Android 3.0 (preview) SDK OUT! - HD2 Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting and Genera

http://www.androidcentral.com/android-30-sdk-preview-2d-3d-graphics-and-dual-core-support-honeycomb
Any one insane enough to try a quick and dirty port?

An SDK port of an unreleased tablet-only OS sounds like a major waste of time to me.

StephanV said:
An SDK port of an unreleased tablet-only OS sounds like a major waste of time to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They did it with the SDK of Gingerbread, and this one will earn the devs some serious props (and mentions from virtually every tech site, I presume).
That might just be me, though. I'd certainly like to see it happen, no matter how unstable or unusable it might be.

I think the port would be more a case of. LOOK WHAT I CAN DO, then any thing else.
(Have a peek at www.twitter.com/blackal1ce , I'm posting up screenshots from the REALLY slow SDK)

M-en-M said:
They did it with the SDK of Gingerbread, and this one will earn the devs some serious props (and mentions from virtually every tech site, I presume).
That might just be me, though. I'd certainly like to see it happen, no matter how unstable or unusable it might be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They started porting it - as they did with every release before - and got fed up after a while because it's too much effort for something that Google's gonna release a couple of weeks later anyway.
Although the GB SDK port was still majorly flawed, it was at least meant to run on phones with this kind of hardware. Have you seen the previews of Honeycomb? Even if someone did a pretty decent SDK port (which on itself is already quite impossible) it still wouldn't be any good because even our big-ass 4.3" screen is still nothing compared to a tablet. The UI just wouldn't be useable.
And yes I know there's gonna be people willing to give it a shot anyway, and of course that's fine by me, best of luck. Just trying to keep it real here: don't get your hopes up for a somewhat useable port because I don't see that happening before Google decides to put it in AOSP.

StephanV said:
An SDK port of an unreleased tablet-only OS sounds like a major waste of time to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree you couldn't just compile and run this thing on a HD2, it's not just for tablets. It's optimised to be used on higher resolutions and bigger screens, but will still run fine on phones.
I reckon we'll be seeing ports of this in the near future

No, as of now it really is officially tablet-only, and I'm not talking just about the technical stuff. A tablet OS isn't quite useable on a phone, not because you can't run it, but because it's really hard to use its UI.

I did hear originally that is was tablet only, but I've since heard reports that it's viable for phones as well. You know what t'internet's like. I guess we'll only know when it's actually out proper!

Very good news, waiting to see who's the first want to put their hands dirty

Related

Is there still an progress of the Android port?

Hey all,
Im quite new and I was wondering if someone knows if there still is a progress of the android port to the HD2.
I've searched myselfs lots of times but I didnt find anything except in the [CLOSED] ANDROID/MAEMO/LINUX on HD2 [NO MORE ACTIVE!!] thread (CANT URL THIS IM NEW!!!)and its closed...
So my question was... Is there still a progress going on? and how far is the progress? Please reply.
Greetings Hawiak
This is the new thread. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=651632
They're still working on getting Linux on there and from there Android will go on. It's going to take a while (many months).
aceo07 said:
This is the new thread. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=651632
They're still working on getting Linux on there and from there Android will go on. It's going to take a while (many months).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your friendly response!
Ok I expected someone was working on it and I also expected that it would take some time to develop this port.
Thanks again!
Im glad its going to take a few months!
Because when Im bored of my phone, I can look forward to giving it new life in droid form
lonelykatana said:
Im glad its going to take a few months!
Because when Im bored of my phone, I can look forward to giving it new life in droid form
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not for sure it only would take some months mayby it can take much longer in the worse case it can turn out on nothing!
Hawiak said:
Its not for sure it only would take some months mayby it can take much longer in the worse case it can turn out on nothing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, there's no way to positively say how long it will be or even if it will ever be done.... right now they are stuck on some kernel issues that they have yet to figure out. They haven't made any more progress for a couple weeks, I think. But I'm remaining hopeful.... I think things will work out eventually. I'm in no rush for Android.
zarathustrax said:
Yeah, there's no way to positively say how long it will be or even if it will ever be done.... right now they are stuck on some kernel issues that they have yet to figure out. They haven't made any more progress for a couple weeks, I think. But I'm remaining hopeful.... I think things will work out eventually. I'm in no rush for Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Am not expert when it comes to this but am guessing things might get a little better when the evo comes out as they have both got simmiler hard ware so they might be able to use the drivers etc.
jagger2k said:
Am not expert when it comes to this but am guessing things might get a little better when the evo comes out as they have both got simmiler hard ware so they might be able to use the drivers etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The drivers aren't the main issues.... they already have a lot of the drivers. The main thing they were hoping to get from the evo is the touchscreen... but it uses a different touch sensor than the HD2, so probably no luck there. The evo might help a little, but probably not any more than the nexus one did. It's just gonna take time to work out the kernel issues.
With so many android phones coming out with specs similar or even better than the HD2, this is a futile attempt.
zarathustrax said:
Yeah, there's no way to positively say how long it will be or even if it will ever be done.... right now they are stuck on some kernel issues that they have yet to figure out. They haven't made any more progress for a couple weeks, I think. But I'm remaining hopeful.... I think things will work out eventually. I'm in no rush for Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the worst kind of news... I mean, baby steps are fine, but no progress makes me worry.
... not wishing to bash the people who are working on this, just stating my worries here.
BTW, I'm sort of amazed that hardware manufacturers would rather side with software developers rather than the community. IE: Throw down the specifications and then porting one phone OS to another phone won't be such a problem, right? Instead, they keep the specs hidden and only one software company gets them (in this case MS). If software could be changed, it would force the developers to put some more effort into it.
Alternatively... are there any phones with Android and Snapdragon-like CPUs coming out sometimes soon? I bet that'd help.
lude219 said:
With so many android phones coming out with specs similar or even better than the HD2, this is a futile attempt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why is it a futile attempt? It was known from the start that there will be just as good or better android phones by the time it was finished. Thats how it was for all the android ports to WinMo devices in the past. I dont want to use android full time... anyone who does should have gotten an android device instead of a WinMo device. I want to use my WinMo most of the time, but have the ability to boot into android on the same phone and use that if I want to. Android or Linux ports were never being developed to completely replace WinMo... just get an android phone if you want that.
zarathustrax said:
Why is it a futile attempt? It was known from the start that there will be just as good or better android phones by the time it was finished. Thats how it was for all the android ports to WinMo devices in the past. I dont want to use android full time... anyone who does should have gotten an android device instead of a WinMo device. I want to use my WinMo most of the time, but have the ability to boot into android on the same phone and use that if I want to. Android or Linux ports were never being developed to completely replace WinMo... just get an android phone if you want that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I understand but I prefer 2 fully working OSes on 1 device that you can have a choice is nice tho...
zarathustrax said:
Why is it a futile attempt? It was known from the start that there will be just as good or better android phones by the time it was finished. Thats how it was for all the android ports to WinMo devices in the past. I dont want to use android full time... anyone who does should have gotten an android device instead of a WinMo device. I want to use my WinMo most of the time, but have the ability to boot into android on the same phone and use that if I want to. Android or Linux ports were never being developed to completely replace WinMo... just get an android phone if you want that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
shoot, the only reason I want Android is for the apps. I could care less if the radio worked correctly. a phone is a phone. The apps and hardware is what makes it stand out and we got some bad ass hardware.

Redevelopment of apps now that gingerbread is on the horizon

Hey,
I am NOT a dev, but I would like to know what kind of work work is going to be required now that gingerbread is on the forefront?
For example, VPlayer, doesn't work... it FC... How much work is it going to take to get the program back up and running???
Im just asking because, as much as I hate to admit it, fragmentation (as everyone calls it) is going to start causing issues. I get that google wants to offer the best and the latest and greatest, but if everytime a new API get sent out, and devs' have to rewrite their work, how much time is it going to take to get the proggy back up and running??
Thanks!
Theo
theomajigga said:
I am NOT a dev,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should've stop right there.
You realize that at this point only 1(!) phone is running official 2.3 Gingerbread and it's Samsung Nexus S. It's a drop in a bucket comparing to all of the phones that are running official 2.x firmware.
Furthermore, if an app is properly developed against 1.x or 2.x SDK then it will work with gingerbreadas as all APIs are future-compliant. The only problem would be is if an app is developed using 2.3 APIs and you would try to use it on earlier roms or if it used undocumented/unofficial APIs that were not supposed to be used and were discontinued in future releases.
We don't know what 's causing vPlayer not to work, could be many things (kernel, unfinished rom development, missing libs) or it could be things in vPlayer that were improperly implemented.
Send a log to developer and see if he/she can help you. Given that you're not running official (or at least stable!) release, you may not get far though.
But please, don't jump on that "fragmentation" train, it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.
borodin1 said:
You should've stop right there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First off, I didn't ask for you to be a ****, if I would have posted this in the dev forum that would have prompted you to respond as such.
borodin1 said:
You realize that at this point only 1(!) phone is running official 2.3 Gingerbread and it's Samsung Nexus S. It's a drop in a bucket comparing to all of the phones that are running official 2.x firmware.
Furthermore, if an app is properly developed against 1.x or 2.x SDK then it will work with gingerbreadas as all APIs are future-compliant. The only problem would be is if an app is developed using 2.3 APIs and you would try to use it on earlier roms or if it used undocumented/unofficial APIs that were not supposed to be used and were discontinued in future releases.
We don't know what 's causing vPlayer not to work, could be many things (kernel, unfinished rom development, missing libs) or it could be things in vPlayer that were improperly implemented.
Send a log to developer and see if he/she can help you. Given that you're not running official (or at least stable!) release, you may not get far though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the answer, i guess.
borodin1 said:
But please, don't jump on that "fragmentation" train, it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that that is out of the way, can I ask you HOW you can honestly say that Android isn't fragmented. Seriously ask your self... I LOVE android, I really do, G1-cliq-MT3G-Nexus One-HD2(androided)-MT4G, but I can't even lie about that. There is 9 API levels!! 2.3, 2.2, 2.1, 2.0.1, 2.0, 1.6, 1.5, 1.1, 1.0.
NOW I DO UNDERSTAND THAT ALMOST 45% ARE ON 2.2 and 40% ARE ON 2.1.
Ok, so now most apps are going to be working on that 84% of phones running level 7+.
But this ALSO doesn't account for the manufacture API's that are implemented buy some of them, which I KNOW causes some problems. (skype on the Samsung Galaxy Series) just to name one very big one. Skype works on other devices with 2.1, but it doesn't on the Samsung 2.1? as a consumer, I'd ask wtf, even with their limited knowledge of android.
Fragmentation is defined as is the inability to "write once and run anywhere". Rovio complained about this. Albeit not directly, but they said that they were having issues with people on some phones, with some versions of software, and that it wasn't going to work across the board.
I hate to admit it but there are certain things that need to be done to insure that Android will not only be the "Mobile OS" but it will also be the demanded one (IMHO):
1. Cut the bull**** manufacture stuff out, make only ONE set of API's, with 0 proprietary API's. Make it stuff that you can get if you want through the Android Market (custom UI's and such).
2. Control the god-damn market, find spammers, find shady devs re-uploading their apps multiple times to get ad dollars.
3. Get everybody on board to updates, require that all devices with X specifications be updated Y months after a source is released. That will get again get everyone on the same API level, and will make all apps compatible (maybe slow).
4. For the love of all holy, USE THE BEST COMPONENTS YOU CAN FIND! AND MAKE IT A STANDARD At least for the primary functions of the phone. For example, the Nexus One (my fave so far) did NOT have a competent touch screen, 2 point, and a BAD 2 point at that, and that is considered to be the new dev phone. Well who the HELL would want to dev for a platform that can only recognize two points (barely) that doesn't always even get them right? I sure as hell wouldn't. Finally I get the MT4G, the FIRST thing i did was test the touch screen, and guess what... It still is sub-par. 4 points, where my friends Galaxy S can do 6 or something. Now you are going to ask me, who uses 6 points idiot? Some games, do, and to top **** off, if you can't recognize 2 points properly, close together, how can some of the basic multi-touch functions work? (google maps on the N1)
I'm sorry for the rant, but I'm realistic. A mobile platform can't win like this.
http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~damithch/df/device-fragmentation.htm

Honeycomb 3.0 SDK!!!

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).

Why would you want Honeycomb (on a phone?)

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.

[Q] [REQUEST][NEWS]Ubuntu Phone OS

Hi folks!
I'm sure many of you already know about it, but still sharing it
After Teasing Its Touch-Friendly Future, Canonical Officially Reveals The Ubuntu Phone OS
Is there even the slightest chance of seeing it on our phone?
Would love to have it!
I would love new Ubuntu os
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I cannot find anywhere supported devices...
I am little sick of android beta versions for our phone. I would also like to see this running
Ubuntu OS looked great on the GNexus
I wish they would release a standard image so devs can port it to our defy. However its not going to be released any soon till 2014.
i only have heard of gnexus versions of the os, but if the device compatibility is not deeply integrated into the os, it should be possible.
but keep in mind, that this is not android, this is something totally different, devs must learn a whole bunch of new things to be able to port this to the defy. and frankly, being quite an old device, its not really worth the effort imo. but true, would be great to see it/use it on the defy.
very good os, it really has potential.
The truth made me sad!
zakoo2 said:
i only have heard of gnexus versions of the os, but if the device compatibility is not deeply integrated into the os, it should be possible.
but keep in mind, that this is not android, this is something totally different, devs must learn a whole bunch of new things to be able to port this to the defy. and frankly, being quite an old device, its not really worth the effort imo. but true, would be great to see it/use it on the defy.
very good os, it really has potential.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya, I know, maybe I could do it if I get enough free time (which I barely get).
But your reply made me :crying:

Categories

Resources