will get some more roms and goodies for our phones.

what exactly is a vendor tree? and how would it be able to get around the driver issue which is apparant to the SGS?

Some info on the .rfs files that samsung uses:
http://movitool.ntd.homelinux.org/trac/movitool/wiki/RFS

Merging into AOSP
It seems like good idea to have the scripts merged into AOSP tree that support building stock ROMS for samsung galaxy s, with binary-only files being downloaded directly from the device (if I'm not mistaken, this is how one can build froyo for N1 from source now).
From someone else experience: would the patches that add vendor-specific support for SGS be accepted into AOSP tree? Are there known blockers for this?

Hmm.. rom development is quite sluggish due to the firmwares that are being released!
But i really don't care! the original rom is fine with WJG5!
I just use Launcher Pro and widgets to make it better! Speed is ok!

bratfink said:
I was aware that a few days ago paul obrien was having a conversation to cyanogen about creating a vendor tree for the sgs which would enable us to use cyanogen mod. If someone can confirm this with paul this would be very good news for us sgs owners.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.

miker71 said:
Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This isn't fragmentation though, this is exactly what Google wanted Android to be - a base for phone manufacturers to lay their own tweaks on top of. HTC, Motorola, Samsung etc don't just want to be differentiated by how their handset looks, they want to put their own stuff on there too. Previously each had their own OS (Symbian, UIQ etc.) that took years of development time and was very slow moving. Google provided Android as a quick route to market for a phone, the manufacturers didn't really have to worry too much about the OS and then get lots of apps for free.
The thing is, the vanilla apps are a bit.. basic. The standard music player is fine, it works and does what it says on the tin. The standard contacts is fine again etc. Makers can ship a ROM based on vanilla Android and it would be good to go, but if they can improve upon the apps and brand it slightly more then all well and good.
But it's not fragmentation. Android is a base. A starting point. It's not meant to look exactly the same on every device, but it's meant to work exactly the same as much as possible. These manufacturers get a stable, standard, capable phone OS for free, which to them is awesome. It saves them so much time and is ultimately why eventually there will be nothing but Android on devices. It's the Mac vs PC all over again - cool but closed and restricted vs ubiquitous free-for-all.

psychoace said:
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the right people get onto it it's only a matter of time. The G1 camera drivers were reverse engineered for Eclair CM ROMs after HTC gave the community sod-all.

dirk1978 said:
If the right people get onto it it's only a matter of time. The G1 camera drivers were reverse engineered for Eclair CM ROMs after HTC gave the community sod-all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't they have the source for 1.6's camera drivers? At least then they had a base to start from. That is not true with Samsungs drivers.

A little bit OT but due to the fact that in this thread are some EX-Nexus users: Would you recommend switching to the SGS ?

dirk1978 said:
it's meant to work exactly the same as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's when it doesn't work, it's very very annoying. How long do we have to wait for the Samsung music player to enable scrobbling? Sure I can use a different app from the Market - meaning Samsung wasted effort on their own Music app, why didn't they build on the AOSP version which does support scrobbling and iSyncr, etc because they use standard API or whatever so these other programs can read the state or whatever they need to do.
Same with dialer and contacts - on Launcher Pro, pressing the default Contacts icon - won't get you anything except maybe a FC :-(
The AOSP Desk Clock - where is that? If I install a clock from Market then I have two different Alarm daemons which is a waste of everyone's time when the default Clock in AOSP Eclair is fine and - more importantly - compatible with stuff and API calls.
Then all the other stuff that may or may not be Samsung stuff - the DRM, the Device Management, the Samsung Account - given the option I just don't want that stuff.
I'm intending to flash JG5 (from factory shipped JF3) which may increase performance but presume won't make these other problems go away.
I'm really happy with the hardware - but currently I am dissatisfied with the software and "Samsung knows best". For me, personally, Google knows best (and I bet they have data on me to prove it!), so I really want to see Froyo AOSP version for the Galaxy. That day may come, or it may not ...
I know I know, "can't please all of the people all of the time"

PAO1908 said:
A little bit OT but due to the fact that in this thread are some EX-Nexus users: Would you recommend switching to the SGS ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right now the question for me would be "do I recommend switching from Samsung OS from Froyo" - my answer would be no, unless:
1. better multitouch is important to you (better for gaming, no axis mess-up)
2. 4" screen is important (I do really like the Samsung screen)
3. Better built-in audio quality is important (the Galaxy is noticeably louder than the N1 and I think it may have a better A/D sampler too)
So fully recommend switching for hardware, UNLESS you can't live without Froyo.
I can live with the SGS shortcomings. Well, for a few months anyway ... and even if AOSP never comes there are alternatives in the Market but does mean you have to ignore the Samsung stock apps depending what you want to do (which means added complexity to your life, which I don't always have time to deal with!)

psychoace said:
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have any proof that the drivers are actually locked down in any way?
I can see the source of all the modules provided by samsung, just 3 of them (pvrsrvkm, s3cbc and s3clcd) are just precompiled, and if you check the info they are GPL.
Am I missing something?

@miker71
Thanks a lot !

[Q] nexus one and gingerbread - past and future?

if gingerbread is the future of android devices, it suppose to support hardware capabilities that may not be on the nexus that has been around for a while.
i really wanted to buy a nexus, but it seems that when android 3.0 is out - it should be followed by high end devices by HTC and others.
i really don't know what to do here...
gingerbread is said to launch mid november - not a long time to hold off.
but hey, what do think? wait or buy nexus now?

That is Exactly what I am doing! The desire HD looks wonderful, but i think There will be a VERY nice phone coming on T mobile with new gingerbread already there around Christmas....Just my guess
It seems T mobile and Google have some sort of special deal when it comes to android, like getting stock android phones.....and there MUST be a stock gingerbread phone coming soon!

oronm said:
if gingerbread is the future of android devices, it suppose to support hardware capabilities that may not be on the nexus that has been around for a while.
i really wanted to buy a nexus, but it seems that when android 3.0 is out - it should be followed by high end devices by HTC and others.
i really don't know what to do here...
gingerbread is said to launch mid november - not a long time to hold off.
but hey, what do think? wait or buy nexus now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First, Gingerbread will run fine on a N1. Second, no matter when you buy a phone in a couple months another one will come out that is even better. The N1 has an awesome modding scene though.

First, Gingerbread will run fine on a N1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nobody know that for sure...the minimal requirements may suit the N1 but it may lack the ability to perform certain tasks. we've seen it happen with other phones.
Second, no matter when you buy a phone in a couple months another one will come out that is even better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
true for most cases. to me nexus is different from others by design. that phone feels right. i really couldn't care less about all these samsungs or motorolas that are out there. and other htc devices seem too big like the desire HD that was mentioned.
basicly, the world need a NEXUS TWO!

So you think Google will develop an OS using their development phone, but not all features of the OS will work on the phone they developed it on? I highly doubt that. Google debunked the minimum requirements roomer for Gingerbread, that was nothing but a site trying to get traffic. Do a little thinking on the subject.
If I were getting a new phone soon though, I would wait till the next gen ones come out. I do love my Nexus though!

the nexus one was a success in regard of telling the world "this is what android can do right now". others did follow and it is biting the market share making other mobile OS look like code accidents.
none the less, why shouldn't gingerbread allow "facetime like" video service for capable devices? the technology for that is in the wild. that is only one example. i am sure there are more features just like that.
at this point, maybe it would be smarter to wait.

oronm said:
the nexus one was a success in regard of telling the world "this is what android can do right now". others did follow and it is biting the market share making other mobile OS look like code accidents.
none the less, why shouldn't gingerbread allow "facetime like" video service for capable devices? the technology for that is in the wild. that is only one example. i am sure there are more features just like that.
at this point, maybe it would be smarter to wait.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whether or not Gingerbread includes a facetime like option is irrelevant to how it will run on the N1. Obviously any phone without a front-facing camera will not be able to do something like facetime. Gingerbread itself will run just fine on the N1. Without going into any technical reasons, just think of this. Of all the Android phones out there right now, the top ones are all in the general vicinity of the N1 in performance. If Gingerbread wouldn't run on the N1, then you cut out these phones too which means only as-yet-unreleased phones would run Gingerbread. So on what basis are you questioning it?
You should probably wait though since you don't seem sure about the N1. The only guarantee you can have is that in a few months from now an even better phone will be released. And then a few months from that once again, and repeat... Dual core snapdragons will start finding their way into phones at some point soon. If you're not rushed then just wait and see what comes out.

Will a Gingerbread ROM be made for Legend?

I'm just curious seeing the Gingerbread OS requires very high-spec devices, and that the Legend is only a mid-range phone.

Most probably not. And you should post questions under General section!

Needs a 1GHz processor and 3,7" screen,...
But it's too early so be sure

JonasDroid said:
Needs a 1GHz processor and 3,7" screen,...
But it's too early so be sure
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think these requirements were faked and never confirmed by google

They most probably complete hoax. It's not even definite that it'll be 3.0 or 2.3. I strongly assume that every device that can handle eclair and froyo can also handle gingerbread.

I'm also quite confident that these specifications are pure nonsense and FUD.
We will certainly try to port Gingerbread to the Legend once the sources are released and I don't see a reason why the great team behind CyanogenMod shouldn't succeed.

Nice to hear that!
I've read those needed specs on engadget and coolsmartphone didn't know they weren't confirmed by Google
Sent from my Legend using XDA App

It's also worth considering that there are two kinds of requirements:
1. Requirements set by Google to get a licence to sell gingerbread phones with the Google apps, i.e. what Google considers is needed to get an optimal gingerbread experience. Call these commercial or marketing requirements.
2. Actual technical requirements to get the thing running. Expect these to be far lower than than the commercial requirements.
HTC has to care about both #1 and #2, while the cyanogenmod team only needs to consider #2, so even if Google should decide, say, that a 1GHz phone is required, that's probably just a commercial requirement which won't stop ali ba at all.

@oysteivi: 100% ACK.

Nexus 1 Updated to 2.2.2 Nexus S 2.3.2 What about Galaxy S ?

Just read the news about these two getting the update that fixes the SMS bug but no mention of any other 2.2.x O/S'd phones getting it. Can't be far off surely?
http://phandroid.com/

I just want that SMS fix, I've seen two I9000Ms do it. I pinged Samsung Canada on Twitter, we'll see what their response is.

v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
maybe

My20 said:
v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
maybe
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe ayes maybe naws

My20 said:
v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
(American variant releases not guaranteed)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed that for you.

i somewhere read that we can expect 2.3 for SGS for the end for the first quarter of the year...but are you people using stock ROMS ? i think Darky's ROM is working on a multi-device able to detect and flash devices accordingly, shouldn't that fix your sms problems ?
ps: i have the i9000, but what is "the sms problem", i don't think i have it..

Everybody bug samsung to skip 2.3 and prep for 3.0.

With carriers charging 15-20¢/SMS and having a free replacement (google voice, google talk, emails)
I really couldn't care less about SMS. I should even remove the SMS app from my phone.

Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|

t1mman said:
Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's for both.

t1mman said:
Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So wrong, it hurts.

rumor
the rumor is here :
i like the way they say
"site called SamFirmwares – one we’ve never heard of before."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they better all listen to these site ! i wonder how these big companies would react to
all the amazing roms out there !

JCopernicus said:
So wrong, it hurts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it? Then prove me wrong...
From google:
Honeycomb is the next version of the Android platform, designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes, particularly tablets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/01/sneak-peak-of-android-30-honeycomb.html
That's the reason Google is naming "honeycomb" 3.0, and later Tablet optimisez releases will be 3.x where smartphone will stay on 2.x
Before saying crap at one another, do some research...

t1mman said:
Is it? Then prove me wrong...
From google:
http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/01/sneak-peak-of-android-30-honeycomb.html
That's the reason Google is naming "honeycomb" 3.0, and later Tablet optimisez releases will be 3.x where smartphone will stay on 2.x
Before saying crap at one another, do some research...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's literally hurting my brain that you think that. Check back after 3.0 line is cut and put up on AOSP, you'll see all the honeycomb roms(for phones) floating around.

JCopernicus said:
It's literally hurting my brain that you think that. Check back after 3.0 line is cut and put up on AOSP, you'll see all the honeycomb roms(for phones) floating around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can get rom floating around of about anything, doesn't mean it's made for it... You can even get a whole Linux distrubution working on SGS, still it's not "official" or optimised...
Still, nothing will be official and Honeycomb is still optimised for Tablet. I don't know why your "brain hurts", but when google sais their thing is optimised for something, since they made the thing, you'd better beleive them!
hell, you can put a Corvette engine in a Civic, still it's not meant or optimised for.

t1mman said:
You can get rom floating around of about anything, doesn't mean it's made for it... You can even get a whole Linux distrubution working on SGS, still it's not "official" or optimised...
Still, nothing will be official and Honeycomb is still optimised for Tablet. I don't know why your "brain hurts", but when google sais their thing is optimised for something, since they made the thing, you'd better beleive them!
hell, you can put a Corvette engine in a Civic, still it's not meant or optimised for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html
Honeycomb adds "tablet" (ie big screen) specific support. It's not an independent branch, feature sets will trickle down accordingly to phones, they will both be 3.0.
P.S. A rom built from AOSP is as official as you can get in regards to Android.

JCopernicus said:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html
Honeycomb adds "tablet" (ie big screen) specific support. It's not an independent branch, feature sets will trickle down accordingly to phones, they will both be 3.0.
P.S. A rom built from AOSP is as official as you can get in regards to Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't read title can't you?
"New UI designed from the ground up for tablets"
The reason it's (honeycomb) taking another number (3.0) instead of following the same (2.x) is because it's for tablets...
as far as AOSP vs. Official, their's a huge difference between official source code (from google) vs official rom (from samsung).
I can't tell the future, but I can most certainly say that Kies would offer 2.4 hell before 3.0 for our devices (which are smartphones, not tablet).

t1mman said:
You can't read title can't you?
"New UI designed from the ground up for tablets"
The reason it's (honeycomb) taking another number (3.0) instead of following the same (2.x) is because it's for tablets...
as far as AOSP vs. Official, their's a huge difference between official source code (from google) vs official rom (from samsung).
I can't tell the future, but I can most certainly say that Kies would offer 2.4 hell before 3.0 for our devices (which are smartphones, not tablet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The large screen views (which never existed) are built from the "ground up" because, guess what? They never existed in the first place.
The reason it's taking 3.0 is because it's a huge jump in feature set, and qualifies as a version realease and not just a point release.
If a device has a certain feature it can access certain API from the android OS. If a device doesn't, then it can't. It's that simple.
"tablets" have the big screen feature and they can access the nested view API's. You don't know how android works. there is ONE line, which sits at 2.3.2, and it's device independent.
Just like the Nexus S can access the NFC api's because it has an NFC chip.
AOSP is the code that google/samsung/moto/acer/etc pull from, and build more on top.
Cyanogen roms are on par and equivalent(better actually) as google's roms, you can't get more "official" than AOSP. MFG roms are actually less true to AOSP as they are modified. You probably won't see 3.0 on the current galaxy line at all, but that has nothing to do whether it works on there or not.

Chill out dude! Take a deep breath....
This is getting nowhere, running in circle...
I'm pretty sure we won't see Honeycomb as a release by the makers (Samsungs, Motorola, LG, HTC, name em) on any smartphone. Don't know why this is such a big deal for you and what you don't get on the whole deal but if you want,
You can bookmark this thread and if you see an official honecomb as an official release by samsung or LG or HTC or google on a Smartphone, revive it from the archives and rub it on my face, I'll gladly take the fall...

Chill out? I think I'm just typing normally on a keyboard? Maybe I'm smashing keys, and don't recognize it?
You don't understand how android works if you think it won't appear on phones, we're not going around in circles. You're just wrong.