Related
I may be the only one interested in this, and I know its set for froyo 2.2 and not sure if its possible but is there no way to port this back one version? Maybe make it work for us?
I really like the idea and would be disappointed to have to wait the loooooooooong time before 2.2 is ported to G1.
no it uses the new pushy mc jig from froyo
probably could back port the whole framework, but seems like a wast ogf time to me
atantekeier said:
I may be the only one interested in this, and I know its set for froyo 2.2 and not sure if its possible but is there no way to port this back one version? Maybe make it work for us?
I really like the idea and would be disappointed to have to wait the loooooooooong time before 2.2 is ported to G1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know it will be such a long time?
Depending on the code changes between 2.1 and 2.2, it may be little more than trivial to get 2.2 running.
Also, I suggest that the first step required in either backporting or building a whole system would be to actually wait for the availability of the source code. Then we judge what would be a more efficient use of time -- building a whole system or backporting chunks of it.
2.2 will support the ION, so in turn, it will support the Dream. We just have to WAIT for it, people.
Mod edit: not dev related, moved to q&a
Just a thought: during the google io presentation of google TV they make a presentation of this feature with the google box in 2.1. So I don't know if the sdk or the source code is published but can't we use that to make it working with eclair roms?
PS: here at 1:30
Time is relative here, by the time a new update is released from modders porting it to another much older phone version a new version is almost ready to be released.
This is not a bad thing and Im not talking down about it ether. But was simply asking the question if it would take too much effort to get just that .apk to work for even 2.1 that is now very stable on the G1.
2.2 was just released, and it will probably take a while to get it stable, to the point where 2.0 or 2.1 is now for the G1 anyways.
I just really like the chrome to phone and think its a super idea. Maybe I'm a bit impatient too.
When is there going to be any alternate ROMs to run on the Captivate?
All I see are samsung ROMs that can be loaded on the Captivate, and they're all loaded up with crappy samsung touchwiz. Whether its "Cognition" or JF6 or JH7 or JI6, etc. the fact remains that these are all crappy samsung ROMs. Where's all the "openness" that I hear the pro-android crowd pumping day in and day out?
I guess I dont understand much about android, but why is it impossible to just load a purely stock version of the OS on the phone and have it run? I hate touchwiz. I hate the bluetooth stack that samsung put on the phone (no WII-mote gaming). I hate the absolutely ridiculous file system that samsung uses. I hate the fact that it takes 20 seconds to open up the phone dialer.
My dialer opens instantly and i like touchwiz.
But the 2.1 sources are there, if someone wants to build a generic 2.1 they can. I guess if someone really wanted it, they would build it.
It sounds like you would like to commission someone to build a Stock Android 2.1 build for the Captivate. You could try to motivate someone with a cash bounty.
Why not search the forum and see what is available for the phone instead of complaining. Roms are available that remove touchwiz and boatwear. Or get a phone that would suit you more since learning about android and the captivate don't work well for you.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
alphadog00 said:
My dialer opens instantly and i like touchwiz.
But the 2.1 sources are there, if someone wants to build a generic 2.1 they can. I guess if someone really wanted it, they would build it.
It sounds like you would like to commission someone to build a Stock Android 2.1 build for the Captivate. You could try to motivate someone with a cash bounty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, I would love a stock 2.1 or 2.2. Someone in the developer forum tried building an AOSP 2.1 but they stopped. They put out a version 0.1 and it had so much wrong with it, it was worthless. Things like having voice while on a call or being able to use data are pretty important things on a smartphone.
derek4484 said:
Yea, I would love a stock 2.1 or 2.2. Someone in the developer forum tried building an AOSP 2.1 but they stopped. They put out a version 0.1 and it had so much wrong with it, it was worthless. Things like having voice while on a call or being able to use data are pretty important things on a smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is work being done right now on getting as close to aosp as they can......search cde aosp or browse the dev forum.
Also there are i9000 reorient roms you can run
Sent telepathically using vulcan mind meld app and aosp beta 3 froyo
The devs are working on a Froyo AOSP rom. I'm sure it will be finalized and released for general consumption once the 2.2 source code is released.
You won't see any "true" AOSP builds until the devs can get the source from Samsung and find out how intertwined TW is integrated with the OS.
So you can flash to what is available currently or wait till early 2011 for the "final" ROMS to start coming out of the woodwork. Samsung announced that 2.2 is slowly rolling out to all Samsung Galaxy S devices this Oct... in Europe - so I don't think the Captivate crowd will see the update until late Nov/Dec of this year.
I know Design Gears is attempting to build one that is as close as your going to get to one right now. He almost has a "stable" build going but it is still being tweaked.
But.. the latest 2.2 Cognition build currently has TW removed and Launcher Pro installed. It isn't perfect but it is close to what you are looking for. I prefer .6 and kept TW on as the phone seems to rely on it pretty heavily for functionality. Only issue I get is a lag spike here and there but otherwise it runs great.
Will it be possible for us to get 2.3 ported on the milestone?
We haven't even got official 2.2 yet...
cherrybombaz said:
Will it be possible for us to get 2.3 ported on the milestone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
needs higher memory requirements like 512Mb, so only Miletone2 and in 2012..
(it took 1yr for milestone1, so thats easy to estimate from now+12months)
Dexter_nlb said:
needs higher memory requirements like 512Mb, so only Miletone2 and in 2012..
(it took 1yr for milestone1, so thats easy to estimate from now+12months)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that really true? What would require higher memory than Froyo? I don't see anything in the features which would require 512MB..
Guys: let's focus on what is REALLY important from 2.3. We don't need all those features...I mean: we WOULD like to get them all but I think it's a hard challenge for developers (the upgraded kernel hasn't even been released for 2.2, I don't want a 2.3 with battery draining and kernel_issues just becuase of Motorola laziness...). I just need a 2.1 (which covers all the "basics" of what a smartphone MUST do) with some improvements from 2.3! I'll start with mine:
1) New Keyboard: I really want to try the new keyboard and think shouldn't be so difficult to port it to 2.1 (just a hope!)
2) Download manager: not a must-have but hey...would be useful!
3) New UI and "smoother" animations: I'm quite sure this is almost impossible to port..
4) Support for WebM: see above...
By the way maybe the whole gingerbread can run on 2.6.32 kernel! So a good porting would be ready when motorola releases the official 2.2 sbf. Am I correct?
EDIT: Look at these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AAFF9PN-WU&feature=channel
Youtube 2.0 is also available for 2.1! I can't notice any difference with 2.3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCgf8RW7B88&feature=channel
Newer streetview and Maps navigation are available on 2.1...No voice controls though!
Dexter_nlb said:
needs higher memory requirements like 512Mb, so only Miletone2 and in 2012..
(it took 1yr for milestone1, so thats easy to estimate from now+12months)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And also (correct me if I'm wrong)
Probably some features like GPU accelleration in openGL 2.0 may be a little difficult to port over right?
mardurhack said:
3) New UI and "smoother" animations
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's a sweet dream... but i would be awesome
@89luca89: I didn't see anywhere that 2.3 supports GPU acceleration! This would be AWSOME especially for the browser!! How have Opera's guys been able to enable hw acceleration on their browser? Do you think it would be also possible on custom browsers like Dolphin or is that a "Presto" (the Opera's rendering engine while Chrome's one is Webkit) feature? Thanks!
@razer54: Being sincere...I'd really like (read as NEED) a smoother browser than smoother animations...Launcher Pro is smooth enough for me! And menus scrolling is too! The only one who lacks smooth interaction (scrolling, pinch2zoom etc.) is the browser! But, as I wrote above, there could be the possibility to port Opera's hw acceleration on a browser like Dolphin (or the stock one being the source code public). Couldn't it?
I presume everyone has seen this:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.3-highlights.html
Heaps of the new improvements look awesome, improved responciveness, native audio control, new keyboard, dalivik garbage collector, native voip, updated video drivers - all this stuff would make lots of apps (including games!) much better on Android.
I really hope game devs start getting serious about Android with the approah of the Playstation phone and Android 2.3 available. I'm no expert but I assume while some things like the new keyboard may be possible to port back to 2.1 or 2.2 on milestone, we will never see the bulk of 2.3 on our phones.
Ballinor I almost forgot to ask if copy&paste can be ported from 2.3!!
EDIT: Ok I changed my mind...I NEED Gingerbread!! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me that will be possible to install it on Milestone!
can someone port the new keyboard? there´s already a couple of leaked keyboards but they all appear small on our precious .... its like a hyper compact keyboard ....
Dexter_nlb said:
needs higher memory requirements like 512Mb, so only Miletone2 and in 2012..
(it took 1yr for milestone1, so thats easy to estimate from now+12months)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry but what you're saying is mostly a dull statement. I wouldn't expect this coming from you at all, seriously. You didn't even explained what would need more memory. Its clearly stated the most of the higher specs would be used for new Multimedia standards and gaming improvements (Concurrent garbage collector being one of them!).
It took a bit more then half of year for Milestone 1 to get unofficial 2.2, the biggest problem being unlocked boot loader.
This is the same thing as telling its impossible to get Froyo to G1. Officially, that is correct. Unofficially, Cyano and everyone in XDA and other communities are doing everything to keep G1 alive. And I can tell you, Froyo on G1 is working smooth and without problems.
greglord said:
I'm sorry but what you're saying is mostly a dull statement. I wouldn't expect this coming from you at all, seriously. You didn't even explained what would need more memory. Its clearly stated the most of the higher specs would be used for new Multimedia standards and gaming improvements (Concurrent garbage collector being one of them!).
It took a bit more then half of year for Milestone 1 to get unofficial 2.2, the biggest problem being unlocked boot loader.
This is the same thing as telling its impossible to get Froyo to G1. Officially, that is correct. Unofficially, Cyano and everyone in XDA and other communities are doing everything to keep G1 alive. And I can tell you, Froyo on G1 is working smooth and without problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 512mb of RAM is a statement from Google. They just want less fragmantation in android devices.
What that really means is it'll probably run on the Milestone if we didn't have that damn bootloader..
It'll probably be ported to the Droid.
It will be ported to Milestone too..
greglord said:
It will be ported to Milestone too..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup,but without proper kernel
I hope so!!!
Unfortunately I'm not an expert in programming, but I'll give all my support for testing!
Milestone is too young do be abandoned, it is still an optimum phone in my opinion!
mardurhack said:
@89luca89: I didn't see anywhere that 2.3 supports GPU acceleration! This would be AWSOME especially for the browser!! How have Opera's guys been able to enable hw acceleration on their browser? Do you think it would be also possible on custom browsers like Dolphin or is that a "Presto" (the Opera's rendering engine while Chrome's one is Webkit) feature? Thanks!
@razer54: Being sincere...I'd really like (read as NEED) a smoother browser than smoother animations...Launcher Pro is smooth enough for me! And menus scrolling is too! The only one who lacks smooth interaction (scrolling, pinch2zoom etc.) is the browser! But, as I wrote above, there could be the possibility to port Opera's hw acceleration on a browser like Dolphin (or the stock one being the source code public). Couldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you got a point, i wanted to speak about browsing experience when i wrote animation ^^
max_3000 said:
The 512mb of RAM is a statement from Google. They just want less fragmantation in android devices.
What that really means is it'll probably run on the Milestone if we didn't have that damn bootloader..
It'll probably be ported to the Droid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you please post a link where I can see such Google statement? Thanks.
(And to be clear, I'm not interested in links to the old rumors that have been denied and ridiculed directly by a google engineer a long time ago.)
mardurhack said:
Guys: let's focus on what is REALLY important from 2.3. We don't need all those features...I mean: we WOULD like to get them all but I think it's a hard challenge for developers (the upgraded kernel hasn't even been released for 2.2, I don't want a 2.3 with battery draining and kernel_issues just becuase of Motorola laziness...). I just need a 2.1 (which covers all the "basics" of what a smartphone MUST do) with some improvements from 2.3! I'll start with mine:
1) New Keyboard: I really want to try the new keyboard and think shouldn't be so difficult to port it to 2.1 (just a hope!)
2) Download manager: not a must-have but hey...would be useful!
3) New UI and "smoother" animations: I'm quite sure this is almost impossible to port..
4) Support for WebM: see above...
By the way maybe the whole gingerbread can run on 2.6.32 kernel! So a good porting would be ready when motorola releases the official 2.2 sbf. Am I correct?
EDIT: Look at these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AAFF9PN-WU&feature=channel
Youtube 2.0 is also available for 2.1! I can't notice any difference with 2.3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCgf8RW7B88&feature=channel
Newer streetview and Maps navigation are available on 2.1...No voice controls though!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree...
obviously we won't get all the new implementations, but it would be nice to have some of them... the easier ones to port...
I think one of the most important think to port it"s the jit no ? if i remember well, the jit from froyo was ported to eclair, so the one from gingerbread can be ported to froyo no ?
Since many people asked what I was doing these days:
The Nook Color running a healthy mix of Android 3.1 Honeycomb from the Xoom and Android 3.1 from Google's SDK.
As can be seen towards the end the Launcher application suffers from some drawing issues. The same issues can be observed in Google's SDK 3.1 emulator. The emulator and the nook both are doing software UI rendering instead of the new in 3.0 hardware accelerated UI rendering. Sadly the PowerVR SGX530 drivers that are (publicly) available right now are lacking some features to activate the hardware UI rendering on the nook. (like support for EGL_SWAP_BEHAVIOUR = EGL_BUFFER_PRESERVED
and the GL_OES_EGL_image_external extension). I started patching around those issues, which is hard without the access to the Android source, and can confirm that the nook's hardware is more than capable of running 3.0/3.1 hardware accelerated even though the source might need some patches if we don't get updated drivers for the SGX530.
So the status right now is: software UI with redraw issues or hardware UI with a working home screen but tons of more issues in other applications.
Other than that sound, wifi and opengl works. (no DSP/video decoding so far)
So who's up for solving the redrawing issues?
Possible solutions are:
getting our hands on a newer SGX530 driver than 1.1.16.4061
unpacking, patching and repacking Launcher2
?
waiting until Google releases the 3.1 AOSP source
-Rafael Brune
It sucks but I feel our best bet is just to wait for source. There are a lot of honeycomb tablets slated for release over the next few months, I think once it becomes more widely available we'll see source.
Since we dont know when will be... all the time, effort, and trouble to get it fully working witout source - will be in vain once the source drop happens.
So unless the people involved don't care, cm7 is more than enough for now. We are lucky to even have that, my phone doesn't even have cm7 working for it.
My .2 anyways
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
The problem is, Google has stated they won't be releasing Honeycomb source until it's integrated with the phone branch. I personally doubt that we see real source until Ice Cream is out.
honeycomb source will never be released, google said so, we'll get Ice Cream Sandwich source which will be awesome on our nook's i'm sure
ok all of you guys are real downers when you pretty much say "give up, source is the only way" now i know thats not what your literally saying but thats what im getting from your posts
@deeper-blue
good job dude, i would love to see a beta for this if its as stable as honeycomb v4(knowing your work it will be) a side from a few graphical errors(im assuming the same ones from the first SDK port) i think it can and probably will be a daily driver for most people here
Any hope for USB host support with the port or once again not till source
Sent from my Vision using XDA Premium App
deeper-blue said:
Since many people asked what I was doing these days:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJ_k4kdsaMk
So who's up for solving the redrawing issues?
Possible solutions are:
getting our hands on a newer SGX530 driver than 1.1.16.4061
unpacking, patching and repacking Launcher2
?
waiting until Google releases the 3.1 AOSP source
-Rafael Brune
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey THANKS for posting up what you've done and this very cool video... that was just awesome to see how far someone has gotten to get 3.1 running WELL on the nook.
mad props.
Nice work rafael!
Sent from my NookColor using Tapatalk
can't really help you out, but I'd just like to cheer you on
+1 !
Keep up with the excelent work !!!
botossi said:
+1 !
Keep up with the excelent work !!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
luigi90210 said:
ok all of you guys are real downers when you pretty much say "give up, source is the only way" now i know thats not what your literally saying but thats what im getting from your posts
@deeper-blue
good job dude, i would love to see a beta for this if its as stable as honeycomb v4(knowing your work it will be) a side from a few graphical errors(im assuming the same ones from the first SDK port) i think it can and probably will be a daily driver for most people here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Completely agree, there are a couple of interesting apps in the market that take advantage of HC and would be great in the Nook.
If you ask me waiting for AOSP don't look as such a good idea, since it's release is not so sure.
deeper-blue: Quick question: which HC image are you running in the posted video?
Since the initial SDK image you did, I've not seen any run that smoothly.
arrjaytea said:
deeper-blue: Quick question: which HC image are you running in the posted video?
Since the initial SDK image you did, I've not seen any run that smoothly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is running 3.1, which he has been working on and has yet to release because of the bugs he demonstrates in the video.
Great work DB, really excited to see the progress on this. I'm just wondering - would it be feasible to run this with ADW or similar as a holdover until the Launcher2 rendering issues are resolved?
Sounds like patching the launcher will be the easiest route. This is why I love you DB ahhaha, your work is amazing.
Hi deeper-blue,
If you want, I can offer you my help. I would be able to try to patch launcher2. I've been able to work out a few stuff in launcher2 when I was doing test builds of HC 3.0 and 3.1.
I'm trying to look if I can find some drivers for the PowerVR SGX530, but I unfortunately can't help by making 3.1 available on AOSP.
Is there a pointer to instructions on how to cook from SDK ? Have been looking around and have not found anything useful.
Wanted to take a crack at the graphics driver portion.
Very nice work deeper-blue.
Don't let the lazy people uninspire your work. If the Android and Open-source community in geral would wait for corporations solutions linux would never have been created. This is the open-source spirit, guys. If you come here to say that open-source hackers should wait, you're on the wrong place doing the wrong stuff.
Back to honeycomb, even before this 3.1 news I was noticing that one of the main limitations we have on honeycomb is the laucher. I suggest that while we can't hack it (but we will keep trying), we use honeycomb with another launcher just for the sake of using the great tablet oriented apps we can't have on cm7.
About the source code, for me Google made clear that they weren't releasing it for a while. So, I think this is more motivation to make a honeycomb daily driver.
Keep up the great work, Good luck everyone and all hail to this awesome community.
--
Marlon Moura
Keep at it man, we appreciate the work.
Unfortunately I lack the technical expertise to help keep this moving forward; however, I think an earlier poster was dead in his argument that waiting for source code is defeatist mentality for the open source "hacking" gurus out there.
I imagine that Deeper-blue could turn this into a truly polished machine....if he had the time to devote endless amounts of hours to this, but who does and that's why he's seeking assistance from other willing and capable hands.
If anything I hope others who are capable find some inspiration in the challenge and ultimately crack this one into something special.
Thanks in advance to Deeper - blue and other who continue to provide users with a cost effective tablet experience.
-Rt
Before any of you say anything negative this isnt to bug other devs this is a thread for people to request/ ask for things me and the other devs to do after they have finished their other projects.
-Firefox OS
-LG UI(fix lockscreen)
-CM7
-Sense 4.1
-cm10.1 WiFi and Bluetooth
-cm10 WiFi authentication issue
-S-OFF
-Roms for cdma version
-Sense 4.1.2
Just pop requests underneath and ill update reguarly.
Shad0wPanda said:
Before any of you say anything negative this isnt to bug other devs this is a thread for people to request/ ask for things me and the other devs to do after they have finished their other projects.
-Firefox OS
-LG UI
-CM7
Just pop requests underneath and ill update reguarly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sense 4.1 (If possible)
Shad0wPanda said:
Before any of you say anything negative this isnt to bug other devs this is a thread for people to request/ ask for things me and the other devs to do after they have finished their other projects.
-Firefox OS
-LG UI
-CM7
Just pop requests underneath and ill update reguarly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahaha, heres an LG UI Rom, iv'e had it for a while, just lockscreen doesnt work at all! so slide down NC and hit settings to unlock, then install a custom locker such as holo locker! I'll post in the dev threads when i can be bothered, but test that out..
http://d-h.st/2V2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think gettin bt and wifi implemented in cm 10.1 should be a good place to begin
lead3r1 said:
i think gettin bt and wifi implemented in cm 10.1 should be a good place to begin
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
but we really need the devs to go back to work
CM7 FTW
CM7 first ... it would be super buttery smooth for us ...
How are you so certain it'd be "buttery smooth"? Cuz I'm not sure, if not totally negative on that matter.
How are you so certain it'd be "buttery smooth"? Cuz I'm not sure, if not totally negative on that matter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Brnt you don't have to flash cm7... What's with all the gingerbread hate??
Sent from my HTC Desire C using xda app-developers app
I suggest we go back to XP then. It's going to run so much better on our new PCs!
It's not hate, you just get overexcited over nothing without even putting some though into it. Go on, prove me gingerbread will run smoother than JB/ICS, but without these facts your words are nothing.
brnt said:
I suggest we go back to XP then. It's going to run so much better on our new PCs!
It's not hate, you just get overexcited over nothing without even putting some though into it. Go on, prove me gingerbread will run smoother than JB/ICS, but without these facts your words are nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you have your analogy wrong. Going from a newer version of Windows to an older version of Windows is pointless because...well...it's still Windows.
However, if you were to go from Ubuntu to, say, Slackware, you would definitely see a boost in performance because Slackware is far less taxing on the available resources. The same could be said about going from JB to GB. GB requires less resources and can therefore run smoother/faster on hardware designed for a higher version of Android. This is a well known fact throughout the Android community because nearly every JB or ICS based device has GB ROM development in some form or another.
It's still Android. Roughly 90% of the differences between JB/ICS and GB lie in the overall appearence, not the functionality.
IDEA
Or lets make CM10 even better
Like eliminate WiFi problems and hotspot problems etc :fingers-crossed:
What do you think?
S off would be good.
Not first priority though
sent from CM10'd Desire C
Phenziox said:
S off would be good.
Not first priority though
sent from CM10'd Desire C
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would be very useful though but it's more HTCs job
Sent from my HTC Desire C using xda premium
@soupmagnet, i agree entirely with that statement, however, where is the desire coming from for having GingerBread Roms? if it was desired so much, then why not buy a gingerbread phone in the first place? Would've been cheaper and there are still devices on the market, some with faster processors then the Desire C, if you wanted GingerBread, should've bought a GB Device, you don't go buy a brand new Windows 8 PC to deliberately downgrade it to a legacy OS like vista and limit the features you have access to. It lacks all logic in all honesty.. You don't go to sell a phone after use being all like, Yeah it has 2.3.5 GB on it, or brag to your mates, yeah my device is android 2.3.5, fact is 4.2.2 is the best android so far, Android has only improved over time, GB on our device is like an i7 with vista, you just don't do that kind of thing..
penguin449 said:
@soupmagnet, i agree entirely with that statement, however, where is the desire coming from for having GingerBread Roms? if it was desired so much, then why not buy a gingerbread phone in the first place? Would've been cheaper and there are still devices on the market, some with faster processors then the Desire C, if you wanted GingerBread, should've bought a GB Device, you don't go buy a brand new Windows 8 PC to deliberately downgrade it to a legacy OS like vista and limit the features you have access to. It lacks all logic in all honesty.. You don't go to sell a phone after use being all like, Yeah it has 2.3.5 GB on it, or brag to your mates, yeah my device is android 2.3.5, fact is 4.2.2 is the best android so far, Android has only improved over time, GB on our device is like an i7 with vista, you just don't do that kind of thing..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with your logic is that Gingerbread based devices (with a few exceptions) only have hardware that is capable of meeting the low demands of Gingerbread.
For many people, the worth of their device is in its functionality, not its "bragging rights". I will never have Windows on my computer simply because of the features it provides. I use Linux, because of it's speed, stability and and overall functionality. ICS and JB do have some nice additional features, but at a noticeable cost of available resources and stability, and the overall functionality is still nearly the same. While higher versions of Android do provide some "improvements", they are mostly linked to the user interface (which many people don't necessarily like) and there are very few performance improvements. So for you to say that it "lacks all logic" is, well, illogical in itself.
While you may like what JB and ICS have to offer and prefer that for your daily driver, I don't think it's fair to ridicule others' personal preference in Android versions, considering the majority of changes between these versions are exclusive to the UI and not Android itself.
Off-topic... naughty naughty
Sent from my HTC Desire C using xda premium
Getting back on topic...
It would be nice to see more CDMA support though. I have a shell script, based on bin4ry's exploit, to root the CDMA variants, but it needs to be converted over to Windows' batch scripting language. If anyone wants to have a go at it, just let me know.
As far as ROMs are concerned, we can use the existing GSM ROMs, but a patch will need to be made. It wouldn't be that difficult to implement and would be much easier than creating all new CDMA ROMs.
The biggest problem would be getting a working recovery. I tried unpacking the existing (GSM) recovery and replaced the kernel with the phone's stock kernel but it didn't work out very well. I think a new recovery would need to be built from source, but I'm running into strange compile errors when compiling the stock kernel from source. I don't have experience building custom recovery so it's going to be challenging trying to figure everything out, but I think I can handle it.
Clearly, the need for CDMA support is low, but it's far from non-existent. I'm more than willing to take the reigns on this project, but I may have to take advantage of some of the experience around here, assuming there are those willing to lend a hand.
soupmagnet said:
The problem with your logic is that Gingerbread based devices (with a few exceptions) only have hardware that is capable of meeting the low demands of Gingerbread.
For many people, the worth of their device is in its functionality, not its "bragging rights". I will never have Windows on my computer simply because of the features it provides. I use Linux, because of it's speed, stability and and overall functionality. ICS and JB do have some nice additional features, but at a noticeable cost of available resources and stability, and the overall functionality is still nearly the same. While higher versions of Android do provide some "improvements", they are mostly linked to the user interface (which many people don't necessarily like) and there are very few performance improvements. So for you to say that it "lacks all logic" is, well, illogical in itself.
While you may like what JB and ICS have to offer and prefer that for your daily driver, I don't think it's fair to ridicule others' personal preference in Android versions, considering the majority of changes between these versions are exclusive to the UI and not Android itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I stand corrected, thankyou for clearing that up for me, i never thought to look at it in this way, however, when you do get a working recovering, i do so believe i added cdma support in SHTD, the rom was both configured for cdma and for gsm, as it is in the build.prop also!, however a cdma aosp kernel would be needed
cm10.1 wifi bluetooth fixed would be a cool rom... Devs plz fix it... We noobs will be greatfull to you......:laugh::laugh::good:
akashgartia said:
cm10.1 wifi bluetooth fixed would be a cool rom... Devs plz fix it... We noobs will be greatfull to you......:laugh::laugh::good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't rush them. They have other stuff to do. If you want it done, you could learn and try it yourself.