Related
Hello,
Im currently writing an academic paper on android and openness in my master's programme. If all goes well, it will be submitted for a conference soon.
I'm looking for your opinions on having an android device open for operating system level modifications or not. As you may know, some phones have a signed bootloader such as the Motorola Milestone, t-mobile g2 (who made the phone reinstall stock OS when breached), and probably many others. Google however, make their devices open, even though they are sold as consumer devices. Many others do not bother to install circumvention mechanics.
Obviously, the people here will be biased towards allowing modification to the OS, therefore, i would like to get a discussion going, to discern what problems and possibilities you see in the long run for hardware manufacturers.
1. Does the possibility of making OS level modifications affect your willingness to purchase an android product? i.e. do you check if it can be modified before buying? And how much of an impact does it make on your desicion?
2. Why do you think hardware manufacturers put in measures to prevent custom android OS builds to be installed? Put on the corporate hat and try to see their strategy.
3. Do you think manufacturers have anything to gain by making devices open and free for modification, with source code for drivers and the like publically available?
I would really appericiate your opinions and discussion!
1. Does the possibility of making OS level modifications affect your willingness to purchase an android product? i.e. do you check if it can be modified before buying? And how much of an impact does it make on your desicion?
As a beginner app developer, this has yet to bother me. I do enjoy being able to add apps that add functionality to my phone but I haven't bothered to get down into the "root" area. So no I do not check nor does it impact my decision...I own a Samsung fascinate by the way
2. Why do you think hardware manufacturers put in measures to prevent custom android OS builds to be installed? Put on the corporate hat and try to see their strategy.
My opinion on measures to prevent changes is all about PR and performance. If enough people hacked a phone and the hack caused the phone to work below is ability then the only news report you will see is the phone sucks.
3. Do you think manufacturers have anything to gain by making devices open and free for modification, with source code for drivers and the like publically available?
This is also a give and take if question 2 is not of a concern to them, then its def a gain for the company and to all of the developers out there that do search for the best phone and nick pick around until they find it.
Are there enough of those kind of people out there to affect a companies buttom line. Maybe not yet but in another couple of years who knows.
1. Does the possibility of making OS level modifications affect your willingness to purchase an android product? i.e. do you check if it can be modified before buying? And how much of an impact does it make on your desicion?
It hasnt yet been a deciding factor on which device to get, primarily because sooner or later they all get cracked open.
2. Why do you think hardware manufacturers put in measures to prevent custom android OS builds to be installed? Put on the corporate hat and try to see their strategy.
One reason could be that the carriers demand it as a way to keep any revenue that they get from the preinstalled bloatware.
3. Do you think manufacturers have anything to gain by making devices open and free for modification, with source code for drivers and the like publically available?
The percentage of people that actually tinker in this area is very slim, so the manufacturers most likely don't see that as a big market opportunity.
Don't have any answers, but would like to read your paper when done...sounds interesting and a Masters Thesis is always fun to read! LOL
It's not a thesis, just a short article. I might make a survey for it but I need to ask the right questions.
Not all devices get fully customized, root is common, but in my phone for example it is not possible to load a custom kernel, as the bootloader checks for signed code (Motorola's secret key). There's been a massive uproar from the owners of the Milestone, as people didn't expect to be hustled like that when getting an android phone. The main problem is of course, that Motorola takes a long time to release updates. Even as of today, Froyo has still not been released for my phone by Motorola.
While I am not sure about it, I suspect Sony Ericsson X10i owners are in the same boat, and they will get a really rotten deal, seeing as 2.1 has been officially declared the last version the device will recieve. Yet, an enthusiast could release a perfectly fine version of 2.3 if the phone accepted custom firmware and he had access to drivers etc.
So basically, you buy a piece of hardware that is very capable, but The Company decides for you which software you could run.
Imagine if you bought a Windows Vista PC right before Windows 7 was released, and the only way you could get Windows 7 on it was if that particular PC manufacturer released an official update containing all it's bloatware and applications you don't want. Since the update needs to go through all kinds of verifications and approvals, it might be delayed for a half a year, or maybe 9 months, after the new OS release. Why do we accept this on our phones and tablets?
Hi,
1. Does the possibility of making OS level modifications affect your willingness to purchase an android product? i.e. do you check if it can be modified before buying? And how much of an impact does it make on your desicion?
For me personally, yes, most definately. I like to be able to get in and play, see how things work, change stuff. And i think custom ROMs IMO are a big drawcard of Android.
2. Why do you think hardware manufacturers put in measures to prevent custom android OS builds to be installed? Put on the corporate hat and try to see their strategy.
To try and ensure the device works as they want it to. Minimise support costs etc.
3. Do you think manufacturers have anything to gain by making devices open and free for modification, with source code for drivers and the like publically available?
Definately. Encourages improvement of existing features, and development of new stuff beyond the manufacturers initial product scope, which can be integrated in future products.
Android OS its self is an example of this - the developer community is writing apps, logging bugs, and contributing code to the benefit of future releases of Android, which in turn benefits device manufacturers.
- jc
my two cents
1. Does the possibility of making OS level modifications affect your willingness to purchase an android product? i.e. do you check if it can be modified before buying? And how much of an impact does it make on your decision?
>> Personally, I feel like the ability to modify my phone at the core level is something I as a power user can use to tailor my phone's experience in the way I need to make it the most efficient device it can be. This is especially necessary as my phone is my primary connectivity device (I really only use my laptop for things the phone just really isn't capable of handling yet, such as video conversion)
2. Why do you think hardware manufacturers put in measures to prevent custom android OS builds to be installed? Put on the corporate hat and try to see their strategy.
I think this is less the decision of the manufacturers and more of the carriers themselves. This really is because each device has to be tailored to be sold to the average user, rather than power users (read: 85-90% of people who will read this reply) and as a result is designed with an experience in mind. To the suits, anyone who take a phone that is supposed to have a specific experience in mind, and changes that, it becomes a different phone, and anyone who looks at that phone will see that. This means, TMo/HTC can't sell a G2, because everything that my office mates will see when they look at my phone is my android customizations, not a G2. my office mate, who is shopping for a phone, can get an android phone anywhere... but they can only get a /G2/ from TMo/HTC. Similarly, if I like my G2 experience, when i get a new phone, i will be more inclined to continue enjoying that experience with a G3, rather than buying any on sale android phone and making it just like my last one. Hence the need to have a G2 experience on every G2 phone. Just my 2 cents. I am not a businessman, lawyer, or doctor.
3. Do you think manufacturers have anything to gain by making devices open and free for modification, with source code for drivers and the like publically available?
Yes, but nowhere near as much as they can get by keeping their cards close to their hand. see my answer to number 2.
It looks like Marshmallow is following the usual pattern of Android "x.0" alpha release to the public, followed by "x.0.1" beta release with initial defect ('bug") corrections starting with Nexus beta testers (I.e. Nexus users in general).
Reading about the MM 6.0 problems on MXPE, I'm sitting out the 6.0 alpha testing on the sideline with LP 5.1.1. Most trouble-free phone I've had yet, and I don't yet need the only compelling feature I see with MM on the MXPE (T-Mobile Band 12 support).
Any noises yet about MM beyond 6.0.1? (I know I can look for this elsewhere too, but thinking maybe some of the XDA community may have inside info from the Android community.)
TIA...
The marshmallow update give me some new features and better battery life (though I do own the X Style, not pure). Unless you are dead set on being intentionally obtuse, then this isn't considered an alpha update.
Also the 6.0.1 update is quite minor, the largest change being some ART performance improvements, the rest is adding bands to the Nexus line and some emoji's: http://www.androidheadlines.com/2015/12/google-posts-android-6-0-1-changelog.html
I know the label "alpha" is not not the official label for something like 6.0. But with so many substantial defects, and multiple forthcoming revisions to correct those defects a certainty, that's really what it is IMO. Maybe "public release alpha" would be a better description, since pre-release revisions go through even more defect-ridden levels including pre-release alpha, prior to public release.
Similar situation with previous Android versions, and in fact most software foisted on the public these days (I'm looking at you, Microsoft and Apple). Look at Lollipop and the multiple public release revisions it took to iron out most of the substantial defects, finally, with 5.1.1.
6.0.1 is not just "...some ART performance improvements, the rest is adding bands to the Nexus line and some emoji's...", it also includes defect corrections. (Bluetooth, anyone?) And if the changelog doesn't list a significant number of defect corrections, that doesn't necessarily mean it is already polished at 6.0.1. The fragmented Android ecosystem and separation between Google, phone manufacturers, carriers, and users guarantees a plethora of various non-trivial defects in the ecosystem, many of which Google will address only slowly or even never for most phones.
For example, the memory leak defect in LP was not fixed until 5.1.1. How may revisions and months did that take? How many phones still run pre-5.5.1 with this defect?
One reason I bought the MXPE was the idea that it would be one of the first to get the updates. That turned out to be overly optimistic. It looks like Nexus is the only one still close enough to the source to get timely updates, and it also looks like Google is not pursuing Android defect corrections with any kind of urgency at all nowadays, maybe because the hardware ecosystem is becoming way too diverse to adequately support any more (or maybe because the profits roll in no matter what). Motorola phones, with the Moto alterations to Android, outsider status with carriers, and now hollowed-out Motorola support, appear to be no closer to adequate Android support from Google than any other non-Nexus phone.
"Obtuse"? A "bug" is a euphemism for a defect. Let's stop being obtuse, and call it what it is.
Any other info also appreciated.
You're being obtuse by insisting that we're all public alpha testers.
You obviously have no idea about software development, nor about Android Open Source development. Not your fault, but running your mouth is.
You bemoan the memory leak fix took several revisions to fix. So, you think that Google dedicated the whole team to fixing that one bug? What then? No other bugfixes or features are introduced in the meantime? The likely case is (and this is from experience) that bug took some revisions to fix, in the meantime, Google were also pushing ahead with other fixes. Regardless to what the uneducated (about SW development), throwing 15 developers onto one problem doesn't solve it any quicker. 5.0.1 came, adn 5.0.2 came, then 5.1 came in the meantime. While that memory leak was being worked on, more releases come fixing other things. Be grateful they didn't listen to you and leave it at 5.0 for several months while they fixed one issue.
Whatever bluetooth fixes that you think are in 6.0.1 are pure fantasy, because none exist in AOSP 6.0.1: http://aosp.changelog.to/android-6.0.0_r5-to-android-6.0.1_r1.html <-- That's the FULL changelog of commits between 6.0.0_r5 and 6.0.1_r1.
It is not Google's job to fix a problem in anything other than their own devices. At all. Google's job is to make AOSP run smoothly on Nexus devices and release the source. Samsung, HTC, LG, Motorola et al all take the source code, just like CM, AICP, Slim and the rest do, and make modifications for their devices, using the sources given to them by their hardware partners and themselves. So if BT works in Nexus devices, but not others, then it's not Google's problem (usually). An AOSP issue will persist several devices, including Nexii devices.
Google also have taken on the quite large undertaking of monthly security updates for their devices, which I can tell you will be taking up some of the development teams time (it's what, 3-4 months into that project?).
No software ever released on this planet comes without bugs and issues. This is software development. You can check the status of AOSP development here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/q/status:open and feel free to download, code and submit your own features.
MattBooth said:
You're being obtuse by insisting that we're all public alpha testers.
You obviously have no idea about software development, nor about Android Open Source development. Not your fault, but running your mouth is.
You bemoan the memory leak fix took several revisions to fix. So, you think that Google dedicated the whole team to fixing that one bug? What then? No other bugfixes or features are introduced in the meantime? The likely case is (and this is from experience) that bug took some revisions to fix, in the meantime, Google were also pushing ahead with other fixes. Regardless to what the uneducated (about SW development), throwing 15 developers onto one problem doesn't solve it any quicker. 5.0.1 came, adn 5.0.2 came, then 5.1 came in the meantime. While that memory leak was being worked on, more releases come fixing other things. Be grateful they didn't listen to you and leave it at 5.0 for several months while they fixed one issue.
Whatever bluetooth fixes that you think are in 6.0.1 are pure fantasy, because none exist in AOSP 6.0.1: http://aosp.changelog.to/android-6.0.0_r5-to-android-6.0.1_r1.html <-- That's the FULL changelog of commits between 6.0.0_r5 and 6.0.1_r1.
It is not Google's job to fix a problem in anything other than their own devices. At all. Google's job is to make AOSP run smoothly on Nexus devices and release the source. Samsung, HTC, LG, Motorola et al all take the source code, just like CM, AICP, Slim and the rest do, and make modifications for their devices, using the sources given to them by their hardware partners and themselves. So if BT works in Nexus devices, but not others, then it's not Google's problem (usually). An AOSP issue will persist several devices, including Nexii devices.
Google also have taken on the quite large undertaking of monthly security updates for their devices, which I can tell you will be taking up some of the development teams time (it's what, 3-4 months into that project?).
No software ever released on this planet comes without bugs and issues. This is software development. You can check the status of AOSP development here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/q/status:open and feel free to download, code and submit your own features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
t
No new or useful information there. Thanks anyway, despite the ad hominem. I guess that comes with the territory (forums).
Yep, the Google-Android-(independent hardware makers) ecosystem is seriously flawed. Too much disconnect between the OS owner (Google), the hardware makers, the carriers, and the customer. And the first three in the chain (not including the customer) have different incentives/disincentives, and there are a bazillion hardware variations, of course it is broken. We know all this.
Reminds me of the original PC/Windows mess. Except worse because the carriers interpose an additional dysfunctional layer hindering OS updates/support. (Before anyone says "just DIY with one of the many available ROMs, I started this "Q" thread about stock MM, not third party ROMs.)
Still hoping for any useful information on anything happening to fix the MM defects, to get an idea when it might be past public beta and worth installing to MXPE.
TIA...
Tinkerer_ said:
t
No new or useful information there. Thanks anyway, despite the ad hominem. I guess that comes with the territory (forums).
Yep, the Google-Android-(independent hardware makers) ecosystem is seriously flawed. Too much disconnect between the OS owner (Google), the hardware makers, the carriers, and the customer. And the first three in the chain (not including the customer) have different incentives/disincentives, and there are a bazillion hardware variations, of course it is broken. We know all this.
Reminds me of the original PC/Windows mess. Except worse because the carriers interpose an additional dysfunctional layer hindering OS updates/support. (Before anyone says "just DIY with one of the many available ROMs, I started this "Q" thread about stock MM, not third party ROMs.)
Still hoping for any useful information on anything happening to fix the MM defects, to get an idea when it might be past public beta and worth installing to MXPE.
TIA...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What ad hominem? Your uneducated state affects your ability to understand the nature of Android and software development. It's a perfectly legitimate response to your position. You lack the ability to understand and therefore your argument is flawed. I'm not attacking you, I actually tried to give you some insight into how it works, but you're not really interested and would rather insist on this "public beta" bull.
As far as fixing any "defects" you suppose, you haven't actually listed any so no-one is going to be able to help you with temporary work around without a list of what you feel is broken. I also showed you the changelog, so you can do your own homework to see if your supposed defects are fixed in 6.0.1.
The various hardware configurations doesn't even matter because Android is built to deal with it. So long as the hardware vendors of chips and modules support them properly and give out functioning binaries to OEM's, or proper source code, it's irrelevant. The exact opposite of what you said is true, Google has a very close relationship with it's partners (anyone signed up to their Google programs, to preinstall Google apps). The problem is carriers, who really shouldn't have a say in software on the phones, but that seems to be a chiefly North American problem.
Google doesn't need to have any connection to Android users as customers. Google does not sell Android, therefore you are not Google's customer unless you use a Nexus phone. Google sell the Google Experience, with the Nexus. You are Motorola's customer, and you are using Motorola's branched version of Android. Google doesn't owe Motorola any fixes or patches for their device. Motorola must maintain their own device tree and maintain their own relationships with their partners.
EDIT:
Also, Motorola's problem is resources. They have four version of the Moto X 2015 to deal with, three versions of the Moto X 2014, the new X Force, then the various versions of the G and E to deal with, along with two smart watches, and so forth. Their line up is increasing whist I imagine their development team is not. There was outrage (rightly so) when news broke that the Moto G 2015 wasn't getting the MM update, despite being a couple of months old, and Motorola listened and OTA's are rolling out.
I am asking if anyone can offer any info on anything being done to move toward MM revision with the many significant defects of 6.0 corrected. Read the forums, there are way too many defects with 6.0, it is patently a de facto public alpha, and we are tracking the usual pattern where it takes 3 to 5 revisions before an OS major rev is ironed out enough that upgrading will not cause more problems than it fixes.
There are always excuses made for why there are so many defects in software. There is a euphemism for "defect" everybody uses, "bug". Everyone has been making excuses for so long about shoddy workmanship and inadequate testing and correction of software, with the "bug" euphemism to minimize the reality that these are defects, that we are all just to suppose to accept systems ridden with faults without complaint. It's unacceptable. It can be done better. Part of why it doesn't get better is because everybody says "that's just the way it is, deal with it". With mountains of byzantine excuses and even ad hominem attacks (as here).
This thread was not started to start a tit for tat ad hominem back and forth, nor to post long essays detailing excuses for the pathetic status quo of the fragmented Android ecosystem with respect to defect causes and distributions. It was started looking for any info about work being done to fix the stock MM defects. Still seeking info.
TIA.
You should probably check the definition of ad hominem. There was no attack on you as a person, just pointing out that your uneducated state with regards to knowledge about software development affects your ability to call judgement on this.
But you haven't listened to a single word I've said and still maintain a shoddy position, so I would suggest to anyone else who reads this to simply ignore you as a troll.
Tinkerer_ said:
It looks like Marshmallow is following the usual pattern of Android "x.0" alpha release to the public, followed by "x.0.1" beta release with initial defect ('bug") corrections starting with Nexus beta testers (I.e. Nexus users in general).
Reading about the MM 6.0 problems on MXPE, I'm sitting out the 6.0 alpha testing on the sideline with LP 5.1.1. Most trouble-free phone I've had yet, and I don't yet need the only compelling feature I see with MM on the MXPE (T-Mobile Band 12 support).
Any noises yet about MM beyond 6.0.1? (I know I can look for this elsewhere too, but thinking maybe some of the XDA community may have inside info from the Android community.)
TIA...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we'll close this debate. There are no real "Android" insiders on XDA, so asking for update info which is privy to Google is perhaps somewhat futile.
On a related note, XDA have a few dedicated "Android Fora", such as this complete Category where non-device specific discussion and indeed conjecture takes place. Perhaps you could take a look there and see what transpires?
Thanks
so i recently finished updating my brothers Galaxy S5 to the latest CM13 nightly. while doing this i became furiously jealous. not of the phone but of the fact that its able to run CM. the following day while on my break from class i decided to launch one final attempt at getting custom roms to not only the mate7 but to hopefully all huawei devices.
as we all know, android is open source and free to use. if oems decide to use it on their hardware they are legally obligated to release all possible sources for any and all to use/inspect. huawei has continually refused to do so....... kinda.
so i bought my mate7 from an amazon merchant who imported it from china. why does this matter? on the US huawei site, one can purchase small range of huawe phones (the P8 lite, GX8 and Mate2). huawei has provided all sources for these phones. if you check their xda forums you can see that there are custom roms for all of these.
so, since i didnt buy my mate7 from an authorized US retailer, i have no legal recourse. while this sucks for me, that means that maybe someone in the EU or elsewhere will have luck. other countries have strict laws that protect consumers against OEMs.
all i need is someone to help out with a bit of research so that i/we can hopefully get huawei to comply. look at lenovo/motorola and their situation. i cant be the only one that despises not being able to fully control my device.
its not only a ui issue, its also a huge security issue. who's to say that china isnt spying on us through our devices?? maybe thats why huawei is so adamant on keeping their sources. either way, i think we should unite and give this a try because it looks like huawei might soon be the only OEM to produce top end phablets.
I am in Australia and got my mate 7 from Vodafone here, what do you need me to do to help?
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
snake65 said:
I am in Australia and got my mate 7 from Vodafone here, what do you need me to do to help?
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first of all.... THANK YOU!!! with that out of the way, the device must have a kirin processor (i know they all are but i have to make sure). since you purchased it from your local authorized dealer, then that means Vodafone and Huawei have a contract.
this is where we can all contribute. here in the US, service providers aren't legally obligated to provided updates to their phones. in some countries they are. there was mention of one country where consumers where legally obligated to 2 years of updates and some other perks.
in your case snake65, i would kindly suggest you start by researching if these laws apply to you in your country. secondly, start a dialogue with a Vodafone representative in a hope to getting the contact information of a huawei official.
i have been in contact with a few but because they are from the north america office and my device is not legally provided here they have refused to help me and by extent everyone else. legal threats wont work with the chinese branch but im hoping that will change in other countries.
im currently trying to get in touch with google over the matter but that is proving to be very difficult. the google product forums will be my next stop. i hope to get some more leads and hopefully more help. thanks again to any and all that can and are willing to help!
i was planning on posting a discussion thread regarding this topic in as many other huawei device subforums but since i still have a few more hours at work and finals this week, i would appreciate it if anyone could help out. maybe the mate 8, p8 forums. thanks to any and all who can help.
droidbot1337 said:
first of all.... THANK YOU!!! with that out of the way, the device must have a kirin processor (i know they all are but i have to make sure). since you purchased it from your local authorized dealer, then that means Vodafone and Huawei have a contract.
this is where we can all contribute. here in the US, service providers aren't legally obligated to provided updates to their phones. in some countries they are. there was mention of one country where consumers where legally obligated to 2 years of updates and some other perks.
in your case snake65, i would kindly suggest you start by researching if these laws apply to you in your country. secondly, start a dialogue with a Vodafone representative in a hope to getting the contact information of a huawei official.
i have been in contact with a few but because they are from the north america office and my device is not legally provided here they have refused to help me and by extent everyone else. legal threats wont work with the chinese branch but im hoping that will change in other countries.
im currently trying to get in touch with google over the matter but that is proving to be very difficult. the google product forums will be my next stop. i hope to get some more leads and hopefully more help. thanks again to any and all that can and are willing to help!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish I could help with the legal side of things, but I bought my device in Tanzania. Huawei does have an office here, however I SERIOUSLY doubt there are any laws here regarding open source software policies.
But I can't think that Google wouldn't be able to step in? Isn't the whole point of Android being open sourced? As far as I understand it (I've only read a few articles on his over the past year or so) is that the only sources that a company can withhold (if their device is running Android, of course) would be software / applications developed and legally owned by them, for example Samsung Pay and so on. Withholding kernel sources does not (once again, according to my knowledge) fall within the rules of using the Android platform. This might also only be applicable law in the US, but I really don't know.
If there are any French users, I understand they just opened up a massive office somewhere in France, in Paris if memory serves. Perhaps they could be helpful?
Isn't there a full kernel source on one of the site's. Is that all that's needed?
Is this any good.
http://www.emui.com/plugin.php?id=hwdownload&mod=detail&mid=97
Or this
http://emui.huawei.com/en/plugin.php?id=hwdownload&mod=detail&mid=74
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
snake65 said:
Isn't there a full kernel source on one of the site's. Is that all that's needed?
Is this any good.
http://www.emui.com/plugin.php?id=hwdownload&mod=detail&mid=97
Or this
http://emui.huawei.com/en/plugin.php?id=hwdownload&mod=detail&mid=74
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to what i have read and collected from the forum these are not the only things required to build a custom rom, someone mentioned there are other huawei pieces which they didn't release. Also these kernal sources are for kitkat and lolipop and npt for the marshmallow. In one thread i have read that the kernal sources for marshmallow have been released but its not compilable, so they have made some tweaks to make the kernal compilable. But they require more sources from huawei ("sources for magic bits from huawei") without which building any custom rom is not possible.
wow! thanks to everyone that is showing interest in this. @Scruffykid: that is indeed true. they are legally supposed to share all the sources for their devices. the north american branch of huawei has been doing this for their devices but those are few in number (4) and snapdragon soc based. this is why my attempts to convey my concerns with the north american branch has failed.
they dont see any solution because they are not responsible for my devices since its not technically a north american product. i have tried to get contact info from huawei so that i can start a dialogue but that has not been easy. their forums are also of no use. they keep on deleting my threads regarding the subject and i have been banned 4 times so im starting to reach my limit.
btw, it really irritates me how much people dont seem to care about this. android n will soon be upon us and i doubt we will get it but even if we do it will no doubt be a crippled mess. we really need to get huawei to comply for not just our benefit but them as well.
droidbot1337 said:
wow! thanks to everyone that is showing interest in this. @Scruffykid: that is indeed true. they are legally supposed to share all the sources for their devices. the north american branch of huawei has been doing this for their devices but those are few in number (4) and snapdragon soc based. this is why my attempts to convey my concerns with the north american branch has failed.
they dont see any solution because they are not responsible for my devices since its not technically a north american product. i have tried to get contact info from huawei so that i can start a dialogue but that has not been easy. their forums are also of no use. they keep on deleting my threads regarding the subject and i have been banned 4 times so im starting to reach my limit.
btw, it really irritates me how much people dont seem to care about this. android n will soon be upon us and i doubt we will get it but even if we do it will no doubt be a crippled mess. we really need to get huawei to comply for not just our benefit but them as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't say people don't care, but do you have any idea the resources you need to take legal action against Huawei?
If it bugs you enough it's just much quicker to switch brands I guess.
Sent using Tapatalk
I don't know why everyone is so desperate for custom ROMs anyway. They always have bugs and unless it's a Samsung touchwiz phone, people tend to go back to stock software rooted.
I have an oppo Find 7 which has a bunch of custom ROMs available and mine is still on oppo ColorOS and rooted.
My Mate 7 on Lollipop runs really nice and there's absolutely no need to even flash it to anything else.
RobboW said:
I don't know why everyone is so desperate for custom ROMs anyway. They always have bugs and unless it's a Samsung touchwiz phone, people tend to go back to stock software rooted.
I have an oppo Find 7 which has a bunch of custom ROMs available and mine is still on oppo ColorOS and rooted.
My Mate 7 on Lollipop runs really nice and there's absolutely no need to even flash it to anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then clearly my friend, this does not concern you. if your happy then keep emui, but many of us would rather have change. this is not a thread meant to justify our need for custom roms. also, eventually huawei will stop supporting devices. what then? just look at the mediapad x1, it was skipped for marshmallow after only having one update.
this is why sources are needed. no one is saying that you have to use costom roms and actually its not even about that. sure i would love cyanogenmod or omni rom but i would just be happy with aosp android and not that ****ed monstrosity that is emui.
so, to anyone else that wants to sing over their love for emui, please do so on your own thread and not here. this meant for those of us that want our moneys worth. btw, do some googling on huawei product reviews. they all feel the same overall. great hardware, **** software.
I'm all for someone to have a go at doing custom ROMs (if they were not buggy) and Huawei would do well to release all the software sources, especially now that they decided to be a global mobile device powerhouse rather than just a Chinese local. I do think you have zero chance of making an impact. It's a massive company and lets face it, Chinese do not care about what is right or wrong, or about international law. All they care about is making some money. The thing that would hit them is if people stop buying the product.
droidbot1337 said:
wow! thanks to everyone that is showing interest in this. @Scruffykid: that is indeed true. they are legally supposed to share all the sources for their devices. the north american branch of huawei has been doing this for their devices but those are few in number (4) and snapdragon soc based. this is why my attempts to convey my concerns with the north american branch has failed.
they dont see any solution because they are not responsible for my devices since its not technically a north american product. i have tried to get contact info from huawei so that i can start a dialogue but that has not been easy. their forums are also of no use. they keep on deleting my threads regarding the subject and i have been banned 4 times so im starting to reach my limit.
btw, it really irritates me how much people dont seem to care about this. android n will soon be upon us and i doubt we will get it but even if we do it will no doubt be a crippled mess. we really need to get huawei to comply for not just our benefit but them as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you should talk to the Google branch from the country in which the phone originated. My specific device (judging by the builds I receive during OTA updates) is from the Asian Pacific region, but obviously then there are European and Middle Eastern versions as well. Try getting in touch with a Google office there?
As @kta said though, taking actual legal action against Huawei will just be a waste of time. If Google can help by simply telling them to release the software (if it does indeed break the law/Google's rules, which it may not). At the end of the day just switching to a device that does have publicly available sources will be the cheapest and most hassle-free way to go.
kta said:
I wouldn't say people don't care, but do you have any idea the resources you need to take legal action against Huawei?
If it bugs you enough it's just much quicker to switch brands I guess.
Sent using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We should share this thread to other huawei device forums like mate 8 so that we gather more strength.
To all those who want to know more about Project Treble please use this thread to discuss about it.
What is Project Treble?
Ans. Treble is the most significant low-level change to the Android platform to date. To simplify heavily, it separates the vendor implementation from the Android framework in an effort to avoid lengthy waits for updates. . Let’s break things down a bit more:
The full update process to bring a new Android version to devices is a long and complex topic.
The “vendor” usually refers to silicon-manufacturers such as Qualcomm, but can also refer to the maker of any other proprietary hardware found in a device. The “device maker” or “OEM” usually needs to wait for the vendor to update their code so the proprietary hardware works with the Android OS framework in a newer version of Android.
However, what is happening with Project Treble is that Google is requiring that any vendor-specific code be separated from the Android OS framework and instead live in its own vendor implementation. Usually this means that there is now a separate /vendor partition on Treble-enabled smartphones that contains a bunch of HALs (Hardware Abstraction Layers).
Furthermore, vendors must implement code that lets the Android OS framework communicate with HALs in a standardized way. This is done via HIDL (HAL Interface Definition Language). With this in place, an OEM can work on an Android update without having to wait on vendors to update their HALs. Theoretically, this should speed up the entire Android update process as vendors can update their code at any time through the Play Store.
For indepth information check out this pagehttps://www.androidauthority.com/project-treble-818225/
Devices with Treble support:
- Essential PH-1
- Google Pixel
- Google Pixel XL
- HTC U11 Plus
- Huawei Honor 8 Pro
- Huawei Mate 9
- Huawei Mate 10 Pro
- Sony Xperia XZ1
- Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact
- Asus Zenfone 4 (ZE554KL)
- Honor V10
- Huawei P10/ P10 Plus
Devices which will ship with Android 8.0 Oreo will be Treble compatible by default.
Older devices will become treble compatible if the OEM creates a vendor partition via OTA update, like the Honor 8 Pro.
Custom Roms:
As of now @phhusson is working hard to make his AOSP rom boot as a fully functional rom on all the Treble supported devices, go check out the rom thread here https://forum.xda-developers.com/pr...evelopment/experimental-phh-treble-t3709659"]
Check Treble Compability
Open a terminal app on your device and simply type the following command:
getprop ro.treble.enabled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it returns a boolean value true, your device supports Treble and if false it doesn’t.
[NOTE: New devices with Treble support are launching so its not possible for me to update the supported device list, so they'll not make their name on my list, but you can surely ask about your device on the discussion thread]
My understanding of Treble is, from the *big picture* anyway, that the responsibility for hardware access shifts from Google to the individual device mfgs.
The hope for us is that new versions of Android can be distributed much more rapidly, because testing of new hardware (or changes to existing hdw) won't have to wait for the new OS to be done, and that the interface to the hdw will be separate from the OS.
Another hope would be that a devices 'life span' would increase? (or at least stay current longer).
AsItLies said:
My understanding of Treble is, from the *big picture* anyway, that the responsibility for hardware access shifts from Google to the individual device mfgs.
The hope for us is that new versions of Android can be distributed much more rapidly, because testing of new hardware (or changes to existing hdw) won't have to wait for the new OS to be done, and that the interface to the hdw will be separate from the OS.
Another hope would be that a devices 'life span' would increase? (or at least stay current longer).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Treble means separating the vendor source from the software source, the treble devices will have a separate vendor partition, in which the vendor source will be. Now the manufacturers will only require to make the Software bug free so that the user dosent face any problems in day to day usage. From @phhussons AOSP treble rom we can get a clear picture that by separating the vendor source, the Treble based AOSP roms will run on any Treble compatible device regardless of the SOC/hardware configuration.
venom928 said:
Treble means separating the vendor source from the software source, the treble devices will have a separate vendor partition, in which the vendor source will be. <snip>
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah yes that makes sense, it's not only the hardware source (vendor specific), it's also the vendors software (their mods and bloatware) that will be in the separate partition.
It really does sound as though this should speed up the time it takes for users to get updates of all kinds. It also seems pretty certain, non-Treble enabled devices will fall by the wayside. Doesn't seem there's any way around that?
AsItLies said:
Ah yes that makes sense, it's not only the hardware source (vendor specific), it's also the vendors software (their mods and bloatware) that will be in the separate partition.
It really does sound as though this should speed up the time it takes for users to get updates of all kinds. It also seems pretty certain, non-Treble enabled devices will fall by the wayside. Doesn't seem there's any way around that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For non-treble devices the only way is that the OEMs must release an OTA update which will create a separate Vendor partition, but OEMs won't do(except some recent flagships) that bcz they want sales of newer devices with Treble support. As far as time is concerned, suppose it takes 2-3months for an OEM to build a fully bug free update, but it will require 3-4weeks for the OEM to build that same update
venom928 said:
For non-treble devices the only way is that the OEMs must release an OTA update which will create a separate Vendor partition
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems the consensus is that mfg's won't risk bricking the phones by doing that kind of an OTA update? We'll see fairly soon what they'll do with the older devices.
It's good that google is calling the shots with this and is insisting new Oreo devices have it. It's bad though that devices just a few months old that cost mucho bucks may go without it.
AsItLies said:
Yes, it seems the consensus is that mfg's won't risk bricking the phones by doing that kind of an OTA update? We'll see fairly soon what they'll do with the older devices.
It's good that google is calling the shots with this and is insisting new Oreo devices have it. It's bad though that devices just a few months old that cost mucho bucks may go without it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The honor 8 pro got Treble via OTA because it was one of the best selling device, but some OEMs will prefer not to do that so that customers will shift to newer devices. Like OnePlus could have easily added Treble to atleast 5/5T but they thought of not doing it, just depends upon the OEM
venom928 said:
The honor 8 pro got Treble via OTA because it was one of the best selling device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, I did not know that, thanks. I better read more of the Treble threads to keep up to date
AsItLies said:
Wow, I did not know that, thanks. I better read more of the Treble threads to keep up to date
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep surely
Mate 9 as well
AsItLies said:
Wow, I did not know that, thanks. I better read more of the Treble threads to keep up to date
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mate 9 got treble as well with the Oreo update, major repartitioning as well.
revjamescarver said:
Mate 9 got treble as well with the Oreo update, major repartitioning as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mate 9 is in the list bro, check OP
revjamescarver said:
Mate 9 got treble as well with the Oreo update, major repartitioning as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks Neighbor. Huawei is rapidly moving to the top of my list of phone mfg to buy. It doesn't look like the kirin processors have much los support, but with treble... well, it seems previous prerequisites are being turned upside down.
For sure, when one evaluates (buying) a phone, many factors are relevant. But for most (if not all) of us, how long the phone will stay up to date is probably at the top of that list.
Hope the other mfg's follow Huawei's lead here, else we'll have a lot of recently mfg phones with outdated sftwr soon.
AsItLies said:
Thanks Neighbor. Huawei is rapidly moving to the top of my list of phone mfg to buy. It doesn't look like the kirin processors have much los support, but with treble... well, it seems previous prerequisites are being turned upside down.
For sure, when one evaluates (buying) a phone, many factors are relevant. But for most (if not all) of us, how long the phone will stay up to date is probably at the top of that list.
Hope the other mfg's follow Huawei's lead here, else we'll have a lot of recently mfg phones with outdated sftwr soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huawei is the 3rd most fastest growing OEM after Apple and Samsung. What stops me from buying a Honor Device is the Kirin SOC and apps like Google Camera port dosent work on the devices except devices with Snapdragon SOC, so will wait for a device with the specs like the Mi A1 and a 18:9 display
venom928 said:
Huawei is the 3rd most fastest growing OEM after Apple and Samsung. What stops me from buying a Honor Device is the Kirin SOC and apps like Google Camera port dosent work on the devices except devices with Snapdragon SOC, so will wait for a device with the specs like the Mi A1 and a 18:9 display
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good point. So even with Treble, which SOC (the phone has) will still be relevant in some respects. I have a G6 and think a wide angle lens is da bomb, but could easily do without all the glass 'bling'.
Kirin SoC
venom928 said:
Huawei is the 3rd most fastest growing OEM after Apple and Samsung. What stops me from buying a Honor Device is the Kirin SOC and apps like Google Camera port dosent work on the devices except devices with Snapdragon SOC, so will wait for a device with the specs like the Mi A1 and a 18:9 display
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing at all wrong with the Kirin SoC, performance is on par with the Qualcomm SoC, only real downfall is that Huawei doesn't sell the Kirin to other oems, otherwise it would be more widespread. The Kirin 970 with its built in NPU and and gigabit LTE modem is going to give the Qualcomm 835/845 a run for their money. Of course the port of the new Google camera app is not going to give you more than the basic functionality as it was written specifically for Google pixel devices (it doesn't give you all the features on older Google or snapdragon devices either), I installed the port on my mate 9 and it was acceptable for basic camera functions but no matter what you do you're never going to get a port of something written for another device to have the same features or performance as the stock app written for your device.
revjamescarver said:
Nothing at all wrong with the Kirin SoC, performance is on par with the Qualcomm SoC, only real downfall is that Huawei doesn't sell the Kirin to other oems, otherwise it would be more widespread. The Kirin 970 with its built in NPU and and gigabit LTE modem is going to give the Qualcomm 835/845 a run for their money. Of course the port of the new Google camera app is not going to give you more than the basic functionality as it was written specifically for Google pixel devices (it doesn't give you all the features on older Google or snapdragon devices either), I installed the port on my mate 9 and it was acceptable for basic camera functions but no matter what you do you're never going to get a port of something written for another device to have the same features or performance as the stock app written for your device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that the Kirin Processors are good, and the reason is Kirin is Huawei's home made processor so the pairing between Hardware and Software is perfectly optimisez for better performance and as far as Better Processing is concerned, after Apple Qualcomm holds the 2nd position no doubt, yeah in near future Kirin might surpass Qualcomm interms of performance no idea.
As far as the ported app is concerned I prefer stock android/custom roms over stock roms(MIUI/EMUI) and if someone ports the stock huawei camera for Los/RR running on Huawei devices itself, I'll surely go with a Kirin device but right now thats not available so after installing a custom rom I'll prefer Google camera app, if not the ported one, I'll go with the one available in Apkmirror, though this is my own preference as I'm addicted to using stock android and google apps suite, lets see how much development the Honor 7X gets, if it gets Treble support via OTA I'll go with it else the Mi A1 as of now is my 1st choice
I'm wondering, and the answer may be 'We don't know yet', but...
Many of us have used custom ROM's to avoid using an OEM's UI, bloatware, etc. Because Treble enabled phones will have a 'Vendor' partition (which will include these UI's etc), will that then mean the mfg's specific stuff can't really be (completely) removed the way an after market ROM does?
Of course, there's always ways of disabling mfg stuff, but Roms like Los just do it all in one fell swoop (much easier).
Do we know at this point how this will work with Treble?
Cheers and Happy New Year
AsItLies said:
I'm wondering, and the answer may be 'We don't know yet', but...
Many of us have used custom ROM's to avoid using an OEM's UI, bloatware, etc. Because Treble enabled phones will have a 'Vendor' partition (which will include these UI's etc), will that then mean the mfg's specific stuff can't really be (completely) removed the way an after market ROM does?
Of course, there's always ways of disabling mfg stuff, but Roms like Los just do it all in one fell swoop (much easier).
Do we know at this point how this will work with Treble?
Cheers and Happy New Year
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SOC source code will reside in the vendor partition, for example The Pixel XL has SD835 so the source code of the SOC will be there in itz Vendor partition. So if you are using a Treble enabled device such as the Huawei Mate 9 which has its own custom UI, if u flash a custom rom on it, the stock OS will get completely removed and the run ROM will run on it.
The Mgf's UI is a part of the system nd not of the vendor partition.
I am planning to buy Honor 7x, I found a thread on 7X forum which has Mount points and partition layout details for 7x. In the details, i can see below line, does this mean that phone supports Treble once updated to Oreo?
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Dec 24 10:46 vendor -> /dev/block/mmcblk0p47
Orignal thread link
https://forum.xda-developers.com/honor-7x/development/mount-partition-layout-profile-xml-t3727990
Thanks:good: in advance!!
indigo110 said:
I am planning to buy Honor 7x, I found a thread on 7X forum which has Mount points and partition layout details for 7x. In the details, i can see below line, does this mean that phone supports Treble once updated to Oreo?
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Dec 24 10:46 vendor -> /dev/block/mmcblk0p47
Orignal thread link
https://forum.xda-developers.com/honor-7x/development/mount-partition-layout-profile-xml-t3727990
Thanks:good: in advance!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is evident from past experiences that the Honor 7X might get Treble via OTA update as the case was with Honor 8 Pro. The Honor 7X's source code got released a few weeks ago and I got some info that the Open Kirin team will also support the 7X so I guess the Open Kirin team will also release a Treble supported rom
As seen here
https://www.reddit.com/r/LineageOS/...ect_trebel_devices/?utm_source=reddit-android
LineageOS team state that project treble is in its baby shoes and completely dependant on google to optimize it even more since as of now gsi rom requires certain adjustments for each device, so will project treble successed?
any1 has an insight please share.
I think it needs more adjustment. The kernel should be universal and updateable along with the OS, it's pretty universal as it is at the moment. Drivers should also be standard and updateable, at least for standard items. There should be a driver model where possible to support other devices, and any phone specific changes could be done through manufacturer supplied drivers. There's really no reason why it can't be done, it would be along the lines of how Windows works. Of course, it can be tailored to suit phones.
System updates should realistically come from Google, it would mean all phones and devices would be up to date with the latest security updates. The phone can also check with the manufacturer for specific updates. If Google keeps them apprised of any changes they can update their specific updates in time. This model would mean individual service testing for a new OS update etc wouldn't be a problem since it should at least be compliant with the base model.
Don't forget Google tracks down security leaks in other OS like Windows, which isn't even a direct competitor, and releases the security leak information if it isn't patched within 30? days. How many Android devices are updated with security patches within 30 days by the manufacturer? It's very much a double standard. Google really needs to think of an even more universal model like I just depicted for Android 10 Quinoa Slice (or whatever they call it).
Will Treble succeed? It's a step in the right direction, but needs more work. Not only should something like I just described be done, it should be made mandatory for all new devices. It doesn't mean custom versions are out, but custom versions would have to have OTA updates and be updated quickly along with the standard OS.
To say whether it succeeded or not, I think you'd first need to define what's its goal.
I still don't even know the answer as of today.
Some people say that the goal is to have a system image controlled and updated by Google.
But I don't see this happening any time soon. Google would need to test their GSIs on many devices, and they didn't even test P GSI over O-MR1 Pixels!
It seems to me that their goal was simply to make updates easier to OEMs. Considering Essential PH-1 getting Pie day-one, this might seem a success.
But we'll need to compare Oreo adoption rate to Pie's to confirm.
Oooh someone made a thread so i can moan cheers
The main problem with treble for me is that it's splintered between a plethora of devices, so one dev will release a treble rom and a multitude of device owners will flash it, each with their own subjective problems and issues, requests and wants.
And there lies the problem, it's difficult even when it's a dedicated rom thread for a particular device to get help at times.
So when you have a bunch of users talking about completely different devices you haven't got a hope in hell.
I think there should be branches to each thread for each specific device, that way help threads can be more linear rather than the chaos that it is at the moment.
Least that's my thoughts
My only rom i've flashed is RR and besides a few missing features, Fingerprint, Stereo and NFC i think it's brilliant.