Related
So I have been giving a lot of thought to this subject ever since reading a few articles a couple of weeks back about the CEO of Google Eric Schmidt saying that they have no plans on making a "Nexus Two." Not only this, but Google stating that they will no longer sell the Nexus One direct and unlocked from the www.google.com/phone store. My question is, does this threaten the Android platform in the future. I personally think it won't because Android will continue to live on, but the open Android that we have come to know and love today will be jeopardized. This is why I decided to start this thread to see how others feel about this subject and ask some important questions about the fate of Android.
To start off we really have to see what Google's Nexus One brought to the world of Android to be able to see what we will be missing if there is no "Google phone" in the future. On January 5, 2010 Google threw a press conference where it called it's new baby the Nexus One a "superphone" and ever since then the i has been in the news having every flaw dissected and blown out of proportion by tech blogs all around the web. Yes, the Nexus One had some big flaws like the multitouch screen, early T-Mobile 3G problems, No multitouch pinch to zoom (now changed), and even the pentile arrangement of pixels on the AMOLED screen, but it also was the first in the smartphone world (unless you count the HD2, but we are talking about Android not WM in this discussion) to have a lot of huge features that now started this Android revolution. It had a powerful Snapdragon 1 Ghz processor (up to this point the biggest we had was the Droid with an Arm Cortex A8 550 mhz processor), 3.7 inch AMOLED screen (WVGA 800x480 pixels) , 512 mb of RAM (most had 256mb RAM), 5mp camera (with LED flash and 720x480 video capture), and one of the lightest (130 grams with battery), sleekest 119mm heidth by 59.8mm depth), and thinnest (11.5mm) phones on the market. The Droid paved the road and the Nexus One showed OEM's what the top of the line Android phone must have to compete in specs. The Nexus One launched with Eclair 2.1 and was the first to bring it to the world. A couple months after launch Google gave pinch to zoom multitouch to the Nexus One and this allowed other phones like the Droid and now most of the Android phones available to get this much desired feature. Perhaps one of the best features of the phone was that it launched with an unlocked bootloader and introduced the world to the adb command "fastboot oem unlock." I know that are beloved developers have been unlocking the full potential of phones since the Windows Mobile days, but Android has brought that even further. Since then the Nexus One has quickly become the dev phone of the Android world. If you don't like a feature simply change it or flash a different ROM. This wonderful world that the great developers in the Android community work so hard to bring to us is really the "killer feature" of the Android OS and this is being threatened by not having anymore "Google phones." Lately we are seeing companies like Motorola and Verizon using eFuse to lock down their phones and keeping people that spend their hard earned money from flashing ROM's. I am sure the whole eFuse thing has been blown out of proportion and I am sure the next Android superstar (or one of the many we already have here on XDA) will unlock the Droid X to it's full potential, but the mere fact that these companies are locking down phones using the FREE Android OS is very disheartening. We don't want the same cat and mouse game that Apple and their iPhone customers have to play to unlock and use their phones and this is one of the many reasons people flock to the open Android OS.
Not only do we risk "locking down" the platform, but by not having any further Nexus phones we will more than likely never see another Vanilla Android phone. Instead we are seeing what the OEMs and wireless providers want us to see and this is evident in the losing of WiFi tethering in the latest build of Android 2.2, or known as Froyo. If a wireless provider doesn't want a feature (like tethering) the OEM's are then pressured into leaving it out to make them happy. This is not a good thing in my opinion as it again puts the power and fate of Android in the wireless providers like Verizon and AT&T where we are quickly losing the openness of Android and the ability to even side load applications. This is exactly why we need a phone like the Nexus One. A phone that will push the boundaries of innovation and keep the wireless companies honest by simple competition. They won't leave an important feature out if the Google phone already has a version of it out and available unlocked. Without Google making a phone we are left with whatever skin the OEMs have minus the features the wireless companies don't want included. If the Nexus One would not of been released we would be stuck with minimal upgrades and even worse what would make the OEMs and providers hurry with the newest release (Froyo in this case and soon to be Gingerbread)? If Google wouldn't of pushed Android 2.2 to the Nexus One then would all the companies like HTC, Samsung, and Motorola even be racing to get Froyo out? In my opinion the Nexus One is the only reason that these companies are trying to get 2.2 out in a timely basis. I mean I may be wrong as I am not a developer, but what would really make the OEMs and providers want to hurry with their releases if they didn't have the competition? I think it would be the opposite and these companies would make us buy their newest and top of the line Android phone just to get the newest and best Android release. This has been proven in the past and if it wasn't for the iPhone and Google's Android the smartphone world would be a very different place filled with Bada OSs, Windows Mobile phones, no app stores, and worse of all mediocre upgrades. This is the real reason we need Google to release a phone so they can take the fate of Android (and the power, in my opinion) away from greedy wireless companies and OEM's that only look to sell us a phone multiple times a year.
I have really given a lot of thought to this because ever since I purchased my Nexus One back in March (without AT&Ts permission, I should add) I had planned on buying a "Google phone" every year. I was aware that Google would work closely with different OEMs and we would get a great dev phone every year with the latest and greatest Vanilla Android, free from the clutches of wireless contracts, and most of all "OPEN." This was a great idea and I can see why Google's idea of selling a phone didn't catch on here in the states, but they accomplished a lot more than selling millions of devices like Apple does. They accomplished (along with the Droid, which I might add Google had a big hand in creating and bringing to life, and also was free of a locked bootloader) bringing Android to the masses and making the statement to companies that a top of the line Android phone needs to have these specs to compete in the Android world.
I just went out and bought me a Samsung Captivate and to be honest the first thing I thought I would get rid of was TouchWiz, but it has kind of grown on me. I think HTC Sense is nice as well, but I will always be a Vanilla Android fan and there is something about the Nexus One that always brings me back. This will be a phone that I will not ever get rid of and is still the best phone I have ever owned. I am sure many others feel the same way and the Nexus One will continue to be a niche kind of product, but I think I have made the argument that Google needs a phone to further Android and keep the fate of it's Android in it's hands. This could get out of control quick and it could turn bad. We are just nearing the top and Android is here to stay and will be the OS that everyone else attempts to mimic. Come on Google I know I am not the only one that feels this way and this is why I started this thread to get the feel of others in the Android community as I am sure there are others that are worried as well. The open Android that we know and love today is in jeopardy if Google doesn't maintain a little control over their Android OS. The OEM's and wireless companies are going to ruin the openness of Android if they don't have a constant pressure keeping them honest. One of the main reasons that Android has grown so rapidly is that a company like Google has created it to be free, open, and common to many phones so we don't have to worry about dozens of companies with mediocre platforms. Weigh in and let me know how you feel and maybe just maybe we can get someones attention. Feel free to copy this on other forums as I feel we need to save the idea of an open Android. One without the boundaries of no side loading of apps, eFuses, locked bootloaders, and most of all innovation and the advancement of the Android platform.
Google's own line of phones phone has zero influence on the android os.
JCopernicus said:
Google's own line of phones phone has zero influence on the android os.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you are right, but without a Google phone what will Android be like? We won't see another Vanilla Android phone that is for sure.
Not being able to see into the future makes this a hard statement to take as fact.
There were vanilla phones before nexus one and there will continue to be more
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
If you want a true vanilla android phone grabe one of HTC's china phones, not even google apps are on it. =D
I agree with the basic premise that the Nexus One did provide leverage to potentially (and I think that is a key qualifier) keep the competition honest, but it isn't clear that it would do so without significantly more marketing. And, to market the Nexus One more could have annoyed some of the vendors that Google wants to keep happy - lots of happy vendors means lots of seats for Android means lots of seats off of which Google makes a lot of money. In particular, if every Android phone is locked, then Google still makes a mint, though they stand to make more of a mint if the platform is more widely adopted. And, an open phone does have an impact on platform adoption, but I don't think it is that critical since the public is used to buying fixed feature-set phones and upgrading for new features so this isn't an issue of taking away something that they demand as it is failing to give them something that they would come to know and love (as we already do).
But, I also want to counter some of the supporting arguments you present.
First, the current wave of smartphones was headed here one way or another. Google didn't create the wave, they simply reacted and targeted Android at the capabilities that were coming down the pike. To do that most effectively they needed a new developer phone and the Nexus One was going to be released in January one way or another as the ADP3 until they had this idea to sell direct. It was simply them needing to get out a testbed for the new Android capabilities that were targeted at the new baseline smartphone hardware and they chose to do it in an experimental new way this time. If they hadn't released the Nexus One direct to consumers then you would have seen the same phones come out and you would have seen the same OS releases, you just wouldn't have had a large installed base of end users previewing it on a non-developer handset.
Second, I think the main factor spurring the vendors to get 2.2 out quickly is that it offers so much, not that they have to keep up with the Nexus One. It is, in my opinion, the biggest release so far (and I've been with Android since 1.0) primarily because of the JIT. Also, all the manufacturers came out with what would become the new standard amount of RAM (512MB) and the existing release available for them to ship on did not support it, so they need to get on 2.2 in order to simply unlock the hardware they originally designed. In some sense, these phones were really designed for 2.2 - 2.1 was simply a stepping stone to get them shipped on their hardware schedule until 2.2 was ready on its software schedule. So, there are really 2 factors that would encourage them to get 2.2 out on their 2010-class phones that have nothing to do with the Nexus One being here.
As far as vanilla phones... The G1 was vanilla. The original Droid was vanilla (is it still vanilla with the latest releases?). The Nexus One was vanilla. But, where there any others? I love my vanilla phones (first G1 then N1), but I don't mind value added by the vendors, I just wish they would make it easier to customize things away and that they would learn to design their add-ons so that they can be easily dropped on to a new Android release with little fuss...
Short answer: No. It does not.
Simply put, there will always be a phone that will have Vanilla Android. If for nothing more than using that as a sale point. Especially with Andy 3.0 in the horizon which focus is on the UI. No worries.
Of course it doesn't.
Simple answer, no. There have always been vanilla Android phones, the developer phones at least, and there will always be developer phones. In fact, the Nexus is still for sale now as the latest developer phone.
Eventually there will be another vanilla Android phone that Google is behind, unless they get their own hardware built by someone and don't sell it publicly... but that wouldn't make much sense, just like it wouldn't make any sense for them to not ever have another phone.
Soon enough, the 2ghz and dual-core phones will be out, and eventually mobile devices will catch up to computers in terms of power. They're gonna have to.
I'm sure they will come out with a different dev phone in the future.
I agree with the op, up to a point. While it may be true that there'll always be a phone Google gets behind -a 'dev' phone, if you will- I think it still limits choice for people who want the vanilla experience. Is it really ok to just have one phone that's vanilla?
To the op: "If the Nexus One would not of been released...."
I think you mean "had not been released..."
and: "If Google wouldn't of pushed Android 2.2 to the Nexus One then...."
It's "If Google hadn't pushed Android..."
Sorry for the pedantry. Bad grammar just spoilt a good, well-thought out post.
Consumer are what they are a android is one of the greatest os I have experience.all those problems was soft ware issue and minor only something a child would complain about.i have a nexus almost went with a nokia n900 glad I didn't .proud of google.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
check out the article in businessweek.com/technology/ regarding honeycomb source (sorry, not enough posts to add links to my thread)
looks like we're waiting awhile for a full-scale port of HC
Wow... what a load of crap. I am giving you the biggest middle finger i can right now Google......
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2011/tc20110324_269784.htm
well this just blows!
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA Premium App
This actually kind of makes sense. By not releasing the code, Google can control what kinds of devices actually run Honeycomb. Look at how many extremely crappy Froyo tablets there are out there from hole in the wall manufacturers. The hardware is crap. Performance is crap. The reliability is crap. It makes Android look horrible. If Honeycombs source got released today, you'd see crappy $100 tablets in Wal-greens running Honeycomb. They would suck huge monkey balls and make Honeycomb look horrible. People would buy the $100 iPad alternative, find that it was a POS, return it and never buy an Android device again.
I wish they would have released it though and done something else. Like maybe not allow any maker to use the "Android" name in advertising unless it met their requirements? Similar to what they do with the "With Google" on the back of phones.
Heck they could take it a step further and only allow phone manufacturers to produce pure Google Experience phones instead of wrapping it up with their own skin.
And this is why Richard Stallman is always, always, always right.
yeah this blows, a lot. Engadget has a good article too.
This is not going to help Android gain more market share. The money hats are sure working on Google.
cadium said:
I wish they would have released it though and done something else. Like maybe not allow any maker to use the "Android" name in advertising unless it met their requirements? Similar to what they do with the "With Google" on the back of phones.
Heck they could take it a step further and only allow phone manufacturers to produce pure Google Experience phones instead of wrapping it up with their own skin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you have open source, but still tell OEMS what they can and can't do?
A. Nonymous said:
How can you have open source, but still tell OEMS what they can and can't do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By doing exactly what he said in his post. Not allow them to use the android name. Also, don't allow them access to the market and other google apps. They can't force OEMS to do anything, but they can give them incentives. I think them restricting the android name to google experience devices would be excellent. Ubunutu is based on Debian Linux, but you don't see them calling it Debian anywhere. In fact, if you didn't look it up, you would have no idea that Ubuntu even had anything to do with Debian. It's very similar, but it's been modified and is therefore no longer called Debian, just like sense, motoblur, touch-wiz and others should not be called android.
They already do that though. The $100 tablet you can buy at Walgreens doesn't have the Google name on it. Doesn't have the market or google apps. Still makes Android look bad. Besides, not giving them the Android name would be great for OEMs. They would drop it all together, call it HTC Sense OS or MotoBlur OS or whatever and the consumers would then be extremely confused.
I was upset about this at first, but it makes perfect sense. Like people have said, it makes Android look like crap. IMHO, Honeycomb is an embarrassment as far as polish when it comes to iOS. Get me right, I'm an Android fan through and through, but lacking polish and stability can really hurt Android right now. I'm sure we'll get the source eventually while it's still relevant. Remember, the first commercial device running that software is barley a month old...
I see a final SDK Honeycomb build in our future.
i assume we will never see a 3.0 aosp at all. it isnt meant for phones and i think google initally wanted to branch off but decided against that. and from seeing our development they have realized that >3.0 is bad for tablets and 3.0 is bad for phones. they know we will try to do it anyway and just discover that the other half (phones or tablets depending on version) is very inadequate so they plan on making ice cream the version of android that works on both
still sad that they wont even let us try to get it working, hell the preview release is running pretty well already, this " we decide what is good for you " stance is worrying from an open source os
By "indefinitely" I understand the exact release date is not definite. Thats all. Android >>>>>>>> iOS
Pretty terrible news. Really puts a mark on future android releases for the community. Really sad even if there are business reasons for it.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. They're either open source or not. They can't try to have it both ways.
xdabr said:
And this is why Richard Stallman is always, always, always right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. I can't tell you how many times I've rolled my eyes at something he's said and considered it to be extreme but it's true.
They are probably just working on making it stable...
Remember, google is the forerunner for open source.
chrome(based off chomrium open source)
chome os( based off chomrium open source)
android(obviously linux)
Definitely disappointing. Would love to see my Nook Color running Honeycomb AOSP.
I don't buy their reasoning. I don't see why anyone would go rushing to put Honeycomb on a phone??? If anything it's all these cheap tablets running pre 3.0 that is making Android look bad.
This is pathetic!!!! So much for it being "Open Source"!!!
It's probably full of stolen code or something.
veeeee said:
Definitely disappointing. Would love to see my Nook Color running Honeycomb AOSP.
I don't buy their reasoning. I don't see why anyone would go rushing to put Honeycomb on a phone??? If anything it's all these cheap tablets running pre 3.0 that is making Android look bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the point. Google is trying to avoid cheap tablets running Honeycomb. Let's be completely honest here. In terms of polish, iOS is a better OS than Honeycomb. That's to be expected given that Honeycomb is a first-gen tablet OS. Google is pushing it as it's answer to iOS though. They don't want it plastered on crappy ass tablets that barely run and definitely don't want it on phones that won't run it well at all. It would make Honeycomb look awful even though it's a very nice OS if it's run on a device that can actually run it.
Has everybody noticed how this has slipped thru the cracks with all the distraction of Google I/O 2011 news?
Google I/O Google has said that the next version of Android, dubbed "Ice Cream Sandwich", will be open sourced "by the end of the year," and that it will not open source the current Android incarnation, the tablet-centric Honeycomb, before that time.
Source:
UU UU UU dot theregister.co.uk/2011/05/10/android_ice_cream_sandwich/
Andy Rubin has backtracked on making the Honeycomb source available until after it is no longer relevant (if even then). There is no promise any more of EVER getting the Honeycomb source, so it looks like the best we'll be able to do is SDK11 unless B&N updates stock to Honeycomb (don't hold your breath).
I wouldn't say Honeycomb will no longer be relevant after ICS. After all, ICS is a smart phone OS, whereas HC is designed for tablets. What I'm getting from this is that ICS is basically going to be the smartphone version of HC. Google has stated that they don't want people porting HC to smartphones. By delaying the release of source for HC until after ICS hits the shelves, Google is trying to forestall the translation of HC to phones by waiting to release HC code until it no longer makes sense to do so (beacuse there'll be no point in doing so).
dsf3g said:
I wouldn't say Honeycomb will no longer be relevant after ICS. After all, ICS is a smart phone OS, whereas HC is designed for tablets. What I'm getting from this is that ICS is basically going to be the smartphone version of HC. Google has stated that they don't want people porting HC to smartphones. By delaying the release of source for HC until after ICS hits the shelves, Google is trying to forestall the translation of HC to phones by waiting to release HC code until it no longer makes sense to do so (beacuse there'll be no point in doing so).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, from the presentation, ICS is just as much for tablets, since the UI is supposed to scale based on the device.
However, they keep saying ICS for quarter 4, which is half a year away. Frankly, i am pissed that they yanked devs around for so long HOPING we might see the code, when in reality, i have no doubt they held it back solely on the request of Moto and others, to help maintain a monopoly on HC market..
Other media reports are characterizing the discussion as Rubin saying that they will never release the Honeycomb AOSP. Yet another reason to ignore the Xoom, et al. tablets if they're going to pull this bull****.
Brilliant plan -- release a closed buggy version, refuse the community to do de-bugging work for free and then hope that it will be magically fixed by merging with the OS that originally was thought to not be up to snuff.
Google thinks that they can "merge" Honeycomb back into Ice Cream Sandwich (after they "get it right").
What I want to know is, how is Andy Rubin justifying withholding the source of an "open source" OS? And what is to keep him from doing the same thing again next year with ICS?
There are more comments over in the developer thread on this subject. I started this one first, but I don't have enough posts to start one over there (grumble, grumble). I'm slowly getting closer to being able to post there though (grin).
One school of thought over there is that the Honeycomb AOSP is a hacked up kludge "not ready for primetime" and that's why Google doesn't want it out.
While that is very likely true and (and will probably continue to be true now that 3.1 is released), that is no justification for opposing "opening" the source.
Since I expect the kludges will be "grandfathered" throughout future releases, I don't expect to ever see HC AOSP. I could be wrong, but it really doesn't matter because ICS will be out by then and everybody will be wanting to port to it.
What I'm concerned with is the "promise" of ICS being released in a timely fashion. Mr. Rubin has made earlier "promises" that have later been rescinded. I don't think he EVER wanted HC released and was just trying to "buy time" until Google I/O 2011 so that he could take the heat off with the announcement of ICS.
I hope I'm wrong, but ... fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice....
Divine_Madcat said:
However, they keep saying ICS for quarter 4, which is half a year away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fiscal, or calendar? Because fiscal Q4 is July-September.
zombieflanders said:
Fiscal, or calendar? Because fiscal Q4 is July-September.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, i don't think they have said, but i have never seen any other Google release announcement refer to a fiscal quarter instead of the calendar. I would love for it to be fiscal, but that is a real pipe dream.
DM -
Tell them over in the other thread that Andy Rubin's quote was in a Q&A w/press after his keynote.
DiDGR8 said:
DM -
Tell them over in the other thread that Andy Rubin's quote was in a Q&A w/press after his keynote.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Consider it done.
Divine_Madcat said:
Consider it done.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks (just one more post and I can get into Dev!!)
Ice cream sandwich to release next week?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20...xt-week/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
CNET said:
Google is expected to serve up Ice Cream Sandwich--the newest version of Android--on Tuesday at the Samsung Unpacked event in San Diego.
That revelation comes courtesy of the official Android Developers YouTube channel, which earlier today posted a placeholder video titled "Android ICS launch." The site now says, "This live event is no longer available. Sorry about that." Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said last month that the next flavor of the company's mobile operating system would debut sometime in October or November.
Samsung is also expected to use the event to unveil a new Android phone, perhaps the Nexus Prime, which would likely be the first Ice Cream Sandwich phone. Samsung has posted a teaser video that includes the words "Something big is coming"--perhaps an indication of the phone's screen size.
Ice Cream Sandwich is Google's first attempt to create one single unified mobile OS, taking Honeycomb features and interfaces and adapting them to run across both smartphones and tablets. ICS developers will get new open-source APIs and a framework that will help them optimize their apps to run on a variety of different Android phones and tablets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hoping to see this on my nook soon
Sent from my NookColor using xda premium
Hopefully we get a full source release soon after.
---------------------------------
Sent from my LG Optimus V using Tapatalk
If this post helped you don't forget to say thanks!
Doesn't Google usually release to one manufacturer first and then to everyone else some 6 months later? I recall that has been a concern of phone manufacturers since Google announced they wanted to buy Motorola, ie; Motorola might then exclusively get the 6 month jump. Usually Google would rotate manufacturers.
The question now is, which will come first: CM7.1 stable, or CM8?
CM8 FTW!!!!!!!!
CANCELLED!
Just saw the announcement from Samsung
I don't think we will see any ICS code anytime soon.
Personally, I think, first, they introduced the ICS (which just got delayed) then waiting for certain period of time (who know how many months) before release the source codes.
I think it's good to call CM8.
votinh said:
I don't think we will see any ICS code anytime soon.
Personally, I think, first, they introduced the ICS (which just got delayed) then waiting for certain period of time (who know how many months) before release the source codes.
I think it's good to call CM8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I'm strongly disagreeing with this statement, with the exception of Honeycomb, Google pushes its source code to the repo's within hours or at the most a couple of days after it launches. With all the leaks lately, I wouldn't be surprised to see ICS leaked pretty soon. If it doesnt though, I'm sure we'll have source within 2-3 weeks tops.
RileyGrant said:
No, I'm strongly disagreeing with this statement, with the exception of Honeycomb, Google pushes its source code to the repo's within hours or at the most a couple of days after it launches. With all the leaks lately, I wouldn't be surprised to see ICS leaked pretty soon. If it doesnt though, I'm sure we'll have source within 2-3 weeks tops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See my post above. Google usually gives one manufacturer a jump on the rest and rotates. "hours" is not really much of a jump unless they are going to change their release habits.
patruns said:
See my post above. Google usually gives one manufacturer a jump on the rest and rotates. "hours" is not really much of a jump unless they are going to change their release habits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I read that post, but that's not the case. They don't do that with the software, just the phones. For instance, the Nexus S came out on T-Mobile, then eventually Sprint, etc. When the new software is released/launched however, they push it directly to their "AOSP" (Android Open Source Project) repositories, and from there, developers have open access to the source code. Technically, since Android is licensed under the Apache Open Source license, if they are to call it "Open Source" they must post the source code within a certain time limit (which is only a couple of weeks) or else it violates the license.
Well I'm pretty excited to see some ICS efforts. New OSs are fun. I'm particularly interested in trying out the newest stock web browser.
RileyGrant said:
Yeah, I read that post, but that's not the case. They don't do that with the software, just the phones. For instance, the Nexus S came out on T-Mobile, then eventually Sprint, etc. When the new software is released/launched however, they push it directly to their "AOSP" (Android Open Source Project) repositories, and from there, developers have open access to the source code. Technically, since Android is licensed under the Apache Open Source license, if they are to call it "Open Source" they must post the source code within a certain time limit (which is only a couple of weeks) or else it violates the license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know they promised then delayed then ignored then decided not to release the Honeycomb source code, right?
There is no such a "must" from them.
But anyway, if you're correct, which I and the rest of us also wish, then it's great. I want to see them release ICS code ASAP, 3 weeks like you said is reasonable and if 3 days or even 3 hours then it's more than expect.
We all hope for the CM8, should we?
votinh said:
You know they promised then delayed then ignored then decided not to release the Honeycomb source code, right?
There is no such a "must" from them.
But anyway, if you're correct, which I and the rest of us also wish, then it's great. I want to see them release ICS code ASAP, 3 weeks like you said is reasonable and if 3 days or even 3 hours then it's more than expect.
We all hope for the CM8, should we?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They released what was required by the license for honeycomb but Google has confirmed that ICS will be an open source release.
---------------------------------
Sent from my LG Optimus V using Tapatalk
If this post helped you don't forget to say thanks!
votinh said:
You know they promised then delayed then ignored then decided not to release the Honeycomb source code, right?
There is no such a "must" from them.
But anyway, if you're correct, which I and the rest of us also wish, then it's great. I want to see them release ICS code ASAP, 3 weeks like you said is reasonable and if 3 days or even 3 hours then it's more than expect.
We all hope for the CM8, should we?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reason I heard is that Honeycomb was a quick throw together for a tablet OS.
Not really an excuse, but considering they've been working on ICS for quite a while now, I think it'll be in the repos pretty quickly.
RileyGrant said:
Yeah, I read that post, but that's not the case. They don't do that with the software, just the phones. For instance, the Nexus S came out on T-Mobile, then eventually Sprint, etc. When the new software is released/launched however, they push it directly to their "AOSP" (Android Open Source Project) repositories, and from there, developers have open access to the source code. Technically, since Android is licensed under the Apache Open Source license, if they are to call it "Open Source" they must post the source code within a certain time limit (which is only a couple of weeks) or else it violates the license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will agree to disagree But I do hope I am wrong!
Alright, let's hope that they do what they should have been doing.
Dalingrin said the HP Touchpad will get ICS and maybe the Nook Color.
patruns said:
I will agree to disagree But I do hope I am wrong!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya thats fine, a previous comment mentioned that they didnt have to release code such as what they did for honeycomb, however, they did release the required source for honeycomb but did not push the framework and what not because it was being saved for what we now know is ICS.
RileyGrant said:
Ya thats fine, a previous comment mentioned that they didnt have to release code such as what they did for honeycomb, however, they did release the required source for honeycomb but did not push the framework and what not because it was being saved for what we now know is ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think one of the main reasons for Google not releasing the source code was because they didn't want people to run it on phones, being a tablet OS.
Dalingrin said the HP Touchpad will get ICS and maybe the Nook Color.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When did he say that? That makes it sound that the touchpad will definitely get ICS and the nook color may get it.
I need to get a new phone, but I don't have a lot of money, so I'm looking for something cheep (under $150) but that should support last a while (so should have a decent developer community around it).
So I'm thinking of either getting a athene or something from xiaomi, or waiting a bit until most phones come out with android > 8 and then get something cheep with Treble.
Now it's true that there are no guarantees when it comes to ROMs. A maintainer could get bored and move on, leaving an immensely popular device dry while a small niche device can have a dedicated maintainer for years. But my question is that since I'm not really a ROM dev (I know Java, C, and general Linux but don't know the inner bowels of Android) I don't know how difficult will it be to port future Android versions to current phones.
For example, according to the rumor mill, other ROMs are finding it extremely hard to port Oreo to klte or to s4 due to camera HAL issues. So based on the above, what would be the most reasonable way to proceed?
iamfoolish said:
I need to get a new phone, but I don't have a lot of money, so I'm looking for something cheep (under $150) but that should support last a while (so should have a decent developer community around it).
So I'm thinking of either getting a athene or something from xiaomi, or waiting a bit until most phones come out with android > 8 and then get something cheep with Treble.
Now it's true that there are no guarantees when it comes to ROMs. A maintainer could get bored and move on, leaving an immensely popular device dry while a small niche device can have a dedicated maintainer for years. But my question is that since I'm not really a ROM dev (I know Java, C, and general Linux but don't know the inner bowels of Android) I don't know how difficult will it be to port future Android versions to current phones.
For example, according to the rumor mill, other ROMs are finding it extremely hard to port Oreo to klte or to s4 due to camera HAL issues. So based on the above, what would be the most reasonable way to proceed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Athene ftw