Related
I'm not just ranting or trying to make a point, I'm legitimately interested in Google's strategy.
Obviously, google cant argue with the fact that htc has widgets that blow googles widgets out of the water. Google cant say theyve worked hard on their widgets and they cant honestly suggest that they are satisfied with them.
Are there any articles or official satements by google/android regarding their refusal to develop Widgets that are more attractive and elaborate? I'm google faithful and wont switch on principle but I can't imagine more than 10% of those people who've tried HTC's subsequently preferring Googles. Its a very strange angle that google has taken.....or maybe its not I'd like to know their view/opinion...does anyone know it? thanks
Incidentally, its not that Google's Widgets are horrible its just that they could be infinitely better at what I would assume to be relatively little effort... off the top of my head if the power widget was broken into single widgets and more options were included that would great and presumably pretty damn simple, and google emphasizes the customizable desktop which I'm all for yet they neglect wiidgets which could really be a draw for potential customers. thank you
Have to agree with you there. They need to add more stock/easy ways to change the look. It would go a long way in selling more phones. People simply think nicer looking things are "cooler" devices. Some of the metamorph's prove the changes aren't exactly difficult. I'm sure they could code a minimal program that had the ability to change the status bar to black, white, gray... A few nice widgets.. Small changes that the XDA community already offers the rooted phones.
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
i do agree with you, but those not wanting to void warranty are alittle more limited, i very much want to root but don't want to void warranty to find a month from now something is wrong and theres still no bootloader relock option. i think theres a lot more customization for rooted vs nonrooted and that's where people feel limited and have the "this should have been added" attitude
You have to keep in mind, Google is just providing a basic operating system. They leave it up the the developers to customize it. You can kinda compair it to what microsoft does, loosly. You can build your own computer, buy windows and customise it to your liking. Or you can buy one from Dell that comes pre-loaded with windows and various other applications. Google just really provides the base level OS.
@psylink you dont need root for most widgets. With exception to like the overclock widget and such, or if you are trying to run a widget that was part of a different rom.
JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
There are a few home screen redesigns on the market that (AFAIK since I've never tried any of them) don't require rooting and significantly change the "look" of the standard phone. Most of them are heavily theme-able as well. On the Behold II forums a lot of people were touting these apps as ways to get rid of the Touchwiz interface that they didn't like (Samsung pouts).
Also, Google created this OS as a platform both for developers to fill with apps, but also for manufacturers to customize to differentiate themselves. If they didn't leave room for manufacturers to customize then the platform would be far less attractive to them and they'd have more adoption problems. If they create too strong of a core UI then they might either be in the position of competing against the manufacturers on that "differentiation" ground, or they might remove any need/desire to customize and the manufacturers would have to consider producing another "me too" phone which they may not like as much, or Google might spend a lot of time on work that will be discarded by the manufacturers during their differentiation. Most of these manufacturers are members of the "alliance" that collaborated on the platform so I'm sure these points were hashed out during that planning phase.
If they don't promote adoption then they lose the win for developers in having a widely adopted platform. Note that even though HTC heavily customizes with Sense and Motorola heavily customizes with Blur and Samsung with Touchwiz, a developer can still write an app that runs on all of those and so everyone is happy.
muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, they could do that, but I don't think they are putting the Nexus One out so much to enter the brand market heavily as they are to put out the canonical reference version of the phone, at least initially. In my mind, the N1 was never to compete with the manufacturers head to head, it was more to have a phone out there that was as open and pluggable as their vision has always been so that if all the manufacturers/carriers decide they are going to take the base OS, lock it down, make people buy ringtones through a carrier market and cripple the browsing so you can't download anything - customers would have an alternative open solution to turn to. In the past there have been classic examples of a given model/brand of phone available from some carriers where you could download any customization file to it that you wanted and then on other carriers it was crippled and locked you in. In those cases you had to buy the crippled versions because there was no independently available canonical "open" version. The N1 fights that tendency not by force or contract, but by simply being. It doesn't have to be the coolest, hippest incarnation, it just has to be pretty and usable and so open that everyone will start to get a distaste for anything closed.
What we are seeing so far with Android isn't so much of this "carrier locking" as it is "carriers customizing so heavily that they threaten the upgrade paths for their customers". I don't think they are doing it intentionally, they just aren't familiar with working on a platform that evolves so quickly. Without the N1 being a bare bones example of the platform they would only be competing with other manufacturers that are similarly locked in by their own lack of upgrade foresight and so the drive to release upgrades wouldn't be so compelling. But, if there are alternatives available that will be keeping up on a much more aggressive pace, like the N1, then they are more likely to fix their differentiating software so that it can move to newer OS versions in a more timely manner. Imagine in a year or two when we can all own Blur or Sense phones and get our OS updates within a month or two of a new OS release.
It's the "reference fully open Android example" and, as such, is less in need of customization as it is to simply stand as an option to keep the others honest. It's meant to be as "close to the raw OS source" as it can be.
muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect
MonkySlap said:
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but its still content non the less, correct? Doesnt need to be exclusive to be considered content. Me personally I really didnt buy it for stock os or content. I bought mine to tweak, mod, and play with, and it is more then fulfiling that for me . Love the desire rom running so smooth so early in the port.
muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or maybe their philosophy is that any and all "enhancements" should be optional add-ons available to all phones of the breed. As it stands you can only get Sense or Blur if you buy a phone from those manufacturers (or if you root and someone scavenges a semi-compatible ROM from one of them for you). I don't think they want to be in the game of "you have to get your phone from us to get XYZ" and so they provide a reasonably attractive basic package, they set it up so that others can come in and provide openly available enhancements (see the various replacement "home screens" on the market for example) and then the customer gets the benefit of both choice and of an open environment.
I think they view branding as more of an obstacle than as a sales/owner satisfaction tactic.
JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All good points. Now that I think about it I bought this phone for stock google stuff, which in hindsight may have been a mistake. With the g1 and mytouch 3g the google software was often the closest thing to stable available and I've grown to trust mainly them and reputable companies. Its kind of embarrassing to look thru the market and have to sift through countless apps that serve virtually no purpose, have terrible icons, and aren't even close to stable, but perhaps this is a product of androids relative immaturity, though I'm unfamiliar with winmo, palm, and apple. I just haven't been impressed with many third party apps or Widgets, save a select few very impressive ones. 90% of the apps look and feel very amateur. I stick to apps and Widgets produced by real companies because those have the best chance of being usuable. That was quite a gamble by google to go largely hands off and let all software be driven by development. Xda has spotlighted many excellent devs as far as rooting goes but for the average user the options are unimpressive. Maybe google will give in and start developing more usuable/stable/useful apps/widgets
I think that there are two schools of thought on this, yet we are all agreeing on the same concept.
While Google did create Android to be a stock type OS that they could distribute to multiple handset makers (in order to increase their ability to produce smartphones with only minor increases in developmental costs aside from those related to hardware - ultimately getting more people using the mobile web resulting in more ad revenue -whew! ), they also have in a sense slightly abandoned those of us who took the direct to consumers path. This is why they didn't put much into the release of the phone (look up the launch stats - or lack of accessories). While they don't have the responsibility to create widgets, programs, animations, etc. for us (the D2C crowd). I believe that they should have worked out a deal with HTC where we are allowed to unlock the bootloader and tinker/mod/play with/customize, etc as much as we want to without penalty or breaking the warranty. We don't have the funding to purchase a few hundred phones in case we brick them testing out various configs., nor do most of us have the expertise to repair the device if it gets bricked. The only other possibility is that a contract clause is created whereby we are allowed to download ROMs from Android manufacturers (or at least just HTC) and put them on our phones - doesn't that give us the MOST number of options to customize our phones? And isn't the ability to customize an Android phone the original intent of the OS?
By giving us either an allowance to unlock the bootloader or the allowance to download (and maybe play with other manufacturer customized ROMs) or preferably both I think that it would be a win-win situation.
I know that when Android began development their focus was on apple and they wanted to compete with the iPhone. Which is a commmendable goal because the iphone ineluctably changed the mobile device world for the better. This makes me think Android has a lot they want to do with the stock ui and not just fixes to further stabilize the software but to give the UI a seeker look and add functionality.
On the other hand I've read here that Google just wants to make a stable UI available for companies like MOTO and HTC to skin and for developers to customize and improve.
Id like to think that Android has big plans for my new nexus one.
So do you guys think Google looks at HTC's sense and says " its all going according to plan, companies are taking our software and vastly improving it so we do the leg work and get our software on mass amounts of phones and manufacturers can customize it to their liking and their customer preferences" or do you think they say " wow HTC has really made phenomenal improvements on our software so we need to step up our game and make 2.2 and on more competitive"
I do understand its open source implying the intention for third party customization. but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way, i just hope android isnt stopping short on purpose to let developers put the finishing touches, thats a great option to have but id rather not be compelled to root.
I'm not saying android stock isn't very solid. Other than sense its the best ui available. I'm just trying to clarify whether android wants stable software by them at the heart of every mobile device and customized by those manufacturers or if they want android stock to be competitive in and of its self. Personally I'm hoping for the latter.
Your thoughts?
I don't know if their focus is so much of pushing people to make their own but more of focusing on the availability. They seem to want to always have the availability of customization and freedom. I think they see Sense UI as "Hey people actually love our work and are willing to spend days/months on working to make something of our product."
Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"
Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
touche.....
i can't see google having any problems with sense UI, any improvement is great. Anything that will make more people use android and use google's services, im sure they will be happy with. Somehow i don't think they are happy with the deals the other companies have made with bing and yahoo though.
DMaverick50 said:
but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.
O
Paul22000 said:
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely understand what you're saying, that they want their software on as many devices as possible. That was actually the first of the two possibilities I offered. Officially google initially indicated they wanted to compete with apple (the second possibility I offered) and as a nexus owner I hoped for the second but it makes a lot more business sense to make their software/applications ubiquitous. And at the end of the day, google has a bottom line to worry about. So I guess in the end the manufacturers using android but customizing it probably offers a more thoughtful interface (though many, many prefer stock) but having stock android is more likely to receive updates fastest while some customized skins may not receive them period. Seems like a win-win for consumers regardless of android and Google's strategy.
I never saw Android as a competition to iPhone. There are huge differences between them. To start with, iPhone is a hardware and Android is an OS.
Android is not just targetted towards phone.. but also a more lucrative platform buisness. Android is targeted towards Windows and Linux and not iPhone.
Windows CE and Linux are pretty much the only choice for platforms. Many GPS units, car control systems, Controllers for many equipment etc.. are all Windows CE or custom linux. Android is targeting this market share. Therefore it is not surprising that Android has similiar policies like Win CE and linux to keep the core seperate from UI. Customers can choose their UI to adapt their implimentation. e.g. many of us don't even relaize that our car GPS has windows in it or our routers has linux in it.
Of course there are other advantages of controling a platform. They have been nicely sumarized by paul.
Seems LG knows something Samsung doesn't? They say Google not allowing ui over lay on honeycomb at this time... Maybe vanilla 3.0 after all?
http://phandroid.com/2011/03/24/lg-says-google-wont-allow-custom-uis-on-honeycomb-samsung-says-huh/
Sent from my Tab using XDA Premium App
This is very interesting. Because Samsung was verrrryyyy careful to note that TouchWiz4.0 would be coming to "some devices" in "some markets". and wouldn't even hint at which those were.
Also it should be noted that they're calling TouchWiz4.0 a "UX" or User Experience, rather than a UI (User Interface). Although this is kinda stupid because they're re-skinning basic Honeycomb UI elements like the back/home/multitasking buttons and the entire settings menu, etc. Sounds like a UI more than a UX to me.
Sounds like they're going to try and develop TouchWiz4.0 and then fight Google on it. If anything, Google will push it back until they just include a few widgets and call it a day. I'm perfectly okay with this.
This sounds awesome btw, and I hope Google follows through with it. Its good for them to try and protect Android as a brand and keep it from getting bastardized by all the manufacturers and carriers.
You guys should remember that Samsung has previously squeezed through Google's rules. Google tried to stop Android from being put on tablets too early by not allowing GAPS (Google Apps, e.g. the Market) to be shipped on those devices, however there was an exception to this rule and surprisingly enough it was the original Galaxy Tab. I also believe the Notion Ink Adam had the market installed, but I don't know how they managed that one.
If what LG states is true, Samsung and maybe even other major manufactures like HTC do not have to follow this rule. I assure you, TouchWiz will somehow make it to these tabs somehow, Samsung seems to be special.
martonikaj said:
This sounds awesome btw, and I hope Google follows through with it. Its good for them to try and protect Android as a brand and keep it from getting bastardized by all the manufacturers and carriers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree. I think it would be great for Google to be firm footed about this. It's mainly the UI customisation that has caused so many manufacturers to cancel or postpone Android OS updates. I don't care if a manufacturer can produce a better UI than stock, I'd still rather have stock so that OS updates can be more timely.
Manufacturers can still customise the UI/UX somewhat via the application layer and their own widgets. Look at Launcher Pro for example.
I think Google need to create a supported mechanism for manufacturers to customise/skin/theme Android via official API calls. This gives manufacturers the differentiation they want and keeps everyone working ontop of official API calls.
Google should simply require that any modifications to the stock Android Experience be made "optional" by the manufacturers. Everybody wins.
RickBaller said:
Google should simply require that any modifications to the stock Android Experience by made "optional" by the manufacturers. Everybody wins.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. That way Samsung can advertise it all they want in promotional material etc., but there is a switch in the settings menu to turn it all back to stock. Maybe this will be Samsung's compromise, who knows. It sounds like Google would prefer if it was stock and no questions asked. Manufacturers can customize all they want with widgets and apps, just leave the OS stock!
What people don't realize is that as long as carriers have any part of the update process, you will always get updates late. Why do you think the iPhone has no carrier logo, no carrier apps, and all updates are through iTunes? Apple knows that carriers are slow as **** and mess up everything they touch.
ryude said:
What people don't realize is that as long as carriers have any part of the update process, you will always get updates late. Why do you think the iPhone has no carrier logo, no carrier apps, and all updates are through iTunes? Apple knows that carriers are slow as **** and mess up everything they touch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I totally agree. Having firmware that toggles between stock and custom sounds like it will take even longer to release that the custom firmwares of today. The only way it could work is. If Samsung release them separately. Stock would be released first. They can then take as much time as they need to release their custom variant. That would be best of both worlds. Having said that I still think i'll be using home brew roms from xda as it will be tonnes better than what samsung produce.
Android should have a central repository like Ubuntu so it's always up to date on every device. Google made a mistake not doing something like that in the beginning. Now it's probably too late.
"An LG spokesperson." Yeah, dunno if I would actually believe this person. It's like asking a retail salesman at the store when the release date is for the new phone.
Also, do you guys really want to loose Touchwiz? Besides the rfs file system which is still yet unknown, I wouldn't mind Touchwiz if it includes all the codecs. The Vibrant was a beast of a media player right off the bat and if I get a tablet, I would want it to play anything from the get go. Although, the other topic posted a video saying the Touchwiz update would be optional so who knows.
DKYang said:
"An LG spokesperson." Yeah, dunno if I would actually believe this person. It's like asking a retail salesman at the store when the release date is for the new phone.
Also, do you guys really want to loose Touchwiz? Besides the rfs file system which is still yet unknown, I wouldn't mind Touchwiz if it includes all the codecs. The Vibrant was a beast of a media player right off the bat and if I get a tablet, I would want it to play anything from the get go. Although, the other topic posted a video saying the Touchwiz update would be optional so who knows.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good point about the codec support. What's involved with Samsung adding codec support? Is it a case of just having the codec files added to the Android OS or does it require native modules to be installed within the Android OS? I guess it's the UI elements I have the most issues with TouchWiz. Non-UI elements that enhance the phone such as additional codecs are a welcome benefit. They probably add hardly any extra time to incorporate into a stock Android OS release.
Techno79 said:
That's a good point about the codec support. What's involved with Samsung adding codec support? Is it a case of just having the codec files added to the Android OS or does it require native modules to be installed within the Android OS? I guess it's the UI elements I have the most issues with TouchWiz. Non-UI elements that enhance the phone such as additional codecs are a welcome benefit. They probably add hardly any extra time to incorporate into a stock Android OS release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think he's just saying that Samsung has more incentive to add in the codec support if they're going to customize with TouchWiz4.0.
Although I'd like to see them add the codec support either way considering they could use it as a huge selling point.
Just wanted your opinions on which dev has the best Onskreen Cornerstone build right now. I have installed both CM9 and Eos i personally prefer Eos' build they are doing a great job with the dev so far. Great job on both roms though. And are there any other roms with OSCS built in these are the only two im aware of.
I can deal with the minor bugs I really couldn't see my TF without OSCS now im spoiled
I'd personally love a completely stock with cornerstone and stock buttons. I like the Asus quick panel and soundset
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
I like the Team EOS better.
After using Cornerstone for a day, you cannot imagine life without it. I know the feeling.
jinsoku3g said:
I'd personally love a completely stock with cornerstone and stock buttons. I like the Asus quick panel and soundset
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is pretty much what I'm holding out for, a nice stock rom with cornerstone.
st0nedpenguin said:
This is pretty much what I'm holding out for, a nice stock rom with cornerstone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which can't happen right now because we ain't got no source code yet.
i flashed back to ARHD to many bugs for me to use as daily (especially now with the dock) waiting for a good solid CS build screen swapping would be cool if they release the source for that (not likely soon)
Here is some important information from the CEO of Onskreen directly to Diane Hackborn of Google, I've not read this on this site, I was directed here after an email with consumer relations with Onskreen while asking if the window-swappng option was going to be re-implemented..their reply was basically "no, and here is why; read this comment" so here is what they said..
(my emphasis)
hansmeet sethi - I am the CEO of Onskreen and felt it was about time we weighed in on the public discussion. To start off with, we have been impressed by the level of discussion on this thread on the topic of compatibility. We take it very seriously and are glad that the rest of the community do as well.
+Dianne Hackborn - Thanks for sharing specific concerns and we can appreciate their gravity and the need for a dialogue. However, outside of the implementation details perhaps some background will help. Onskreen saw an obvious need in the UX of Android on larger screen devices (that is our business after all), and we worked to address that with Cornerstone. During the process, we have invested heavily to respect Android's intentions and compatibility of the Frameworks you helped build. When you get a chance to review the code, you will see that we went out of our way to not introduce app requirements, leverage the patterns already used, and treat running Applications in a way that they are oblivious to the Cornerstone experience. We rejected many features along the way to optimize for compatibility. The result is a product that we are proud of, respects the Android project, that the user and mod communities are excited about, and OEMs love. And frankly, once you use a tablet with multi-tasking there is no going back. We are the first to admit the product is not perfect, but was at a point where we felt comfortable sharing with the community to use, help improve and polish. We see the goal of this conversation as a way to come to an agreement on some of the aspects of Compatibility and deliver multi-tasking on Android.
Now - a few of your concerns:
- Orientation - Good points, and we spent a ton of time thinking through the UX here. Cornerstone adheres to the desired orientation of the Application running in the Main Panel (and rotation of the device). Cornerstone restricts the user from opening an app that won't support all orientations in the Cornerstone panel, so there is not a case where an app running there is forced into an orientation the app developer did not intend to run in (try opening Angry Birds in the Cornerstone and you will see this). There is more here but I will leave it at that for the time being.
- Screen size changes - You point out the complexity of a changing screen size on an app. We agree and this is the reason that swapping panels (applications moving from the main area to the cornerstone or vice versa) was removed from the product. Apps at this point just aren't enforced to consider this, so Cornerstone imposing it on them would be incompatible and we don't (although we all sorely miss the feature). One area we are still considering is the Config of the main app. Logically this should change when the user minimizes/maximizes the Cornerstone, however the implementation is not doing that because of compatibility issues it would introduce. To be fully compliant we are aware that we will may have to remove the ability to minimize/maximize the Cornerstone (we will miss that feature too). Perhaps you have some suggestions here?
- ProcessRecord/ActivityThread Configurations - As you mentioned, while the ActivityStack was refactored out during your exploration, other inherent dependencies on a static Configuration do still exist. Some interesting features could be enabled by expanding this, but we didn't make these changes so that the Cornerstone codebase could more easily be used in customized Android trees of OEMs and others, as well as perhaps in upcoming Android releases.
- CDD Compliance - We take this one very seriously and you bring up good points. However, our intention is that each area (the main panel and cornerstone panels) be designed as CDD compliant sizes. That is not fully the case in the .85 release that was open sourced. As we made the switch to v4.0.3_r1 and the 1280x800 reference device (Xoom), we haven't made all these changes yet. It may require that some of the panels in certain orientations run in a pseudo compatibility mode similar to how the Android OS supports legacy apps already so that their config is CDD compliant and the UX is optimized.
- CTS - One test in CTS calls for any Activity that doesn't have the focus to be moved to the paused state. This is obviously not the case in Cornerstone as Activities do stay resumed when not having the focus and still are visible on the screen. Google could ding Cornerstone for that and in truth they would be technically correct. However this would be silly considering the nature of the test when applied to a real multi-tasked environment. That is not our call however.
In short, we think about the same problems you do and we believe in the product as well as maintaining the integrity of Android applications and devices. You of all people can appreciate the complexity in working with the Android framework in the way we have to get Cornerstone built, and to call it a fork is doing the design and engineering effort that went into it a disservice. We see the point of AOSP and contributions like Cornerstone to create a dialogue, come to agreement and add great features to the platform. To that end, we are more than happy to continue this conversation. Some of us are in the bay area and happy to drop by Google if you prefer.
hansmeet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats pretty cool but i will miss having the features im sure the community will implement our own twist on it though. to bad for the screen swapping though .
on a different note CM9 with cornerstone is moving along quite well a lot more stable ROM can i vote again lol
Cornerstone is just a placeholder for me until Windows 8 is released for tablets.
Definitely switching to Windows 8 unless Google adds to Android a comparable multitasking capability.
Just stock, I like stock ICS on TF101 (after reboot and pc connection issue removed...) and don't see any pro's in any other ROM for me...
Pretty much all of the concessions that they have or are discussing making to cornerstone are quickly removing the reason for having it at all. There are plenty of apps that already are not compatible with many devices and resolutions. Crippling a feature because you "can't" create new app requirements is silly. This is the area where google(and cornerstone) have the potential to destroy apple. As these devices get faster and bigger, you can't stick with the one app at a time paradigm.
I understand google is trying to remove the "fragmentation" but your OS can't evolve if that outweighs everything else.
gottahavit said:
Pretty much all of the concessions that they have or are discussing making to cornerstone are quickly removing the reason for having it at all. There are plenty of apps that already are not compatible with many devices and resolutions. Crippling a feature because you "can't" create new app requirements is silly. This is the area where google(and cornerstone) have the potential to destroy apple. As these devices get faster and bigger, you can't stick with the one app at a time paradigm.
I understand google is trying to remove the "fragmentation" but your OS can't evolve if that outweighs everything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google will add better multitasking to Android. They have to or they will lose to Windows 8.
Cornerstone is just not Google's answer to multitasking on Android. I bet Google has something better.
horndroid said:
Google will add better multitasking to Android. They have to or they will lose to Windows 8.
Cornerstone is just not Google's answer to multitasking on Android. I bet Google has something better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with windows 8 is that a windows tablet will always cost 100 dollars more than the same android tablet. Add to that the fact that you'll have to re-buy all your apps for ARM or Metro and they have a tough battle ahead in the consumer market.
Personally I Find Metro totally annoying on my 17" laptop, I think Microsoft is having an identity crisis with windows 8. The last thing I want on my laptop is forced full screen apps. Honestly Metro is a little to Android(ish) for what I would want on a tablet once they get a little more powerful and have better rez.
EDIT: I should qualify this with the fact that I am a die hard windows fan, I LOVE windows 7, prefer coding for windows over any other OS EVER, and absolutely hate MAC OS.
gottahavit said:
The problem with windows 8 is that a windows tablet will always cost 100 dollars more than the same android tablet. Add to that the fact that you'll have to re-buy all your apps for ARM or Metro and they have a tough battle ahead in the consumer market.
Personally I Find Metro totally annoying on my 17" laptop, I think Microsoft is having an identity crisis with windows 8. The last thing I want on my laptop is forced full screen apps. Honestly Metro is a little to Android(ish) for what I would want on a tablet once they get a little more powerful and have better rez.
EDIT: I should qualify this with the fact that I am a die hard windows fan, I LOVE windows 7, prefer coding for windows over any other OS EVER, and absolutely hate MAC OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care. All that matters is that Windows 8 will motivate Google to add some real multitasking capability to its Android OS. We all know how competitive Google is. They will do it, and it won't be Cornerstone. It will be something better.
horndroid said:
I don't care. All that matters is that Windows 8 will motivate Google to add some real multitasking capability to its Android OS. We all know how competitive Google is. They will do it, and it won't be Cornerstone. It will be something better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kinda, my point. have you used Windows 8 Multitasking? it looks too much like Honeycomb except they keep apps actually running. This is of course Metro, native apps are still good old windows. This isn't Microsoft putting out something for google to steal or envy, it's Microsoft going "OHHH everybody love android and IOS, they must all want "one app at a time" style OS.
Hello
An interesting article I read today with regards to the skins OEM put on android devices (touchwiz) that leads to fragmentation.
Interesting quote from the article,
"I believe this Android update underscores Google’s new vision for OEMs has hardware producers only! Android 4.4 is a trojan horse of unification - it will give Google the tools it needs to completely wipe a skin from a device with a simple download from the Play Store."
If this turns out to be true it can have a major impact on the Galaxy Note products due to it being so reliant on touchwiz. Also I do not know how deeply integrated touchwiz is on Android so I guess time will tell.
http://techtainian.com/news/2013/10...l-reclaim-android-and-unify-holo-with-kennedy
Great article. Thanks for posting the link. I hate touchwizz and love simple vanilla android which you get on the nexus devices. Android needs to be simple to use and I find using touchwizz requires a another learning curve and it just irritates me. I think manufactures should use stock android and then install custom launchers and apps. Commercially google wants to retain the rains of android which will also be a business decision. I can see the advantages for Joe public who could just pick up any android device and know it works like any other device. I want the choice to pick either without having to root a device and install custom firmware.
andyzarins said:
Great article. Thanks for posting the link. I hate touchwizz and love simple vanilla android which you get on the nexus devices. Android needs to be simple to use and I find using touchwizz requires a another learning curve and it just irritates me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Vanilla is good but then you don't get S Pen and multi window. And nexus devices come without SD Support.
ddavtian said:
Vanilla is good but then you don't get S Pen and multi window. And nexus devices come without SD Support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These two things do not apply to one another whatsoever. Samsung could put S-Pen, SD, and multi-window support on their devices without the UI overhaul. The two are not in any way connected.
It makes perfect sense for them to put stock android in their tablets and make the S-Note, multi window etc available via the playstore.
Honestly, I don't know about Samsung's and Google relationship as it stands today but if Google does makes an app that allows the user to remove OEM skins than it might be the start of the downfall between the two companies.
On a side note there are rumours that the new Nexus 10 is Asus built not Samsung.
Not a rumour. Asus is building the new nexus 10. One the fence about buying the new 10.1 or waiting for the new nexus.