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
Now, before I get started I just want to say please don't yell at me going "WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU WANT THAT?" This is just a simple question:
Could it be possible to port WP7 onto the Nexus One? I noticed we have development for things like Ubuntu and Meego.
xxjoshuaaxx said:
Now, before I get started I just want to say please don't yell at me going "WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU WANT THAT?" This is just a simple question:
Could it be possible to port WP7 onto the Nexus One? I noticed we have development for things like Ubuntu and Meego.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The difference is, OSes like Android, Meego and Ubuntu are all based on open-source Linux. That means we can try and squeeze them onto devices that weren't designed for it without running into huge legal repercussions, and if something is incompatible we can just recompile it with changes.
WP7 is closed-source and designed for specific hardware. I don't think it'd be easy, it definitely wouldn't be legal, and I don't think you'll find a lot of people here who care to see it happen anyway
cmstlist said:
The difference is, OSes like Android, Meego and Ubuntu are all based on open-source Linux. That means we can try and squeeze them onto devices that weren't designed for it without running into huge legal repercussions, and if something is incompatible we can just recompile it with changes.
WP7 is closed-source and designed for specific hardware. I don't think it'd be easy, it definitely wouldn't be legal, and I don't think you'll find a lot of people here who care to see it happen anyway
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Add in to the fact that it's not even released yet, so how would anyone know anyway? Yes, xxjoshuaaxx it's possible, but it's nothing like getting Ubuntu to run on the N1. It would require a lot of custom driver code to be written. Nobody will care enough to do this though, so while yes it is possible it won't happen. Same reason you don't see Symbian or BB OS running on an N1, or any Android phone. Unless the hardware is extremely similar it's not worth trying.
One possible exception might be - if a manufacturer produces an Android and a Windows phone that are 99.9% the same hardware with different OSes slapped on them. In that case it *might* be possible to reflash one to the other. But don't count on it!
I would guess the way it happens is that you take a phone 7 device with a similar hardware device sporting android and then install android on the phone7 device and dual boot. It was the wild west with windows mobile up to now but with phone 7 I expect to see apple style policing of the OS meaning developers fiddling with putting it on a non native phone 7 device and offering up such a rom will be seeing a cease and desist order very qickly.
We’ve been hard at work on CM9 since Google released Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) into the wild last month, and things are slowly starting to come together. Google did a great job with ICS and added some really awesome features which in some cases replace or deprecate functionality that we had in CM7, so we are reevaluating all of our customizations. A number of devices are already up and running with CM9, and the focus is currently on getting as many devices ready as we can. The first devices (besides the Nexus S, which you can already get from Koush’s section on ROM Manager) that we’ll have ready will mostly likely be devices based on OMAP4, MSM8660/7X30, and Exynos. We also have some Tegra2 tablets in the pipeline such as the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Asus Transformer. Our goal is to provide continued support to all CM7 devices back to the QSD8250 series of devices such as the Nexus One. I don’t want to make any promises at this time, but that is the plan. And sorry Droid1 owners, we’re dropping support for you. Time to upgrade.
What do you recommend if we have to keep our Droid1?!?
I have no philosophical problem with the Droid1 not having the latest and greatest CM ROM. I can get along without CM7 on the Droid1, since I will be going that way with my Droid Bionic "real soon now". (I'm kinda, sorta, used to this class of support, since I have about 6 Win XP/Pro boxes and a SBS 2003 server here on my SOHO network. All the current best boxes for me and my digital nerds are dual booted running top end Win7 and several flavors of Linux.
So, what is the last build that we should use, how long will it be supported and will security fixes be available?
Thanks,
/s/ BezantSoft
aoidcool said:
And sorry Droid1 owners, we’re dropping support for you. Time to upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And you plan to make this seem official... How? If the CyanogenMod developers actually said that, I might have a few unkind remarks about forced hardware upgrades to share.
For the record, I am not complaining about the lack of official CM9 support, the fact that ICS on the Droid1 would likely be a slow/buggy/needless upgrade, or anything along those lines.
What I might complain about is that the Droid1 is the most recent Android phone I would buy. Nothing newer has an unlocked bootloader, a better physical keyboard (well, minus the Nokia N900, but that's not without its issues either), a comparable screen, and the second-hand advantage: No carrier contract/spying or data plan required (Google Voice over WiFi FTW), cheaper than dirt for mobile software development, and wide availability (unlike certain Maemo/MeeGo phones).
Until a developer phone appears that meets my stingy requirements, I will continue using my Droid and experimenting with Linux software on it. I only wish that waiting for other people to do what I should be doing was easier, secure in my knowledge that someone else in the world cares about the same things I care about. What can I say, I'm lazy.
TL;DR: Telling people to upgrade when they don't have a choice is counterproductive IMHO.
gTan64 said:
And you plan to make this seem official... How? If the CyanogenMod developers actually said that, I might have a few unkind remarks about forced hardware upgrades to share.
For the record, I am not complaining about the lack of official CM9 support, the fact that ICS on the Droid1 would likely be a slow/buggy/needless upgrade, or anything along those lines.
What I might complain about is that the Droid1 is the most recent Android phone I would buy. Nothing newer has an unlocked bootloader, a better physical keyboard (well, minus the Nokia N900, but that's not without its issues either), a comparable screen, and the second-hand advantage: No carrier contract/spying or data plan required (Google Voice over WiFi FTW), cheaper than dirt for mobile software development, and wide availability (unlike certain Maemo/MeeGo phones).
Until a developer phone appears that meets my stingy requirements, I will continue using my Droid and experimenting with Linux software on it. I only wish that waiting for other people to do what I should be doing was easier, secure in my knowledge that someone else in the world cares about the same things I care about. What can I say, I'm lazy.
TL;DR: Telling people to upgrade when they don't have a choice is counterproductive IMHO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That first post is a quote from the cm blog. So it is 100% true.
VISION 1.5Ghz
I think a kang will show up sooner or later. There are plenty of other interesting OMAP3 devices (Nook Color for one) which should get ports, and OMAP3 doesn't have to lose 60-100MB of RAM to the radio, so with compcache and good tuning 256MB might actually be enough.
It really depends on if OMAP3 HW accell can work fully under ICS. If the Nook Color runs well, so should the Droid...
gTan64 said:
What I might complain about is that the Droid1 is the most recent Android phone I would buy. Nothing newer has an unlocked bootloader, a better physical keyboard (well, minus the Nokia N900, but that's not without its issues either), a comparable screen, and the second-hand advantage: No carrier contract/spying or data plan required (Google Voice over WiFi FTW), cheaper than dirt for mobile software development, and wide availability (unlike certain Maemo/MeeGo phones).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so your complaint has nothing to do with software development, but with handset manufacturers. What does that have to do with CM saying they won't support what amounts to a 1st gen device?
TL;DR: Telling people to upgrade when they don't have a choice is counterproductive IMHO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but you do have a choice. either upgrade, or you're stuck with whatever they've already built.
:|
Well, someone'll port ics to this 3 year old POS i'm stuck with for another year.
I'd rather have a current os that doesn't run well than a outdated os that does.
Sent from my Nook Tablet using Tapatalk
Mr. Argent said:
I'd rather have a current os that doesn't run well than a outdated os that does.
Sent from my Nook Tablet using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why????
Sent from my VS910 4G using xda premium
Having no money for a off-contract phone and not being able to upgrade for a year, I have to do something to keep my original droid usable for a year. I find knowing there's a major update available and not getting it due to hardware issues annoying when the g1 got it (even if it was a laggy mess, at least it's not 2.3), which impacts it being what I consider usable.
(Also, I don't want ics launcher. Beneath the veneer of modernity it's still that stale old gingerbread.)
Sent from my nook tablet (eagerly awaiting a bootloader workaroiubd and ics) using Tapatalk.
Mr. Argent said:
Having no money for a off-contract phone and not being able to upgrade for a year, I have to do something to keep my original droid usable for a year. I find knowing there's a major update available and not getting it due to hardware issues annoying when the g1 got it (even if it was a laggy mess, at least it's not 2.3), which impacts it being what I consider usable.
(Also, I don't want ics launcher. Beneath the veneer of modernity it's still that stale old gingerbread.)
Sent from my nook tablet (eagerly awaiting a bootloader workaroiubd and ics) using Tapatalk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm in the same boat as you, I have no upgrade for a year. so i'm stuck with my D1. and i agree with your other statement a g1 can handle it yet no one is making an attempt in porting it to the D1 on top of that a 6 year old htc windows mobile phone has it with like 134mb of ram. and yet the droid still has no port whatsoever
This is a general question from me trying to understand things better. Before the D4 I had a samsung stratosphere. Completely unlocked bootloader with full capability to flash custom ROM/kernel images. Despite this no AOSP ROMs could be build due to lack of driver sources. It was the same situation with the Epic 4G. The Droid 4 on the other hand had the bootloader locked with the key thrown away. Despite this CM9 and other AOSP ROMs are up and nearly fully operational, even with ICS booting on GB kernels. What makes this possible on D4 but not the stratosphere?
My guess is that driver software is available for the D4. This is due to the fact that Motorola uses parts from other OEMs (TI CPU ect) with public drivers. Samsung on the other hand uses their own proprietary parts and keeps the drivers private. Is this an accurate assessment?
It would seem then that the most important thing to making development possible for a phone (apart from popularity) is driver availability, NOT whether or not the bootloader is unlocked. Is that true? Regardless, I will probably steer clear of samsung for future android purchases. HTC still seems best and motorola acceptable. If only HTC still made high end QWERTYs.
Usually devs just pull the proprietary files off the phone and use it in the compile/builds. This has been going on for Motorola phones since the original Droid.
Sounds like no one invested in seeing what proprietary files were needed from the Stratosphere or Epic 4G.
Public AOSP code mixed with copying in private/proprietary files is how most ROMs are made. The higher the user base of a device, the higher the development activity and the larger number of devs finding out what all is needed to be pulled from the stock device to compile a fully functional ROM.
Since some proprietary files are used....you need them for the same version OS you are building, ie...use stock phones ICS drivers for ICS builds or stock phones GB drivers for Gingerbread builds. You can sometimes hack drivers to work but with lots of limitations. Also drivers depend on the kernel so a matching kernel is needed......requiring the device to have the needed kernel level or an unlocked bootloader to be able to replace the stock kernel.
We wont be seeing an unlocked bootloader? Ever?
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
twizzles said:
We wont be seeing an unlocked bootloader? Ever?
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All signs point to no...we will never see an unlocked bootloader on the current Motorola devices.
With Google owning Motorola Mobility and already replacing MM CEO with one of their own from Google........it's possible future devices may be unlock capable.
Current devices....no, not ever.
The first locked bootloader on a Motorola droid was the Droid 2. It still has not been unlocked, hacked, cracked, etc... How long has it been out?
Motorola released a special Razr Dev model with an unlockable bootloader...retail price, zero warranty, nothing you do on it would transfer over to the normal Razr or Razr Maxx.......so why would anyone buy it? Great PR for them to say "see..we released an unlockable device and no one bought it".
Well that just sucks. Thank you for the info
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
I have to say, I don't mind not having an unlocked bootloader. I had the Galaxy Nexus and ran multiple different setups on it. The radio still sucked though. With the Droid 4, I don't feel the need to do a lot of hacking. The phone is well built, radio is awesome, it just works.
GermanGuy said:
I have to say, I don't mind not having an unlocked bootloader. I had the Galaxy Nexus and ran multiple different setups on it. The radio still sucked though. With the Droid 4, I don't feel the need to do a lot of hacking. The phone is well built, radio is awesome, it just works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kind of agree with you for the most, but still I prefer the option and think we should have it as an option. It's one way to keep a device relevant throughout your 2 year contract. For example....the Droid 3. I have one, bought online day of release. In less than a years time it has become a non-supported, forgotten device from Motorola. The locked bootloader prevents devs from picking apart the Droid 4 leaked ICS kernel and compiling one with Droid 3 specs (less RAM, etc..) and bringing a fully functional ICS build to the Droid 3. Unlocked...that would be possible.
JKingDev said:
This is a general question from me trying to understand things better. Before the D4 I had a samsung stratosphere. Completely unlocked bootloader with full capability to flash custom ROM/kernel images. Despite this no AOSP ROMs could be build due to lack of driver sources. It was the same situation with the Epic 4G. The Droid 4 on the other hand had the bootloader locked with the key thrown away. Despite this CM9 and other AOSP ROMs are up and nearly fully operational, even with ICS booting on GB kernels. What makes this possible on D4 but not the stratosphere?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I, as well, went from the Stratosphere to the Droid 4. I love my Stratosphere and still have it, but the lack of development on it is just down right aggravating. That is why I took it upon myself to learn how to compile a kernel to provide everyone with root and recovery for it. Otherwise we wouldn't have the ROMs we have for it now. If it wasn't for the Droid Charge using the exact same dev board as the Strat, I doubt we'd even have that much. I had to take the Charge build of CWM and packed it in a Strat kernel and tweaked the scripts, thank god at least that worked.
JKingDev said:
My guess is that driver software is available for the D4. This is due to the fact that Motorola uses parts from other OEMs (TI CPU ect) with public drivers. Samsung on the other hand uses their own proprietary parts and keeps the drivers private. Is this an accurate assessment?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure about the Motorola drivers, but you are right about Samsung. The first time I compiled the kernel, I was missing 11 modules. I couldn't figure out what I did to keep them from being compiled... and then I learned the sneakiness Samsung uses to get around releasing the source, they compile the kernels for the file system and radios and dynamically link them in the init.rc script. Apparently a lot of them do this, actually.
JKingDev said:
It would seem then that the most important thing to making development possible for a phone (apart from popularity) is driver availability, NOT whether or not the bootloader is unlocked. Is that true?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually both are true to some extent, with a locked bootloader you are stuck with OEM signed boot images and can't recompile the kernel to your own needs, or compiling one with ro.secure = 0 so you get root access in adb (which is how I rooted the Stratosphere). Then you need the drivers to talk to the hardware too. Without them, you'd need to reverse engineer them or use the currently complied ones (also, like we did with the Strat). Finally, you have to have the source for the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) in Android so Android as an OS knows how to talk to the drivers to make calls, send messages, use data, etc. THIS is where we are currently hung up from using AOSP on the Stratosphere. I know work is being done on the RIL for the Charge and since its the same board, we might get lucky and be able to reuse most (if not all) of the same code and bring new life to it. But, I wasn't getting my hopes up and decided to get a D4 anyway.
JKingDev said:
Regardless, I will probably steer clear of samsung for future android purchases. HTC still seems best and motorola acceptable. If only HTC still made high end QWERTYs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You and me both. I was in love with the keyboard on my HTC Touch Pro 2 and wish they'd release something like that running Android on Verizon with newer hardware. Closest they had to a QWERTY on VZ was the Merge, and they botched that up from the gate. I also have the Rezound and am trying to design a way to attach a sliding keyboard to the back battery cover to give me something closer to what i have been wanting in a phone.
I think us QWERTY loves on VZ are at the mercy of Motorola and Motorola alone with the original Droid line of sliders.
KnightCrusader said:
I, as well, went from the Stratosphere to the Droid 4. I love my Stratosphere and still have it, but the lack of development on it is just down right aggravating. That is why I took it upon myself to learn how to compile a kernel to provide everyone with root and recovery for it. Otherwise we wouldn't have the ROMs we have for it now. If it wasn't for the Droid Charge using the exact same dev board as the Strat, I doubt we'd even have that much. I had to take the Charge build of CWM and packed it in a Strat kernel and tweaked the scripts, thank god at least that worked.
I am not sure about the Motorola drivers, but you are right about Samsung. The first time I compiled the kernel, I was missing 11 modules. I couldn't figure out what I did to keep them from being compiled... and then I learned the sneakiness Samsung uses to get around releasing the source, they compile the kernels for the file system and radios and dynamically link them in the init.rc script. Apparently a lot of them do this, actually.
Actually both are true to some extent, with a locked bootloader you are stuck with OEM signed boot images and can't recompile the kernel to your own needs, or compiling one with ro.secure = 0 so you get root access in adb (which is how I rooted the Stratosphere). Then you need the drivers to talk to the hardware too. Without them, you'd need to reverse engineer them or use the currently complied ones (also, like we did with the Strat). Finally, you have to have the source for the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) in Android so Android as an OS knows how to talk to the drivers to make calls, send messages, use data, etc. THIS is where we are currently hung up from using AOSP on the Stratosphere. I know work is being done on the RIL for the Charge and since its the same board, we might get lucky and be able to reuse most (if not all) of the same code and bring new life to it. But, I wasn't getting my hopes up and decided to get a D4 anyway.
You and me both. I was in love with the keyboard on my HTC Touch Pro 2 and wish they'd release something like that running Android on Verizon with newer hardware. Closest they had to a QWERTY on VZ was the Merge, and they botched that up from the gate. I also have the Rezound and am trying to design a way to attach a sliding keyboard to the back battery cover to give me something closer to what i have been wanting in a phone.
I think us QWERTY loves on VZ are at the mercy of Motorola and Motorola alone with the original Droid line of sliders.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the replies. It is interesting stuff. And KC I definitely appreciated your work on the Strat. So I guess it really was a question of popularity being the problem for stratosphere. I definitely know it wasnt the most popular device but it also seemed like reverse engineering drivers for the Samsung devices was so much harder. The charge was relatively popular and years later the RIL has still not been successfully reverse engineered. All the moto devices get cracked so quickly. Is it only because they are more popular, or are there other reasons that make them easier to hack? Thats what leads me to think maybe it's samsung's use of proprietary hardware that makes things more difficult. Does that have something to do with it?
Hello all developers and super flashers, I recently had to depart from my most awesome phone the HTC HD2 when it could not continue ant longer. My loving wife saw that I really enjoyed flashing so she got me this Droid Bionic because the sales pitch to her was Control it and you control everything. Which brings me to this question I have not seen asked or answered. The same way that the HD2 was able to run android and wp7.5 dual boot can anyone say rather if or not this Bionic is capable of a similar task?
No, and why would you want to gimp the Bionic more than it already is?
The Droid Bionic (and every Moto device on the 4 major USA carriers ever since the Droid X) has carried a locked bootloader. This has the side effect of the kernel only being able to be modified by official Motorola updates that contain a heavily encrypted signature.
Nothing except Android can run, and doing anything else is impossible.