Related
Hi guys,
im trying to get my phone jtaged so i can finally have it rooted. are there any suggestions on the best mod to use for the g1? i know we have limited memeory and i beleive we cant even run 2.0 or 2.1 on the phone is that correct?
THanks!
does this mean we get 2.1!!!
Posted by Cyanogen in Home on May 21, 2010
A whole bunch of us have been working hard to get Android 2.1 (CM 5.0.7) running perfect on the HTC Dream and Magic phones and I think it’s nearly ready to go. This release is almost exactly the same as the Nexus One and Droid versions of CM now, minus a few of the heavier apps.
This was an incredible community effort and I hope everyone likes the result. Breathing new life into old hardware is always awesome.
I expect that a stable release of 5.0.7 should be ready for all devices in the next few days.
And after that.. Google has confirmed that Android 2.2 (FroYo) will be available for ION phones, so it’s guaranteed that CM-6 will continue to support the G1 also when the source code hits AOSP.
Cyanogen 5.0.7test7 runs pretty sweetly on my G1 and its based on 2.1
does it lag at all? are there any limitations that i should know of
I find it ok with comcache enabled, around the same speed (if not a little quicker) then the stable based on 1.6.
It is still a "test / experimental" build though, so proceed at your own risk etc...
Link to the download and details - http://forum.cyanogenmod.com/index....ic-would-you-like-a-pony-v507-test7-05222010/
Changelog for test7 - http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/index.php/Release_Notes#5.0.7-DS-test7_.28experimental.29
omgkush said:
Hi guys,
im trying to get my phone jtaged so i can finally have it rooted. are there any suggestions on the best mod to use for the g1? i know we have limited memeory and i beleive we cant even run 2.0 or 2.1 on the phone is that correct?
THanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Running the Rom on my signature which is CyanogenMod5, latest version themed and tweaked. It is a 2.1 and is running very fast/stable so far. Major downside is the battery life however and is a bit hard to get used to vs. a 1.6 Donut Rom.
In all honesty Id say you try SuperD v1.11 (Best Donut Rom in my opinion) first and then flash the Eclair Roms later on. Sooner or later I am sure a developer will improve the battery degradation problem on the 2.1's.
vixsandlee said:
I find it ok with comcache enabled, around the same speed (if not a little quicker) then the stable based on 1.6.
It is still a "test / experimental" build though, so proceed at your own risk etc...
Link to the download and details - http://forum.cyanogenmod.com/index....ic-would-you-like-a-pony-v507-test7-05222010/
Changelog for test7 - http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/index.php/Release_Notes#5.0.7-DS-test7_.28experimental.29
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its been released "stable"
omgkush said:
Hi guys,
im trying to get my phone jtaged so i can finally have it rooted. are there any suggestions on the best mod to use for the g1?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what, might I ask, is a "g1"?
This phone you speak of is an HTC phone called "DREAM".
i know we have limited memeory
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That statement is absurd. EVERYTHING has limited memory. Unlimited memory is by definition IMPOSSIBLE, even the smallest memory component possible would consume more than the total available space in the universe to produce unlimited/infinite memory. In fact, it would consume the space consumed by INFINITE UNIVERSES. Inconceivably huge, eh?
and i beleive we cant even run 2.0 or 2.1 on the phone is that correct?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And just where did you come up with this nonsense? Do you realize that all the chicken littles in the world will always say "your old hardware will never see this!" -- fact is that this is NOT WINDOZE!! Just because windoze phones don't get to see the newer versions does NOT mean that WE won't get to see our newer versions.
**** this guy is annoying with this rooting ****...
You push too much dude. People don't want to work on your phones cause your too pushy
You start threads about the same thing.....useless
So, let me start off by saying that I have searched, read and spent time trying to understand this... but still don't. Which answers why I'm posting this question.
First, what exactly is the reason that an AOSP rom is being developed and a Vanilla Froyo ROM is being developed?
Is the AOSP rom the important one here? Does the working AOSP rom with working kernel mean that we would have 2.2, 2.3.... and so on supported regardless of Samsung?
I understand that Samsung has not supported tremendously up to this point, I understand 2.2 has not been released for the CDMA version yet, and I understand the code they have released is "crappy." When I hear everyone talk about the great work the devs are doing, are they referring to mainly working on the AOSP? If this rom is built, will we be able to just keep developing it for the new versions of Android?
Sorta like in Back to the future when they break off the real timeline and go into the alternate 1985?
Samsungs Android - 2.1, 2.2.... EOL
Dev's Android - 2.1, AOSP, 2.2, 2.3?
Is this how it works? Basically just trying to understand what needs to happen for the Fascinate to get to at least 2.3... not WHEN or even IF it'll get to 2.3.
Thanks
AOSP means Android Open Source Platform.
It's a version of Android built entirely from sources provided by Google. It's completely Vanilla and comes with zero customer or manufacturer customizations. It's easily root-able, and able to be customized completely by the user if desired.
AOSP ROMs are desirable because they tend to be a bit faster and lighter due to their lack of crapification.
AOSP builds are only distributed in their complete and compiled form by Google for their developer handsets (Currently the Nexus One and Nexus S), and not by any carrier or manufacturer.
Okay, I appreciate that definition... I think I've gotten what AOSP is exactly... but I guess my question is does AOSP have any involvement in a future for this phone if Samsung decides to close its doors. Is a working AOSP, radio, kernel... whatever basically devs developing a future of this phone parallel to whatever Samsung does for it?
Like, I see from other threads that the ROM for Froyo and Gingerbread isn't necessarily the problem, its the radio and the RIL? If that is the case, what needs to happen for everything to figured out and for us to have a bright future for the Fascinate? Samsung has to release code for the RIL and radio? Are we SOL without Samsung helping here or will the devs definitely figure something out to get 2.2, 2.3... and so on for the Fascinate?
Bwangster12 said:
Okay, I appreciate that definition... I think I've gotten what AOSP is exactly... but I guess my question is does AOSP have any involvement in a future for this phone if Samsung decides to close its doors. Is a working AOSP, radio, kernel... whatever basically devs developing a future of this phone parallel to whatever Samsung does for it?
Like, I see from other threads that the ROM for Froyo and Gingerbread isn't necessarily the problem, its the radio and the RIL? If that is the case, what needs to happen for everything to figured out and for us to have a bright future for the Fascinate? Samsung has to release code for the RIL and radio? Are we SOL without Samsung helping here or will the devs definitely figure something out to get 2.2, 2.3... and so on for the Fascinate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's kinda like building an office park, or strip mall or something. You toss up the basic vanilla buildings, and when it's finally done, companies move in and tweak it how they deem fit.
With a working ASOP build, it'll remove some of the shackles of Samsungs bs code.
So... the AOSP build IS THE KEY here? I understand it isn't working yet, but if the devs get AOSP working, does that mean we will get a 2.2, 2.3 and so on regardless of what is released by Samsung?
I'm just trying to figure out what is happening to keep the G1, Droid, Droid 2... supported by ROMs like Cyanogenmod and others, that hasn't happened yet for the Samsung Fascinate.
I'd like to get the Fascinate, but am sorta waiting because I don't wanna be stuck with a phone for the next 2 years that will max out at MAYBE 2.2 if we are lucky.
I don't know where to start with your confusion.
Samsung has not given 2.2 to us. This means that we do not have froyo...
The RIL is an interface layer between the os and the radio. I'm not too sure about it, but anyways...
The developers are working around the fact that samsung has not given further tools that they need to get froyo ported over. Currently they are working on a 1.6 RIL to get froyo working. On another note, vanilla aosp is a good thing because it gives developers more freedom to customize the roms. It also allows for them to be able to port over other roms.
I really don't understand your confusion. If you want a better explanation , I recommend getting on irc.
If I were you, I'd wait. Next gen phones are coming from vzw in the next few months which will essentially blow the existing tech soon.
Bwangster12 said:
So... the AOSP build IS THE KEY here? I understand it isn't working yet, but if the devs get AOSP working, does that mean we will get a 2.2, 2.3 and so on regardless of what is released by Samsung?
I'm just trying to figure out what is happening to keep the G1, Droid, Droid 2... supported by ROMs like Cyanogenmod and others, that hasn't happened yet for the Samsung Fascinate.
I'd like to get the Fascinate, but am sorta waiting because I don't wanna be stuck with a phone for the next 2 years that will max out at MAYBE 2.2 if we are lucky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically, that's the hope at least. If there are changes in say, 2.4 that require something that couldn't be hacked around with ASOP, we'll be stuck waiting for Samsung. But with a working ASOP, the groundwork is laid for updates to be ported over a bit more quickly by the devs.
Regardless of the future of this device, the Fascinate is one of the better Android handsets on the market. The screen is brilliant, it's the perfect size, and it's damn fast. The only thing that drags it down is the factory setup (although I personally think it's idiotic to ding the phone because of the inclusion of Bing like some people/reviewers have.)
I'm trying to understand what is going on instead of being one of the millions to ask about updates for this phone. I see phones like the droid series and read that they basically are being supported forever and then I see the Samsung Fascinate, and while I understand that the code is crappy/not released to community... I'm trying to figure out what needs to happen for it to be a supported device like the droids have been.
Bottom line, nothing at all is going to happen unless Samsung releases more than just a 2.2 update? If I see 2.2 drop like tomorrow, does that mean anything for a future, or is it just 2.2 update and we will just get devs releasing their versions of 2.2 roms?
RacerXFD said:
I really don't understand your confusion. If you want a better explanation , I recommend getting on irc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read his questions as:
"Will a working ASOP build mean better developer support/faster developer released updates?"
I did skim them though.
RacerXFD said:
If I were you, I'd wait. Next gen phones are coming from vzw in the next few months which will essentially blow the existing tech soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a good point. There's an LTE Samsung handset coming out soon, so it might be worth holding out for a little.
Although the Fascinate is no slouch.
Pretty much what I am asking. Like of everything that could possibly happen, Samsung releasing 2.2, AOSP being finished, blah blah what is the key that a consumer should look for to say...
"Well, now the Fascinate has no negatives to it and I have no fear that in a year, we won't still be stuck on 2.1 or 2.2 because Samsung screwed us."
Doesn't necessarily seem like Samsung needs to do MUCH to future this phones life and turn over the keys to the devs (like HTC seemingly has done), but I'm trying to understand what that thing is they need to do. Release a newer kernel, RIL, 2.2 ROM, some code that magically allows devs to port over future roms eternally...
I don't think I care if the phone has LTE capability. I won't get LTE and a regular 3G phone is beyond enough for me. LTE is zero impact for me.
Bwangster12 said:
Pretty much what I am asking. Like of everything that could possibly happen, Samsung releasing 2.2, AOSP being finished, blah blah what is the key that a consumer should look for to say...
"Well, now the Fascinate has no negatives to it and I have no fear that in a year, we won't still be stuck on 2.1 or 2.2 because Samsung screwed us."
Doesn't necessarily seem like Samsung needs to do MUCH to future this phones life and turn over the keys to the devs, but I'm trying to understand what that thing is they need to do. Release a newer kernel, RIL, 2.2 ROM, some code that magically allows devs to port over future roms eternally...
I don't think I care if the phone has LTE capability. I won't get LTE and a regular 3G phone is beyond enough for me. LTE is zero impact for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does SAMSUNG need to do? Release their source code, and not just incomplete parts of it.
Will that happen? I doubt it, but it might. Clearly the companies ears are perking up with all the yelling by the consumers.
What can we do in the meantime? Support the devs and wait for them to crank out a working ASOP build and Froyo.
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Basically... AOSP will only be updated to whatever version Samsung has released?
Bwangster12 said:
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Android Open Source Project means "Android" in general. It can be 2.1, 1.6, 2.3, whatever. The devs elected to start with 2.1.
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you've followed anything in the dev folders, clearly not. JT's "Vanilla" Froyo looks like an AOSP build.
Basically... AOSP will only be updated to whatever version Samsung has released?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. At least not our version.
Bwangster12 said:
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's hard to answer your question because AOSP and Froyo refer to two completely different things, which can be the same or separate.
AOSP is basically Android, built from clean, unmodified source code directly from Google, without any changes by carriers or manufacturer.
Froyo is simply the 2.2 version of Android.
So, you can have Froyo that's modified by a carrier and/or manufacturer. This wouldn't be AOSP. And you can have Froyo, built directly from Google code. This would be AOSP. You can also have Eclair (Android 2.1), or any other version of Android that's AOSP or not AOSP depending on whether it was built directly from Google code, or modified by a carrier or manufacturer.
AOSP doesn't refer to a single, particular version of Android, but the state of the code that was used to compile whatever version you want to talk about.
Bwangster12 said:
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of the issue surrounds the kernel. When Google releases a new version of Android, it runs on a particular version of the kernel, which supports it's particular features. Manufacturers have to modify the kernel to support their particular hardware. So, since Samsung has only released source code for the kernel for Android 2.1, we're stuck on 2.1.
The versions of 2.2 from Kaos and JT are running on the Android 2.1 kernel that's been hacked to enable 2.2 to boot and run correctly. It works, but it's far, far from ideal. It doubles (if not more) the amount of work necessary to get 2.2 running, which is the reason for the rather slow pace of development.
So for your question, once Samsung releases 2.2 (the system and kernel), it'll be much easier to get an AOSP build of Android running, since the devs will only need to worry about the system instead of hacking together a kernel and RIL (radio interface layer) as well.
At least this is my understanding of the situation. I'm sure people with more knowledge and experience can correct me where I'm wrong, but I think this is the basic gist of it.
ChrisDDD said:
It's hard to answer your question because AOSP and Froyo refer to two completely different things, which can be the same or separate.
AOSP is basically Android, built from clean, unmodified source code directly from Google, without any changes by carriers or manufacturer.
Froyo is simply the 2.2 version of Android.
So, you can have Froyo that's modified by a carrier and/or manufacturer. This wouldn't be AOSP. And you can have Froyo, built directly from Google code. This would be AOSP. You can also have Eclair (Android 2.1), or any other version of Android that's AOSP or not AOSP depending on whether it was built directly from Google code, or modified by a carrier or manufacturer.
AOSP doesn't refer to a single, particular version of Android, but the state of the code that was used to compile whatever version you want to talk about.
A lot of the issue surrounds the kernel. When Google releases a new version of Android, it runs on a particular version of the kernel, which supports it's particular features. Manufacturers have to modify the kernel to support their particular hardware. So, since Samsung has only released source code for the kernel for Android 2.1, we're stuck on 2.1.
The versions of 2.2 from Kaos and JT are running on the Android 2.1 kernel that's been hacked to enable 2.2 to boot and run correctly. It works, but it's far, far from ideal. It doubles (if not more) the amount of work necessary to get 2.2 running, which is the reason for the rather slow pace of development.
So for your question, once Samsung releases 2.2 (the system and kernel), it'll be much easier to get an AOSP build of Android running, since the devs will only need to worry about the system instead of hacking together a kernel and RIL (radio interface layer) as well.
At least this is my understanding of the situation. I'm sure people with more knowledge and experience can correct me where I'm wrong, but I think this is the basic gist of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, thank you for this answer... this makes sense to me.
So, have HTC and Motorola released newer kernels for the devs of roms like Cyanogemod to update their ROMs, despite HTC and Motorola not actually releasing newer versions? I mean, how is the G1 updated as far as it has. Did HTC release a 2.2 kernel to allow devs to put 2.2 on it?
That's were I'm start confused as well.
I understand that Samsung has some proprietary kernel level code and drivers.
But, I'm curious what is the difference between Linux kernel versions used for different versions of Android. It doesn't sound like major version change and hence should not change anything dramatically. It should be mostly bug fixes. That's why jt was able to get kernel work.
As in relation to ASOP for SF, I see it like attempt to adapt Samsung code to current android interfaces. Once again, these interfaces should not change dramatically between versions, because these are evolutionary. So, I assume when done it is pretty much paved road up to 3.0 at least. That said some new features might not work at all, because we do not have working initial binaries from Samsung.
By the way mrbirdman has GB in progress.
Alright... so this may sound like I'm oversimplifying it, but I don't mean to.
Why can't the dev community just create a "custom" kernel to work with their versions of 2.2, 2.3 and so on? You say that they are working to hack the 2.1 kernel Samsung has released so it allows 2.2 to run on the Fascinate... but why can't they just make a 2.2 kernel? Is that sorta what Cyanogenmod is doing to get a 2.2 Froyo build to work on a G1?
Based on the amazing things I've seen the dev community do, building ROMs from scratch, I guess I don't understand how the kernel can't be built specifically for each new version... forgetting about what Samsung releases.
Bwangster12 said:
Why can't the dev community just create a "custom" kernel to work with their versions of 2.2, 2.3 and so on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theoretically they could, it would just be a lot of work. Hardware drivers might not be compatible with the kernel version designed for 2.2 or 2.3. I don't think manufacturers are required to release the code for their drivers, so if a driver wouldn't work, one would need to be written from scratch, and without the detailed knowledge of the hardware itself, that is very difficult.
Hardware support is very integral to the kernel, so a kernel for one phone wouldn't run at all on another. So in addition to the difficulty of putting together a totally independent kernel, it would need to be done separately for each and every phone out there, and how many versions of the Galaxy S alone are there? How many HTC phones, how many Motorola and LG and Sony and so on.
It's just not realistic for people doing this, essentially, in their spare time.
So, what the devs generally do is wait until a carrier releases a version of Android (System, kernel, radio, etc.), and with all the hardware support in place and working, they can focus on building custom or AOSP versions of the system.
It's not that they couldn't build their own kernel, it's just a matter of practicality, audience and the shelf live of the particular phone. As it is, a new generation of phones are already either coming out or on the near horizon... and our phone is what, 4 to 5 months old?
Bwangster12 said:
Based on the amazing things I've seen the dev community do, building ROMs from scratch, I guess I don't understand how the kernel can't be built specifically for each new version... forgetting about what Samsung releases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The misunderstanding is in the complexity of compiling a custom system, and developing a custom kernel. They are hugely different in terms of complexity.
Think of a ROM as taking Windows 3.1 and simply tweaking the components that are installed by default - what accessories are installed, what wallpaper is selected, the color scheme of the windows. Not terribly complicated.
Think of the kernel as having to compile DOS, complete with custom drivers for all the hardware - CPU, graphics, memory, storage, multitouch, sound, radio, modem, WiFi, networking, power management, USB support, file system support, etc. all by hand.
Android 3.0 Preview SDK is now available
More infos you can find here:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/preview/index.html
Saw that yesterday.
But as far as I know it is Tablet only.
Yes,but multiple screen support is there,but needs developing
again!
Well since it is not going to work on a Hero, Don't see the use in posting it here, but maybe better for general dev?
Some similar threads about Gingerbread,Android 2.1 SDK
here to,so think we can stay here!
Android 2.3 works,maybe 3.0 too,Devs can make it possible!
I'm not a developer, but Honeycomb would be difficult even for the likes of Desire. It is very tablet orientated. The next Android for mobile phones is 2.4 Ice Cream, by the time it comes out a lot of the devs would've moved to a different phone.
Sent from my Hero using XDA App
As i understand it google have anounced it there not goung to be any hardware ristrictions on android 3.0. I have a feeling that differnt features will atomatically enabe/disable themselves dependind on the specs of the divice running it. You can already see an example of this in latest google maps which checks the gles version in build.prop to decide weather or not to implement tilt and compass.
Sent from my HTC Hero using Tapatalk
Their maybe no hardware restrictions, but there will be minimum requerements.
And you say devs can make it possible.
You see devs around??
Its a warzone out there....
Most of em are gone, so I am just focusing on 2.3,
and I don't get the comment you made on well there is a 2.2 SDK topic. Duh, but we all knew that is definitly possible to run on the Hero. 3.0 99% That it will never been 100% same as the 2.2 Sense is.
But we will see. The Hero is almost a dead device. So.
And you say it yourself
HTC Hero sold- not a real Gingerbread and Power to low for new Android
Sooo BTW That statement is so wrong...
If you knew anything about android, you would know honeycomb is TABLET ONLY. there is no chance of seeing this on rmthe hero. Wait for 2.4 ice cream but I can't see that on the hero either seeing as there's no devs left.
I think a mod should delete this thread
sjknight413 said:
If you knew anything about android, you would know honeycomb is TABLET ONLY. there is no chance of seeing this on rmthe hero. Wait for 2.4 ice cream but I can't see that on the hero either seeing as there's no devs left.
I think a mod should delete this thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Noo needs to
rdejager said:
Their maybe no hardware restrictions, but there will be minimum requerements.
And you say devs can make it possible.
You see devs around??
Its a warzone out there....
Most of em are gone, so I am just focusing on 2.3,
and I don't get the comment you made on well there is a 2.2 SDK topic. Duh, but we all knew that is definitly possible to run on the Hero. 3.0 99% That it will never been 100% same as the 2.2 Sense is.
But we will see. The Hero is almost a dead device. So.
And you say it yourself
HTC Hero sold- not a real Gingerbread and Power to low for new Android
Sooo BTW That statement is so wrong...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No its not only for tablets, this has already been established.
All of the apps have multiple DPI res folders in them (MDPI, HDPI, Extra Large, NoDPI) so it will work on phones - not just tablets.
And Yes,I see Devs for 2.3 so the same Devs maybe developing/porting 3.0
http://pocketnow.com/android/android-30-honeycomb-how-it-might-work-on-smartphones-video
And Yes I said Power to low for new Android versions
does not mean this will not works.
Perhaps not so smooth and not with all functions.
but
you might be right, however 2.4 is I think going to be pretty much the same OS as 3.0 however the 2.X codeline is for phones while the 3.x codeline is for tablets.
Which is definitely the stupidest thing I've heard of in a very long time.
Any developer would twitch at the concept of two different OS codelines to maintain which would otherwise be very similar, unless of course google's keeping some bizarre building structure where it's all one shared resource except whatever is unique to each release line. But that isn't something I personally have seen done before.
Mostly the way they broke up the numbering by a huge value of, wait for it, ONE (2.x versus 3.x) to differentiate between phones and tablets... well that's pretty silly too. Numbering shouldn't be relevant. It should be called two different things, like Android versus AndTab or something like that. But then that would mean we're all talking on our Roids (versus ours tabs) which is, admittedly, kind of rude ;-)
I'm more interested in how they solve this over 20 years. Are we going to expect an Android 2.200.9132 for my phone and 3.7.20 for tablets?
riemervdzee said:
I'm more interested in how they solve this over 20 years. Are we going to expect an Android 2.200.9132 for my phone and 3.7.20 for tablets?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and 4.89.20 for laptops?
They will stop changing the whole OS sooner or later, and just provide smaller focused updates. It's very stupid to have 10 different major android versions running at the same time. If 80% of the devices are running Android 2.4.x, things should be easier. They're just following the Ubuntu-like releasing schedule: 2 versions a year. That's the way I see it. They WILL have to stop doing this, they can't go on improving forever.
goodnews xD
im expected.
Android 3.0 Honeycomb won’t be Coming to Smartphone, just for Tablets,says Google:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379271,00.asp
Ganii said:
Android 3.0 Honeycomb won’t be Coming to Smartphone, just for Tablets,says Google:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379271,00.asp
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea
it'll be 2.4 for us phone ppl
RaduG said:
They will stop changing the whole OS sooner or later, and just provide smaller focused updates. It's very stupid to have 10 different major android versions running at the same time. If 80% of the devices are running Android 2.4.x, things should be easier. They're just following the Ubuntu-like releasing schedule: 2 versions a year. That's the way I see it. They WILL have to stop doing this, they can't go on improving forever.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hardware moves fast, demand for said hardware even faster. They have to keep up, if not ahead!
I had a feeling this would be the case since we first saw shots of 3.0 running on a then-unidentified Motorola tablet. Looking at it now, there's absolutely no way that this is plausible to run on handsets; for one, it likely demands a decently high hardware spec to run efficiently, and even if you've got something like the Optimus 2X for example, the screen's far too small to allow for efficient usage.
In all honesty, it's likely we'll see divergence of Android into 2 distinct OSes; handset-based (2.3 onward) and tablet-based (3.0).
Well there's the question, why would you want Honeycomb on your fascinate? I mean, it looks nice from what I saw of the xoom demo but it really doesn't look like it would be nice on a phone just yet, so why ask/want it, why not wait until something actually meant for a phone is developed?
I just don't understand the want/"NEED" for honeycomb on my fascinate, can't we just keep it to actual phone OS's for now?
gabenoob said:
Well there's the question, why would you want Honeycomb on your fascinate? I mean, it looks nice from what I saw of the xoom demo but it really doesn't look like it would be nice on a phone just yet, so why ask/want it, why not wait until something actually meant for a phone is developed?
I just don't understand the want/"NEED" for honeycomb on my fascinate, can't we just keep it to actual phone OS's for now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same reason everyone wanted DJ05, DL09 and DL30...they always want something new. Instead of optimizing what they have and being content, they rather complain and wish for something better to come along.
I get that, but whats with the wanting of this new thing if its not even meant for a phone; I mean I wouldn't want something clunky and literally designed for something bigger on a 'tiny' device. It would just be wrong. I fail to see how even those who continually ask for new shiny things would overlook the real incompatabiliteis with a phone. I can see asking for Gingerbread, but even that's a bit much. I mean, we have Froyo, and now my brother with his fancy incredible is actually jealous of my phone. I think things are great, and I understand the desire for new shiny things, but honeycomb really isn't for phones, so why be ignorant of that?
gabenoob said:
I get that, but whats with the wanting of this new thing if its not even meant for a phone; I mean I wouldn't want something clunky and literally designed for something bigger on a 'tiny' device. It would just be wrong. I fail to see how even those who continually ask for new shiny things would overlook the real incompatabiliteis with a phone. I can see asking for Gingerbread, but even that's a bit much. I mean, we have Froyo, and now my brother with his fancy incredible is actually jealous of my phone. I think things are great, and I understand the desire for new shiny things, but honeycomb really isn't for phones, so why be ignorant of that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
keep in mind though...froyo wasn't meant for our specific phones either...we're all running a leaked version. For all we know, after a year of addl development the next ota update may be honeycomb...
jenisiz said:
keep in mind though...froyo wasn't meant for our specific phones either...we're all running a leaked version. For all we know, after a year of addl development the next ota update may be honeycomb...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
honeycomb is for tablets!!
ace5198 said:
honeycomb is for tablets!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
3.0's UI is meant to be able to scale down to phone sizes. The current developer preview doesn't work exceptionally well when that's done to it (it's buggy, but obviously meant to), but it's not anywhere near a finished product (it's really meant to show the APIs).
Android also isn't being forked, there isn't going to be a Phone version and a Tablet version, future phones will be running the 3 series (they might wait for 3.1, but they will run 3). They will pretty much have to if any of them want to use the newer dual-core CPUs that should be just about to hit the phone segment.
Also, don't forget that Android 3.0 adds a fair bit of new APIs, not all of which are meant exclusively for tablets (there's a fair bit of HW acceleration stuff, IIRC).
KitsuneKnight said:
3.0's UI is meant to be able to scale down to phone sizes. The current developer preview doesn't work exceptionally well when that's done to it (it's buggy, but obviously meant to), but it's not anywhere near a finished product (it's really meant to show the APIs).
Android also isn't being forked, there isn't going to be a Phone version and a Tablet version, future phones will be running the 3 series (they might wait for 3.1, but they will run 3). They will pretty much have to if any of them want to use the newer dual-core CPUs that should be just about to hit the phone segment.
Also, don't forget that Android 3.0 adds a fair bit of new APIs, not all of which are meant exclusively for tablets (there's a fair bit of HW acceleration stuff, IIRC).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im sure that it could be scaled down to use on a phone.. and actually i believe somewhere i seen that it was.. but everything ive read said its desinged specifically for tabs.. im sure there will be a 3.1 or 2.5,,6,7,8 or whatecer for the new apis.. but everything ive read says 3.0 is for tabs.. im not saying im right.. but thats just what ive read
ace5198 said:
im sure that it could be scaled down to use on a phone.. and actually i believe somewhere i seen that it was.. but everything ive read said its desinged specifically for tabs.. im sure there will be a 3.1 or 2.5,,6,7,8 or whatecer for the new apis.. but everything ive read says 3.0 is for tabs.. im not saying im right.. but thats just what ive read
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The new user interface is designed for tablets, as well as parts of the new APIs. Nothing prevents you from replacing the launcher, and hopefully by the time Honeycomb stabilizes, the new Launcher won't just force close at lower resolutions (but this isn't meant to be a preview of the new interface, but of the APIs).
I don't understand you question.
Honeycomb is simply the natural progression of Android. Hence why its 3.0. Eventually all Android devices will be on 3.x of some kind just as iOS was able to merge its variant it made for the iPad with the rest of the family.
Google had a separate team continue to small upgrades in the 2.x line while the AAA team worked on a tablet enahnced 3.0 Honeycomb variant.
I'm sure as this year moves (early next) on we'll see a 3.1 version come out that has the appropriate scaling features to handle screens of all sizes.
This is evidenced by the same Gmail app being used in both. Just different views based on overall screen size. Also, 3.0 and 2.3 have code to allow devs to make different views based on screen size. The base code is there, its just now gotta be merged to be one line again.
So, why do I want honeycomb? I don't. I want to continue to be using the latest version of Android, what its build version is is not important. (2.3, 2.4, 3.0, 3.1) As long as its made to work with the hardware I have and adds improvements, I want it.
Stop the debate:
http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/03/google-will-not-bring-honeycomb-to-smartphones/
mexiken said:
Stop the debate:
http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/03/google-will-not-bring-honeycomb-to-smartphones/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All that says is 3.0 i.e. Honeycomb won't be on phones. I am sure a later 3.x version will once the code has been merged from 2.x.
I thought 3.0 is where we finally get hardware accelerated UI, is this correct?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
superchunkwii said:
All that says is 3.0 i.e. Honeycomb won't be on phones. I am sure a later 3.x version will once the code has been merged from 2.x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And this thread is about Honeycomb... Not 3.x versions.
crookshanks said:
And this thread is about Honeycomb... Not 3.x versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honeycomb is 3.0
gabenoob said:
Well there's the question, why would you want Honeycomb on your fascinate? I mean, it looks nice from what I saw of the xoom demo but it really doesn't look like it would be nice on a phone just yet, so why ask/want it, why not wait until something actually meant for a phone is developed?
I just don't understand the want/"NEED" for honeycomb on my fascinate, can't we just keep it to actual phone OS's for now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd want the built-in data encryption features.
-deleted-
Misread somethin'
Hmm alright; what I was asking is that where it stands now it is a Tablet OS, why would anyone want something like that on a phone. As shown in the link, google does not mean for Honeycomb to be brought to phones (3.0) but maybe at a later date a later variant of the 3.1 series will.
The original question I had in mind was why would anyone want it, in its current state, on a phone, as I've seen threads asking for it; and for the life of me I can't find a good reason.
superchunkwii said:
Honeycomb is 3.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was referring to your "later 3.x versions" comment. This thread was about why anyone wanted 3.0 specifically, not later versions.
crookshanks said:
I was referring to your "later 3.x versions" comment. This thread was about why anyone wanted 3.0 specifically, not later versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely right, my post was to the validity of the entire discussion as its obvious 3.0 is just the initial tablet offering and as Android continues through 3.x it will be on phones as well.
Basically, I find the entire constant discussion here, BGR, other sites about Honeycomb being a Tablet OS and why is Google diverging Android to just be stupid. To me the version "3.0" should have been enough to satisfy everyone that eventually features you see in Honeycomb will be on phones. Like Google's going to lock themselves in 2.x for the rest of Android phone's life.
Honestly I don't understand it. Other than a very small number of users, myself not included, do people really see a big difference in the use of their phones? I use mine for calling, texting, e-mail and occasional web browsing. Other than flash support, I haven't noticed any ground breaking improvements over DJ05 with DL30. I can't imagine Gingerbread, Honeycomb, Lucky Charms or Poptart making a huge difference in the day to day use of my phone either.
Or maybe I'm wrong and Honeycomb cures cancer.
So I've noticed a lot, and I mean, a lot less stuff on the development forum and just wondering if we're pretty much at the limits of our phones.
I appreciate all the work done for our phones, but I hate seeing that we're essentially gone.
Anyways, looking for maybe future roms in the works or something different I should try out. change it up a bit.
kevphan08 said:
So I've noticed a lot, and I mean, a lot less stuff on the development forum and just wondering if we're pretty much at the limits of our phones.
I appreciate all the work done for our phones, but I hate seeing that we're essentially gone.
Anyways, looking for maybe future roms in the works or something different I should try out. change it up a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you running now? You have variants of gingerbread: Jaybob's, deck,cm7, omgb and omfgb 2.3.4 and 2.3.5, you have WildHeroc (2.3.3) with 2.1 sense and some 3.0 goodies, and you have iHero (2.3.2) which is some ios fun and different tweaks and themes too. Also, there have been some great kernel developments (.35) which is probably going to be crucial in pushing the Hero's limits even further.
Remember, we never got an update from htc above 2.1 update 1. We have a lot for a mdpi phone. We will never have MIUI most likely, but my phone is flying now and a lot more fun than when I 1st got it.
Maybe you can come up with something that hasn't been thought of yet?
Most of the guys developing for the hero don't even have one, or if they do, it is only to test what they are developing; they are not activated.
My $.02.
You think Meth is bad? Try being a flash whore with a Gingerbread habit and a legacy device! It ain't pretty.
Yea I've been running Pure GB, with jaybobs kernel.
I've seen the different roms and such; actually liked the iOS one that was made, but honestly performance for me is key. No lag or issues, so probably why I've stuck with 2.3.x
Overall I've just seen a lot of the same gingerbread roms, maybe a few minor tweaks here and there, but overall the same.