Related
Check it out:
HTC Says Software Fix is Coming For Lousy Video Drivers
Is this real? I know it is only a software/driver fix, but it is better than not...
rumors, rumors and more rumors.
There are countless rumors for and against this claim. No one here knows for sure.
It looks to me like this thread will be yet another source of baseless rumors...
EDIT: Ah, that was supposed to be a link. Perhaps post the correct link to the article you are referring to, and we can discuss that. Right now, the link is http://HTC Says Software Fix is Coming For Lousy Video Drivers, which is obviously not a proper URL.
Dishe said:
rumors, rumors and more rumors.
There are countless rumors for and against this claim. No one here knows for sure.
It looks to me like this thread will be yet another source of baseless rumors...
EDIT: Ah, that was supposed to be a link. Perhaps post the correct link to the article you are referring to, and we can discuss that. Right now, the link is http://HTC Says Software Fix is Coming For Lousy Video Drivers, which is obviously not a proper URL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed... Here is the meat:
Some of our top engineers have investigated video performance on our devices and have discovered a fix that they claim will dramatically improve performance for common on-screen tasks like scrolling and the like. Their fix would help most of our recent touch-screen products including the Touch family of devices and TYTN II / Tilt, Mogul / XV6900. The update is in testing and we hope to release it soon. However this fix is not a new video driver to utilize hardware acceleration; it is a software optimization. Video drivers are a much more complicated issue that involves companies and engineers beyond HTC alone. We do not want to lead anyone to believe they should expect these. To explain why we are not releasing video acceleration instead of the optimization I offer you our official statement... "HTC DOES plan to offer software upgrades that will increase feature functionality, over the air wireless speeds and other enhancements for some of the phones being criticized, but we do not anticipate including any additional support for the video acceleration issues cited in customer complaints. It is important for customers to understand that bringing this functionality to market is not a trivial driver update and requires extensive software development and time. HTC will utilize hardware video acceleration like the ATI Imageon in many upcoming products. Our users have made it clear that they expect our products to offer an improved visual experience, and we have included this feedback into planning and development of future products. To address lingering questions about HTC's current MSM 7xxx devices, it is important to establish that a chipset like an MSM7xxx is a platform with a vast multitude of features that enable a wide range of devices with varied functionality. It is common that devices built on platforms like Qualcomm's will not enable every feature or function. In addition to making sure the required hardware is present, unlocking extended capabilities of chipsets like the MSM 7xxx requires in-depth and time consuming software development, complicated licensing negotiations, potential intellectual property negotiations, added licensing fees, and in the case of devices that are sold through operators, the desire of the operator to include the additional functionality. To make an informed decision about which handset suits them best, consumers should look at the product specification itself instead of using the underlying chipset specifications to define what the product could potentially become."
I was at this conference. Take a look at what is inside the Mogul, Vogue, etc (aka Convergennce platform) chipset: (The second half talks about the graphics capabilities)
http://brew.qualcomm.com/brew_bnry/pdf/events/brew_2005/t202_ligon_qualcomm.pdf
It is difficult to be angy at HTC, as just about every HW vendor does this: The retail channels and the manufacturers want product diversity, but Qualcomm can't design all that many chips (a full chip design is expenive), nor can they build a wide diversity of fab plants so they just disable parts or leave out drivers.
The question that no one can answer due to NDA's is who exactly is holding them back? I.e. it may be that Qualcomm didn't license the accelerator for this part from ATI or that HTC didn't license the rights to from Qualcomm.
Either way, a gdi/direct draw driver for the basics is not a massive undertaking. We aren't asking for DirectX 10 suport.
awandkk said:
To make an informed decision about which handset suits them best, consumers should look at the product specification itself instead of using the underlying chipset specifications to define what the product could potentially become."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is the thing.... when I looked at what specs were available to me when I bought my Mogul, they looked better than my Wing. I expected better video performance than a 2 year old phone. What they said sounds like back peddling.
Sounds to me like all they are going to do is a quick software optimization which they will call a video fix, when in reality, it has nothing to do with the video hardware inside the device.
They are just releasing this and calling it a "video fix" to get all the people like us who want full functionality to shut the .... up about it.
We has given up?
cstyle226 said:
We has given up?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most likely. One of those "believe it when you see it".
that pdf is such a teaser so my phone is as powerful as ps2 and i cant use it thats just messed up and you know all the hardware their cause its integrated.This sucks cause i never play games cause they always play horrible. htc is so responsible for the iphone gui blowing away any other phones.
Everytime I read mobile.engadget or any gadget site for that matter, I see posts "dogging" the Android operating system about how they are fragmented and certain apps/games won't work for older OS's/devices. Our EVOs have been out for almost 6 months now and this phone is still rock solid IMO but I wonder how fragmented (if at all) this OS is and what that means for this phone and future android devices. I'm literally asking cause I have no idea. And also what the heck is fragmented actually mean, cause all I get out of this is that the older Android devices just can't run the app or game because of the older/slower specs not necessarily because of the OS.
It would help if you posted the link. When you say fragmented, I would guess that this means that Android Users are divided between those that can run an application on said device and those that can't.
This is not any different that using M$ OS's as well. Not all applications will run on older Operating Systems. This is partly due to Hardware upgrades and partly due to marketing. If all software were reverse compatible then people would be less likely to upgrade their devices. Also the list of Drivers would get longer and longer as the Android Developers add phones to their database.
Apple only has what, 4 phones and 2 or 3 Ipod Touch's? And realistically most of the people that own these would have the 3rd or 4th Gen. Phone anyways. I think the "fragmentation" problem will exist on no matter what platform OS you are using, its just that Android is on sooooo many devices now ranging from Phones/TV and now its going into cars. It wouldn't surprise me to see it on X-box since they like to run Linux code.
So yeah.... Long story short its due to all of the different devices and the fact that no one keeps electronics for any length of time but IMHO Android will start to get a lot more life out of their electronics since the software is upgradeable like on a PC.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. We saw the same thing in the computer desktop arena. At one point you had Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, Win95, WinNT, and Win98 all running around at the same time. Going back even further all the different flavors of DOS. The PC industry survived so will Android. Eventually you will have to upgrade so fragmentation is pretty much a moot point. IMHO
My guess would be because there are phones running multiple versions of the OS such as 1.6/2.1/2.2. Some apps such as task killers will work on 1.6 and 2.1 but not 2.2+. Game compatibility seems more reliant on what that particular phone is capable of. Our phones can handle just about any game available whereas a G1 or MT3G is far more limited.
Sent from my HTC SUPERSONIC
Fragmentation refers to the fact that there are so many different versions of android the app developers have to code for. With the Iphone for example most everyone is at version 4.1 or 4.2. Android devices are being released with 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2 and soon 2.3. It makes it extremely hard to code and optimize apps across all versions. I foresee this has having no negative effects on our beloved EVO's for though.
People like to point out the fact that there are multiple android devices, and not all of them are on the newest os (like some of the sgs phones not having froyo, or the moment, or hero for example). unlike the iphone, where there is only one device of each generation, and when the update is released, everyone can get it.
My take on this is I like variety, just because I like my Evo doesn't mean it suits everyone. Just like there are a ton of people that consider a hardware keyboard a must have, yet I would rather not have one. Having to wait for HTC and Sprint to release the newest version to my phone, or wait for one of the amazing developers contributing their hard work and skill to port it for use is just fine with me. Would it be nice to get it the moment google pushes it out, probably, however I can almost bet that the Nexus line will always get first crack anyway. This is just my two cents, I hope the explanation helps.
Sent from my HTC SuperSonic 4G using the XDA app.
Brutal-Force said:
It would help if you posted the link. When you say fragmented, I would guess that this means that Android Users are divided between those that can run an application on said device and those that can't.
This is not any different that using M$ OS's as well. Not all applications will run on older Operating Systems. This is partly due to Hardware upgrades and partly due to marketing. If all software were reverse compatible then people would be less likely to upgrade their devices. Also the list of Drivers would get longer and longer as the Android Developers add phones to their database.
Apple only has what, 4 phones and 2 or 3 Ipod Touch's? And realistically most of the people that own these would have the 3rd or 4th Gen. Phone anyways. I think the "fragmentation" problem will exist on no matter what platform OS you are using, its just that Android is on sooooo many devices now ranging from Phones/TV and now its going into cars. It wouldn't surprise me to see it on X-box since they like to run Linux code.
So yeah.... Long story short its due to all of the different devices and the fact that no one keeps electronics for any length of time but IMHO Android will start to get a lot more life out of their electronics since the software is upgradeable like on a PC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
My two cents:
I think the "fragmentation" issue is primarily software related and is the fault of the manufacturers and service providers. That said, I think the most important issue is whether the fragmentation discourages developers from creating apps for Android.
As hardware and software advances there will always be features that will work on some phones and not work on others. This occurs with the iPhone too and is no surprise, however, Apple still rolls out new OS's to all phones so that the vast majority of users are on the same platform.
While Google has been releasing two versions of Android per year, it is the manufacturers and service providers who decide whether or not to roll out the updates and that seems to be a crapshoot. Since the manufacturers are not just tolling out vanilla Android, instead choosing to overlay their own UI on top (e.g. Touchwiz or Sense UI), this would require effort on their part to rework their UI to keep up with Android updates. And, sometimes they do, sometimes they don't... So, even though you have hardware in circulation perfectly capable of running newer versions of Android they don't because the manufacturers don't allow it.
I think most people would agree the number of quality apps in the iTunes store far exceeds the number of quality apps in the Android Market. However, Android has been outselling the iPhone for almost a year now. The question is: Is it the "fragmentation" keeping developers from porting their apps to Android? Or, is it something else? If it IS the fragmentation then I AM worried. I think 2011 is an important year for Android and I remain optimistic the Apps will come. It'll be interesting if they don't...
To Be Continued...
the evil fragmentation comes from low-end android phones also some developers not properly coding
Beejis said:
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
simple to answer i think, here's the thing, not every phone is going to be the same, just like not every carrier is the same, what i mean is that each manufacturer is going to have their own set of hardware and specs to follow, thus giving them an option to best choose the Android version that best suits the phone they are building.
Engadget is a huge iEverything fan, so they will help bash android and google just as much as Mr. duschbag, sorry i meant Job's, but you get the point, after all it was Jobs that first coined the whole android is fragmented war, however someone correct me if i'm wrong.
Besides if manufacturer were to listen to android about having a set standard then we might as well also be referred to as Apple, but since we're not under the dictatorship of Stevie, we don't have to worry about that.
Android fragmentation deals with both software and hardware.
Software-wise you have different phones having different Android versions -- OEMs seem to only support their phones for a year, sometimes even less, and sometimes not at all after it's release. You already see this problem with 1.6 vs 2.0 vs 2.1 vs 2.2; and as soon as Gingerbread appears you'll be seeing a sudden split between Android version share. This causes problems for developers because each Android version supports varying API levels, so some phones are inevitably left behind by developers.
Hardware-wise you have a lot of phones that are very different. You can have two phones of the same Android version and you'll still see app incompatibilities. Different CPUs, GPUs, cameras, etc., causes developers to work extra hard to make them all work; this sometimes leads them to drop support for some either because of the extra work it would take or because the hardware is just two low end. This is especially true with games and a reason why I think iOS/WP7 will be the leading mobile gaming platforms in a couple of years.
A lot of people think that Android Market will suddenly become the best once Android's market share inevitably over runs iOS; and I personally think it wont because of fragmentation. I don't think people understand just how expensive it is to develop and design an app that is of the top ~10% iOS quality -- it's in the 100's of thousands. Supporting Android is just that much more difficult for developers. Then there's the fact that a lot of the increasing market share is coming from low end phones which: 1) will probably suffer the worse from the fragmentation problem (incompatibilities with apps), and 2) would most likely not even invest into many paid apps anyway.
Beejis said:
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Intel did it, M$ did it, AMD did it, Nvidia did it and Apple is doing it now. The reason we use Android is so that Corporations don't MAKE us do it. Also, companies like M$, Intel and Nvidia have been pulled into court for things like this. In the end, they "open" back up, because thats what people want.
Brutal-Force said:
Intel did it, M$ did it, AMD did it, Nvidia did it and Apple is doing it now. The reason we use Android is so that Corporations don't MAKE us do it. Also, companies like M$, Intel and Nvidia have been pulled into court for things like this. In the end, they "open" back up, because thats what people want.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People want open? Really? People just want good phones.
Best example....
Most people upgrade their phones every two years. So it won't really matter so long in those two years we get at least one upgrade.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
novanosis85 said:
Best example....
Most people upgrade their phones every two years. So it won't really matter so long in those two years we get at least one upgrade.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you'd be okay rocking a 1.6 phone right now and for maybe another year?
This may have been an issue a year ago but if you check this link:
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
you can see that 77% of android devices are 2.1 and 2.2. Newer versions of the OS will hopefully decouple software updates from the actual service carrier and phone manufacturer, increasing this percentage even further.
Google makes available many guides for deploying your application and being able to support across all versions. Also, the sdk easily allows you to target the newest version and features while still maintaining portability to older OS versions.
Basically, unless you are developing some crazy cutting edge application then 'fragmentation' is not an issue, hardware or software. Using that as a dividing factor with regards to gauging the success of the operating system is by now a stretch from the truth.
elegantai said:
This may have been an issue a year ago but if you check this link:
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
you can see that 77% of android devices are 2.1 and 2.2. Newer versions of the OS will hopefully decouple software updates from the actual service carrier and phone manufacturer, increasing this percentage even further.
Google makes available many guides for deploying your application and being able to support across all versions. Also, the sdk easily allows you to target the newest version and features while still maintaining portability to older OS versions.
Basically, unless you are developing some crazy cutting edge application then 'fragmentation' is not an issue, hardware or software. Using that as a dividing factor with regards to gauging the success of the operating system is by now a stretch from the truth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd argue that the large share of 2.1/2.2 devices is due to the fact that Android has finally gotten popular and sales of current devices has really picked up. So a majority of phones are currently newer 2.x devices. Lets see how this is once 2.3 is released and OEMs fail to keep them up to date just as how it has been in the past.
That is one possibility, but if you look at the bottom of that page there is a stacked line graph representing the historical distribution over the past 6 months.
If you look at version 2.1 and compare its slope to 1.5/1.6 you can see that the older versions follow the same slope as the 2.1 slope, meaning that 2.1 phones were actually replacing physical phones running 1.5 and 1.6.
If you look at when 2.2 takes a steep upward slope you will not notice the same pattern of 2.1 and older following the slope of 2.2, which tells me that more people upgraded from 2.1 to 2.2.
So if this pattern holds, then hopefully it means phone manufactures are starting to realize the importance of providing newer operating systems for their devices. But as you said, we will see!
It's fragmented, but people wouldn't care if all the apps worked across all versions. That's really the only problem.
The average person does not care how many mflops their device scores in linpack or what their quadrant score is, they just want to play Angry Birds, and their phone they bought last year can't, and they aren't able to upgrade yet.
clamknuckle said:
The average person does not care how many mflops their device scores in linpack or what their quadrant score is, they just want to play Angry Birds, and their phone they bought last year can't, and they aren't able to upgrade yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
10char.
so just a thought , you guys know of any other new os for phones that are in development that look really promising?
With out the app market systems og Android, IPhone, and the Windows, I do not see how any OS Will grab a foothole for a long time.
boominz28 said:
so just a thought , you guys know of any other new os for phones that are in development that look really promising?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's bada, which appears to be stripped down android that samsung wants to start using for entry level "smart" phones.
MeeGo springs to mind as the only OS that isn't already out and has a chance to be a contender
The only two real possibilities might be WebOS and Meego, but even they probably have no real future unless they can encapsulate Android compatibility and offer something compelling that goes above and beyond it. WebOS might pull it off, but IMHO Meego is a lost cause, just because:
a) Nokia is its only real supporter,
b) Nokia has allowed itself to become almost completely irrelevant in America as both a brand name AND technology provider,
c) it's almost impossible IMHO for any hardware platform with basically zero mindshare in America to become more than a niche local product. America might be a small part of the global market in terms of units sold, but it's a very influential part of it. Nokia's fatal mistake was assuming that the sole value of the American market was the (minimal) revenue it made by selling phones to American carriers, while totally ignoring the staggering global influence of American media on the rest of the world. The outcome is something we've all seen... 5 years of "Smartphone Roundups" that didn't even mention the EXISTENCE of Nokia phones, and led to them becoming all but irrelevant among high end phone users even in their own home market: Europe. Nokia might try waving the flag and getting people to think Android is "too American"... and they'll fail, because it seems like at least half of Android's core developers are European (even if they live and work in Mountain View), and I don't think even Google will ever really be able to control Android's future global destiny once Chinese developers get tired of waiting for Google to fix things they care about passionately and just take matters into their own hands in ways that cause it to lose full compatibility with "mainstream" Android in ways that can't easily be reconciled.
It's not impossible that some other standard might emerge from China (unique in the sense that its domestic market is basically the same size as the entire rest of the world minus India and Africa, and most phones sold worldwide actually COME from China), but even in China, I'd put the smart money on either Android or a mostly-compatible fork of it. IMHO, China's contribution to our future happiness will be phones that are like PCs... more or less commodity hardware differentiated by speed, aesthetics, ergonomics, and niche peripherals that's perfectly happy running GoogleAndroid, a Chinese variant of Android, Windows*, or a slightly hacked & pirated copy of IOS. Phones sold by companies like Motorola and Samsung will be the equivalent of a micro-sized PC made by HP, sold at Wal Mart, ships with Windows, and nobody has ever successfully gotten Linux to work on because it uses some wacky proprietary video chipset that's undocumented and lacks drivers for anything besides the specific version of Windows that PC shipped with from the factory. Companies like Dell and HTC will sell phones intended for Android, but capable of being coaxed into other OS'es with a bit of work (like running Linux on a Dell Laptop today), and most of US at XDA will have phones designed and marketed by medium-sized companies that focus on trying to outdo each other with arms-race hardware based on bleeding-edge chip and circuit designs that looked good in cad, in the analyzer, and maybe even in the prototype... but inevitably have some major problem that didn't become obvious until 250,000 were made, sold, and bought by users who assumed the flakiness was due to rushed beta drivers instead of some deeper design flaw or premature attempt at cost-cutting that went a bit too far.
SBP Mobile Shell 5.0
Lets not forget android has only been out a few f years and its in its infant stage still. I think future development will blow away the competition once its fully established. The monopoly windows has on pcs is why people still haven't realized the advances of linux yet at the same time we are starting to see that break with some major pc companies shipping systems with linux pre loaded.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
To a degree, yes... but pervasive Windows hegemony is also part of the reason Linux could get a foothold in PCs at all. By being largely compatible with hardware capable of running Windows, PCs capable of running Windows ended up being capable of running Linux by default.
Even now, the fact that it's *possible* to run desktop Linux (KDE, Gnome, etc) on non-x86 hardware doesn't mean that your life won't be *way* more complicated if you insist on trying. Even x86-64 users get a pretty good taste of the sting that comes from deviating from the de-facto hardware norm.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Hi XDA-Samsung Users,
I've been a member of XDA since Jan last year. I went from owning a Nexus One to a Samsung Galaxy S i9000. The reason for the change was for the better specs and superior hardware of the Samsung Galaxy.
The phone is an incredible piece of machinery, but is severely hampered by the modifications that Samsung makes to the Android OS. I admit that the codec support within TouchWiz is impressive, but too much of the core framework of the phone is inefficient and sluggish.
Even using the latest release of unofficial firmware Samsung, Android 2.2.1 (JPY), there is still the occasional hang and the missing RAM (which is there somewhere, but not for user applications).
Samsung is mostly to blame, but there is also a quality control element that Google should be responsible for.
I have prepared an open letter that I sent to Android via Google Press and then forwarded on to Samsung for their reference. This were all through publicly available channels so will have to filter through customer service centers and the like.
I'm not expecting much, Google appears to use Amazon's customer service approach, "No customer service is good customer service".
But would like to post it here to hopefully get it out into the wilderness.
I tweeted it here http://twitter.com/#!/ibproud/status/27528781828722688
and would appreciate if you agreed with the content to retweet it. Hopefully it should give it a bit more weight.
It would be interesting to get the communities feedback on how mature they believe Android is.
Do they need to keep trying to make everyone happy or can they start to use the weight of their OS to get manufacturers to align the user experience?
Dear Android Team,
I am writing this letter to air my frustrations and to hopefully get some peace of mind that your strategy for Android will resolve some of the main issues plaguing the platform.
I have now been with Android for over 12 months. I used to be an iPhone user, but couldn’t stand the walled garden that Apple put me in. I couldn’t download directly to the phone, replace the messaging app or sync wirelessly. I went to Android because I wanted the freedom to use my phone more as a desktop replacement than as a phone/mp3 player.
When I joined the Android family (January 2010), I started with the Google Nexus One. I was so keen to get into the Android community I didn’t even wait for it to be on sale in Australia to get it, thus I hit eBay and bought it outright.
I was very pleased with the platform but could still see a few rough edges around the Operating System. It had the usability I was looking for but was lacking the polish I had grown use to with Apple. There was good news on the horizon with an Éclair update that would give the already beautiful phone a nudge in the right direction. As I was in Australia and the phone wasn’t here yet, I had to push the update through myself, after seeing how easy this was and getting the feeling of being a little phone hacker, I was hooked, I started preaching Android to the masses. Australia is still building momentum for the platform and it’s taking some time. Most of the major carriers stock between 4-6 Android devices, most of which are low end or outdated in the overseas markets.
I follow all the key players in the industry through Twitter and have a majority of Google News trackers picking up articles with android related words. I have also now converted my Wife to Android (HTC Desire Z, also not available in Aus) and I picked up the Samsung Galaxy S and gave my sister the Nexus One. The problem I face now is that I’ve run out of money and can’t go out and buy a new Android phone just to be up to date with the latest Android OS (Gingerbread), this would also be the case for most consumers. The Nexus S is so similar to my current hardware that I must be able to leverage the extra performance from the update.
But alas, we reach the major problem with the platform. Fragmentation. I’m not referring to the Fragmentation of the various app stores and apps available based on different OS versions but more to the Fragmentation of the OS based on the custom skins and manufacturer update cycles. The open platform that is closed at 2 levels, Manufactures and Carriers. I will continue to buy my phones outright as it gives me the freedom and flexibility to upgrade my plans as better ones become available. This always guarantees that I’m free from the bloatware that is preloaded on most Carrier bought phones and free from 1 of the barriers to the true AOSP experience. The next barrier is one that is running rampant in the interwebs rumour mill at the moment and that’s manufacturer updates and in my case I refer to Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy S phones come loaded with Android 2.1, most of them internationally are running Android 2.2 and just recently as select group of the devices is getting Android 2.2.1. This is now a month after Android 2.3 was released. For Samsung I would consider this largely negligent, considering they had the opportunity to work with Google to build a Google Experience Phone (Nexus S). The specs of this phone are so similar to the Galaxy range that a port shouldn’t be too difficult. I understand that there are a lot of constraints and dependencies in the development cycle that could cause delays as well as manufacturers agendas (mostly in unit sales). It is great that Samsung have sold so many devices globally but at a cost of the user experience as well as potential damages to long term retention.
I understand the Open nature of Android and the push to encourage manufacturers to put there own spin on the platform, but Android is getting bigger and more mature, it doesn’t need to be High school girl bending to the whims and peer pressure from the carriers and manufacturers.
There are a team of Devs in Germany who are working to port CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread) to Galaxy S i9000, but these guys have now spent over four months just trying to get through Samsungs drivers. The team didn’t start just to customise the phone but to actually make the phone work properly, I of course refer to the RFS lag issue and Samsungs modification to the framework that slowed it down. The goal of the team is to maximise the potential of the hardware and operating system.
It would be great to see some muscle from Google thrown into the mix, there doesn’t need to be requirements dictated, but maybe ethics encouraged.
There seems to be a few options here:
- Encourage device manufacturers to share their drivers, if it is too sensitive to share at least work with the community to help them do it themselves.
- Start to break down the way the platform is customised so that way the manufactures (Samsung/HTC/Motorola) skin the platform can sit a layer above the core code, thus be a quick implementation/customisation to get their skins working.
- Get each manufacturer to offer the AOSP experience to advanced users. This can be done through an agreement between the user and manufacture that states this will void the warranty and have its own terms and conditions.
- This last one is a long stretch, but how about taking all the manufacturers drivers into a repository, the way Windows do updates. When a new Android version is developed the drivers can be updated or incorporated and be packaged out through the Android SDK.
I may be completely off the mark. I’m not a developer and couldn’t pretend to know what effort is involved at any stage of the process, from building Android to rolling it out into the latest and greatest phone. The one thing I am though is an End User, a person that wants my phone to do more, to get close to being a desktop replacement.
Maybe I’m also being a bit idealistic.
I hope the Android platform continues to flourish and for it to become the Windows of the mobile era.
Sincerely,
Irwin Proud
E: [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really an excellent summary. Consider there're even more black sheeps out there. For example Sony Ericcson which ones recently made a statement like Android is their favourite Smartphone OS and left Symbian in Nokias hands.
But we found also the good ones like HTC, which every Manufacturer should have HTC as its Paragon concerning Android Software Development.
Great write-up; I agree 100%
I agree with your post fully, and concur that the Windows Phone 7 model for OS updates is more efficient, and strikes a happy medium between iOS and Android's approach to upgrades. However it is also more restrictive in terms of handset hardware limitations
I suppose the idea is that customers should vote with their wallets and buy from companies with good software and firmware support. The problem with that is a majority of phone users (android or otherwise) are technically savvy enough to take such support into consideration when looking at the latest and greatest fancy phone in a store. We could all buy the Nexus One or Nexus S only, but this too is restrictive to the customer as other phones offer more/different features
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
What Google should do?
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please allow me to politely disagree. Google can do a lot about this and they have done this also. When I say they have done this - I am talking about not having Market application on Android OSes which come on non-phone hardware.
Google should put similar restrictions for loosley coupled skins, upgradable drivers. I had been giving this a lot of thought lately. I will sum up my thoughts with above letter as above:-
i) Device manufacturer skinning - Google should mandate that it should be just another APK within AOSP and users should be given a choice to turn it off.
ii) Device Drivers - Google should mandate there should be a better way of installing device drivers - similar to what we have in MS Windows (MS Windows is an excellent model of how hardware device should be handled - this lead to the exponential growth Windows is enjoying now).
iii) Android OS Update - If Google can achieve the above two, then the choice to upgrade the OS should be at user discretion. Of course, Google should mandate that there is OTA availble as an option. And obviously this OTA would be served by Google, not by device manufacturers. This would also free up time, effort and cash spent by device manufacturers in upgrading the OS.
So this is in the best of interest of everybody.
These restrictions if put in place, would free us all from this phenomena of running outdated OS.
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Thank you so far for the feedback.
poundesville said:
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember most members of XDA would be a cut above the average user. The reason this letter was written the way it was, was to demonstrate that I am a typical end user. Although I would consider myself leaning slightly to the more advanced side I wrote the letter based on a very general experience of the platform, an experience a lot of consumers would go through.
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What am I trying to achieve with this letter?
I really don’t know, but it helps to just get the thoughts out there.
With approximately 300,000 activations daily, I don’t think Android sees the true reflection of how their platform is received.
When the Galaxy range of phones was released in the US, they would have been seen as the closest thing to an iPhone that non-AT&T customers could get. So sales and activations shouldn’t be seen as the indicator of clever consumers or consumers wanting an open platform, but of consumers who wanted an iPhone but for the various reasons didn’t want to go with AT&T.
Remember: The international Samsung Galaxy is the only Android phone I know of that looks more like an iPhone than any other phone.
What I would really like to see is, that annually google will release a major version of Android. So V1, V2, V3, etc…. the mobile manufacturers commit to any minor or incremental updates per major version. So if Google says they are releasing Android 2.4 then they are saying to the manufacturer that this version will also work on any phone that currently supports v2.1 to v2.3.
As more and more people move to smartphones and tablets, more and more will we see hackers, spammers, botnets and so on attempt to access our devices. If we can’t have the latest updates that close any open holes then our phones become a huge liability.
Pierreken said:
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure if Samsung has failed as such, but have put too much focus on unit sales rather than quality control and great user experience. They started releasing different iterations and modifications to the same phone without considering that each minor tweak to the hardware would mean more resources to develop updates and maintain each device.
I also agree that without Samsung I would know very little about linux filesystems, kernel and custom roms, but shouldn't all of these be more to push the phone above it's limits and not to just get it working properly?
There's nothing wrong with knowing the advanced stuff, however it shouldn't be a necessity.
The problem ironically is that Android is open source. I agree wit the letter above, but I can;t see how you can stop manufacturers doing what they want.
Also the Drivers being proprietary isn't going to change and device manufacturers aren't going to suddenly start releasing their closed driver sources.
Agreed Google should stand up and restrict the Skins to a single APK that can be removed, this would stop all the associated problems with HTC and Samsung skinning too deep in to the OS that it becomes impossible to remove it. The problem with that is, then any manufacturers APK will be installable on any phone. Which is something we know they don't want.
We already know Androids biggest downfall and so does Google. Fragmentation.
I believe once Google has the strong position they want and users demand Android when they buy a new phone, they will start to put their foot down and try to enforce standardisation across Manufacturers, but until they get to what they feel is that point, we're stuck.
Anyway much luck with the letter, I hope someone who matters get's to see it.
Logicalstep
Hi,
I am not sure how to ask this question yet i scribble a few words. Kindly ask questions if you are not clear. Thanks in advance.
We are doing a custom device for a industrial project. The project involves maintaining stock and functioning of electronic products using the USB API. The USB device(Our Product) and the android phone will be placed and provided to the end-user in an assembly. The end user sees the whole thing as a PDA/Device for use in industry.
I need suggestions for the following:
- The android Phone which we use must contain the following according to the Devs.
Android Version 2.2 or Higher.
Android Gingerbread 2.3 or higher is preferred.
- Touch Screen (Resistive or capacitive)
- Resolution 320 X 480 Pixels (Minimum)
- Screen-size 3 -4 Inches
- GPS or aGPS
- G-Sensor
- WiFi (any b/g/n or all)
- Internal Memory 512MB or higher
- RAM 384 MB or higher
- Processor 500 MHz or higher
- Battery 5 hrs or more usage time
- Partially assembled units with Display, Battery and Board.
- the outer case is not required (Optional)
- Bluetooth, GSM.. etc are necessarily required but if present can be used for any future projects.
Is there any board/ assembly unit or may be a mobile phone without the fancy housing or casing which we can buy for our project?
The BeagleBoard and AllGo boards already have android support but are on the expensive side.
Any help would be really appreciated.
Mods kindly help me to make this questions little more clear to the respected community.
Thank you.
As far as I can understand, you want something like DIY package for phone. I haven't heard about such thing, and even if it does exist - it's too expensive when compared to fully assembled phones. Basically what you described covers all functions of hi end PDA 3 years ago.
AFAIK you won't find resistive touchscreen phone with Android - it isn't really supported by AOSP.
I'd look for something like first Android HTCs, these were pretty good devices, aren't expensive now and meets your requirements I believe.
Unfortunately the cost to custom make something would be pretty high, and unless you are going to be selling these by the thousands, it will be cheaper to just buy a stock android phone.
The other problem is, Android devices have a specific set of requirements for both hardware and software before Google lets you put their os on it. (Not sure if that means they are "closed source" per-se, but I can't blame them for having minimum requirements, to at least keep up appearances.)
Have you considered using a Nexus S? It sounds like it would meet the requirements and could be modified if needed. Plus being a google dev phone android 2.3 was pretty much written for it.
DarthCaniac said:
The other problem is, Android devices have a specific set of requirements for both hardware and software before Google lets you put their os on it. (Not sure if that means they are "closed source" per-se, but I can't blame them for having minimum requirements, to at least keep up appearances.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're thinking of the Google Apps, the OS is opensource and can be put on anything. You would just need their approval for the android market, gmail, g maps, etc.
If you're really serious about this, and it's really industry sized, I suggest you fork out a little more money and get the boards and whatnot.
Is the price in 125$ is high for devkit with ARM, I mean Beagleboard? You could view Freescale's devkit imx53qsb. The price is 149$ for board and 99$ for touchscreen. Freescale support Android 2.x (Gingerbread) BSP, Ubuntu 10 BSP, WinCE(if you pay) BSP.
---------- Post added at 07:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 AM ----------
http://www.linaro.org/low-cost-development-boards/
The Samsung captivate has a 1ghz processor with 500 megs of ram. The device was sold for around $50 on contract. I've personally documented the heck out of it. All this boils down to a device which exceeds the specs you want. Has readily available parts, and is totally maintainable. I'd look at that device for a cheap platform. If you're looking for the development board you want the kit S5PC110... but I made that platform obsolete with UnBrickable Mod . I'd say reuse the available device boards and screens. Make a new case.
Rebellos said:
AFAIK you won't find resistive touchscreen phone with Android - it isn't really supported by AOSP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, on android-x86, we had to add tslib and hack framework/base to get resistive touchscreens to work.
http://git.android-x86.org/?p=platform/external/tslib.git;a=summary
http://git.android-x86.org/?p=platform/frameworks/base.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/donut-x86
http://git.android-x86.org/?p=platf...it;h=ff896c717ffdf746d979bdd50348235724832db5
The last two links are for donut and froyo, but could be ported forward for gingerbread or ics.
Hope that is helpful.
AdamOutler said:
The Samsung captivate has a 1ghz processor with 500 megs of ram. The device was sold for around $50 on contract. I've personally documented the heck out of it. All this boils down to a device which exceeds the specs you want. Has readily available parts, and is totally maintainable. I'd look at that device for a cheap platform. If you're looking for the development board you want the kit S5PC110... but I made that platform obsolete with UnBrickable Mod . I'd say reuse the available device boards and screens. Make a new case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 on this. Off the shelf hardware is probably best in this case
Since the hardware specs are so low, price is important and it looks like Android is more the OS than a necessary ecosystem you might look at some of the Chinese mfg's who are building droves of cheap android phones and tablets.
This wont be premier hardware but it should be cheap and meet your needs while allowing whatever quantity you think you'll need.
---------- Post added at 12:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 PM ----------
Rebellos said:
AFAIK you won't find resistive touchscreen phone with Android - it isn't really supported by AOSP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there have been several devices with resistive screens running android. They haven't been released from major OEM's and are fairly rare in the US but they are certainly supported. Unless you're shooting for a device that feels low end or just doesn't work all that well I'd recommend against them but they are an option.
Thank you... We finally settled for a 50$ phone.. It was cheap and has 3years service and replacement agreement with the manufacturer.. Without your suggestions I could have ordered those expensive development boards..
Sent from my HTC Wildfire using xda premium
anoopch said:
Thank you... We finally settled for a 50$ phone.. It was cheap and has 3years service and replacement agreement with the manufacturer..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, I am also looking for a similar device for an Industrial product. Need Blue Tooth and WifI but no battery. Can you share the source or help me get 2 pcs for trial and evaluation.
AdamOutler said:
The Samsung captivate has a 1ghz processor with 500 megs of ram. The device was sold for around $50 on contract. I've personally documented the heck out of it. All this boils down to a device which exceeds the specs you want. Has readily available parts, and is totally maintainable. I'd look at that device for a cheap platform. If you're looking for the development board you want the kit S5PC110... but I made that platform obsolete with UnBrickable Mod . I'd say reuse the available device boards and screens. Make a new case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Main problem with this for the stated purpose in the OP is that the Nexus S doesn't exactly have very strong USB HOST functionality. (Although while it mentions USB, it isn't in the explicit requirements???)
I think for the use described in question, a tablet is likely to be a better bet.
Another option would be Samsung's Galaxy Player series - They are basically Galaxy S devices minus the phone functionality.
However you might want to look into a ruggedized Android device...
Nice
Inviato dal mio Galaxy Nexus usando Tapatalk 2