Related
To whom it may concern...
After this announcement from Sony Ericsson...
In developer forums worldwide, there is a huge activity and engagement in the open Android™ ecosystem. And we also know there are a lot of independent developers out there who are creating their own custom ROMs or modifying the kernel. The Sony Ericsson Developer program is following this community with great interest, and even though Sony Ericsson is not supporting all the activities by independent developers, we recognize that custom ROMs are a part of the Android ecosystem.
We therefore decided to assist a group of developers called “FreeXperia”. The overall open developer community is important to Sony Ericsson, and we hope to learn from it, and share knowledge ourselves. The FreeXperia group was supported with devices and technical know-how, and they are now in the process of creating custom ROMs based on the CyanogenMod for several of our latest Xperia™ phones, including Xperia™ PLAY and Xperia™ arc.
Karl-Johan Dahlström, Head of Developer Relations, explains more after the jump.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
- Sony Ericsson supports independent developers
...could this be an opportunity for XDA to contact the big names such as S.E, HTC, Samsung etc to see if it would be possible to work with them in one way or another because lets face it, the greatest developers in the World are here at XDA. One thought that sprung to mind was that they would be able to donate handsets for the Recognized Developers here to work with, or maybe release Special Edition Roms for XDA members that give built in options for things like Rooting and Boot Loader unlocking, CyanogenMod, etc etc etc.
Those are things most Android users want as standard from what I've seen in the Arc & X10 forum, and given how much better the Devs here at XDA can make a device, in the interests of progression for the Mobile industry in general it could be a revolutionary step.
Interesting Thought, but this announcement probably won't mean that Sony will be partnering with XDA tomorrow.
There is a lot of legal, and corporate bull to weed through. Are the owners of XDA doing something like this? IMHO more than likely, but we won't know about it until its final and ready to happen.
Would like to see more companies jump on board with similar things.
First of all, don't confuse S-E's attempt to get some free PR to prop up their flagging sales, with a genuine interest at working together with hobby-developers.
Secondly, you're sorely mistaken if, as skillful as the devs here are, you really think that "the greatest developers in the world are at XDA" or that they can ever replace the professional coders and programmers that make the ROMs for HTC, Samsung, et al.
There's a big difference between the ROMs that hobby-developers produce for enthusiasts here on XDA, enthusiasts who are willing to live with occasional FCs and performance issues, and the ROMS that go into devices that have to approved and used by hundreds of carriers.
Don't forget that when developers from XDA occasionally pull something off that the manufacturers either couldn't or wouldn't do, it's because they use tricks and methods that could never be accepted on a production-ROM.
(For example: use of ext3 or ext4 file systems, cache2SD and many others)
vszulc said:
First of all, don't confuse S-E's attempt to get some free PR to prop up their flagging sales, with a genuine interest at working together with hobby-developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well they've made the statement so time will tell I guess, but it wouldn't hurt to make contact and see.
vszulc said:
Secondly, you're sorely mistaken if, as skillful as the devs here are, you really think that "the greatest developers in the world are at XDA" or that they can ever replace the professional coders and programmers that make the ROMs for HTC, Samsung, et al.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? Perhaps I put too much weight in to the skills of the true devs here then.
vszulc said:
There's a big difference between the ROMs that hobby-developers produce for enthusiasts here on XDA, enthusiasts who are willing to live with occasional FCs and performance issues, and the ROMS that go into devices that have to approved and used by hundreds of carriers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No doubt, but that's the point, most people join XDA for a reason, mine was to debrand and change as much of the stock FW as possible regardless of the risks, and I'd prefer the manufacturers to be a little more interested in what I want rather than what the carriers assume I want. I've only had the Xperia X10 and now the Xperia Arc while I've been a member here, and having seen how far the FreeXperia team has come, and having just read this...
Well apparently the hard work and passion shown by the dedicated FreeXperia team caught the attention of Sony Ericsson. They have worked hard to assist the team in making a CyanogenMod custom ROM for the Xperia range of smartphones. Sony Ericsson has given around 20 handsets to the team and even provided “debugged and rebuilt camera library binaries”. These libraries will made available to all under a special EULA license shortly to further assist developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
- Xperia Blog
...it could be good times ahead for Xperia users and another reason for trying to come up with something that would benefit us all.
vszulc said:
Don't forget that when developers from XDA occasionally pull something off that the manufacturers either couldn't or wouldn't do, it's because they use tricks and methods that could never be accepted on a production-ROM.
(For example: use of ext3 or ext4 file systems, cache2SD and many others)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is why I mentioned Special Edition type Roms, which could just be released on XDA for example, or at least release source code for whatever which helps to unlock the true potential of our devices. Maybe I also put too much weight in XDA's presence in the mobile World.
JimmyMcGee said:
Interesting Thought, but this announcement probably won't mean that Sony will be partnering with XDA tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And wouldn't expect them to, but think it would be the perfect time to grasp an opportunity for reasons already mentioned.
Hi everyone,
I started this on Sammobile yesterday (where it is already a sticky). Also, german site Badania has wrote about it now, too. The petition is not started yet, this is only for collecting ideas and knowing about your opinions. Recently there was some 'news' saying that the Wave 3 source code was made open source, which turned out to be untrue (the file released by Samsung was only 130kB big). Big letdown for many of us, and Wave 1/2 source codes were not even mentioned.
The current situation
The thing is, at least the Wave 1/2 users desperately need an open source release to continue enjoying their devices. Both devices are great hardware, they have a big community and developers willing to put in some ellbow grease, but, we don't have the means to fix certain stuff, only Samsung has. You might think about the trouble upgrading Samsung Apps and the trouble with push and SHP in general that many Wave users have experienced in the last few weeks and months. You might think about all the small annoyances that you users ask us CFW developers to fix everyday (but we can't). You may also think of the BadaDroid project, and the tons of work put into developing a working modem driver, still with nothing to show to the public until now.
The last official Wave 1 FW is from July (with little to none improvements over the January XXLA1 release), the last official Wave 2 FW is even older. Some of you think (and with a reason) that Samsung themselves are not willing to do any more updates or fixes for these two devices. They have, more or less officialy, abandoned these devices and are not willing to put in any more work. We, as a community, on the other hand are willing to work on these - without pay even -, but our hands and feet are bound behind our backs due to the Wave 1/2 being closed source. Don't be fooled by our recent successes (design changes, ported chinese keyboard and quickpanel) - reverse engineering is like stumbling through the dark in an unknown environment, and eventually we will come to a standstill. With Bada being closed source, we will always lag behind the likes of Android.
Samsung themselves are no strangers to the idea of openness. They plan to make Tizen an open source project, they also develop highly succesfull Android devices and they also did at least say that they are interested in releasing the Wave 3 source code. Also, they are just now planning a big company image overhaul, with a new logo and a new policy of more openness. But, if nothing is done, they will just forget about the 'old' Wave 1/2 devices - guaranteed.
So, what now?
This is where you, the users, the developers, the mods, the bloggers, everyone in the Bada community come in. I've been playing around for a while with the idea of starting a petition for exactly this: To ask Samsung to release in full the Wave 1/2/3 (or for even more Wave devices) source codes. But wait, don't rush things now!
We need a big, coordinated effort, spanning all the Bada sites around the globe.
We need the petition to operate from a site that's easy to use for everyone (that means no complicated signup and no shady stuff), and we need the petition's text to be multi-lingual, translated in all the languages of all Bada countries: german, turkish, azerbaijani, arabic, polish, czech, french, italian, spanish, and a lot that I have forgotten about. We need a great, short text (not as long as this one) for the petition, so that everyone knows even from a quick glance the why's and the uses of such a petition.
We also need supporters, people willinng to spread the word on other sites, especially the big ones such as XDA or Bada-Turkiye, but also the smaller ones. We need every voice, and we need as many people in this as possible.
We need to give Samsung the choice to either publicly let down thousands of customers, or just, finally, give us the source code that we have been waiting for for so long.
Further proceeding - my suggestion
Now, this is what I suggest now:
Don't rush things - we should be collecting ideas for at least a week until we even think about actually starting a petition.
If you're willing to support this case, spread the word or even find more supporters, let us know here.
Double points if you're also a member of some non-english-speaking Bada community .
If you have any additional ideas or concerns, also let us know - this is what this thread is for, to collect ideas and coordinate this.
We need a good short english text for the petition itself (I may come up with something later myself).
We need translations for this text in as many languages as possible. And, no, I'm not thinking about Google translations, but about the good old manual ones.
Looking forward to your opinions!
Big sorry.
But this petition can only Santa Claus make true...
1.
Samsung is not alone patent holder...
Wave 1-3 use Qualcomm Hardware AND Software...
So Qualcomm patents affected...
Nearly same stuff is in hundrets of devices from other manufacturer too, because also Qualcomm...
Not only Qualcomm... think about Quram...
Security and Compression Algos...
2.
Place holder...
Best Regards
i agree this Samsung release the source code wave 1 2 3
Maybe we should think about making the petition not only about Samsung, but also about Qualcomm and Quram. Hopes for Modem drivers and the like might be slim, but chances are we'll get a step forward, at least being able to do something more. I think Bada libraries source codes are well within the realm of possibility, and we could already do a lot with them.
Also... what else could we do now, hoping to keep the Wave 1/2 development alive?
BTW: Christmas might also be a good time to make our wishes come true .
http://www.change.org/petitions/samsung-we-want-a-good-working-bada-for-all-devices#
Why not continue this petition...
with 1,435 supporters
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best Regards
adfree said:
http://www.change.org/petitions/samsung-we-want-a-good-working-bada-for-all-devices#
Why not continue this petition...
Best Regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be a good thing, but - I don't think that we will get Samsung to fix it themselves, and the petitions text is not clear about alternatives such as open sourcing. I think it's a different thing.
Hi Guys...
I am a writer from Badaforums.net.
1 month back,we planed to file petition for open source bada and we got good response.
but,after sometime we dropped the plan as we needed some reliable(and known) person to file the petition.
we have a draft ready for the petition...if u want,u all can have a look at this...
we can use this to file petition if u want...I can give the text file(only to reliable person)...
link is as below :
http ://www.badaforums.net/forums/announces/petition-request-samsung-support-bada-update-t7183.html (Refer Image)
Regards,
WaveGuru
Nice...
You mean the attached one?
I hope, it is okay, that I added your portal as Supprter at our article as official supporter...
Taxidriver05 said:
Nice...
You mean the attached one?
I hope, it is okay, that I added your portal as Supprter at our article as official supporter...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes,its OK.
I don't remember whether this is the final draft or not(have to search my machine ) ,but we can use the final one.
but,before that we need to gather support from all sites.
and BTW,Badaforums is not my portal...i am just writer of that forum
Regards,
WaveGuru
waveguru said:
Hi Guys...
I am a writer from Badaforums.net.
1 month back,we planed to file petition for open source bada and we got good response.
but,after sometime we dropped the plan as we needed some reliable(and known) person to file the petition.
we have a draft ready for the petition...if u want,u all can have a look at this...
we can use this to file petition if u want...I can give the text file(only to reliable person)...
link is as below :
http ://www.badaforums.net/forums/announces/petition-request-samsung-support-bada-update-t7183.html (Refer Image)
Regards,
WaveGuru
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice! I would, however, suggest to make this a bit shorter. People seem to be too lazy to read these times . Also, set the accent on the Open Source release and include Qualcomm in the petitions recipients list. Although this may sound pessimistic, I'm amost sure that Samsung themselves won't do any development or OS updates for the Wave 1/2 (and smaller Waves) themselves.
I guess I should give some more details. Also, for those too lazy too read the whole text: Just jump to the paragraph that answers your question.
What is this about?
We want to ask Samsung to release the source codes for the Wave 1/2/3 firmwares and Qualcomm to release the accompanying hardware drivers (the Qualcomm part is an additional proposal by me).
Why is this important? / Why should I promote this or participate?
For me personally, this is something of a last hope, especially for the Wave 1/2 devices. I should know being a CFW developer myself: With what we got now, we just don't get far, and there's tons of stuff that we just can't fix (because we don't know how it works, because we can't do any changes... etc). Also, think about the BadaDroid project, which will likely get a big boost from a source code release (modem driver, anyone?). Without the open sourcing we will eventually come to standstill, and that point is not too far in the future.
Why now? / How is this different from earlier petitions?
First of all: This is the first petition specifically made to ask Samsung to release the source code. Now is a good time for this, because Samsung is planning a complete brand makeover over thenext few weeks and months. With this brand makeover comes a new policy of openness, which can only be good for this petition to reach its goal.
"The Wave 3 Bada OS is already open source." / "They'll release anyways because of Open Source Tizen."
I can assure you, it is not. Although this news was on several big Bada news site during the last two weeks, the news turned out to be untrue. The file provided by Samsung is only 130kB big and contains something, but not the Wave 3 source code. It is worse for the Wave 1 and Wave 2 devices, cause these two will be just forgotten about if we don't act. Remember, Tizen is only planned for the Wave 3, and I'm not even sure if that is official.
"This won't work."
Of course, you won't have any guarantees this will work, even if you participate or promote this. The alternative - doing nothing of the like and just hoping for the best - won't most likely do you any good either (read the second paragraph for my personal opinion). Also, we're open to suggestions on how to do this the best way. We want the whole Bada community in this, and we want to listen to your opinions and proposals.
We already have supporters such as german site Badania.de, czech site mojebada.cz, US based site badaforums.net and we're in good hopes of getting even more of the big and smaller ones to support us. This is planned to be a big global effort.
"The modem driver is owned by Qualcomm, not Samsung."
So, you're interested in BadaDroid development specifically? That's right, and that's also the reason why I'm suggesting to add Qualcomm to the petitions recipient list.
Quram algorithms sourcecode is what they sell, so they won't publish it.
Qualcomm AMSS sourcecode - forget it.
Parts of Samsung SHP source - maybe, but from my experience with Samsung HQ I wouldn't count on much. ;P
If we all want to start with this petition,we have to start early and with full proof plan.
but,we will need support from whole bada community and many sites.
I am ready to help...with my blogging and ideas...
Regards,
WaveGuru
We of badaos.net (Iranian Bada forum) are ready to sign the petition. Our forum has 20,000 users (about 3000 active)
Thanks everyone for their support!
Waveguru and nip_miniw, can we add you to the list of official supporters? Maybe also your sites (badaforums.net and badaos.net)? And, don't think wrong if it has gotten a little bit silent here, we're still working on this! But, we also still need more supporters.
If you're willing to help, post here, please.
Rebellos said:
Quram algorithms sourcecode is what they sell, so they won't publish it.
Qualcomm AMSS sourcecode - forget it.
Parts of Samsung SHP source - maybe, but from my experience with Samsung HQ I wouldn't count on much. ;P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're 100% right about the Quram (QMG images, anyone?) source codes, and probably about the Qualcomm AMSS source code, too. But, with your new low level BadaDroid modem driver - would we even need the Qualcomm source anymore? Also, for the rest, I think anything will help, right?
k8500 said:
Thanks everyone for their support!
Waveguru and nip_miniw, can we add you to the list of official supporters? Maybe also your sites (badaforums.net and badaos.net)? And, don't think wrong if it has gotten a little bit silent here, we're still working on this! But, we also still need more supporters.
If you're willing to help, post here, please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I can help too,,
I have a little group named BadaIL, we rleased 5 roms until today..
what can I do?
k8500 said:
Thanks everyone for their support!
Waveguru and nip_miniw, can we add you to the list of official supporters? Maybe also your sites (badaforums.net and badaos.net)? And, don't think wrong if it has gotten a little bit silent here, we're still working on this! But, we also still need more supporters.
If you're willing to help, post here, please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What should we do as an official supporter?
k8500 said:
Thanks everyone for their support!
Waveguru and nip_miniw, can we add you to the list of official supporters? Maybe also your sites (badaforums.net and badaos.net)? And, don't think wrong if it has gotten a little bit silent here, we're still working on this! But, we also still need more supporters.
If you're willing to help, post here, please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi k8500,
I am ready to help u all.I also have a plan in place.if you want,we can discuss this over PM.
but,I believe that making Bada as an open source should be one of the thing in petition.
we should also need to ask Samsung to provide us bugfree bada...as current bada firmware is not bugfree.
if we can't play HD games with current firmware...if we need to switch off our wave every time to clear ram...then its Samsung DUTY to provide us bugfree OS which they promised.
As many said that this will not change anything... Samsung will not do this...
It will be Samsung's decision whether they want to provide their customer bug free product or not ...but as a customer...as a money payer...I want to try to make Samsung realize that what they are doing is not RIGHT.
Thanks and Regards,
WaveGuru
I think...
At first we need an overview, who will officially support this petition...
We (badaNIA) will definitely do so...
Need name of plattform and contact infos...
Ripped from /r/android. Found this to be quite interesting. Apparently the OEMs don't really control if their devices get support for new android versions or not.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1j13xd/how_oems_havent_announced_43_updates_for_the/
https://plus.google.com/116988351660148062102/posts/MHhMo7X1fbF
Shen Ye said:
To all the people complaining about how OEMs haven't announced 4.3 updates for the devices:
• OEMs do not get the Android source code directly from Google.
• The SoC vendors are provided the code from Google, where they make a board support package (BSP) which contains drivers and optimisations etc.
• The BSPs are then passed on to the OEMs, which they use to develop updates for their devices.
OEMs are currently waiting for the silicon vendors to decide which SoCs they will support in making a 4.3 BSP for, because their update support is heavily dependent on this.
For example, Qualcomm recently decided to drop development for a 4.2.2 BSP on their S3 SoCs, which is why HTC had turn around and say they were dropping support for the One S. This also caused Sony to drop update development for the Xperia S, SL, Acro S and ION (all S3 SoCs).
Everyone remembers the Thunderbolt and Sensation (LTE variants) which used the Scorpion MSM8655, which Qualcomm dropped support for, so OEMs had to drop future updates for.
Samsung is an exception, they're their own devices' silicon vendors when it comes to Exynos. But they also had to drop support for their S2 LTE variants which were using the Qualcomm Scorpion SoC.
Sure, it's not the perfect system, but it's how it works in the industry right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This doesn't sound right if there's people bringing unofficial 4.2.2 updates to said devices. If some guy that that doesn't even have a job with android developing can do it, I think a multimillion dollar OEM can.
Ascertion said:
This doesn't sound right if there's people bringing unofficial 4.2.2 updates to said devices. If some guy that that doesn't even have a job with android developing can do it, I think a multimillion dollar OEM can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but none of those 4.2.2 ports have kernel source code, and therefore none of them truly work 100% with no bugs whatsoever. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe devs use prior kernel sources and modify them to work with newer android versions (for instance, I had ICS via CM9 on my droid incredible 2, but it never worked 100%).
Yay, time to send hate-mail to Qualcomm.
Sent from my buttered S3
User "iamadogforreal" had an interesting reply:
iamadogforreal said:
This is OEM apologia. In the real world, these OEMs are the customers and boss around the chip makers. Not the other way around, like this blogger is claiming. If OEMs cared about updates then they'd put that in their contracts and pressure the chip makers to do them. Instead, this becomes a convenient excuse (collusion?) for OEMs to stop making those expensive updates, especially when you're 4 months from launching another flagship phone.
Funny how the Nexus line doesn't have this problem. Gee, maybe google just is getting lucky with niceguy SoCs? No, google puts this in their contracts.
Honestly, if you think the SoC guys are telling the world's biggest companies like Sony or Samsung to **** off and to tell your customers to **** off, then you're incredibly naive. Android fans need to keep pressuring these companies to deliver timely updates and to commit to a two year update cycle, at least. Articles like these don't do us any service and only exist to validate that awful status quo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's get this out of the way first, nobody here is stupid, we know the L Release is never going to come to the Galaxy Nexus officially. So let's talk about the community. I just have one basic question for our talented devs, what are the odds that a port of L will be able to come to the Gnex and if so, what kind of time frame are we looking at here?
Does the Cyanogenmod team do developers previews like this one? We might see it from them.
I'm sorry, but this post is exactly what I expected to see today.
so lets get it out of the way.
SURE
we COULD see some 5.0 aosp love(via custom development)
MAYBE.
time frame?
when.source drops, give it a few months at most I'd say
source isn't even CLOSE to ready yet though.
SOOO
let's ALSO look at the past.
which nexus devices, after Google officially dropped support, are STILL ABLE AND ARE running LATEST android version?
ALL of them right?
stability and such isn't a factor for this question, it's IF IT CAN/DOES run newest aosp in SOME FORM.
so I'd say YES gnex WILL see 5.0 in SOME usable form. but asking for ANY "time frame"at THIS POINT since SOURCE ISN'T AVAILABLE YET is kinda pointless.
maybe though, just maybe, there are ALREADY some people at work on getting those "preview" things ported. no matter WHAT, patience and not asking for timeframe/eta is key here
I don't normally do +1 style posts, but I am also greatly interested in knowing this as well.
I imagine it is largely going to depend on how much of the underlying kernel and driver interaction changes. I remember on my prior phone, a Droid X which has been and is still locked down, it was generally impossible to get past ICS because of the major underlying changes in JB and not being able to get those on the DX. Granted the Nexus doesn't have this limitation but drivers aren't likely to be further updated and if the kernel goes too far forward it is unlikely to see compatible driver versions for GNex hardware.
EDIT: I should probably say modules instead of drivers. I'm primarily a Windows person PC-side.
Put it this way my 4 year old HTC Desire can run Kitkat then i would be amazed if we didn't end up with some pretty good builds of "L".
ashclepdia said:
I'm sorry, but this post is exactly what I expected to see today.
so lets get it out of the way.
SURE
we COULD see some 5.0 aosp love(via custom development)
MAYBE.
time frame?
when.source drops, give it a few months at most I'd say
source isn't even CLOSE to ready yet though.
SOOO
let's ALSO look at the past.
which nexus devices, after Google officially dropped support, are STILL ABLE AND ARE running LATEST android version?
ALL of them right?
stability and such isn't a factor for this question, it's IF IT CAN/DOES run newest aosp in SOME FORM.
so I'd say YES gnex WILL see 5.0 in SOME usable form. but asking for ANY "time frame"at THIS POINT since SOURCE ISN'T AVAILABLE YET is kinda pointless.
maybe though, just maybe, there are ALREADY some people at work on getting those "preview" things ported. no matter WHAT, patience and not asking for timeframe/eta is key here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for replying! I figured since I looked pretty thoroughly and didn't see a thread for it and thought that having at least one place for Gnex owners to talk about the L release for us wouldn't be a bad thing. I in no way meant to be one of those people who constantly bugs the devs about ETA's, I just meant what were could be expecting in the general sense. Thanks for the reassurance about us getting it, I've just been burned before about support with previous devices when they got past official support. But those weren't Nexii so I didn't know what to expect.
Brettbesa said:
Thanks for replying! I figured since I looked pretty thoroughly and didn't see a thread for it and thought that having at least one place for Gnex owners to talk about the L release for us wouldn't be a bad thing. I in no way meant to be one of those people who constantly bugs the devs about ETA's, I just meant what were could be expecting in the general sense. Thanks for the reassurance about us getting it, I've just been burned before about support with previous devices when they got past official support. But those weren't Nexii so I didn't know what to expect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea sorry about my tone in that reply mostly too
I'm usually not the one to fly off ranting towards other users actions, at least not on xda(i do #AshRants elsewhere lol)
your question was a valid one, and I know where you coming from when it comes to nom nexus devices and their lack of support, I had a droid x2 that was ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED BY MOTOROLA to have ICS update. which for some reason they just didn't follow through on. Their REASON they said was that "android 4.0+ would not improve functionality of this device"...aka "we don't feel like fixing all the bugs we gave you already with shotty gingerbread releases, and we aren't going to allow you to unlock the device or give you usable kernel source so screw off",...back when moto didn't gaf about the dev communities. they have made huge strides towards mending that relationship. just couldn't believe they had the gall to say 4.0 wouldn't improve the first dual core android device running a tegra2 chipset. bah. ramblings now again from ash.
but yea reason I kinda went off in that reply was mostly cuz I hoped all the other people who were already drooling at the chance to post the exact same things would slow down and think instead first it wasnt intended as a personal attack towards you or to start any flamewar on the subject. and judging by your reply you didn't take offense to it anyways, so :thumbsup: :good: we all on the same page anyways.
personally, I haven't seen much of the IO stuff about L, I saw mostly design changes, and would like to know more details about it's new features so I'll be digging around YouTube today for recaps and such.
but I'm almost certain that if we don't get some kinda official rom like CM, OMNI, SHINY, PA, etc... building L based.roms for us, then some of our awesomely talented devs will at LEAST get us able to look like we have it, along with SOME if not z MOST functionality of L.
ashclepdia said:
I'm sorry, but this post is exactly what I expected to see today.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also think you guys should be patient. Your life won't be (that limited if there won't be a port of the coming up Android L to our Galaxy Nexus. Just relax.
As some have already pointed out, we're unlikely to see Android 5 "officially" ported to our GNex, for pretty much the same reason that we don't have an official 4.4 release for our phone. From ArsTechnica:
"Our talk with Burke shed some light on some more obscure topics too, including the lack of an Android 4.4 update for the Galaxy Nexus. Google's official line was that the company only supports hardware for 18 months after release, which it still mentions in its official Nexus update support document. As was speculated at the time, though, the decision was tied to Texas Instruments' exit from the consumer SoC market (TI's OMAP chip powered the Galaxy Nexus as well as other prominent Android-based hardware like the first Kindle Fires).
"It was a really extraordinary event," he said. "You had a silicon company exit the market, there was nobody left in the building to talk to."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TI stopped development for the GNex SoC at Android 4.1. Google and others worked hard to support it for 4.2 and 4.3, but the official TI software was broken by 4.4. The reason that we even have 4.4 custom ROMs is because some kind-hearted person, perhaps a TI insider, released beta or engineering sample software for the SoC. But as we've found, it's not the most stable
have a great weekend,
john
You could all complain about TI stopping development and blaming them. The Google Glass uses a not to different TI SOC compared to the GNex has a 3.4 kernel and runs 4.4.2
Now please understand that Google simply ditched us for reasons other than TI stopped developing SOC bla bla bla.
akash3656 said:
You could all complain about TI stopping development and blaming them. The Google Glass uses a not to different TI SOC compared to the GNex has a 3.4 kernel and runs 4.4.2
Now please understand that Google simply ditched us for reasons other than TI stopped developing SOC bla bla bla.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plus if they didn't drop support after two years android would have alot more bugs in general.
DR3W5K1 said:
Plus if they didn't drop support after two years android would have alot more bugs in general.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't get your logic. And its not like 4.3 is flawless. HD video playback on this device (GNex) lags.
+ if Google themselves show a bad example to OEMs on how long to update devices, expect OEMs to not update devices older than a year. And this makes the whole "android doesn't get timely updates" into a new issue where "android doesn't get updates after a year+ at best".
GNex will never die!
(3.5 yrs going strong bby, and thanks to vanir+dirtyv f2fs running better than ever)
latenightchameleon said:
GNex will never die!
(3.5 yrs going strong bby, and thanks to vanir+dirtyv f2fs running better than ever)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed. There will likely be somebody out there building from the latest source for this device as long as it's possible to do so, and possibly even if it isn't.
akash3656 said:
Now please understand that Google simply ditched us for reasons other than TI stopped developing SOC
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity, what would those reasons be?
jsage said:
Out of curiosity, what would those reasons be?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's up for you to imagine....
Money, profit, greed? You pick which one. Or make your own reasons.
akash3656 said:
That's up for you to imagine....
Money, profit, greed? You pick which one. Or make your own reasons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I guess when simple facts aren't sufficient then fantasy must be more believable.
wow
some of these replies were brutal, sheesh
gray bishop said:
some of these replies were brutal, sheesh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honest perhaps. It's pretty simple really. The new OS (4.4) has a new kernel. The new kernel requires new drivers. Neither TI (OMAP SoC) nor ImgTec (PowerVR GPU) will supply those drivers.
Yes, an engineer at TI "released" a blob last fall. But it was not release-quality, it was beta-quality. Not everything is a conspiracy; we've just reached the end of the official support road.
On the other hand if one is inclined to run on the bleeding edge and stability is not their primary concern, there are any number of KitKat custom ROMs in which one can indulge.
have a great evening,
john
jsage said:
Honest perhaps. It's pretty simple really. The new OS (4.4) has a new kernel. The new kernel requires new drivers. Neither TI (OMAP SoC) nor ImgTec (PowerVR GPU) will supply those drivers.
Yes, an engineer at TI "released" a blob last fall. But it was not release-quality, it was beta-quality. Not everything is a conspiracy; we've just reached the end of the official support road.
On the other hand if one is inclined to run on the bleeding edge and stability is not their primary concern, there are any number of KitKat custom ROMs in which one can indulge.
have a great evening,
john
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah crap I didn't mean to thank you. Anyway, yea sure remember all those OEMs you blame and all have given everything you've said to a certain product. GOOGLE GLASS. And go and check what SOC Google Glass uses.
Now have fun.
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
kcv_earner said:
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Lughnasadh said:
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
Google does what is in their best favor, not for the niche hobbyists. Over the years, you could see the gradual move to making ROM developers lives more complicated.
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those were the good ol' days. I miss those times a lot.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from the interest Google has in open and free contributors to the code, would that be legally possible for them to privatize and "close" Android code for Pixels given it is based on Linux? Would that fit the open source license of the original Linux platform?
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
neelchauhan said:
I am no longer working on this ROM. A13 blocks downgrading the bootloader. If you still want this, there are developer support images to downgrade with an updated bootloader.
To add, newer LOS19 builds don't boot on raviole, even the recovery fails.
I also switched to stock A13 for the time being.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kcv_earner said:
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Custom roms are dieing for sure. The people left over are un friendly the builds nearly allways have bugs hence the amount of wingers the devs get which turns the devs into rude people. Majority of them have private sources they won't share. There dodgey ****s. I attempted to build a rom and failed and couldn't get any help. Instead every rom dev will ban u if u ask for help building there rom. Telegram is a **** storm. Mods on power trips. I have given up on the scene. Let it die with wild fire.
I start understand now a crew of 5 guys will never beat a company at there game. They might apply some patches or shot before the real devs release the proper os version but it not worth the actual bugs in the frame work. Who can trust the security of a team of guys to. They can do what they like to us from messing with the os put virus in it.
fil3s said:
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as the A13 bootloader is installed to both slots, the worst that could happen is the firmware would run poorly.