Related
Hi folks
Recenty I got the Windows XP Embedded kit, and I was really satisfied and surprised with the performance of the directly built system on an old machine like a P1 @ 200 MHz with 64 MB of RAM, without a hard disk.
The main goal would be to run truly win32 apps on mobile devices, to give better functionality and compatibility.
Yet the builder supports x86 architecture only, but cannot be a big problem to port it to ARM pocessors.
What might be difficult are these things:
-Getting win32 drivers for built-in devices (ex. integrated SDIO/USB WLAN, BT adapter, touchscreen, and sound devices, and apps for them!)
-Saving user data on turning off (Ebmedded systems are designed for a workstation, like a cash register: prebuilt apps, and nothing more comfort ) like WM200x
If anybody has any suggestion are to get a warm welcome
bye
Yet the builder supports x86 architecture only, but cannot be a big problem to port it to ARM pocessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you kidding me?
This would mean reverse engineering and recompiling every binary in the OS.
Do you have any idea how many hours something like that would take?
yup, you're right, but in theory it's possibe. I've seen a running DOS on a Microchip micro-controller, or for example the Atmel STK 1000 is Linux based, also seen an mPlayer app operational on the demo board at the college.
as you see, i'm not an experienced programmer, but i'm not afraid to ask
Yeah, the basic low-level binaries must be recompiled, and once it's ok, it might be usable with regular win32 apps, until you run an old DOS app, wich directly access the hardware.
A few years ago i was able to port Z80 software to 8086, and it wasn't easy.
I don't really know these things, just want to see opinions, possibilities, and suggestions.
exe files are binarys which are instructions directly for the cpu
it's not parsed by the operating system
so compiling the os is not enough every application needs to be recompiled too
The programs you mentioned have source available in one way or another (since DOS is very old there are clones, like freeDOS).
If you have the full source for an app and the right compiler, porting it to another CPU is feasible.
But, this is not the case with embedded XP. Getting the full source is impossible which means most of the system will have to be rewritten from scratch.
Just look at the Wine project to see what it takes, and they "have it easy" - they are just trying to simulate the APIs not change processor architecture. (Lets make it clear - ARM instruction set is very different from x86).
And as Rudegar said it will not let you run any program that has not been specially compiled for ARM CPU.
I know it sounds like we are trying to kill you idea here but its nothing personal, unfortunately it just isn't feasible. We would all like to be able to run desktop apps on our devices, but simply having embedded XP on them would not accomplish that. Also while many old DOS apps can be run using various emulators like pocketDOS, almost all Win32 apps take more resources than our little gadgets can offer.
I am fairly sure though that in 5 -10 years that problem will be fixed.
<_< man hours or not, reveng'ing this will have a bigger impact than just winDOS Mobile devices. Desktops have a use for this, definitely (because the Vista-Only crap is starting to hit the market). Too bad they don't provide assembly in programming classes anymore, obviously because they don't want anyone else to reverse engineer anything and spoil their foisting fun. <_<
In any case, IIRC XP Embedded is missing the install/uninstall engine, so you can't customize it after it's flashed onto the board. This isn't quite a good start - XPLite or 98Lite are better for reverse engineering from scratch (but they're too powerful for mobile devices).
The other alternative is porting ReactOS, which is a reimplementation of W2K. Those guys are "having a lot of fun" getting things to work, tho. <_<
Maybye Windows CE6 yes, but Windows XP Embedded no, because they must run at 686-AT/X platform IMB. Sorry of my English
linux would be a path
with most linux programs you can compile them yourself
using good old
./configure
make
make install
of cause gui programs could have issues displaying correct
on such a small screen
You MIGHT be able to pull it off by installing a minimal (very!) WinMo firmware and then have it autorun Bochs, which is known to be able to run the PC version of XP.. A customised, thinned-down XPe image should run fine under Bochs.
--W5i2
I have been trying to learn how to do some android development for work and keep running into problems. I find it hard to believe that people are able to create a lot of these apps with the Google development tools in such poor condition.
I have set up a development system with eclipse and the android tools. One of the first problems I ran into is ADB crashing whenever I tried to debug and there was a device attached to the system. Didn't matter if I was trying to debug on the device or emulator, ADB would crash. I was finally able to get the problem fixed by using the Composite ADB interface driver instead of the plain ADB interface (would it really hurt Google to add one sentence to the directions to tell people this?)
Now every time I go to debug, the emulator comes up in Chinese/Japaneses. I type in English and it converts it. I can fix it by changing the input method, but I have to do it every time I start the emulator. I have Googled looking for a solution and have found this is a known problem that has been around for almost a year and there is no resolution with it. The bug reports I have found on the android site even lists them still as NEW!
When trying to debug a problem, I wanted to delete the shared preference file for the app as it seems like it had become corrupted and every time it went to read it, the app would force close. (And when this happen, the debugger perspective would come up but for the life of me, I could not find any information as to what caused the fault or any sort of stack trace to look back and see where in my code it failed).
If you are an app developer, are you running into these issues? Have you found ways to work around the problems? I just can't believe that this is the way people develop for this platform. I'm ready to tell my boss that we forget about the platform unless we can find some stable development tools, otherwise we will be spending more time fighting with the tools than working on the app.
If anyone has any suggestions, I would really like to hear them. I'm not a noob when it comes to software development (20+ years as a software engineer), but I have never seen development tools for such a major platform, be this poorly done. What am I missing?
I'm a professional developer as well too. 20 years or so as a C/C++ developer, but I've worked most of my career as a Unix developer. Naturally, I use linux where possible and my Eclipse setup on Gentoo linux is pretty stable. I tried on Win7-64 but it was buggy as heck. I believe that the problem is with Java. There seems to be so many ways to set it up wrong that I'm not sure you can set it up right under windows.
I find it ironic that Oracle is trying to sue Google for making a JVM that actually works!
I havent had any of your mentioned issues. I am running eclipse on a 32 vista machine and a 64 bit windows 7 machine.
Not sure what I may have done different that you for setup. But I followed the Android application development for dummies book. The author goes step by step of what to download and how to install and configure. Even though your software experience is way beyond this book maybe its worth picking it up to read the install notes.
FreeTheWorld said:
I havent had any of your mentioned issues. I am running eclipse on a 32 vista machine and a 64 bit windows 7 machine.
Not sure what I may have done different that you for setup. But I followed the Android application development for dummies book. The author goes step by step of what to download and how to install and configure. Even though your software experience is way beyond this book maybe its worth picking it up to read the install notes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I picked up the book, "Sams Teach Yourself Android Application Development in 24 Hours" and it has a section for setting up the environment too. Followed it to the letter several times and always had this problems. I think the issue comes down to the books were written using version 6 and 7 of the SDK and the current version, 8, has introduced some problems the books don't cover. For example, the tools directory has been split into two directories, tools and platform-tools. When you first download the SDK, you don't get everything you had like before until you update the SDK.
I have talked to several other people who also had the problem with the ADB crashing like I did, even started a thread here about it. No one could get any help anywhere on resolving the issue. I think the problems I have that others don't see is because they started with an earlier version of the SDK.
Gene Poole said:
I'm a professional developer as well too. 20 years or so as a C/C++ developer, but I've worked most of my career as a Unix developer. Naturally, I use linux where possible and my Eclipse setup on Gentoo linux is pretty stable. I tried on Win7-64 but it was buggy as heck. I believe that the problem is with Java. There seems to be so many ways to set it up wrong that I'm not sure you can set it up right under windows.
I find it ironic that Oracle is trying to sue Google for making a JVM that actually works!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have also setup the development platform on a linux system and haven't had the problems I have with Windows 7 64bit. I also feel a lot of the problems have come from the Windows 64bit platform and even windows in general. I tried installing on a clean 64bit and 32bit Windows 7 and was still having the ADB problem. As soon as I get my tax refunds, I'm going to get a work desk setup at home so I can try using my linux system (it sits on the floor with no monitor and is my network server). Boss will really love it if I tell him we have to set up linux platforms to develop on. Guy is a bit of a tight wad when it comes to equipment.
edboston said:
If you are an app developer, are you running into these issues?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I didn't have any stability problems with SDK. I use linux 32-bit, didn't try to work on a Windows, MacOS and/or 64-bit arch.
I've not seen any of your problems, either.
FYI, I followed these instructions to set up the env:
http://developer.android.com/resources/tutorials/hello-world.html
(Environment - WinXP/32 netbook)
Eclipse is buggy. The most annoying issue with it is that the auto complete freezes your computer at times.
An alternative is IntelliJ. They offer a free community addition. I work with one dev that swears by it.
I use Windows7x64 and Ubuntu 10.10 to develop my apps. I use IntelliJ mostly because I find Eclipse to be convoluted overcomplicated mess. I think the Android integration in Eclipse is better, especially around editing some of the key XML files but I despise how projects are organized in Eclipse.
The OS you use really doesn't matter the results are the same, once you're up and running the work will be the same so the OS becomes irrelevant. The IDE becomes the differentiator.
I haven't met with the issues you mentioned, but as you said it can be because I installed the sdk a long time ago (after google anounced the eclair). I'm using eclipse and yes, that program is full of bugs, but I read an article about developing for android in Netbeans (my personal favorite). You can read it here: http://androidportal.hu/2011-01-09/fejlesztes-androidra-netbeans-segitsegevel (it's hungarian, but google translate is our friend)
Sent from my GT-I5700 using XDA App
MotoDev Studio 2.01
stick to 32-bit Galileo
for the slow autocomplete problem, I've made sure to use eclipse Galileo, something in Helios was causing massive lag. Also make sure you're running the 32-bit version of eclipse, even if your machine is 64-bit, there are definitely some bugs last time I tried to install ADT on 64-bit eclipse.
the new tools directory was a bit of a pain after updating to the latest API but nothing too bad once you figured it out.
I haven't had many of the other problems you mentioned. I always debug with adb logcat from terminal, and you can always hop into the device with adb shell.
I use eclipse every day at work so I've kind of gotten used to all the little quirks. I had the chinese text problem with the emulator, but I do most of my testing on a real phone. I use the emulator just to try out different resolutions.
I'm a major power user of Windows. At work, I am a sysadmin, managing hundreds of Windows servers (from 2003 to 2008 R2). Exchange servers, Citrix/Terminal servers, Active Directory are my specialties. I have experience with programming .NET, VBScript, php, and a bit of Java. I would say I have about 18 years of computing experience, the first problem I had to fix myself was DOS6.22 not locating my CDROM drive, the issue turned out to be an mscdex problem
I'm pretty good with *nix as well, though not as good as my Windows skills, I am pretty good with my way around command line on bsd and linux. Although I have a passion for PCs, I have also dabbled with macs, and can manage and repair them as well. Oh I completely forgot to mention my hardware background, but I don't really do too much with that nowadays, so might not be that relevant.
Over the last year I have started to play with Android devices, I have a Motorola Droid4 as my phone, and a Nexus 7 as my tablet.
My PC usage habits have changed since I got my first tablet, I use my PC for what I would consider, advanced tasks. Things like building ISOs, and bootable USB sticks, repairing/managing my android devices (things like moto rsdlite, or factory restore on my nexus 7), banking, deep research, and working from home (which includes a variety of management of system utilities using RDP to the office). I have been using Windows 8 for about a day and like to new interface of the desktop but find the "Windows 8 Style" (formerly known as metro) pretty disappointing since it's a 1 app at a time thing, NOT something I would want to do on my PC (I mean how often do you have only one thing up on the screen, that's fullscreen??). Is there a way I can use Windows 8 in desktop only mode? I don't know about you, but doing development in Metro doesn't seem very smart to me...
and your point being? cannot believe i wasted my time reading this post...
http://google.com/search?q="windows+8"+desktop+mode+default
e.mote said:
http://google.com/search?q="windows+8"+desktop+mode+default
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is so experienced, yet he does not know how to search? you should not feed the trolls
nitr8 said:
He is so experienced, yet he does not know how to search? you should not feed the trolls
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I spent about 2 hours searching last night with no success. But to desktop mode had been disabled in RTM, which is why I've posted a thread on this forum. Xda always has ways around things.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
>But to desktop mode had been disabled in RTM
You're saying that the methods in the below link (2nd link in above Google search) no longer work?
http://blog.laptopmag.com/6-ways-to-totally-avoid-metro-and-use-only-desktop-mode-in-windows-8
I'll have the RTM installed this weekend and will find out first hand. My real interest in Win8 is Windows-to-Go, and I'll see if it can be done with the Pro edition. If not, then we'll need to get more creative.
>Xda always has ways around things.
XDA is strong with Android, but there are better forums for Win8 info.
e.mote said:
>But to desktop mode had been disabled in RTM
You're saying that the methods in the below link (2nd link in above Google search) no longer work?
http://blog.laptopmag.com/6-ways-to-totally-avoid-metro-and-use-only-desktop-mode-in-windows-8
I'll have the RTM installed this weekend and will find out first hand. My real interest in Win8 is Windows-to-Go, and I'll see if it can be done with the Pro edition. If not, then we'll need to get more creative.
>Xda always has ways around things.
XDA is strong with Android, but there are better forums for Win8 info.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding boot to desktop review the following link:
http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-said...-straight-to-desktop-in-windows-8-7000002219/
Don't waste your time with pro, you'll need enterprise for Windows-to-Go.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
desktop is there, click desktop or hit the win button,
use metro as a start menu, apps are apps, wee programs to run on metro, applications or programs are big programs to run in desktop
in short, consider getting used to it. as you at length told us, you know a great deal, and pulling out the mscdex issue suggests....very little actually, as to know what you were doing with that would have required you to learn how to use it and know that was only one half of the potential issues with cd drives.
so my point being, try it, learn it, get used to it, and i can promise you, you'll go back to win 7 or xp one day and think is like stepping back in time to some god forsaken inefficient decade of OS design,
>Don't waste your time with pro, you'll need enterprise for Windows-to-Go.
That's the official line. The imagex route worked for the CP, so I'll try that for the Pro and see what happens. Else, we'll see.
In any case, I've no doubt that the WTG feature will be hacked out and made available as a standalone before long. It's the cherry on top of Win8, and a bull's-eye for every hacker.
As dazza said: Search. Try different things. And have patience and wait for solutions. Remember that Win8 isn't officially released yet.
MS can block certain methods, but it cannot block everything, like setting up a task or a keyboard macro to bypass the UI on boot-up. Here's one method (yes, this came up in a search):
http://pureinfotech.com/2012/08/14/script-bypass-start-screen-windows-8-desktop/
Anyway, your disdain of Metro is a common refrain, and there'll be solutions to address it.
I need to get a good ebook on Win8 nuts & bolts. Any recommendations out there? OK I'll take my own advice and search before ask..."Windows 8 Unleashed"..."Windows 8 for Dummies"
Thanks, that's a good suggestion; creating the scheduled task. At this point a lot of the OS is pretty much what I would consider "half baked". Reminds me of a Blackberry situation, where they have this grand OS, with not a lot of developer support. I'd like to get my google apps into the metro portion, and I am hoping in the future something will come along to replace the desktop without the start menu (seems sort of like a silly solution to force people to use metro). I'm not against the metro UI, for what I use PCs for it just doesn't really work that well.
I'm planning on continuing to use it for another month, and since I'm an MS admin, it's something I'll have to get used to whether I like it or not, that's why I came to this forum to ask around.
Again, thanks for the searching on the issue. I'm sure this will help others in their search for a boot to desktop solution.
danifunker said:
Thanks, that's a good suggestion; creating the scheduled task. At this point a lot of the OS is pretty much what I would consider "half baked". Reminds me of a Blackberry situation, where they have this grand OS, with not a lot of developer support. I'd like to get my google apps into the metro portion, and I am hoping in the future something will come along to replace the desktop without the start menu (seems sort of like a silly solution to force people to use metro). I'm not against the metro UI, for what I use PCs for it just doesn't really work that well.
I'm planning on continuing to use it for another month, and since I'm an MS admin, it's something I'll have to get used to whether I like it or not, that's why I came to this forum to ask around.
Again, thanks for the searching on the issue. I'm sure this will help others in their search for a boot to desktop solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my point is, you dont have to use it other than for a fancy start menu, and even then you dont have to use it, pin a folder to the task bar and you have an instant ld fashioned start menu.
think of it this way, turn PC on, up pops metro giving you at a glance a little bit of info on everything you have setup, pop in to desktop and get on with work, every now and then you can flick to metro to get a little update, if you want to read more without opening the full blown program an app may do the job, if you need to do a bit more work with the item in question then you can fire up the main program, its just a different way of thinking, but i can assure you, if you put in the effort, you will find your productivity measurably improved!
>At this point a lot of the OS is pretty much what I would consider "half baked"
I see Win8 as work in progress, which probably means the same as yours. Yes, desktop/Metro integration is poor. But MS had to implement a touch UI, integrate it with existing WIMP UI, set up an app store infrastructure, and support the ARM platform. That's a lot for one rev, so it'll take two (or more). I think of RTM as Release Preview 2.
My SWAG is that Win8 will have a mixed reception, and MS will quickly push out a service pack next year to address the shortcomings.
x86 aside, I'm interested in how WinRT will fare. As do MS, no doubt. The rumor of $199 RT toy has at least a whiff of truth to it.
Classic Shell now supports RTM, and has options to bypass Metro UI & disable hot corners
http://www.overclock.net/t/1295961/sf-classic-shell-is-officially-released-for-windows-8-rtm
For those who have Synaptic touchpads, you can use the latest Win7 drivers, although edge-swipe functions aren't implemented:
http://www.synaptics.com/resources/drivers/
Win8 beta Synaptics driver w/ edge-swipes below. It works, but is a little buggy. Left-edge swipe (task switch) gets activated at odd times.
http://drivers.softpedia.com/progDo...161811-for-Windows-8-x64-Download-172310.html
Frankly, for non-touchscreen PCs, you won't miss the Metro UI or the edge swipes. Will have to know your shortcuts, though.
Better yet,
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/157302-windows-7-explorer-for-windows-8/
danifunker said:
I'm a major power user of Windows. At work, I am a sysadmin, managing hundreds of Windows servers (from 2003 to 2008 R2). Exchange servers, Citrix/Terminal servers, Active Directory are my specialties. I have experience with programming .NET, VBScript, php, and a bit of Java. I would say I have about 18 years of computing experience, the first problem I had to fix myself was DOS6.22 not locating my CDROM drive, the issue turned out to be an mscdex problem
I'm pretty good with *nix as well, though not as good as my Windows skills, I am pretty good with my way around command line on bsd and linux. Although I have a passion for PCs, I have also dabbled with macs, and can manage and repair them as well. Oh I completely forgot to mention my hardware background, but I don't really do too much with that nowadays, so might not be that relevant.
Over the last year I have started to play with Android devices, I have a Motorola Droid4 as my phone, and a Nexus 7 as my tablet.
My PC usage habits have changed since I got my first tablet, I use my PC for what I would consider, advanced tasks. Things like building ISOs, and bootable USB sticks, repairing/managing my android devices (things like moto rsdlite, or factory restore on my nexus 7), banking, deep research, and working from home (which includes a variety of management of system utilities using RDP to the office). I have been using Windows 8 for about a day and like to new interface of the desktop but find the "Windows 8 Style" (formerly known as metro) pretty disappointing since it's a 1 app at a time thing, NOT something I would want to do on my PC (I mean how often do you have only one thing up on the screen, that's fullscreen??). Is there a way I can use Windows 8 in desktop only mode? I don't know about you, but doing development in Metro doesn't seem very smart to me...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, good ol' MSCDEX . Anyway, I've been an IT guy for about the same amount of time as you (16, just shy of 17 years) and personally, I love Windows 8. My suggestion is this: use the desktop for desktop things, and use Metro for Metro things. Revolutionary advice, I know . To answer the question of "when would I use an app full screen?" the answer is simple: When you want to be *productive* in that app. Studies have shown that people working in clean, full-screen workspaces get more done because they have fewer distractions.
Metro, to be sure, is not a "one size fits all" solution. It does certain things exceptionally well, and others are best left to the desktop. And honestly, that's OK. I'd rather have an OS that can handle both worlds than have two distinct and separate OS's for different devices.
---------- Post added at 10:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:30 PM ----------
e.mote said:
Classic Shell now supports RTM, and has options to bypass Metro UI & disable hot corners
http://www.overclock.net/t/1295961/sf-classic-shell-is-officially-released-for-windows-8-rtm
For those who have Synaptic touchpads, you can use the latest Win7 drivers, although edge-swipe functions aren't implemented:
http://www.synaptics.com/resources/drivers/
Win8 beta Synaptics driver w/ edge-swipes below. It works, but is a little buggy. Left-edge swipe (task switch) gets activated at odd times.
http://drivers.softpedia.com/progDo...161811-for-Windows-8-x64-Download-172310.html
Frankly, for non-touchscreen PCs, you won't miss the Metro UI or the edge swipes. Will have to know your shortcuts, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank goodness there are options for people who can't bring themselves to move forward with the times .
>My suggestion is this: use the desktop for desktop things, and use Metro for Metro things.
That's the problem. Many desktop users would just want to do desktop things and ignore Metro altogether, but Metro is mandatory for apps navigation.
I understand MS' motivation for pushing Metro, although I don't have to like it: It wants to get Metro (and App Store) as many eyeballs as possible, to get people used to the notion of "buying apps" for desktops. It needs to do this to kick-start Metro apps, and thereby give WinRT a boost. The change is for MS' benefit more than the users. As you said yourself, Metro can't do desktop duties, and it only ends up annoying desktop users.
>To answer the question of "when would I use an app full screen?" the answer is simple: When you want to be *productive* in that app. Studies have shown
This is a bad blanket statement in that it assumes everybody works (or should work) the same way. People don't. It also ignores the reality that people are used to certain ways of getting things done, and resent being forced to relinquish those routines for purportedly "better" ones. That's a recipe for wholesale userbase loss.
BTW, a tip: Don't use the phrase "studies have shown." Any time you have to reach for "scientific surveys/studies/experts," it's already a losing argument.
I'm a proponent of Windows 8. I think it's a step in the right direction. But I recognize it's a love-hate relationship with Metro, and both sides have their justifications. It's a subjective thing, and appealing to authority (studies) isn't the answer. The only verdict that matters is from Win8 PC and tablet sales, and we'll know in Oct how Metro will fare.
I found something...
Interesting that I found it in the forbes.com website, I didn't even know they had technical articles!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adriankingsleyhughes/2012/08/23/restore-the-start-menu-in-windows-8/
In the article it mentions something called Start8. This program is pretty much what I wanted.
http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/
I'll follow up after I've used Start8 for a little while longer.
Just curious to see exactly how many people actually use Linux or OSX a.k.a the only OSes you can build Android on which IMO all Android devs should be using
I'm running Manjaro, an Arch based distro
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Just curious to see exactly how many people actually use Linux or OSX a.k.a the only OSes you can build Android on which IMO all Android devs should be using
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha still on win 7...Waiting for win 10
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Just curious to see exactly how many people actually use Linux or OSX a.k.a the only OSes you can build Android on which IMO all Android devs should be using
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are virtualization options availible for Windows such as cygwin I've used in the past that can help.
PC Gaming Master Race (Windows). Proud. xD
8.1 on one xubuntu 15.04 on another
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using XDA Free mobile app
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Just curious to see exactly how many people actually use Linux or OSX a.k.a the only OSes you can build Android on which IMO all Android devs should be using
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm using fedora but why should all android devs use linux? I think you should use whatever you're comfortable with
Niropa said:
I'm using fedora but why should all android devs use linux? I think you should use whatever you're comfortable with
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because:
1) Android is a Linux system so if you wanna develop it it's best to know Linux up close and personal
2) Building Android things (like ROMs) on Linux is much more straightforward
3) Linux systems are much more secure and generally more stable (not related to Android, just in general)
4) Microsoft is a corporate evil that restricts the freedom of its users and encourages the use of proprietary software
OSX is also guilty of the same evils as Windows with the exception that OSX is a Unix system and therefore enjoys many of the same benefits as Linux
I've been a linux user since 1998, I'm comfortable building programs from scratch, used to build my own kernel (prior to 3.x) and have modified kernel modules to add support for some devices.
Having said that, I tried to build a kernel and system for an Android device some long time ago, did have the source tree for the device, but it always failed because some blob was missing or some source file had incorrect references to other files. I just tossed the towel, mainly because compilation took forever just to fail at the end. Besides I had to download like 40GB to set up the build environment.
Having previous linux experience did not help me much, as Android was different enough to what I knew. This was at the time gingerbread was the latest version ( Android 3 devices existed, but that's another story).
Hopefully things have changed, if so I might give it a try again.
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Because:
1) Android is a Linux system so if you wanna develop it it's best to know Linux up close and personal
2) Building Android things (like ROMs) on Linux is much more straightforward
3) Linux systems are much more secure and generally more stable (not related to Android, just in general)
4) Microsoft is a corporate evil that restricts the freedom of it)sers and encourages the use of proprietary software
OSX is also guilty of the same evils as Windows with exception that OSX is a Unix system and therefore enjoys many of the same benefits as Linux
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) android is very different then any Linux distribution, as glock said having previous experience on Linux does not help much.
2) I agree with that point because Linux comes with a lot of tools needed to compile but if that's the only reason you need Linux for then it's better to just run it as a secondary OS on a virtual machine.
3) now that's a very silly point, Linux is only more secure because its more obscure then other operating systems and saying it is generally more stable is just wrong. With windows I had rarely any problems. With any Linux distribution I get very bad screen tearing, audio stops working after a reboot, many packages (steam for example) don't work without hours of troubleshooting and file transfers to my phone or music player make at least one song on every album sound like it got thrown in a blender and got chopped up before being transfered. There are many more problems which don't help my android development. When iI could be updating my ROMs I can't because I'm busy troubleshooting why my distribution decided not to pass grub.
4) that's also a very silly point stallman. With that logic you should not be using phones either because they contain proprietary blobs. The play store is proprietary. Most websites you visit are proprietary (including github which is needed for android development) your mp3s are proprietary, even your computer that you think is running all free software iis running a proprietary BIOS. I could go on all day about the proprietary software you use but I'm on my phone
Niropa said:
3) now that's a very silly point, Linux is only more secure because its more obscure then other operating systems and saying it is generally more stable is just wrong. With windows I had rarely any problems. With any Linux distribution I get very bad screen tearing, audio stops working after a reboot, many packages (steam for example) don't work without hours of troubleshooting and file transfers to my phone or music player make at least one song on every album sound like it got thrown in a blender and got chopped up before being transfered. There are many more problems which don't help my android development. When iI could be updating my ROMs I can't because I'm busy troubleshooting why my distribution decided not to pass grub.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I work for a major IT company. All system administrators- Window, Unix, Mainframe, or DBA have to use Linux as their OS because it is more secure than MS Windows. The base multi-user model of Unix makes it more secure, then add things like SELinux, and becomes very hard to compromise.
Your garbled songs sounds like you are disconnecting your device before all the files have finished transferring. Your screen tearing sounds like you are using a software or frame buffer driver instead of the accelerated driver for your video chipset. Sound can be a pita at times. A newer distro solved my issues (meaning updated kernel drivers) with sound. For Steam, I think I had to enable a repo, then just 'yum install steam'. It is not so much Linux is difficult as it is different from what you are used to.
alose said:
I work for a major IT company. All system administrators- Window, Unix, Mainframe, or DBA have to use Linux as their OS because it is more secure than MS Windows. The base multi-user model of Unix makes it more secure, then add things like SELinux, and becomes very hard to compromise.
Your garbled songs sounds like you are disconnecting your device before all the files have finished transferring. Your screen tearing sounds like you are using a software or frame buffer driver instead of the accelerated driver for your video chipset. Sound can be a pita at times. A newer distro solved my issues (meaning updated kernel drivers) with sound. For Steam, I think I had to enable a repo, then just 'yum install steam'. It is not so much Linux is difficult as it is different from what you are used to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol nice assumptions but no. I can assure you I'm not disconnecting it before its finished transferring, my only guess is it has something to do with libmtp and the way it handles file transfers which must be different then other operating systems. I use the open source amd drivers which give me screen tearing. I noticed proprietary drivers fixed it but then when I reboot its just a blank screen that iI cant be bothered to troubleshoot. I have steams repo enabled and it iinstalls fine with dnf but I can't figure out how to get it to actually open. Opening with the command line doesn't give me any errors to work with either sadly. Also as I stated in an earlier post I use fedora and am much more experienced with Linux then any other OS. I'm also on the latest kernel released (4.0.6 I think? I'll have to double check) and I still get issues with pulseaudio.
With all that being said I'm not trying to bash Linux and say windows is better,(like i said i use fedora myself and have been using other various distros for the past several years)my point was that you should use whatever works best for you and won't get in your way.
All runing linux
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Just curious to see exactly how many people actually use Linux or OSX a.k.a the only OSes you can build Android on which IMO all Android devs should be using
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 laptop, raspberrypi, game pc, media pc, kib pc, all running flavor of Linux.:good:
Windows ME.
Posted using my phone.
Niropa said:
Lol nice assumptions but no. I can assure you I'm not disconnecting it before its finished transferring, my only guess is it has something to do with libmtp and the way it handles file transfers which must be different then other operating systems. I use the open source amd drivers which give me screen tearing. I noticed proprietary drivers fixed it but then when I reboot its just a blank screen that iI cant be bothered to troubleshoot. I have steams repo enabled and it iinstalls fine with dnf but I can't figure out how to get it to actually open. Opening with the command line doesn't give me any errors to work with either sadly. Also as I stated in an earlier post I use fedora and am much more experienced with Linux then any other OS. I'm also on the latest kernel released (4.0.6 I think? I'll have to double check) and I still get issues with pulseaudio.
With all that being said I'm not trying to bash Linux and say windows is better,(like i said i use fedora myself and have been using other various distros for the past several years)my point was that you should use whatever works best for you and won't get in your way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely see your point. I guess it really depends on what you hardware you use Linux on; I run Arch on my old HP G71 from 2011 with an Intel Core 2 Duo and everything runs amazingly. The only issues I've ever had is pulseaudio (which magically fixed itself after some time) and a few crashes due to me using a custom kernel (linux-ck). In fact, the only problems I've ever had are completely due to a mistake on my part.
With the Microsoft it was mild sarcasm with a big point: pretty much everything in Windows is closed source. Pretty much everything in Linux is open source (depending on what distro you use, of course). I'm not afraid of proprietary; I run Plex Media Server and Google Chrome. But I made that choice to run those programs. Just like I made the choice of what window manager to run; how to log in to my system (I go through startx now); how to play music (mpd); how to interface with my network. All of these were choices I made in building my system from the ground up -- even with distros like Ubunutu you can still replace basically whatever you want. That's what I meant when I said that Windows takes away your freedom.
Mint 17 on C720 i3 Chromebook here!
Jhdoubleoseven said:
Because:
1) Android is a Linux system so if you wanna develop it it's best to know Linux up close and personal
2) Building Android things (like ROMs) on Linux is much more straightforward
3) Linux systems are much more secure and generally more stable (not related to Android, just in general)
4) Microsoft is a corporate evil that restricts the freedom of its users and encourages the use of proprietary software
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) Tools to build apps for Android are cross-platformed. Using Eclipse IDE under Windows i compile every my app and don't see any restrictions making me want to migrate to Linux.
2) VirtualBox + Ubuntu solve this problem completely.
3) Not more secure and definitely not more stable. You can setup Linux to be less secure and setup Windows to be more secure. And if you compare how many side (i mean apps not included in distro) apps you use in Windows and in Linux, you will find the answer about security. Even light usage of Linux (mostly for kernel compilation and some AOSP code) produces different services/apps crash. So, if i would use Linux as i'm using Windows, there will be even more crashes.
What i really hate in Linux is how much time it requires to be prepared for some non-generic environment. If somehow happen distro doesn't provide required package (even from dedicated support server), or more worse if package version is different from required, then be prepared for "sex" with Linux. You can spend a lot of time to compile and most likely to fix incompatibilities in source code. Sometimes such preparation takes several days. And then when you are prepared, you can compile that code in 5 minutes. Nope.. Such productivity isn't for me. In most cases i even don't expect compilation because i simply want to use some utility. And then i find that pre-compiled version doesn't work. Because there is very low compatibility between different versions of Linux. Even binary compiled for Linux release couple years ago may not work in more modern Linux (unless it statically linked, but even in this case there is no warranty). And if it doesn't work, see my description about preparation to compile it
Btw, both VirtualBox and VMWare require special drivers for guest Linux to properly support folder sharing and VM window handling. And these drivers have to be recompiled with every minor kernel version update. This is IMHO very lame for Linux. Even after some kernel update (through standard distro package manager, so it's very minor update) VMWare stop to compile its drivers. So i have to find why and then patch the source code. And i often ask myself "Why i have to do this crap again and again?"
In Windows, i can take binary compiled for Windows XP, and use it in Windows 10. Interoperability of binaries between versions of Linux is a big red sign for me.
I was trying to migrate to Linux several times already in the past 10 years. And every time i find my self spending most of time for side tasks than my main projects.
Another thing i don't like in Linux is GUI. Not the design. It's OK for me to adapt to new interface. KDE or XFCE are fine. What i don't like in Linux GUI is how it works. Sometimes it lives its own life. Some windows appear when i don't expect, or i forgot about it already. It looks like GUI threads are running not in sync (or in very weak sync) with main code. I prefer MS Windows behavior when app tries to open the window, i cannot do anything. So, i know, something will happen soon. On Linux it's always a guess game "will some new window appear or app simply ignores my input."
4) From other side, you can see standardization of APIs and stable for many years SDK in Windows. As a software developer i care about it very much. There is no restriction for Open Source projects.
Absence (or nearly absence) binary compatibility between Linux versions, very flexible and often changing APIs can be considered as an additional security mechanism, but I'm against such methods.
---------- Post added at 06:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 AM ----------
P.S: About "Android is a Linux": it's completely wrong.
Android is an OS with high level of abstraction when it comes to devices.
To make this abstraction, Linux kernel is used. Nothing to do with Desktop Linux here.
Generally speaking, any kernel could be used to make this abstraction. It could be OpenBSD and even Windows kernel. Android wouldn't be different. Google choose Linux kernel to be free from other software developers - that's the only reason.
sorg said:
1) Tools to build apps for Android are cross-platformed. Using Eclipse IDE under Windows i compile every my app and don't see any restrictions making me want to migrate to Linux.
2) VirtualBox + Ubuntu solve this problem completely.
3) Not more secure and definitely not more stable. You can setup Linux to be less secure and setup Windows to be more secure. And if you compare how many side (i mean apps not included in distro) apps you use in Windows and in Linux, you will find the answer about security. Even light usage of Linux (mostly for kernel compilation and some AOSP code) produces different services/apps crash. So, if i would use Linux as i'm using Windows, there will be even more crashes.
What i really hate in Linux is how much time it requires to be prepared for some non-generic environment. If somehow happen distro doesn't provide required package (even from dedicated support server), or more worse if package version is different from required, then be prepared for "sex" with Linux. You can spend a lot of time to compile and most likely to fix incompatibilities in source code. Sometimes such preparation takes several days. And then when you are prepared, you can compile that code in 5 minutes. Nope.. Such productivity isn't for me. In most cases i even don't expect compilation because i simply want to use some utility. And then i find that pre-compiled version doesn't work. Because there is very low compatibility between different versions of Linux. Even binary compiled for Linux release couple years ago may not work in more modern Linux (unless it statically linked, but even in this case there is no warranty). And if it doesn't work, see my description about preparation to compile it
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, every distro is binary compatible -- binaries are based on the processor, so every Linux x86-64 computer can run any binaries on my Arch Linux system. You're either referring to package compatibility, as different distros use different package managers, or just that you don't have all the dependencies (such as the libraries required to run).
Secondly, I'm surprised to hear how many crashes and issues you have with Linux... I easily get an uptime of 30 days+ without a single issue and then choose -- not get forced -- to reboot because my kernel is out of date. I've heard Ubuntu has given people issues but I use Arch which required me to know my hardware to install exactly what I need -- nothing more. Arch, being rolling release and up-to-date, is amazingly stable and also ensures you are in the driver's seat.
Thirdly, while you're right that you can have a secure Windows, the problem is how freely Windows gives out root permissions -- it's just asking for malware. Especially if you make youeself an admin, have fun running as root 24/7. Any *nix OS has an incredibly strong user system -- my system itself has over 20 users on it even though I am the only human who uses it. The other 19 users run programs and keep privileges separate. That and Linux is open source, so instead of like 1000 people looking through the source code you have over 10,000 eyes that may see any vulnerabilities. Windows "security through obscurity" is absolute crap; I will gladly use Windows once they go open source and I can get rid of that bloated UI and use something I have full control of.
Like you said, it really depends on a lot of things... however, as a power user I could never go back to Windows. I need freedom and transparency; Windows offers neither. Definitely don't think less of people who use Windows; some people want things to just work and don't care about anything else. I like things to work exactly like I want them to work and to be in control of what goes on with my computer. It's really just preference; my system is constantly changing and I configured everything myself. It's hard to describe, but when your OS becomes a project -- your project -- that you put time and effort in to get working like you want it's a really gratifying feeling
Jhdoubleoseven said:
or just that you don't have all the dependencies (such as the libraries required to run).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Sorry for wrong wording.
Hello users,
This question may be offtopic here, but i need your kind suggestions. I am now going to reinstall an operating system in my computer.
I had Windows 10 earlier. Now I am thinking to use Linux. I have not used it before so I have a few doubts.
Will it be difficult to use and understand Linux?
Will Linux be faster than Winodows 10?
Thanks
Xubuntu is pretty fast, faster than windows on idle. About the same on heavy load
bkdroid13 said:
Will it be difficult to use and understand Linux?
Will Linux be faster than Windows 10?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) It will be different to use, difficulty depends on how easily you pick up new user interface paradigms. There is no standardized UI among distributions, so you should pick one the you think you'll enjoy. Since you'd be new to Linux, I would suggest Xubuntu, or Ubuntu-Mate, as both have familiar-enough interfaces for Windows users who have never run a Linux system before. Beware, you WILL need to relearn ideas if you're looking to use the CLI for any reason, DOS commands ARE NOT in the Linux shells, and there are several other conventions that are different. That said, you can easily get away with not using the CLI at all if you're looking for just using GUI applications.
2) This is subjective and depends on your workload. For instance, I installed Borderlands2 from Steam on both Windows and Ubuntu and noticed the game ran significantly better on Ubuntu than Windows, however other programs may not and YMMV. Honestly, it depends on what UI you pick, what you do with the system, and your system specs.
Linux OS for a new use
ShadowEO said:
1) It will be different to use, difficulty depends on how easily you pick up new user interface paradigms. There is no standardized UI among distributions, so you should pick one the you think you'll enjoy. Since you'd be new to Linux, I would suggest Xubuntu, or Ubuntu-Mate, as both have familiar-enough interfaces for Windows users who have never run a Linux system before. Beware, you WILL need to relearn ideas if you're looking to use the CLI for any reason, DOS commands ARE NOT in the Linux shells, and there are several other conventions that are different. That said, you can easily get away with not using the CLI at all if you're looking for just using GUI applications.
2) This is subjective and depends on your workload. For instance, I installed Borderlands2 from Steam on both Windows and Ubuntu and noticed the game ran significantly better on Ubuntu than Windows, however other programs may not and YMMV. Honestly, it depends on what UI you pick, what you do with the system, and your system specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you so much for your reply. I understand my point. Great
MINT and UBUNTU are good for new users. But If you have never had contact at the beginning will be a small haos but after a while it becomes great. The only drawback is the drivers sometimes with this problem. I use BackTrack and somehow it will stay longer. Has very useful tools )
I had forgotten to mention that if software packaging feels complex, you may wish to look into both Flatpak and AppImage, as both are alternative software packages that operate similarly to Windows executables (I guess a better parallel would be Apple's .app folder format).
Yes, Linux is faster
I will recommend you install Linux Mint or Ubuntu. Both are beginner friendly
In the world we're living in today, more and more alternatives to mainstream services should be used. Self-preservation should be a motto. Go with Ubuntu.
Good morning,
I am looking for a cheap laptop to start testing Linux, have any recommendations
bkdroid13 said:
Will it be difficult to use and understand Linux?
Will Linux be faster than Winodows 10?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
linux is faster than windows, uses more CPU and less RAM. Linux mint is the easiest to start with. You can even run windows programs with wine software if you don't find any linux alternative. but not all hardware manufactures support linux so you might either miss some features or the connected device might not work at all.
I recomed using Linux Mint or Ubuntu if you never used linux before
Kali Linux in Kali undercover mode. It looks exactly like Windows 10 and it's Debian based so Ubuntu commands and resources will work
I was in a similar situation about a year ago. I had played around with all sorts of Linux distros in virtual machines just to get a taste of each one. Some looked more like Windows but didn't act the same. Some looked completely foreign to me but behaved well. I kept coming back to Linux Mint. It's Ubuntu-based, contains more applications you need than Windows comes with, the apt package management system is my choice because it seems to make the most sense, it has great hardware support, and it is actively maintained. I have older hardware so I chose the Mate desktop environment. It runs great on my old hardware, and doesn't get the fan kicking up the way Windows does.
It's different than Windows, so you'll be Googling how to do this and that until you get the hang of it, but it's not that hard and it gets easier all the time. You won't regret learning how a new OS works!