Database Users

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.

"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.

HC Has a hidden GB like type UI!

We got HC 3.1 on the dell streak 7 and the lcd density was too low making everything small. I bumped it from 120 to 190 and rebooted and was shocked.. it was a different UI! It was like GB. Setting the LCD Density to 160 and below gave us the HC UI 170 and higher gave us the GB UI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8m_Qawds9o

Get out our forum
Nice find...but really get out our forum

Interesting
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium App

bwcorvus said:
Get out our forum
Nice find...but really get out our forum
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahah you know you love me BW Besides you wouldnt want me telling everyone here you're also an op on the Asus transformer channel would you? hahaha

graffixnyc said:
hahah you know you love me BW Besides you wouldnt want me telling everyone here you're also an op on the Asus transformer channel would you? hahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What can i say, i get around...

trader!!!!

Old news. This circulated round when the SDK was previewable.

What file did you modify to manually change the LCD density?

This has been known since the SDK... yet Engadget is reporting on it again

Please forgive my pure "noob" question...
Please forgive the pure "noob" question I am about to ask but does this mean that Honeycomb is not really a Full OS and just a build up on Gingerbread?
Im not sure if that even makes any sence but the one reason I bought my Xoom (which I am excitedly waiting to have shipped to me) is because of the Honeycomb Tablet "Optimized" OS otherwise I would have just bought a Galaxy Tab...

Just-in-time said:
trader!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that supposed to be "traitor"?

I have yet to find a way to change the density on the xoom, anyone try this yet?

yiannisthegreek said:
Please forgive the pure "noob" question I am about to ask but does this mean that Honeycomb is not really a Full OS and just a build up on Gingerbread?
Im not sure if that even makes any sence but the one reason I bought my Xoom (which I am excitedly waiting to have shipped to me) is because of the Honeycomb Tablet "Optimized" OS otherwise I would have just bought a Galaxy Tab...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gingerbread and honeycomb are separate. Both are self contained OS. For all practical purposes...In the world there is a kernel that is the operating system and everything else (drivers, interface and on is just additions to be able to use the kernel). Just as windows 7 is not vista or XP, they are separate. Combined all together is the OS.

So what makes GB so special and better than HC?

One was designed for small devices GB and HC is still young but made for tablets. they both serve a different purpose. Each one is seperate and one is not better then the other. For instance HC on my Htc evo would not make any sence. Screen is to darn small. you could do it...but it would not(IMO) be practical. I want my tablet not to make phone calls, yet gingerbread could run a tablet, very well I might add. Ice cream from google is the merging of tablet and phone android OSs to a single codebase. There is still much work needed on HC that will be done and the Gingerbread, froyo, Eclair have been around longer so the have a bigger user base.

antiochasylum said:
I have yet to find a way to change the density on the xoom, anyone try this yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check the market for an app called "LCD density changer"
Sent from my HTC HD2

[Q] Honeycomb on KF? Vs ICS

Ahoy mateys. I've been a longtime Android user (October 2009) and have never been much for running the stock OS on my devices.
Currently I've been running CM7 and loving it on the KF. Been keeping tabs on the ICS port over, just waiting for the sound issues to be hammered out as I use the device mostly for watching videos via RockPlayer.
Lately I've been thinking about trying to port over Honeycomb to the KF, as it might be simpler given that it's been around longer. I know that it's somewhat futile given the state of the 3.0 kernel being needed for HW acceleration. But it seems like it could be worthwhile just to test it and see what might happen. Give it more tablety goodness if anything!
I'm a programmer by trade and am majoring in CS. Not much dev experience on Android aside from writing games. But I've built Gentoo for my machines, so I've got some kernel knowledge. What do you guys think?
Regards,
-Free
P.S. I don't have 10 posts so this is in General.

freeqaz said:
Ahoy mateys. I've been a longtime Android user (October 2009) and have never been much for running the stock OS on my devices.
Currently I've been running CM7 and loving it on the KF. Been keeping tabs on the ICS port over, just waiting for the sound issues to be hammered out as I use the device mostly for watching videos via RockPlayer.
Lately I've been thinking about trying to port over Honeycomb to the KF, as it might be simpler given that it's been around longer. I know that it's somewhat futile given the state of the 3.0 kernel being needed for HW acceleration. But it seems like it could be worthwhile just to test it and see what might happen. Give it more tablety goodness if anything!
I'm a programmer by trade and am majoring in CS. Not much dev experience on Android aside from writing games. But I've built Gentoo for my machines, so I've got some kernel knowledge. What do you guys think?
Regards,
-Free
P.S. I don't have 10 posts so this is in General.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally, I think it's a good idea, and that you should do it. You'll probably get a lot of people saying there's no point cause ICS is what honeycomb should've been. I've never used honeycomb before, so I don't know how different it is from ICS but I'm sure there are some.
I think you should do it to give this device and its users another ROM choice, with a different android version. Or even just for the fact that you might want to use it, do it for yourself and post it here just to see if people want it. I'd try it out, even if ICS is out and stable haha
Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk

Personally, I think it's a good idea, .... I've never used honeycomb before...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh?
Why would you encourage someone to work on something when you yourself don't know what the differences are between them??
ICS is Honeycomb just taking to what was its planned completion. With many Honeycomb devices moving to ICS I don't see the point.
That would be doing a lot of work, just to end up with an in between OS with all the new support going to ICS which is what everyone that can get it wants.
Also, for someone with no Android programming experience, you most likely would be a lot better of working with apps before tackling a whole OS.

krelvinaz said:
Huh?
Why would you encourage someone to work on something when you yourself don't know what the differences are between them??
ICS is Honeycomb just taking to what was its planned completion. With many Honeycomb devices moving to ICS I don't see the point.
That would be doing a lot of work, just to end up with an in between OS with all the new support going to ICS which is what everyone that can get it wants.
Also, for someone with no Android programming experience, you most likely would be a lot better of working with apps before tackling a whole OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like to check it out. It's not like I'm telling him that he needs to do this, he asked what people thought of the idea because he was interested in doing it, and I voiced my opinion.
Though I do agree that it might be easier to work with apps and then maybe work on a ROM, but hey, if he's willing to attempt it and learn how everything works, why stop him? The more devs, the merrier lol

Isn't the problem with porting honeycomb is that it was never truly open source?

My understanding is there was never a source release for honeycomb
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium

[email protected] said:
Isn't the problem with porting honeycomb is that it was never truly open source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, that is, AFAIK, why there was never a CM8. I don't think it would be worth OP's time to try to reverse-engineer a Honeycomb tablet and shoehorning it into the KF.
However, the OP might want to donate some of their time to the ICS port
It is open source after all...

[email protected] said:
Isn't the problem with porting honeycomb is that it was never truly open source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe Google released the source for Honeycomb when they released the source for ICS
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

Hit up this Google announcement, they did indeed release the source.
This release includes the full history of the Android source code
tree, which naturally includes all the source code for the Honeycomb
releases. However, since Honeycomb was a little incomplete, we want
everyone to focus on Ice Cream Sandwich. So, we haven't created any
tags that correspond to the Honeycomb releases (even though the
changes are present in the history.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
groups.google dot com/forum/#!topic/android-building/T4XZJCZnqF8
The only thing that I really want to know is if there is a significant driver difference between ICS and Honeycomb. If there is, then there is a reason to try to port 3.0 over because it would have more driver support. There are 3.0 devices out in the wild. If there isn't a driver difference between 3.0 and 4.0, then it's futile and all efforts should be spent on 4.0.

theholyfork said:
I believe Google released the source for Honeycomb when they released the source for ICS
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed.
And when they released the source for ICS, they elaborated on why they included Honeycomb in the Source tree: To essentially display the hacks they were forced to use to push Honeycomb to market. Honeycomb was never AOSP'd because it wasn't reliable for wider use.
Based upon the fact that Google was basically too ashamed to release Honeycomb to AOSP, I don't think it would make much sense to target a broken platform (Honeycomb).
IMO, if you're going to spend time trying to work on getting a more tablet-oriented version of Android running, it's probably going to be *easier* to work with ICS than Honeycomb. Moreover your contributions could assist the greater KF community in getting a stable base of ICS for all.