Database Users

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

Android 3.0 (preview) SDK OUT!

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

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.

Android Honeycomb for HD2?

I was just browsing the dutch tweakers.net site and saw the article below.
Its telling about a CWM 3 ROM Honeycomb for the Desire HD phone.
For now they still have some hardware problems due to the lack of good drivers.
Now the HD2 community have way better devs with much more knownledge. So I was wondering if someone was already aware of or already busy with this. I and I think so much others would love to see HoneyComby running on our HD2.
http://t3hh4xx0r.com/?p=1353
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App

Would be nice, really, why not.. but did you see how f***ed up the screen layout looks?

Ya we need that!!!!

we have to wait...

We do have much better devs and even a build with honeycomb themes and skins, but I still want one build that I don't have any complaints about. There's always one thing, ya know?

MAy I ask a simple question...why? Honeycomb is going to be tablet based. Watching the video, he even says practically nothing works. The touchscreen is barely functional, the buttons don't work...honeycomb is going to be pointless for a phone..

We have WP7 and Ubuntu, so why it is pointless and why they shouldn't be able to do it HD2 is always good for another OS

I would love Honeycomb on my HD2!

Android 2.4
I heard rumors about new smartphones (like the Xperia Arc) will have Android 2.4 which is based on Honeycomb for tablets.

Awassenaar said:
I would love Honeycomb on my HD2!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A barely functioning OS that you can't do anything on? Why? Just for the look? Try the Honeycomb theme for CM7.

"We have a dream"....Honeycomb on HD2....

so....
HTC EVO 4G, Nexus One, Desire HD and Incredible joined the Honeycomb world....
it seems that, in this joyous family, missing only our HD2 ....
is possible or not ?
....that's the question

lorezz said:
is possible or not ?
....that's the question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.
...............

Honey Monster
What is Honeycomb, I've heard (read) a few posts refering to this, but the only Literature I can find refers to Android 3.0 which is supposedly Tablet only. Can someone show me the way to enlightenment so I too may share the dream. I would love to add more OS to the seemingly endless capabilities of my HD2.

It is meant for tablet only. However some have modified the roms to run on Phones.
However, apparently the current phone Honeycomb ROMS are flakey to say the least.
I am so used to a stable working gingerbread I'd be hesitant to jump ship until its been through a few iterations on the HD2
GG

Hansel & Gretel
Is Google trying to fatten us up by feeding us all these sweets before throwing us into the oven?
What is Gingerbread, Android 2.x??

GodsGift said:
It is meant for tablet only. However some have modified the roms to run on Phones.
However, apparently the current phone Honeycomb ROMS are flakey to say the least.
I am so used to a stable working gingerbread I'd be hesitant to jump ship until its been through a few iterations on the HD2
GG
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well my interest would simply be for trying it out for fun and curiosity more then as a daily OS.
Its primerily for tablets but would be nice to try on our HD2 screens, bit like the ubuntu UI.