Related
Just wanted your opinions on which dev has the best Onskreen Cornerstone build right now. I have installed both CM9 and Eos i personally prefer Eos' build they are doing a great job with the dev so far. Great job on both roms though. And are there any other roms with OSCS built in these are the only two im aware of.
I can deal with the minor bugs I really couldn't see my TF without OSCS now im spoiled
I'd personally love a completely stock with cornerstone and stock buttons. I like the Asus quick panel and soundset
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
I like the Team EOS better.
After using Cornerstone for a day, you cannot imagine life without it. I know the feeling.
jinsoku3g said:
I'd personally love a completely stock with cornerstone and stock buttons. I like the Asus quick panel and soundset
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is pretty much what I'm holding out for, a nice stock rom with cornerstone.
st0nedpenguin said:
This is pretty much what I'm holding out for, a nice stock rom with cornerstone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which can't happen right now because we ain't got no source code yet.
i flashed back to ARHD to many bugs for me to use as daily (especially now with the dock) waiting for a good solid CS build screen swapping would be cool if they release the source for that (not likely soon)
Here is some important information from the CEO of Onskreen directly to Diane Hackborn of Google, I've not read this on this site, I was directed here after an email with consumer relations with Onskreen while asking if the window-swappng option was going to be re-implemented..their reply was basically "no, and here is why; read this comment" so here is what they said..
(my emphasis)
hansmeet sethi - I am the CEO of Onskreen and felt it was about time we weighed in on the public discussion. To start off with, we have been impressed by the level of discussion on this thread on the topic of compatibility. We take it very seriously and are glad that the rest of the community do as well.
+Dianne Hackborn - Thanks for sharing specific concerns and we can appreciate their gravity and the need for a dialogue. However, outside of the implementation details perhaps some background will help. Onskreen saw an obvious need in the UX of Android on larger screen devices (that is our business after all), and we worked to address that with Cornerstone. During the process, we have invested heavily to respect Android's intentions and compatibility of the Frameworks you helped build. When you get a chance to review the code, you will see that we went out of our way to not introduce app requirements, leverage the patterns already used, and treat running Applications in a way that they are oblivious to the Cornerstone experience. We rejected many features along the way to optimize for compatibility. The result is a product that we are proud of, respects the Android project, that the user and mod communities are excited about, and OEMs love. And frankly, once you use a tablet with multi-tasking there is no going back. We are the first to admit the product is not perfect, but was at a point where we felt comfortable sharing with the community to use, help improve and polish. We see the goal of this conversation as a way to come to an agreement on some of the aspects of Compatibility and deliver multi-tasking on Android.
Now - a few of your concerns:
- Orientation - Good points, and we spent a ton of time thinking through the UX here. Cornerstone adheres to the desired orientation of the Application running in the Main Panel (and rotation of the device). Cornerstone restricts the user from opening an app that won't support all orientations in the Cornerstone panel, so there is not a case where an app running there is forced into an orientation the app developer did not intend to run in (try opening Angry Birds in the Cornerstone and you will see this). There is more here but I will leave it at that for the time being.
- Screen size changes - You point out the complexity of a changing screen size on an app. We agree and this is the reason that swapping panels (applications moving from the main area to the cornerstone or vice versa) was removed from the product. Apps at this point just aren't enforced to consider this, so Cornerstone imposing it on them would be incompatible and we don't (although we all sorely miss the feature). One area we are still considering is the Config of the main app. Logically this should change when the user minimizes/maximizes the Cornerstone, however the implementation is not doing that because of compatibility issues it would introduce. To be fully compliant we are aware that we will may have to remove the ability to minimize/maximize the Cornerstone (we will miss that feature too). Perhaps you have some suggestions here?
- ProcessRecord/ActivityThread Configurations - As you mentioned, while the ActivityStack was refactored out during your exploration, other inherent dependencies on a static Configuration do still exist. Some interesting features could be enabled by expanding this, but we didn't make these changes so that the Cornerstone codebase could more easily be used in customized Android trees of OEMs and others, as well as perhaps in upcoming Android releases.
- CDD Compliance - We take this one very seriously and you bring up good points. However, our intention is that each area (the main panel and cornerstone panels) be designed as CDD compliant sizes. That is not fully the case in the .85 release that was open sourced. As we made the switch to v4.0.3_r1 and the 1280x800 reference device (Xoom), we haven't made all these changes yet. It may require that some of the panels in certain orientations run in a pseudo compatibility mode similar to how the Android OS supports legacy apps already so that their config is CDD compliant and the UX is optimized.
- CTS - One test in CTS calls for any Activity that doesn't have the focus to be moved to the paused state. This is obviously not the case in Cornerstone as Activities do stay resumed when not having the focus and still are visible on the screen. Google could ding Cornerstone for that and in truth they would be technically correct. However this would be silly considering the nature of the test when applied to a real multi-tasked environment. That is not our call however.
In short, we think about the same problems you do and we believe in the product as well as maintaining the integrity of Android applications and devices. You of all people can appreciate the complexity in working with the Android framework in the way we have to get Cornerstone built, and to call it a fork is doing the design and engineering effort that went into it a disservice. We see the point of AOSP and contributions like Cornerstone to create a dialogue, come to agreement and add great features to the platform. To that end, we are more than happy to continue this conversation. Some of us are in the bay area and happy to drop by Google if you prefer.
hansmeet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats pretty cool but i will miss having the features im sure the community will implement our own twist on it though. to bad for the screen swapping though .
on a different note CM9 with cornerstone is moving along quite well a lot more stable ROM can i vote again lol
Cornerstone is just a placeholder for me until Windows 8 is released for tablets.
Definitely switching to Windows 8 unless Google adds to Android a comparable multitasking capability.
Just stock, I like stock ICS on TF101 (after reboot and pc connection issue removed...) and don't see any pro's in any other ROM for me...
Pretty much all of the concessions that they have or are discussing making to cornerstone are quickly removing the reason for having it at all. There are plenty of apps that already are not compatible with many devices and resolutions. Crippling a feature because you "can't" create new app requirements is silly. This is the area where google(and cornerstone) have the potential to destroy apple. As these devices get faster and bigger, you can't stick with the one app at a time paradigm.
I understand google is trying to remove the "fragmentation" but your OS can't evolve if that outweighs everything else.
gottahavit said:
Pretty much all of the concessions that they have or are discussing making to cornerstone are quickly removing the reason for having it at all. There are plenty of apps that already are not compatible with many devices and resolutions. Crippling a feature because you "can't" create new app requirements is silly. This is the area where google(and cornerstone) have the potential to destroy apple. As these devices get faster and bigger, you can't stick with the one app at a time paradigm.
I understand google is trying to remove the "fragmentation" but your OS can't evolve if that outweighs everything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google will add better multitasking to Android. They have to or they will lose to Windows 8.
Cornerstone is just not Google's answer to multitasking on Android. I bet Google has something better.
horndroid said:
Google will add better multitasking to Android. They have to or they will lose to Windows 8.
Cornerstone is just not Google's answer to multitasking on Android. I bet Google has something better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with windows 8 is that a windows tablet will always cost 100 dollars more than the same android tablet. Add to that the fact that you'll have to re-buy all your apps for ARM or Metro and they have a tough battle ahead in the consumer market.
Personally I Find Metro totally annoying on my 17" laptop, I think Microsoft is having an identity crisis with windows 8. The last thing I want on my laptop is forced full screen apps. Honestly Metro is a little to Android(ish) for what I would want on a tablet once they get a little more powerful and have better rez.
EDIT: I should qualify this with the fact that I am a die hard windows fan, I LOVE windows 7, prefer coding for windows over any other OS EVER, and absolutely hate MAC OS.
gottahavit said:
The problem with windows 8 is that a windows tablet will always cost 100 dollars more than the same android tablet. Add to that the fact that you'll have to re-buy all your apps for ARM or Metro and they have a tough battle ahead in the consumer market.
Personally I Find Metro totally annoying on my 17" laptop, I think Microsoft is having an identity crisis with windows 8. The last thing I want on my laptop is forced full screen apps. Honestly Metro is a little to Android(ish) for what I would want on a tablet once they get a little more powerful and have better rez.
EDIT: I should qualify this with the fact that I am a die hard windows fan, I LOVE windows 7, prefer coding for windows over any other OS EVER, and absolutely hate MAC OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care. All that matters is that Windows 8 will motivate Google to add some real multitasking capability to its Android OS. We all know how competitive Google is. They will do it, and it won't be Cornerstone. It will be something better.
horndroid said:
I don't care. All that matters is that Windows 8 will motivate Google to add some real multitasking capability to its Android OS. We all know how competitive Google is. They will do it, and it won't be Cornerstone. It will be something better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kinda, my point. have you used Windows 8 Multitasking? it looks too much like Honeycomb except they keep apps actually running. This is of course Metro, native apps are still good old windows. This isn't Microsoft putting out something for google to steal or envy, it's Microsoft going "OHHH everybody love android and IOS, they must all want "one app at a time" style OS.
Watch A Galaxy S2 Run Two Instances Of Android At The Same Time With New Experimental Virtualization Tech
Go ahead and file this one in the Super Cool Tech category. A Russian blog, Rozetked.ru, posted video of a Galaxy S2 running two copies of Android at the same time. The three-and-a-half minute video takes us through a demo switching between a pair of ROMs while playing music from both, proving that the hardware resources can be shared. After the audio segment, we are shown decently high frame rates on a 3D benchmarking app and Angry Birds. According to the team behind the project, running two concurrent instances of Android only takes about 10% off of battery life while the impact on system speed is negligible. Unfortunately, the voiceover and original subtitles are in Russian, but the automatic translation on YouTube does a passable job of clearing things up for the rest of us. (You may need to manually enable subtitles.)
The project comes from a team of students at the St. Petersburg University of Russian Academy of Sciences in collaboration with Parallels, a company well-known for its cloud computing and virtualization products. We reached out to Parallels, and they were happy to confirm the video's legitimacy.
I can assure you that this video states total truth. Indeed, Parallels has strong connection to the project evolvement. The technology’s been researched by group of students in Parallels Lab (it is our own educational laboratories in leading Russian Universities) at St. Petersburg University of Russian Academy of Sciences. To be specific, it is an experimental student project supervised by Parallels pros. The technology allows running multiple Android isolated environments on single Android device - effective and scalable with low overhead on virtualization. Yet it is still a technology with plans for further product development.
Best regards,
Yulia
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you can see, development is still in the early stages, meaning this might not be available as a product for quite a while. And when it does become a product, locked bootloaders and a wide variety of driver-related issues will probably make manual installation impractical for average users and expensive for the company to support. More likely, Parallels will license the software to OEMs like Samsung and HTC and bundle it with devices, or include it as part of a firmware update. Despite a few potential hurdles to get over, this advancement really is something to be excited about. The potential for virtualization in the mobile space is amazing, and may ultimately lead to the next revolution in how we use our devices.
Thanks, Denis Mukhin.
Rozetked.ru
Copy From Android Police
Yup...Finally you'd be able to have a work phone and a personal phone altogether within the same device. I wonder if this will finally start promoting better dual-sim phones.
its awesome may be soon we get this on our sgs2
Awesome
NOMIOMI said:
its awesome may be soon we get this on our sgs2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish for the best.... AWESOME :highfive:
I love Mozilla, but from what I've read it doesn't seem like there is really any point to Firefox OS.
Other than flaming me, could you please list some specifics as to why it's beneficial?
I've talked to a lot of people in person about it and they all seem to talk about potential to grow like Android. The main problem I see with this is that whereas Android filled an obvious gap in the market, Firefox OS is trying to carve a niche in now heavily fortified waters. The fact that Windows Mobile both says they'll be happy for 1% of the market, buys off Nokia and pays off devs to port apps, it should be a pretty clear sign this will be a major challenge for Mozilla when a company with a scrooge mcduck tower of cash is piling money on the issue and still getting limited results.
For the record, I'm going to install it on my of my old devices just to play around with it but in the meantime if anyone could pose a good argument for Firefox OS then I'd all ears. It'd be nice to know the time I'll spend setting it up is worth more than just curiosity and Mozilla sympathy.
Or just flame me and call me a noob
in my opinion, we definitely need firefox os. if it will be of any advantage for your user experience, is heavily dependent of its success. but it's the only smartphone os, that uses a really open approach. since most apps are shortcuts for browsing to a certain web page on your smartphone, basing the whole os on a browsing engine makes a lot of sense. and it makes lots of things easier for devs.
It seems promising to have a fully custoimizable and open source OS for low end phones. FOS could extend the lifetime of many phones which is a nice perspective instead of throwing away functional hardware.
FirefoxOS is:
Customisable, free
Hardware UN-requiring
This means that low end phones can use the fos because they don't need powerful hardware, and poorer people in countries like Brazil or Ghana can use modern phones for little price. It's not really meant for our newer phones high-end.
defender of the Open Web
Most important is that Firefox OS seems to be the most tangible defence to keep our Open Web environment from becoming closed. With Firefox OS, the millions of new users from Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Central / South America who are now just starting to buy low cost smart-phones will enjoy using, coding and Creating in Java and HTML 5, and be free to ignore 5.1 with its restrictions such as DRM.
Right now, the Web, Free and Open as we know it seems to be dying! Here's what Danny Obrien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote on October 2 (link to full article after the quote):-
… where you cannot cut and paste text; where your browser can’t “Save As…” an image; where the “allowed” uses of saved files are monitored beyond the browser; where JavaScript is sealed away in opaque tombs; and maybe even where we can no longer effectively “View Source” on some sites, is a very different Web from the one we have today. It’s a Web where user agents—browsers—must navigate a nest of enforced duties every time they visit a page.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-standards
I think why people should bother with B2G/Firefox OS is because it's not as complicated as Android - Android has a bunch of stuff that most of the time people won't even bother using so that's one benefit with B2G... Apart from the fact that it's not very hardware dependent, it's also simple and fast and aims at open source which Android seems to be lacking nowadays...
Because no Google there..
Sent from my GT-N5110 using xda app-developers app
Because we like to evolve, have choices and detest monopoly (imagineyou turning into an android ;p)
Becouse is extra
Sent from my GT-S5670 using xda app-developers app
No google, is the point!
I would love to see FireFox as an mobile /tablet platform, because it has given middleware which can run webapps. which i feel is far better than any other achievement unlike any other platform where middleware are heavy sometimes VM's to run app in UI. Firefox gives ability to run apps with PC like standards(HTML5, CSS3) etc.
i personally tested and best thing is there search is quite competing with google search for Android. try one .
Lot of other competeres try making webapps as there UI framework but fais may be because there inexperience, i am hoping Firefox with there vast knowledge can create a ecosystem where mobile ui/ PC ui will became synonyms. in that case nothing except a good webkit will solve all issues. till then we can wait.
~Amit
amorley said:
I love Mozilla, but from what I've read it doesn't seem like there is really any point to Firefox OS.
Other than flaming me, could you please list some specifics as to why it's beneficial?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In 2002 and 2003, the world was saying the same thing about Mozilla's browser. What's the point? IE 6 was pretty amazing (seriously!) when it came out and most Web developers I talked to were happy to have one target client. That sentiment was very different after 2005 when Firefox demonstrated to the world that the Web was stagnating. Most Web developers changed their tunes and started demanding Microsoft release newer versions with modern capabilities and erase IE 6 from the face of the Earth.
Mozilla is a non-profit dedicated to pushing the boundaries of what's possible with Web technology while putting users at the center of their computing experience. We are here with no other agenda. We're not trying to sell ads. We're not trying to sell hardware. We're not trying to grow subscribers. We're trying to put users in more control and to expand the possibilities for the best operating system ever created -- the Web.
That's enough reason for me.
- Asa
(15 year Mozilla veteran)
As a developer I love it because I don't need to code twice (at best) if I want my app to work on multiple devices, screen sizes, OSs, future OSs, etc. The WEB is the platform so my app can easily intercomunicate with other webapps regardless of their underlying technology, because the WEB has standards. This will result in better and rich apps with better and rich services WITHOUT being enslaved by any platform/SDK specifics.
FirefoxOS is the next common-sense step on mobile technology and I'm pretty sure we are going to see Boot2Webkit, Boot2Blink, from the other companies... and if we don't, we will see more companies following the same fate as Nokia, Microsoft...
amorley said:
I love Mozilla, but from what I've read it doesn't seem like there is really any point to Firefox OS.
Other than flaming me, could you please list some specifics as to why it's beneficial?
I've talked to a lot of people in person about it and they all seem to talk about potential to grow like Android. The main problem I see with this is that whereas Android filled an obvious gap in the market, Firefox OS is trying to carve a niche in now heavily fortified waters. The fact that Windows Mobile both says they'll be happy for 1% of the market, buys off Nokia and pays off devs to port apps, it should be a pretty clear sign this will be a major challenge for Mozilla when a company with a scrooge mcduck tower of cash is piling money on the issue and still getting limited results.
For the record, I'm going to install it on my of my old devices just to play around with it but in the meantime if anyone could pose a good argument for Firefox OS then I'd all ears. It'd be nice to know the time I'll spend setting it up is worth more than just curiosity and Mozilla sympathy.
Or just flame me and call me a noob
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Mozilla is helping build a internet the world needs and has been for years. Mozilla is also the most privacy focused company making software and has won awards backing that.
I've been trying hard to get our teams to develop for it but there doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm for it in China...
I have the Mozilla Flame phone and currently it's stable version is Firefox OS 2.0 and honestly, the improvements they've made make FFOS more unique and beneficial for the user. It's almost up to scratch, just a one or two releases and the features will be there. The speed already is there.
to be free from the grasps of a company who spys on your every move
As a user since version 1.0 on a ZTE Open, I have to say that I don't see a single compelling reason for an end-user to buy a FFXOS device, other than possibly price (debatable: many Android handsets fall into nearly the same price point, and the Lumia 520 is basically the same price as the ZTE Open C and better in every possible regard).
I get that it is an incredibly important vision that Mozilla have for the future of HTML5 and apps, but that matters most on the back end for developers and those who provide apps and services. I also understand that Mozilla have made great efforts to ensure that Open WebAPI is as painless as possible for developers to use, and that using very few lines of code, you can write powerful solutions. These are all fantastic things, and the web and technology in general stand to benefit massively from this.
However, from a purely end-user point of view, I find the UI/UX to be lagging severely behind every other platform, not to mention the relatively poor functionality of the stock apps. They do nothing other platforms don't do better.
The performance is abysmal, even on the Flame, and the battery life fluctuates wildly and does not impress me at all given my usage pattern.
I've filed endless amounts of suggestions for expansion and improvements to UI/UX and 99% of the time am met with blind reticence.
The feel I get is not that this is a platform for everyone by everyone, but a platform for a very small subset of the population (which if you analyze what the platform ships with stock and how they market it, Mozilla seems to have no idea who this population is) controlled by a team with a death-grip on it, fingers in their ears, blindfolds on, chanting "This is perfect, this is perfect, you don't know what you're talking about!".
People's tepid response to the platform and its slow adoption rate should stand as testimony to the fact that the platform is far from perfect.
****, the keyboard STILL sucks complete ass even on v2.2 nightly. Something as fundamental as the primary ****ing input method still isn't even done half-assed correct, so what do you think the rest of the experience is like?
Such a frustrating platform... I really wanted this to be the Phoenix that takes the principles and ideals of webOS from the ashes and sets the world of technology on fire, but it looks more like a poof of smoke at this point.
I'll continue daily-driving the Flame, I'll continue filing bugs and suggestions, and I'll likely continue to pull my hair out in frustration. Hopefully at some point all of my frustration will amount to something positive and I'll be able to whole-heartedly endorse this platform to other end-users and evangelize for it. Currently, that is not even a remote possibility.
Because we should be more principled and not support companies that pay no tax.
I wonder how many people are actually using FFOS as their only phone.
I have a ZTE Open, I am downloading and compiling FFOS builds once every few weeks, hack around just for fun.
But I have an Android for my daily use.
I have the 2012 Note 10.1 for personal use and have come to the unfortunate resolution that Android just isn't going to cut it from a business perspective. I am not putting the full blame on either the manufacturers or Android itself but without timely updates to a specific platform, I can not justify the use of these in a production environment. There is no way company can justify replacing their hardware yearly, or regularly, in order to get the latest features and security fixes that are provided in updates. Ignoring the additional features for the time being, from a security stand point there has to be a way to patch the devices in a timely manner. The additional features being provided drives the developers to migrate to the newer operating systems and leaving the old systems behind. A lot of times this creates a huge disadvantage in the fact you can run a particular application on one Android device but is unsupported on another.
Now to be fair. I am focusing on Android in this post but have tested Microsoft and iPad devices as well. All have certain advantages and disadvantages but the clear loser so far has been Android. If Android is going to survive in the business world, the manufacturers are going to have to step up and maintain their products actively for at least the full two years of their life expectancy.Android itself will have to hold the manufacturers accountable for keeping their devices maintained. From a personal use perspective, I think it is a great platform and love my Note 10.1. Would I like to see it get updated, I would love to see 4.4.2 on the device to allow me to run application I need that are no longer compatible with 4.1.2. However, I require vulnerability patches in a timely manner and that just isn't happening.
My last job had hired a full time developer to build a custom ROM and patch or update when needed for all the tablets being used on the floor. This approach worked for them because there was only one model in use across all departments.
You should blame Samsung for the late major update for GT-N80XX.
Android actively pushing regular update (minor & major).
Actually Samsung also pushing regular update, but it's only 1 major update (ICS to JB) & some minor/security updates.
If a business used the nexus tablets, they wouldn't have this problem.
theatomizer90 said:
If a business used the nexus tablets, they wouldn't have this problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not necessarily true. Most current android version is 4.4.4 while my N7 LTE still sits at 4.4.3 with no update even spoken of. So if a business has data enabled tablets, they're still behind current version.
What OP posted doesn't really apply to large businesses. Between KNOX and other third party equivalents sensitive data is sandboxed and doesn't rely on the core B2C version of the OS to protect it. As much as Google may see Android's potential in the business environment no one I know in IT at a bunch of Fortune 1K companies is looking at mobile OS's (either Android or iOS) to replace desktop/laptops as "standard" issue. Tablet and smartphone apps have niche opportunities (commercial pilot manuals and logs, flight attendant passenger service tools, gate agent/hotel staff roaming terminals, sales people inventory access, remote staff automated forms, etc.) but migrating the entire enterprise to mobile architecture just doesn't make sense. So Android can't lose anything it never had and, outside Google's wishes, isn't seriously considered for. The lack of Chromebook adoption by the enterprise demonstrates their disinterest.
BarryH_GEG said:
What OP posted doesn't really apply to large businesses. Between KNOX and other third party equivalents sensitive data is sandboxed and doesn't rely on the core B2C version of the OS to protect it. As much as Google may see Android's potential in the business environment no one I know in IT at a bunch of Fortune 1K companies is looking at mobile OS's (either Android or iOS) to replace desktop/laptops as "standard" issue. Tablet and smartphone apps have niche opportunities (commercial pilot manuals and logs, flight attendant passenger service tools, gate agent/hotel staff roaming terminals, sales people inventory access, remote staff automated forms, etc.) but migrating the entire enterprise to mobile architecture just doesn't make sense. So Android can't lose anything it never had and, outside Google's wishes, isn't seriously considered for. The lack of Chromebook adoption by the enterprise demonstrates their disinterest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure if I totally agree with the application only being a niche market. I work for a call center and find that the tablets are becoming an indispensable tool. We have people walking the floor with these devices and using them to keep track of various statistics as well as using them to report potential issues. The ability to pull up data about current client information to respond in an almost instant manner has shaped things drastically. Having a sandbox is really great for protecting certain information, such as email, etc.. but can not protect the device data in flux, such as web browser content. If the system is compromised and access to the file system is obtained then all the data previously obtained becomes available to the attacker. Some measure can be made such as requiring Citrix as your primary form of connectivity but you are only pushing the security back to another device. The focus of this article was to point out the shortcomings of the this tablet as it pertains to the lack of updates.
Don't get me wrong, I truly love Android and will continue to use it as a personal device. However, there is no way I can risk releasing these devices into a production environment without the proper support. And yes, I blame the manufacturer for release and forget, and I blame Android for not enforcing the manufactures to keep these update. It is crucial to both parties to work together and produce something that is not just desirable but maintained for a reasonable amount of time. If Android could come up with a way to provide updates to devices directly and bypass the manufacturer they would have an unbeatable platform.
Zeab said:
Not sure if I totally agree with the application only being a niche market. I work for a call center and find that the tablets are becoming an indispensable tool. We have people walking the floor with these devices and using them to keep track of various statistics as well as using them to report potential issues. The ability to pull up data about current client information to respond in an almost instant manner has shaped things drastically. Having a sandbox is really great for protecting certain information, such as email, etc.. but can not protect the device data in flux, such as web browser content. If the system is compromised and access to the file system is obtained then all the data previously obtained becomes available to the attacker. Some measure can be made such as requiring Citrix as your primary form of connectivity but you are only pushing the security back to another device. The focus of this article was to point out the shortcomings of the this tablet as it pertains to the lack of updates.
Don't get me wrong, I truly love Android and will continue to use it as a personal device. However, there is no way I can risk releasing these devices into a production environment without the proper support. And yes, I blame the manufacturer for release and forget, and I blame Android for not enforcing the manufactures to keep these update. It is crucial to both parties to work together and produce something that is not just desirable but maintained for a reasonable amount of time. If Android could come up with a way to provide updates to devices directly and bypass the manufacturer they would have an unbeatable platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anytime a serious security breach that can be used from without to effect changes on a device have come to light I have seen updates come out on all my tablets and phones, which is blessedly rare. Android does not operate in the way you are thinking. There is no need to constantly shove out security updates like windows. The system is pretty well secure unless you unsecure it yourself, new versions of the OS usually just add functions, however there is a current (when is there not?) RUMOR of a adobe bug on all versions of android lower than 4.0. Personally I still prefere windows for business simply because of ease of function and with baytrail cpu's and even more promising hardware coming this year I find no reason not to use windows for hard business needs if your business can benefit from tablet use. There are a plethora of cheap windows tablets coming and the current hp omni 10 is powerful enough to suit any light tablet buisness needs for just 299.00 if your business needs more power pay the premium for a surface pro with a full on i3,5,7 cpu fully capable of doing the work of a high end laptop. All that said, I feel Android is if anything more secure than a windows machine. Nothing comes in unless you invite it. Updates not needed until such time as Android can add base functionality in the realm of windows 7, and it is close imho.
Check the trends
Have to agree with Zeab. The university I work for is now supporting apple mobile devices but not android. And despite my having pressured for some support, what support is was for android devices is disappearing. Why ?
Android from one device to the next is different enough to make support difficult if not impossible. Providing advice on connections to secure servers and use of common software falls foul of the same issue.
Android device manufacturers have attempted to sequester their market by creating difference, but all they'll achieve is failure. Add to that the early obsolescence they have engineered and android is dying, even as its market share grows!
We now as a family have windows, apple and android devices. If I include TVs and media devices the list lengthens. The only option that provides continuity of operating system and software, and longer term support with updates is Apple. Given the way Microsoft has gone off the rails with windows 8.1 (I really do believe that OSs should make my computing experience easier, not harder), I think we will be going Apple in the future.
Maybe I'm the only one, but I am a long-time fan of the now-dead WebOS, (formerly PalmOS). Back in 2011-2013, I probably had 6 or 7 different WebOS phones, and found the hardware and the software to be superior in user experience than any others. The problem was that that was the big explosion era for Android and IOS, so WebOS got pretty overshadowed, and HP, (the new owners at the time), decided to axe any further development, and ended up selling the OS to LG, who has developed it further for TVs and stuff, (I don't have all of the technical details straight, but that's a superficial summary). Anyway, recently, out of nostalgia, I pulled out an old Veer, and bought a new Pre 2, and went back into the WebOS forums realm to get a fix of my old favorite, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the work of the community to keep WebOS alive. There is an archive of hundreds of app files available on ftp, (all abandonware available for free - even the paid apps from HP catalog), ongoing development of apps and patches to keep WebOS working with all of the changes in technology, (including updates to Preware - the unofficial dev app catalog, started way back then), and LuneOS, an open developers version of WebOS, which can be built for modern phones, and which was just updated - https://pivotce.com
I think the XC is a perfect candidate for LuneOS, being small, currently affordable, (one upside to the short lifespan of official support), and having pretty good specs. Plus, there's already plenty of foundational development needed for supporting porting, (Lineage, AOSP, and even a partly-working Halium - https://github.com/Halium/projectmanagement/issues/103). For anyone familiar with building/porting, the work needed to be done to build LuneOS for XC is minimal.
My problem(s): I am not familiar with building/porting. I am happy to test and learn, but I also currently don't have any regular access to a Linux computer, and even if I did, it would take me a looonng time to figure out from scratch what someone else could probably do in no time, since all of the elements are in place, (I checked with WebOS devs, and they said with what's available, building for XC is '... mostly a matter of configuration').
So, anybody out there with an XC want to do a build for us?
@harryharryharry @oshmoun ...?
Sorry, I'm not even remotely close to having the capabilities to pull a stunt like this, I think I'm currently in the same boat as you (minus the linux part)
Having said that, here's hoping someone more knowledgeable jumps in and picks up this interesting project. I'm willing and able to test and provide feedback as well of course.