Why is my phone cooler than my Kindle Fire tablet? I don't mean hardware. My phone has obviously better hardware than the Kindle. What I mean is why do apps behave differently, in fact better, on my phone than on my KF?
As an example, the Kindle Reader app on my phone shows a book browser within the app when I search for books. On the KF when I want to browse books, the app opens up Amazon's web site in a browser (not the nicest of interfaces for a small screen).
Another example is the Dolphin browser. On my phone, pressing the back button (on this web site for example) actually goes to the previous page whereas on the KF I have to press the back button at least twice and often more in order to get to the previous page; sometimes I have to time it just right, too.
There are a lot of little things like those examples that make my phone cooler in spite of its significantly smaller screen.
In case it matters, I have CM10.1 Android 4.2.2 on the KF and the phone has stock Google Android 4.2.2 that came with the phone. All the apps are presumably the same, having been download from the Play Store.
Can anyone explain this difference? Thanks.
pfederighi said:
Why is my phone cooler than my Kindle Fire tablet? I don't mean hardware. My phone has obviously better hardware than the Kindle. What I mean is why do apps behave differently, in fact better, on my phone than on my KF?
As an example, the Kindle Reader app on my phone shows a book browser within the app when I search for books. On the KF when I want to browse books, the app opens up Amazon's web site in a browser (not the nicest of interfaces for a small screen).
Another example is the Dolphin browser. On my phone, pressing the back button (on this web site for example) actually goes to the previous page whereas on the KF I have to press the back button at least twice and often more in order to get to the previous page; sometimes I have to time it just right, too.
There are a lot of little things like those examples that make my phone cooler in spite of its significantly smaller screen.
In case it matters, I have CM10.1 Android 4.2.2 on the KF and the phone has stock Google Android 4.2.2 that came with the phone. All the apps are presumably the same, having been download from the Play Store.
Can anyone explain this difference? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone's hardware was designed with 4.2.2 in mind and the Kindle was designed for a forked rendition of GB.
Guitarman2010 said:
The phone's hardware was designed with 4.2.2 in mind and the Kindle was designed for a forked rendition of GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then perhaps I do not understand what Android is. I was under the impression it was an OS with a defined API such that it would look (theming aside) and behave the same on different hardware (with obvious exceptions like not having bluetooth functionality on KF). Your statement would indicate that it is very heavily hardware dependent and that somehow app developers take into account the plethora of different hardware platforms and choose to behave in different manners on different devices. If this is the case, then it's an illogically designed system.
pfederighi said:
Then perhaps I do not understand what Android is. I was under the impression it was an OS with a defined API such that it would look (theming aside) and behave the same on different hardware (with obvious exceptions like not having bluetooth functionality on KF). Your statement would indicate that it is very heavily hardware dependent and that somehow app developers take into account the plethora of different hardware platforms and choose to behave in different manners on different devices. If this is the case, then it's an illogically designed system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Running 4.2.2 on a system that was meant for GB results in some things not working right....
pfederighi said:
Why is my phone cooler than my Kindle Fire tablet?
...
Another example is the Dolphin browser. On my phone, pressing the back button (on this web site for example) actually goes to the previous page whereas on the KF I have to press the back button at least twice and often more in order to get to the previous page; sometimes I have to time it just right, too.
...
Can anyone explain this difference? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The browser thing I think can be explained. If you are zoomed in on a page, if you press the back button, it will zoom out to the whole page. The second tap of the back button takes you back to the previous page.
Does this help / make sense?
sent from The Muffinator (it's a kindle fire running cm10.1)
using Tapatalk 4 beta, and loving it!
jma9454 said:
The browser thing I think can be explained. If you are zoomed in on a page, if you press the back button, it will zoom out to the whole page. The second tap of the back button takes you back to the previous page.
Does this help / make sense?
sent from The Muffinator (it's a kindle fire running cm10.1)
using Tapatalk 4 beta, and loving it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would make sense if it was the same behavior on my phone. Thanks, though.
pfederighi said:
Then perhaps I do not understand what Android is. I was under the impression it was an OS with a defined API such that it would look (theming aside) and behave the same on different hardware (with obvious exceptions like not having bluetooth functionality on KF). Your statement would indicate that it is very heavily hardware dependent and that somehow app developers take into account the plethora of different hardware platforms and choose to behave in different manners on different devices. If this is the case, then it's an illogically designed system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pfederighi said:
That would make sense if it was the same behavior on my phone. Thanks, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're missing the point. The Kindle Fire was never made to run apps from the Google app store, and Google Play apps are rarely made for a modified Kindle Fire, running JB, and a custom kernel made from the ground up. Android is versatile, but it's not perfect. There are many apps that work well on some devices but not others. Looking at the reviews of any app in the Play store should be enough to convince you of that.
Guitarman2010 said:
Running 4.2.2 on a system that was meant for GB results in some things not working right....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why? Does the Android code really have such code as:
if (running_on_older_hardware)
{
make_all_apps_less_cool(); // because we only like newer hardware, even if it's possible for the older hardware to function
}
What little I know of OS design is that if you want your OS to be used aon a wide variety of hardware (which seems to be the design goal of Google in their relentless pursuit of world domination), the API should be as hardware independent as possible and that all hardware access should be done through the API. The very fact that (most) apps are written in Java and compiled to bytecode dictate that they have to use the API. Is the functionality difference because there is some sort of proprietary ROM that Android and certain apps know about that doesn't exist on the KF? And this ROM makes apps behave cooler?
Is it a memory issue? Does 4.2.2 expect to have a different memory/segmentation model? Or a different cache model? Or simply ungodly amounts more memory?
The only runtime software difference I could tell between my phone and my KF is that the per app memory limit on the KF is set to 256 MB whereas on the phone it is 512 MB.
Are there dynamic libraries/frameworks/apks on my phone that are not included in stock/CM10.1 4.2.2 that most apps are aware of and use? Can I copy them to the KF?
Thanks.
pfederighi said:
Why? Does the Android code really have such code as:
if (running_on_older_hardware)
{
make_all_apps_less_cool(); // because we only like newer hardware, even if it's possible for the older hardware to function
}
What little I know of OS design is that if you want your OS to be used aon a wide variety of hardware (which seems to be the design goal of Google in their relentless pursuit of world domination), the API should be as hardware independent as possible and that all hardware access should be done through the API. The very fact that (most) apps are written in Java and compiled to bytecode dictate that they have to use the API. Is the functionality difference because there is some sort of proprietary ROM that Android and certain apps know about that doesn't exist on the KF? And this ROM makes apps behave cooler?
Is it a memory issue? Does 4.2.2 expect to have a different memory/segmentation model? Or a different cache model? Or simply ungodly amounts more memory?
The only runtime software difference I could tell between my phone and my KF is that the per app memory limit on the KF is set to 256 MB whereas on the phone it is 512 MB.
Are there dynamic libraries/frameworks/apks on my phone that are not included in stock/CM10.1 4.2.2 that most apps are aware of and use? Can I copy them to the KF?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Proper communication between the API and the hardware is still dependent on the kernel. Considering your phone's kernel was likely produced by a team of paid programmers and the KF's 3.0.x kernel was made by maybe a small handful of people with most of the work done by one man, for FREE, I'm sure there is plenty of possibility for something not working as efficiently as it could.
soupmagnet said:
Proper communication between the API and the hardware is still dependent on the kernel. Considering your phone's kernel was likely produced by a team of paid programmers and the KF's 3.0.x kernel was made by maybe a small handful of people with most of the work done by one man, for FREE, I'm sure there is plenty of possibility for something not working as efficiently as it could.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I truly do appreciate the hard work of the many hackers who put together kernels, boot loaders, recovery programs, apps, etc. I hope someday to join their ranks.
I was under the impression that there was a stock kernel as well as a stock OS and that the only real difference from one system to another was the boot procedure and the selection of drivers (with stubs or emulation for missing hardware/features). I take it that then this not the case.
Related
Market filters:
When a user searches or browses in Android Market, the results are filtered, and some applications might not be visible. For example, if an application requires a trackball (as specified in the manifest file), then Android Market will not show the app on any device that does not have a trackball.
The manifest file and the device's hardware and features are only part of how applications are filtered — filtering also depends on the country and carrier, the presence or absence of a SIM card, and other factors.
Changes to the Android Market filters are independent of changes to the Android platform itself. This document will be updated periodically to reflect any changes that occur.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does anyone have any idea what the market filters are checking against?
That's not really a good reason to do anything, let alone not using 2.2
dik23 said:
That's not really a good reason to do anything, let alone not using 2.2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not being able to get apps? Did you read the link? Doubtful. Uh sure. Have fun with vanilla 2.2 and 0.0 apps.
I'm sorry, did you read your own link? If you had scrolled down, it shows several examples of what can be filtered. The filters are implemented by the application developer themselves, and if they don't, they still show up in the market.
Besides, filtering by the application has been in Android since 2.0. Any application that deems a device incapable of running it (for example, a lack of a light sensor) can stop itself from running.
some kind of filter (the ones I've heard of so far are incompatible screen resolution, unverified builds, and protected apps) is already being applied to 2.1 in the AOSP build. I couldnt see Yelp, the Android Community and TMZ apps for whatever reason
cashless said:
Not being able to get apps? Did you read the link? Doubtful. Uh sure. Have fun with vanilla 2.2 and 0.0 apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yeah, how suspicious. French people couldn't possibly prefer apps in French and people with that new Dell pad thing probably still want SMS and contact apps.
Yeah
so you are saying not upgrade to 2.2 because marketplace will filter apps for our phone, but stick with 2.1 because it doesn't?
well genius, why don't you go and install http://www.appbrain.com/app/com.yelp.android on your phone and let us know how that 'no filtering' works out for you.
When I was running my Vougue we ran into this problem as well, its not a big deal at all. from what I remember it was checking about the build.prob and screen size that is setup in your startup. what I used to do was set my phone to my the specs for the G1, then install the apps after adjusting the density to fit everything on screen and then reboot using factory startup. it worked pretty well for most of the apps since many only blocked off whatever border the developer had.
heres the problem though but with the pace we are going it wont come up for a while, once we decide we have a rom stable enough to flash we lost the abilty to change the settings since WM is copletely gone and no haret was used. I switched over to the Touch Pro and we had the exact same problem which was solved in the EXACT way but we were not flashed still(TP2 still has a LOOOONG way to go sad to say), kept the touch pro 2 for only a few weeks before they replaced my Sprint Line TP with a Touch pro 2 due to all the TP1 problems and i'm still saddened by the slow progress. I am a developer myself and even an avid budsmoker and was still able to help out. now Refer has done a great job but from my understanding he is just doing most changes to the Android Filesystem, theirs a couple other guys working on the kernels which would be were all the hardware problems are going to be fixed from. no matter what build we use something in the kernel is either not right, or we dont have the driver in place for Android itself and since we have few Hardware level developers working on these things it seems to be low progress.
instead of trying to bypass all the bull**** of this custom OS why can't we just install a clean OS now that we have the source code of Kindle we can apply the needed drivers and also apply the BT driver that exist.
labbala said:
instead of trying to bypass all the bull**** of this custom OS why can't we just install a clean OS now that we have the source code of Kindle we can apply the needed drivers and also apply the BT driver that exist.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the issue is someone has to create the custom OS.
From what I've seen, that takes more than a couple days.
Also we need a way to get the custom rom on it. No clockwork makes it a little tricky right now.
What's the difference between the OS from source (clean OS) and the pre installed OS ?
0xdroid said:
What's the difference between the OS from source (clean OS) and the pre installed OS ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my line of thinking (and the pros can certainly correct me if my analogy is bad)...it's like asking what's the difference if I buy a New Dell PC and simply manually uninstall all the bloatware versus reformatting it with a fresh install...the latter is just better.
Well, in the case of PC vendors, there's Windows from Microsoft and a separate install of bloatware by the vendors. Kindle Fire, (as I understand it) has a forked, custom version of Android - they are not installing Android OS and putting some apps on top of it.
0xdroid said:
What's the difference between the OS from source (clean OS) and the pre installed OS ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the suggestion is to build a "stock" Android ROM, using parts of the source of the Amazon ROM. Basically take the drivers from the Amazon source, merge with stock Android and install. Obviously it's a little more difficult than simply copying some files from one ROM's source into another and compiling. Plus there's the problem of getting a custom recovery on there to flash from and to make backups etc.
Well, Amazon is going to sell a crapload of these things - at $199 why wouldn't they? - and I'm sure enough of them will fall into the skillful hands of some of our greatest developers. Given any time at all, I'm sure we'll have CWR and CyanogenMod 9 for the Fire. My wife is getting me a Fire for Christmas, and being a HUGE fan of CyanogenMod, I can't wait for some much needed love from the development community!
Im getting one just for that reason
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
My wife is also getting me a fire for Christmas. It will be here Tuesday! I can't wait to get some custom ROMs on it!
I have one on order should be here in a week can't wait to wrinc the crap out of it.I see good things commin the force seems strong with this one it's not like the others.
labbala said:
instead of trying to bypass all the bull**** of this custom OS why can't we just install a clean OS now that we have the source code of Kindle we can apply the needed drivers and also apply the BT driver that exist.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'd lose the whole Kindle experience... I mean, you could put the Kindle App back on it, but that's just weird. I managed to get every app I could think of that would be useful on a tablet with no camera or GPS onto it, 100% integrated with the Kindle's native interface and ecosystem.
If you just want a tablet, you'd be a lot better off with a Galaxy Tab or Xoom or something, not this small, underpowered tablet. For basic stuff, and as an E-reader, it excels.
GSMinCT said:
You'd lose the whole Kindle experience... I mean, you could put the Kindle App back on it, but that's just weird. I managed to get every app I could think of that would be useful on a tablet with no camera or GPS onto it, 100% integrated with the Kindle's native interface and ecosystem.
If you just want a tablet, you'd be a lot better off with a Galaxy Tab or Xoom or something, not this small, underpowered tablet. For basic stuff, and as an E-reader, it excels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wrong. this tablet is not underpowered or too small. its awesome, and in time will be the best 7 inch available..
Sent from my HTC Glacier using xda premium
smirkis said:
wrong. this tablet is not underpowered or too small. its awesome, and in time will be the best 7 inch available..
Sent from my HTC Glacier using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best available? Really? Serviceable yes. Specs-wise hardly. Let's keep the giddiness in perspective. It's a journeyman middle to low end tab.
Perhaps this thread needs to be in General?
what other 7s are worth mentioning other than the nook? sleek hardware is all we need, the rest comes in due time!
Sent from my Kindle Fire using xda premium
smirkis said:
what other 7s are worth mentioning other than the nook? sleek hardware is all we need, the rest comes in due time!
Sent from my Kindle Fire using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make you a deal. I don't wish to hijack this thread (and it has nothing to do with Android Development) so let's move to General. I've tried as many 7" tabs as I could and am happy to share what I learned.
Mod....can you move us to General?
I would think that, on top of the typical problems associated with making a new ROM from an incomplete android install like the Kindle Fire comes with, you also have additional hurdles to get past, such as implementing the same on-screen hardware controls (back, home, etc) into the new ROM, as well as making a touchscreen recovery in which things can be flashed.
Felnarion said:
I would think that, on top of the typical problems associated with making a new ROM from an incomplete android install like the Kindle Fire comes with, you also have additional hurdles to get past, such as implementing the same on-screen hardware controls (back, home, etc) into the new ROM, as well as making a touchscreen recovery in which things can be flashed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A touchscreen recovery is already in process (a port by TeamWin of their existing touchscreen recovery called TWRP). There is a thread on it in this same section. Once recovery is sorted out then the real ROM work can begin in earnest
The new ICS version of Android is already designed to have on-screen buttons. I think this new Android 4.0 version requires a newer Linux kernel version than the Android 2.3 that the Fire is currently using, so there might be some heavy work required to get the current drivers all working in a different kernel , but once that is sorted out then new ROMs can be built from the ICS source code
Even starting with a 2.3 ROM, patching things on top of the existing Kindle Fire software shouldn't be necessary since Google provided the full source code for 2.3 as well
Additionally, CM7 'Tablet Tweaks' originally for the Nook Color would be perfectly viable here as well. I anticipate that once a solid recovery / 'unbricking' path is finalized, there will be a much greater development pace.
chuffykow said:
Additionally, CM7 'Tablet Tweaks' originally for the Nook Color would be perfectly viable here as well. I anticipate that once a solid recovery / 'unbricking' path is finalized, there will be a much greater development pace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks I forgot to include that part. If a CM7 ROM is what comes first then it should still work great
Looking and searching for days on this topic. Could not find word on anybody working on it.
It is pretty heavy handed for Google to issue an update that reduces to functionality to their device. I use Adobe flash may be 5% of the time on my phone, but still, if I don't use it at all, I will just use an iPhone. No point in letting Google make money from my searches.
It's not Google job to keep Adobe Flash Player updated.
k3lcior said:
It's not Google job to keep Adobe Flash Player updated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adobe flash player doesn't have to be updated. Out dated versions work fine on Android 4.3. But compatibility is completely gone on Kitkat.
Yes, because Adobe is no longer updating it.
This is what Dolphin says on the developer's website (https://dolphinbrowser.desk.com/cus...id-4-4-how-do-i-enable-flash-player-?b_id=317) --
The Adobe Flash Player is no longer compatible with Android 4.4 Kitkat devices. Some critical APIs have been removed from Android 4.4 Kitkat that all browser cannot activate the flash player. We are working on to provide better video playing experience.
sparksd said:
This is what Dolphin says on the developer's website (https://dolphinbrowser.desk.com/cus...id-4-4-how-do-i-enable-flash-player-?b_id=317) --
The Adobe Flash Player is no longer compatible with Android 4.4 Kitkat devices. Some critical APIs have been removed from Android 4.4 Kitkat that all browser cannot activate the flash player. We are working on to provide better video playing experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, but is anyone working on this at the rom level?
which APIs and why are they removed?
Galaid said:
which APIs and why are they removed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Website rendering is no longer done by AOSP(which renders flash). Now it's done by chromium (which doesn't render flash)
Lolento said:
Adobe flash player doesn't have to be updated. Out dated versions work fine on Android 4.3. But compatibility is completely gone on Kitkat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As someone else already said, it's not Google's job to keep Adobe's app updated.
You're basically relying on old technology that should have been gone for a long time already. If you think about it that way, ask yourself, why doesn't Windows rely on MS-DOS anymore (it was there in older versions, so why isn't it there now)?
And I don't see how switching to iPhone would help in any way, you can't sideload apps or have Flash at all actually. Do you really want to go from a 7" screen to a 4" one? And wouldn't you use Google on iOS too?
Bogdacutu said:
As someone else already said, it's not Google's job to keep Adobe's app updated.
You're basically relying on old technology that should have been gone for a long time already. If you think about it that way, ask yourself, why doesn't Windows rely on MS-DOS anymore (it was there in older versions, so why isn't it there now)?
And I don't see how switching to iPhone would help in any way, you can't sideload apps or have Flash at all actually. Do you really want to go from a 7" screen to a 4" one? And wouldn't you use Google on iOS too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your argument is exactly why I will not longer consider Android as my next whatever device. Even when MS no longer base windows on DOS, the underlying DOS commamds are still supported.
Google is pretty heavy handed in trying force users to move away from flash. There are better tech available, I agree, but there asre still tons of websites using flash exclusively. These websites are completely essentially to the people who use it.
I also want to ask, aside from flash, objectively, what makes Android better iOS. Nothing, imo.
I believe App vs App, the quality of Apps on iOS is better than Android, even the Google one. I dont really sideload anything aside from flash, which i use to access sports websites.
Lolento said:
Your argument is exactly why I will not longer consider Android as my next whatever device. Even when MS no longer base windows on DOS, the underlying DOS commamds are still supported.
Google is pretty heavy handed in trying force users to move away from flash. There are better tech available, I agree, but there asre still tons of websites using flash exclusively. These websites are completely essentially to the people who use it.
I also want to ask, aside from flash, objectively, what makes Android better iOS. Nothing, imo.
I believe App vs App, the quality of Apps on iOS is better than Android, even the Google one. I dont really sideload anything aside from flash, which i use to access sports websites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android gives you customization where as iPhone pretty much tells you how your layout is going to be. A lot more freedom on Android, that is the biggest difference for me. You're definitely on the wrong forums to start an iOS vs Android debate though.
Lolento said:
Even when MS no longer base windows on DOS, the underlying DOS commamds are still supported.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Last time I checked the 16-bit subsystem was no longer there in 64-bit Windows.
Lolento said:
Google is pretty heavy handed in trying force users to move away from flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't understand why you keep blaming Google and not Apple, who ceased development on Flash for mobile devices 2 YEARS AGO
Lolento said:
Your argument is exactly why I will not longer consider Android as my next whatever device. Even when MS no longer base windows on DOS, the underlying DOS commamds are still supported.
Google is pretty heavy handed in trying force users to move away from flash. There are better tech available, I agree, but there asre still tons of websites using flash exclusively. These websites are completely essentially to the people who use it.
I also want to ask, aside from flash, objectively, what makes Android better iOS. Nothing, imo.
I believe App vs App, the quality of Apps on iOS is better than Android, even the Google one. I dont really sideload anything aside from flash, which i use to access sports websites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So your willing to go pick up a new over priced device which gives you next to no freedom on it for customization, for a old, out dated, inefficient system of flash? Even though that device also has no flash support ? Glad we settled that.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Joppykid said:
Android gives you customization where as iPhone pretty much tells you how your layout is going to be. A lot more freedom on Android, that is the biggest difference for me. You're definitely on the wrong forums to start an iOS vs Android debate though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not even an iOS or Android debate, I can pick up a Windows device, who knows.
Google removing flash support is the last straw for me. And I am surprised that no else see it as getting escalatingly worse.
Here are a few things that Google did this year.
1. Gmail exchange active sync support removed
2. Youtube comment ties to Google+
3. Google dropping voice support for third party apps
4. And now removal of the killer app, adobe flash, that brought me over from iOS in the first place
Also, i have been using android for the past three years. The level of customization on Android is more of a toy box than anything else. With the removal of adobe flash support, the core functionality is identical and i would even give Windows Phone an edge over both iOS and Android.
Lastly, btw, this thread is about whether any dev is working to bring adobe flash back to 4.4. I didnt start this debate.
Lolento said:
This is not even an iOS or Android debate, I can pick up a Windows device, who knows.
Google removing flash support is the last straw for me. And I am surprised that no else see it as getting escalatingly worse.
Here are a few things that Google did this year.
1. Gmail exchange active sync support removed
2. Youtube comment ties to Google+
3. Google dropping voice support for third party apps
4. And now removal of the killer app, adobe flash, that brought me over from iOS in the first place
Also, i have been using android for the past three years. The level of customization on Android is more of a toy box than anything else. With the removal of adobe flash support, the core functionality is identical and i would even give Windows Phone an edge over both iOS and Android.
Lastly, btw, this thread is about whether any dev is working to bring adobe flash back to 4.4. I didnt start this debate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't agree more... If only iOS have a 5" phone, I'd have jump ship.
The customization advantage is getting lesser by the day...
Lolento said:
This is not even an iOS or Android debate, I can pick up a Windows device, who knows.
Google removing flash support is the last straw for me. And I am surprised that no else see it as getting escalatingly worse.
Here are a few things that Google did this year.
1. Gmail exchange active sync support removed
2. Youtube comment ties to Google+
3. Google dropping voice support for third party apps
4. And now removal of the killer app, adobe flash, that brought me over from iOS in the first place
Also, i have been using android for the past three years. The level of customization on Android is more of a toy box than anything else. With the removal of adobe flash support, the core functionality is identical and i would even give Windows Phone an edge over both iOS and Android.
Lastly, btw, this thread is about whether any dev is working to bring adobe flash back to 4.4. I didnt start this debate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is comparing pros and cons of two competing operating systems not a debate?
You asked "what makes android better than iOS, nothing IMO" I told you what I liked about Android over iOS. And you only mentioned iOS and Android in all of your posts, nothing about windows.
I understand that flash is a big deal for a lot of people. I am unaware of any devs working on it. Sounds like it may be tough with Google removing the framework needed for flash. I doubt many devs want to put time in to developing something that is starting to get phased out. Good luck in your quest to find flash.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Joppykid said:
I understand that flash is a big deal for a lot of people. I am unaware of any devs working on it. Sounds like it may be tough with Google removing the framework needed for flash. I doubt many devs want to put time in to developing something that is starting to get phased out. Good luck in your quest to find flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not just starting to get phased out. As far as Google is concerned, you aren't supposed to keep using an app that hasn't been updated for 2 years (and if the only app using the framework was pretty much abandoned a long time ago why would they have to keep supporting it?)
Lolento said:
Even when MS no longer base windows on DOS, the underlying DOS commamds are still supported.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does that compare? Want me to list the hundreds of programs that no longer work in modern Windows incarnations? How about most Creative sound cards? Is that MS' fault? I wouldn't say that, but you probably would.
Google is pretty heavy handed in trying force users to move away from flash. There are better tech available, I agree, but there asre still tons of websites using flash exclusively. These websites are completely essentially to the people who use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So Adobe is moving away from Flash for mobile and you are saying it's Google's fault for not making sure every outdated app works on their newest OS version?
I also want to ask, aside from flash, objectively, what makes Android better iOS. Nothing, imo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"objectively" - "imo". 'Nuff said.
I believe App vs App, the quality of Apps on iOS is better than Android, even the Google one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that's your right, but don't spin it as anything other than your own biased opinion. Also, I'm pretty sure those sports websites never worked on iOS devices, ever.
I think its a good move by Google, the faster website developers will realize flash is outdated the better for everyone, less users using flash content because its incompatible will force them to switch to html5, sooner or later.
Homever Adobe should stop supporting desktop version too, it would fasten up the process alot.
Again, I was not inviting a debate in my OP. But if it needs to continue, it can.
Firstly, on Windows platform, in every modern iteration, there is a compatibility mode that maintains (to a certain extent) backwards compatibility. This is how MS does business, they dont go out of nowhere to drop support for a key piece of software. My windows 7 setup is backward compatible to software back to Windows 95.
Google, on the other hand, drops third party support for anything that they have a market share strangle hold on. Mark my word on this. It started with exchange sync support for gmail, then google voice, it will not stop there.
I think everyone hopes that web devs will realize flash player is dead. This is wishful thinking. Just like I wish voice call and sms should be dead.
Fact is, there are still millions of websites that are still dependent on flash player. They are still essential to people who uses these websites. I really dont care if Google supports or not, my OP asked if anyone else is working on it.
I switched from iPhone to Android years ago because Steve Job's Apple is a bully in their vision of technology. I see google as going down the same path.
Google doesn't really make anything that blow people's mind. They make things that are cheap and are good enough. I can easily and happily switch. In fact, I already made up my mind to test out the Dell Venue 8 Pro with Win 8.1 since the holiday deals look pretty good.
Lastly, I think someone misunderstood the diff between 'objective' vs 'subjective'.
Has anyone tried to install Andromium OS yet?
It is now available on the playstore now
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andromium.os
can't test it myself right now, but interested in your experiences.
App requires 4.4.2 As Said in discription. So it might not work.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
schybiorz said:
App requires 4.4.2 As Said in discription. So it might not work.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
buberlo said:
Has anyone tried to install Andromium OS yet?
It is now available on the playstore now
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andromium.os
can't test it myself right now, but interested in your experiences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I don't think our processor meets the minimum specs. Too bad. I'd love to try it.
Edit--I tried it. Side loaded it but it wouldn't show up under apps. So I pushed it to sdcard but it said parsing error (of some sort)
Only reason I tried is because for fun i installed it on my KFHD7 running CM 11 and it installed and ran relatively well. So I don't think it's the hardware that's the problem for aftv. This is a great idea btw. I only just heard about it in this thread.
KLit75 said:
And I don't think our processor meets the minimum specs. Too bad. I'd love to try it.
Edit--I tried it. Side loaded it but it wouldn't show up under apps. So I pushed it to sdcard but it said parsing error (of some sort)
Only reason I tried is because for fun i installed it on my KFHD7 running CM 11 and it installed and ran relatively well. So I don't think it's the hardware that's the problem for aftv. This is a great idea btw. I only just heard about it in this thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I played with it briefly this morning on my Galaxy Note 3. It doesn't seem like something worth using on the FTV, but for a tablet being used with a keyboard and mouse, it's very promising as a laptop alternative.
xm41907 said:
I played with it briefly this morning on my Galaxy Note 3. It doesn't seem like something worth using on the FTV, but for a tablet being used with a keyboard and mouse, it's very promising as a laptop alternative.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking it would be a good option since the mouse cursor was broken with the last aftv update. I assume with andromium you'd have a web browser that's easier to use plus I like the way it can be easily launched/shutdown in the status bar (at least on phones and tablets), so those that use launchers might like it more. Guess it don't matter. There's little reason for amazon to upgrade aftv but hopefully we'll have a custom ROM in the future.
Their ad used to say you only needed Android 4.2 to use it so maybe you should edit the first post to ask people if they have the old apks from earlier this year, cause older versions may work. Just a couple months ago it was working wth android 4.2. So if anyone has version 0.1.3 or older they should post the APK here. Versions 0.1.4 and 0.1.5 do not work, but older versions probably do since they only required Android 4.2. I did a google search so I know there was versions numbered 0.1.1, 0.1.2 and 0.1.3, but could not find the apk files.
KLit75 said:
I was thinking it would be a good option since the mouse cursor was broken with the last aftv update. I assume with andromium you'd have a web browser that's easier to use plus I like the way it can be easily launched/shutdown in the status bar (at least on phones and tablets), so those that use launchers might like it more. Guess it don't matter. There's little reason for amazon to upgrade aftv but hopefully we'll have a custom ROM in the future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the mouse cursor is broken, wouldn't that make this even less usable? There is no native mouse cursor for Andronium so if the system cursor isn't visible, then it would be very difficult to control It does have a browser, and certain apps will work natively with it, but not many yet, and those that are supported do not fit inside a window. Only the Andronium specific apps will be windowed. Of the several hundred apps on my phone, only seven were natively supported. The others are hit or miss. . Since the FTV doesn't have a status bar, then that functionality would be lost on the FTV, as far as turning on and off Andronium. This app has lots of promise, but don't think it's a good fit.
xm41907 said:
If the mouse cursor is broken, wouldn't that make this even less usable? There is no native mouse cursor for Andronium so if the system cursor isn't visible, then it would be very difficult to control It does have a browser, and certain apps will work natively with it, but not many yet, and those that are supported do not fit inside a window. Only the Andronium specific apps will be windowed. Of the several hundred apps on my phone, only seven were natively supported. The others are hit or miss. . Since the FTV doesn't have a status bar, then that functionality would be lost on the FTV, as far as turning on and off Andronium. This app has lots of promise, but don't think it's a good fit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You obviously looked into it more than me. What I saw was a clean desktop interface that I naturally assumed would run most applicable android apps. And thinking more...yea. Since the most cursor is now invisible in most apps, it most likely wouldn't show up in andromium either. Lots of potential there, but if its purpose is to be a PC alternative it has a ways to go.
KLit75 said:
You obviously looked into it more than me. What I saw was a clean desktop interface that I naturally assumed would run most applicable android apps. And thinking more...yea. Since the most cursor is now invisible in most apps, it most likely wouldn't show up in andromium either. Lots of potential there, but if its purpose is to be a PC alternative it has a ways to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was interested in it awhile back for my tablet for work trips. Much easier to bring along a bt keyboard and mouse to go with my tablet than both.
I have an old tablet that's essentially unknown to the internet. The model number is AT-8077B(-USA), which apparently belongs to the manufacturer Asiatech 52, but I also found the manufacturer listed as "intel" somewhere during my rooting attempts. Either way, this device seems to be rather rare and obscure. It also seems to have an OEM that lacks the update functionality entirely. There's nothing regarding updates anywhere in the Settings app. The fccid.io website has a User Manual for it, but that doesn't have anything at all more advanced than turning it on, charging it and using the Browser app.
Since it's very old, it has Android 4.4.4 installed, which is essentially useless nowadays. As far as I could tell, anything remotely modern needs Android API 21+ because of TLSv1.2 support, so the tablet, while in good shape technologically, is essentially unusable.
I'm now trying to get anything with API 21 or higher onto this thing. I managed to root it with iRoot, but I'm completely lost regarding a modern Android. I thought if I can't find an actual Android build to put on it, I could use a custom ROM, but every guide I found has huge warning boxes telling me I need to follow the exact steps for my specific device at one point or another, and those simply don't exist.
I there some kind of generic guide (and ROM) I can use to get this tablet to operate with API 21+? I don't need a whole lot from it, but it's barely managing to load some websites while most apps either crash or fail to load anything, both of which I've deduced are caused by the outdated TLS/Android API. I really don't care what exactly ends up on the thing as long as I can install APKs and use them without getting error messages regarding API 21+.
scenia said:
I have an old tablet that's essentially unknown to the internet. The model number is AT-8077B(-USA), which apparently belongs to the manufacturer Asiatech 52, but I also found the manufacturer listed as "intel" somewhere during my rooting attempts. Either way, this device seems to be rather rare and obscure. It also seems to have an OEM that lacks the update functionality entirely. There's nothing regarding updates anywhere in the Settings app. The fccid.io website has a User Manual for it, but that doesn't have anything at all more advanced than turning it on, charging it and using the Browser app.
Since it's very old, it has Android 4.4.4 installed, which is essentially useless nowadays. As far as I could tell, anything remotely modern needs Android API 21+ because of TLSv1.2 support, so the tablet, while in good shape technologically, is essentially unusable.
I'm now trying to get anything with API 21 or higher onto this thing. I managed to root it with iRoot, but I'm completely lost regarding a modern Android. I thought if I can't find an actual Android build to put on it, I could use a custom ROM, but every guide I found has huge warning boxes telling me I need to follow the exact steps for my specific device at one point or another, and those simply don't exist.
I there some kind of generic guide (and ROM) I can use to get this tablet to operate with API 21+? I don't need a whole lot from it, but it's barely managing to load some websites while most apps either crash or fail to load anything, both of which I've deduced are caused by the outdated TLS/Android API. I really don't care what exactly ends up on the thing as long as I can install APKs and use them without getting error messages regarding API 21+.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well.. if It's obscure, I don't think some developers made some roms for it yet.. However, you can use older versions of those apps or basically use alternate versions. If you're looking for Firefox, you can install the latest APK that supports Android 4.4.4. I use Android 4.4.4 still, and I understand the TLSv1.2 support is mere non-existant, and the best way to get app support is to use the latest version that supports API 21. Still though, I don't think there's any ROMS or custom recovery for your tablet (I don't know if CWM or TWRP is released for it), however you can still utilize the tablet even with its age.
Is there a chance I can just use something that's not tailor-made for it and still be fine or is it essentially guaranteed I'll brick it if I use anything that's designed for a different device?
scenia said:
Is there a chance I can just use something that's not tailor-made for it and still be fine or is it essentially guaranteed I'll brick it if I use anything that's designed for a different device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thing is using something designed for a different device... will always almost guarantee you will turn your tablet to a brick.