Hi XDA-Samsung Users,
I've been a member of XDA since Jan last year. I went from owning a Nexus One to a Samsung Galaxy S i9000. The reason for the change was for the better specs and superior hardware of the Samsung Galaxy.
The phone is an incredible piece of machinery, but is severely hampered by the modifications that Samsung makes to the Android OS. I admit that the codec support within TouchWiz is impressive, but too much of the core framework of the phone is inefficient and sluggish.
Even using the latest release of unofficial firmware Samsung, Android 2.2.1 (JPY), there is still the occasional hang and the missing RAM (which is there somewhere, but not for user applications).
Samsung is mostly to blame, but there is also a quality control element that Google should be responsible for.
I have prepared an open letter that I sent to Android via Google Press and then forwarded on to Samsung for their reference. This were all through publicly available channels so will have to filter through customer service centers and the like.
I'm not expecting much, Google appears to use Amazon's customer service approach, "No customer service is good customer service".
But would like to post it here to hopefully get it out into the wilderness.
I tweeted it here http://twitter.com/#!/ibproud/status/27528781828722688
and would appreciate if you agreed with the content to retweet it. Hopefully it should give it a bit more weight.
It would be interesting to get the communities feedback on how mature they believe Android is.
Do they need to keep trying to make everyone happy or can they start to use the weight of their OS to get manufacturers to align the user experience?
Dear Android Team,
I am writing this letter to air my frustrations and to hopefully get some peace of mind that your strategy for Android will resolve some of the main issues plaguing the platform.
I have now been with Android for over 12 months. I used to be an iPhone user, but couldn’t stand the walled garden that Apple put me in. I couldn’t download directly to the phone, replace the messaging app or sync wirelessly. I went to Android because I wanted the freedom to use my phone more as a desktop replacement than as a phone/mp3 player.
When I joined the Android family (January 2010), I started with the Google Nexus One. I was so keen to get into the Android community I didn’t even wait for it to be on sale in Australia to get it, thus I hit eBay and bought it outright.
I was very pleased with the platform but could still see a few rough edges around the Operating System. It had the usability I was looking for but was lacking the polish I had grown use to with Apple. There was good news on the horizon with an Éclair update that would give the already beautiful phone a nudge in the right direction. As I was in Australia and the phone wasn’t here yet, I had to push the update through myself, after seeing how easy this was and getting the feeling of being a little phone hacker, I was hooked, I started preaching Android to the masses. Australia is still building momentum for the platform and it’s taking some time. Most of the major carriers stock between 4-6 Android devices, most of which are low end or outdated in the overseas markets.
I follow all the key players in the industry through Twitter and have a majority of Google News trackers picking up articles with android related words. I have also now converted my Wife to Android (HTC Desire Z, also not available in Aus) and I picked up the Samsung Galaxy S and gave my sister the Nexus One. The problem I face now is that I’ve run out of money and can’t go out and buy a new Android phone just to be up to date with the latest Android OS (Gingerbread), this would also be the case for most consumers. The Nexus S is so similar to my current hardware that I must be able to leverage the extra performance from the update.
But alas, we reach the major problem with the platform. Fragmentation. I’m not referring to the Fragmentation of the various app stores and apps available based on different OS versions but more to the Fragmentation of the OS based on the custom skins and manufacturer update cycles. The open platform that is closed at 2 levels, Manufactures and Carriers. I will continue to buy my phones outright as it gives me the freedom and flexibility to upgrade my plans as better ones become available. This always guarantees that I’m free from the bloatware that is preloaded on most Carrier bought phones and free from 1 of the barriers to the true AOSP experience. The next barrier is one that is running rampant in the interwebs rumour mill at the moment and that’s manufacturer updates and in my case I refer to Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy S phones come loaded with Android 2.1, most of them internationally are running Android 2.2 and just recently as select group of the devices is getting Android 2.2.1. This is now a month after Android 2.3 was released. For Samsung I would consider this largely negligent, considering they had the opportunity to work with Google to build a Google Experience Phone (Nexus S). The specs of this phone are so similar to the Galaxy range that a port shouldn’t be too difficult. I understand that there are a lot of constraints and dependencies in the development cycle that could cause delays as well as manufacturers agendas (mostly in unit sales). It is great that Samsung have sold so many devices globally but at a cost of the user experience as well as potential damages to long term retention.
I understand the Open nature of Android and the push to encourage manufacturers to put there own spin on the platform, but Android is getting bigger and more mature, it doesn’t need to be High school girl bending to the whims and peer pressure from the carriers and manufacturers.
There are a team of Devs in Germany who are working to port CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread) to Galaxy S i9000, but these guys have now spent over four months just trying to get through Samsungs drivers. The team didn’t start just to customise the phone but to actually make the phone work properly, I of course refer to the RFS lag issue and Samsungs modification to the framework that slowed it down. The goal of the team is to maximise the potential of the hardware and operating system.
It would be great to see some muscle from Google thrown into the mix, there doesn’t need to be requirements dictated, but maybe ethics encouraged.
There seems to be a few options here:
- Encourage device manufacturers to share their drivers, if it is too sensitive to share at least work with the community to help them do it themselves.
- Start to break down the way the platform is customised so that way the manufactures (Samsung/HTC/Motorola) skin the platform can sit a layer above the core code, thus be a quick implementation/customisation to get their skins working.
- Get each manufacturer to offer the AOSP experience to advanced users. This can be done through an agreement between the user and manufacture that states this will void the warranty and have its own terms and conditions.
- This last one is a long stretch, but how about taking all the manufacturers drivers into a repository, the way Windows do updates. When a new Android version is developed the drivers can be updated or incorporated and be packaged out through the Android SDK.
I may be completely off the mark. I’m not a developer and couldn’t pretend to know what effort is involved at any stage of the process, from building Android to rolling it out into the latest and greatest phone. The one thing I am though is an End User, a person that wants my phone to do more, to get close to being a desktop replacement.
Maybe I’m also being a bit idealistic.
I hope the Android platform continues to flourish and for it to become the Windows of the mobile era.
Sincerely,
Irwin Proud
E: [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really an excellent summary. Consider there're even more black sheeps out there. For example Sony Ericcson which ones recently made a statement like Android is their favourite Smartphone OS and left Symbian in Nokias hands.
But we found also the good ones like HTC, which every Manufacturer should have HTC as its Paragon concerning Android Software Development.
Great write-up; I agree 100%
I agree with your post fully, and concur that the Windows Phone 7 model for OS updates is more efficient, and strikes a happy medium between iOS and Android's approach to upgrades. However it is also more restrictive in terms of handset hardware limitations
I suppose the idea is that customers should vote with their wallets and buy from companies with good software and firmware support. The problem with that is a majority of phone users (android or otherwise) are technically savvy enough to take such support into consideration when looking at the latest and greatest fancy phone in a store. We could all buy the Nexus One or Nexus S only, but this too is restrictive to the customer as other phones offer more/different features
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
What Google should do?
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please allow me to politely disagree. Google can do a lot about this and they have done this also. When I say they have done this - I am talking about not having Market application on Android OSes which come on non-phone hardware.
Google should put similar restrictions for loosley coupled skins, upgradable drivers. I had been giving this a lot of thought lately. I will sum up my thoughts with above letter as above:-
i) Device manufacturer skinning - Google should mandate that it should be just another APK within AOSP and users should be given a choice to turn it off.
ii) Device Drivers - Google should mandate there should be a better way of installing device drivers - similar to what we have in MS Windows (MS Windows is an excellent model of how hardware device should be handled - this lead to the exponential growth Windows is enjoying now).
iii) Android OS Update - If Google can achieve the above two, then the choice to upgrade the OS should be at user discretion. Of course, Google should mandate that there is OTA availble as an option. And obviously this OTA would be served by Google, not by device manufacturers. This would also free up time, effort and cash spent by device manufacturers in upgrading the OS.
So this is in the best of interest of everybody.
These restrictions if put in place, would free us all from this phenomena of running outdated OS.
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Thank you so far for the feedback.
poundesville said:
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember most members of XDA would be a cut above the average user. The reason this letter was written the way it was, was to demonstrate that I am a typical end user. Although I would consider myself leaning slightly to the more advanced side I wrote the letter based on a very general experience of the platform, an experience a lot of consumers would go through.
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What am I trying to achieve with this letter?
I really don’t know, but it helps to just get the thoughts out there.
With approximately 300,000 activations daily, I don’t think Android sees the true reflection of how their platform is received.
When the Galaxy range of phones was released in the US, they would have been seen as the closest thing to an iPhone that non-AT&T customers could get. So sales and activations shouldn’t be seen as the indicator of clever consumers or consumers wanting an open platform, but of consumers who wanted an iPhone but for the various reasons didn’t want to go with AT&T.
Remember: The international Samsung Galaxy is the only Android phone I know of that looks more like an iPhone than any other phone.
What I would really like to see is, that annually google will release a major version of Android. So V1, V2, V3, etc…. the mobile manufacturers commit to any minor or incremental updates per major version. So if Google says they are releasing Android 2.4 then they are saying to the manufacturer that this version will also work on any phone that currently supports v2.1 to v2.3.
As more and more people move to smartphones and tablets, more and more will we see hackers, spammers, botnets and so on attempt to access our devices. If we can’t have the latest updates that close any open holes then our phones become a huge liability.
Pierreken said:
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure if Samsung has failed as such, but have put too much focus on unit sales rather than quality control and great user experience. They started releasing different iterations and modifications to the same phone without considering that each minor tweak to the hardware would mean more resources to develop updates and maintain each device.
I also agree that without Samsung I would know very little about linux filesystems, kernel and custom roms, but shouldn't all of these be more to push the phone above it's limits and not to just get it working properly?
There's nothing wrong with knowing the advanced stuff, however it shouldn't be a necessity.
The problem ironically is that Android is open source. I agree wit the letter above, but I can;t see how you can stop manufacturers doing what they want.
Also the Drivers being proprietary isn't going to change and device manufacturers aren't going to suddenly start releasing their closed driver sources.
Agreed Google should stand up and restrict the Skins to a single APK that can be removed, this would stop all the associated problems with HTC and Samsung skinning too deep in to the OS that it becomes impossible to remove it. The problem with that is, then any manufacturers APK will be installable on any phone. Which is something we know they don't want.
We already know Androids biggest downfall and so does Google. Fragmentation.
I believe once Google has the strong position they want and users demand Android when they buy a new phone, they will start to put their foot down and try to enforce standardisation across Manufacturers, but until they get to what they feel is that point, we're stuck.
Anyway much luck with the letter, I hope someone who matters get's to see it.
Logicalstep
Related
I think it is rather obvious that our problems with the X10 and SE can be attributed directly to SE UI's. If SE are not able to get their UI's stable enough to run with native Android revisions couldn't SE scrap them all together? Or, at least release their products native and offer their UXP down the road when they have been able to get what ever they add to run smoothly enough with current OS and features.
3rd party add-ons are ruining the Android experience. In it's current form I do not see any advantage to Android or SE. And, I am hoping now the WINMO7 will be great; since I am confident that my next device will not be Android or SE. I understand that this is not Googles fault, but as the end user suffering through the X10's lag, bugs, closed platform, lack of control ability, and lack of timely revisions (or any revisions for that fact), where is the Android advantage?
Right now it is the companies that have partnered with Google on Android who might wind up being responsible for Android's eventual demise.
I guess the only thing we can do is hope that rumors about Gingerbread not accepting 3rd party UI's is true. If not I can not see Android being anything more then 3rd rate in the future.
Are you still trying to flame-bait?
If all a company had to offer was the same stock experience as everyone else, it wouldn't have a product to market. Why do you think every major manufacturer has their own custom UI on top of Android?
I agree that a small, niche market for stock Android exists, but it won't be enough to carry a company's sales.
It's incredibly simple marketing.
Also, I find it incredibly telling that you've chosen to ignore the six or seven firmware updates the X10 has received.
fm1776 said:
I guess the only thing we can do is hope that rumors about Gingerbread not accepting 3rd party UI's is true. If not I can not see Android being anything more then 3rd rate in the future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If Android is not accepting 3rd party UI, then i throw Android away.
Having many selection that differentiate you and the other, that is the beauty of it man. One of the major turn off of iPhone for me is there is only single product, none offers with keyboard, same color, the UI is also is all the same. Like there is no difference between my iPhone and everyone's iPhone.
And i think the future of UXP is very bright compared to other Android device. When you pick up Samsung Galaxy S and play it side by side with your X10, you will know immediately which one is better.
Anyway, the point is full experience customization is a really wonderful thing to have.
That's why i choose to buy X10 and still prefer to use it even though its still 1.6. In my office desk i have a lot of other Android phone i can take for personal usage. Nexus One, Motorola Milestone and also Samsung Galaxy Spica, LG GW 620.
Most of them are faster and better then X10 in term of speed and because of Froyo, but whenever i take one home, i end up using X10 instead.
So conclusion its SE DEV fault that the update is delayed, but full 3rd party customization is the best thing you can have in your smartphone.
Hell, my friend is keep on whining that his iPhone doesn't have Swype and also complains about iPhone keyboard auto-correct, while i can install any onscreen keyboard for Android.
Here is one of hundreds of articles I found related to Gingerbread. So obviously there are plenty of people who see the OEM added skins as much of a problem as I do. And, from my personal experience with the X10 this hits the nail on the head.
http://www.dailytech.com/Android+30+Gingerbread+Launches+Q4+Will+Kill+Off+OEM+UI+Skins/article18897.htm
My user experience with the X10 has been anything but enjoyable. And, since this is my first and only Android experience it has left a bad taste in my mouth. I seriously doubt that I would consider another Android device without killing off OEM add-ons that interfere with OS revisions. Let's allow the manufacturers build the hardware and leave the OS's to companies that design it. Because it is all to obvious that SE for example do not know what they are doing when it comes to UI. Which is exactly why we are still waiting after over half a year for our revision.
This whole SE premise of them "improving the overall user experience" has seriously back fired on the X10.
If what is being said about Gingerbread is true I might consider giving Android another try. Though I doubt I would give SE another go.
fm1776 said:
Here is one of hundreds of articles I found related to Gingerbread. So obviously there are plenty of people who see the OEM added skins as much of a problem as I do. And, from my personal experience with the X10 this hits the nail on the head.
http://www.dailytech.com/Android+30+Gingerbread+Launches+Q4+Will+Kill+Off+OEM+UI+Skins/article18897.htm
My user experience with the X10 has been anything but enjoyable. And, since this is my first and only Android experience it has left a bad taste in my mouth. I seriously doubt that I would consider another Android device without killing off OEM add-ons that interfere with OS revisions. Let's allow the manufacturers build the hardware and leave the OS's to companies that design it. Because it is all to obvious that SE for example do not know what they are doing when it comes to UI. Which is exactly why we are still waiting after over half a year for our revision.
This whole SE premise of them "improving the overall user experience" has seriously back fired on the X10.
If what is being said about Gingerbread is true I might consider giving Android another try. Though I doubt I would give SE another go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"The wealth of information was leaked by Mobile-review.com’s Eldar Murtazin in his Russian language/locale podcast "Digestiv.""
While the guy has a good track record, anything said about a non-existent OS can't be taken as fact.
Also, you seem to be the only person brutally raped by the X10 that, for some reason, keeps asking for more, soapfree. I don't understand why you post repeatedly about an OS and phone you claim to hate so much.
SE's UI is just a slap of blue over stock Android, with some widgets. Then you go and blame them when they want to make sure their update is bug-free (as it can be)? Would you rather they ship phones like the G2 that fall apart? Or that they ship 4 phones within two months that can't use GPS properly? SE's biggest problem is the in-call volume on certain phones is low and the Android version it's running is 1.6. There have been scattered reports of USB ports breaking, (probably more than G2's that are falling apart), and some issues that affect nearly all GSM/3G phones, namely APN and Network settings.
xeviro said:
If Android is not accepting 3rd party UI, then i throw Android away.
Having many selection that differentiate you and the other, that is the beauty of it man. One of the major turn off of iPhone for me is there is only single product, none offers with keyboard, same color, the UI is also is all the same. Like there is no difference between my iPhone and everyone's iPhone.
And i think the future of UXP is very bright compared to other Android device. When you pick up Samsung Galaxy S and play it side by side with your X10, you will know immediately which one is better.
Anyway, the point is full experience customization is a really wonderful thing to have.
That's why i choose to buy X10 and still prefer to use it even though its still 1.6. In my office desk i have a lot of other Android phone i can take for personal usage. Nexus One, Motorola Milestone and also Samsung Galaxy Spica, LG GW 620.
Most of them are faster and better then X10 in term of speed and because of Froyo, but whenever i take one home, i end up using X10 instead.
So conclusion its SE DEV fault that the update is delayed, but full 3rd party customization is the best thing you can have in your smartphone.
Hell, my friend is keep on whining that his iPhone doesn't have Swype and also complains about iPhone keyboard auto-correct, while i can install any onscreen keyboard for Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SE added UI is what has killed the X10. So if you are asking SE to listened to you they would go out of business within a few short years. As of today the iphone4 is the best device on the market exactly for the reason that the are no 3rd party skins. I am not saying that this will be the case tomorrow. But as of today right now it is.
Timescape is a marketing ploy with little to no user interface. And, because of it you can not get support for full flash capabilities; 2.2 native is 1000 times better. On the other hand I like Media scape. But that is just because I own my own media files. Is Media scape really that much better than native? Or is it that much better than third party soft you could find on your own in Android market or, something user created here in XDA; that is if the X10 was really an open platform? A software that would not prevent your device getting the latest OS the day it is released. SE's entire objective it to offer you their skins that will lead you to their OEM created after market for media (just like apple). However, there are only a dozen movies, games, and songs to download there. At least with iphone4 you have itunes. How could you possibly want that? That is pure madness man. And, you said "Anyway, the point is full experience customization is a really wonderful thing to have." Where is the full customization in the X10? The X10 is locked down with little to no customization. It is a joke and I just laugh harder when people keeping mistakenly claim that this device is anything but a closed platform.
I like competition that comes from a free market system as much as the next guy. But SE are adding their UI's to remove that competition, not to add to it. And, X10 users are guinea pigs whilst they work out the details. It has a long way to go. And, why make their current customers suffer before they have their market in place? They are still trying to negotiate with the entertainment industry for goodness sake. It is a long , long way off mate. So, if you think you are getting some kind of magical benefit from SE skins you need to have your head examined.
There would be plenty to distinguish one device from the next without OEM added non-sense. Besides hardware (which SE also do not manufacture themselves), there is Android market. OEM's that want to stand out for the right reasons will need to start being true manufacturers and not simply some design company slapping together the same pieces of plastic everyone else is using and than adding some cheap skins that either don't even work right, or are simply a gimmick.
All these things that people use to criticize Apple for are what most users are really getting in non-apple phones. You are getting screwed by SE and lack the understand to even know that it is happening. I find that comical.
iead1 said:
"The wealth of information was leaked by Mobile-review.com’s Eldar Murtazin in his Russian language/locale podcast "Digestiv.""
While the guy has a good track record, anything said about a non-existent OS can't be taken as fact.
Also, you seem to be the only person brutally raped by the X10 that, for some reason, keeps asking for more, soapfree. I don't understand why you post repeatedly about an OS and phone you claim to hate so much.
SE's UI is just a slap of blue over stock Android, with some widgets. Then you go and blame them when they want to make sure their update is bug-free (as it can be)? Would you rather they ship phones like the G2 that fall apart? Or that they ship 4 phones within two months that can't use GPS properly? SE's biggest problem is the in-call volume on certain phones is low and the Android version it's running is 1.6. There have been scattered reports of USB ports breaking, (probably more than G2's that are falling apart), and some issues that affect nearly all GSM/3G phones, namely APN and Network settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because you make a claim here in your post that the only thing bugging on the X10 is call volume does not make it so. There are plenty of bugs in this phone. SE added UI skins being the biggest one driving away customer right now. And, a whole host of others. But this thread is not about the X10's call volume, or screen lag, or battery life, or wifi, or any other bug. It is about the UXP, SE -vs- native, so let's try to stay on point. But if you want to start a thread about X10 bugs I would be happy ot contribute
iead1 said:
SE's UI is just a slap of blue over stock Android, with some widgets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am quoting you twice because I would like to put this into perspective.
Xerviro says if if there are no OEM UI skins he would chuck the phone in the trash. You say the UI's are simply color schemes!
Why don't you both simply consider the iphone4 a different option with a different color scheme. Only one other difference. Theirs has itunes market and no 3rd party added UI skins getting in the way of updates whilst Android come out with a new OS every other week.
try to be at least remotely objective. Or, at least try to appear so.
UI = User Interface
"In computer science and human-computer interaction, the user interface (of a computer program) refers to the graphical, textual and auditory information the program presents to the user, and the control sequences (such as keystrokes with the computer keyboard, movements of the computer mouse, and selections with the touchscreen) the user employs to control the program."
The UI is the menu system, the home screen, app drawer, notification bar, ect.
You're talking more about Widgets and Apps like Timescape and Mediascape. There's a deliniating line. HTC's Sense and Samsung's Touchwiz are UIs because they take over how you interact with the phone. Timescape and Mediascape don't add anything to the basic User Interface. That is to say, if you removed them, the phone would act exactly the same. SE has failed miserably in making Timescape a UI. (Like the fact that the Timescape interface is not default when you turn on the phone).
Also, I want evidence of a new Android OS every other week. So far, in 2010, we've received minor OS updates 2.1, 2.2, and 2.2.1. Not exactly "every other week", or Operating Systems, seeing as we're currently in October. Edit: In comparison, Apple has released more firmware updates, and has it's flagship product still running on a version released over a year ago.
DailyTech said:
Another drastic change in Android 3.0 is that Google is killing off third-party user interface shells like Motorblur and HTC Sense, by offering a faster, superior alternative. The new built-in UI is reportedly similar to that seen in the Gallery app in this clip, with fluid animations and a photobook sort of feel to it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I understand it and as another article (i can't remember where) says, Gingerbread doesn't prohibit third-party UI's, it just offers a UI which in their opinion makes them unnecessary. IF a phone company decides to change the UI nonetheless, it can still do it. How would you ban third-party UI's anyway since Android is completely Open Source?!
Edit: ah, here is the article i mentioned: http://www.intomobile.com/2010/06/16/android-to-focus-on-user-experience-with-gingerbread/
Android coming out with OS updates every few weeks has certainly put front and center some issues. I appreciate they are trying to get improvements of their product to the customers as quickly as possible. That is great service. What the end users are experience as a result of their improvments is simply high lighting a problem that has been around longer than they have.
And, that is the OEM UI skins. Which tend to be a gimmick that are not improving the over all customer experience in the slightest. This problem will most likely be less obvious next year when Android slow down the number of revisions they issue. However, unless something is done to block OEM UI add-ons it will continue to be a problem. People will always be frustraited waiting for OS revision and new features whilst the OEM's get their UI's to run smoothly with the next OS. By the way none of which is open source. It is all propriatary in nature.
This entire problem is created by the companies that have partnered with Google to support Android. And, SE is the worst offender. X10 customers are unfortunetly experiencing the most extreme case of this issue.
Until either Gingerbread, a newer Maemo, or winmo7 come out the safest device to own right now is the iphone4 to avoid these issues and the problems that come with it. It either has every single feature available in every our device on the market or offers a fair alternative. Without 3rd party add-ons deminishing the over all user experience. Come summer 2011 maybe this will no longer be true. But as things stand right now Android stink, for no fault of their own.
qwer23 said:
How would you ban third-party UI's anyway since Android is completely Open Source?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They would do it contractually. Open source is meant to be open source to the end user. And, not for the OEM to close with ridiculous UI's that offer no real end user benefits. The X10 is Android and it is NOT open source. So as things stands such much for the open source arguement.
I saw what you are saying about the android created UI's too. We can only hope. But as things are now Android will go out of business. Driven there by their own partners who were supporting their plat form.
fm1776 said:
Android coming out with OS updates every few weeks has certainly put front and center some issues. I appreciate they are trying to get improvements of their product to the customers as quickly as possible. That is great service. What the end users are experience as a result of their improvments is simply high lighting a problem that has been around longer than they have.
And, that is the OEM UI skins. Which tend to be a gimmick that are not improving the over all customer experience in the slightest. This problem will most likely be less obvious next year when Android slow down the number of revisions they issue. However, unless something is done to block OEM UI add-ons it will continue to be a problem. People will always be frustraited waiting for OS revision and new features whilst the OEM's get their UI's to run smoothly with the next OS. By the way none of which is open source. It is all propriatary in nature.
This entire problem is created by the companies that have partnered with Google to support Android. And, SE is the worst offender. X10 customers are unfortunetly experiencing the most extreme case of this issue.
Until either Gingerbread, a newer Maemo, or winmo7 come out the safest device to own right now is the iphone4 to avoid these issues and the problems that come with it. It either has every single feature available in every our device on the market or offers a fair alternative. Without 3rd party add-ons deminishing the over all user experience. Come summer 2011 maybe this will no longer be true. But as things stand right now Android stink, for no fault of their own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're the wordiest troll ever.
2010:
Android version 2.1 - January 12
Android version 2.2 - May 20
Android version 2.2.1 - October 1
Please, please, please tell me how five month gaps qualify as "a few weeks". Not to mention 2.2.1 is just bug fixes.
What is proprietary? The OEM's UI? Well no duh! If HTC's Sense UI was Open Source, anyone could download it to their Android phone, and thus, defeat the purpose of selling phones based on uniqueness.
I really don't understand what your argument is here. Do you hate customization? Do you love customization? Do you hate open source? Windows Phone 7 and iOS4 seem to be up your alley. Leave Android to the people who like to tinker around.
fm1776 said:
They would do it contractually. Open source is meant to be open source to the end user. And, not for the OEM to close with ridiculous UI's that offer no real end user benefits. The X10 is Android and it is NOT open source. So as things stands such much for the open source arguement.
I saw what you are saying about the android created UI's too. We can only hope. But as things are now Android will go out of business. Driven there by their own partners who were supporting their plat form.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you know the meaning of any word that you post on here?
Open Source has nothing to do with the end user in this case. Please educate yourself: http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
iead1 said:
You're the wordiest troll ever.
2010:
Android version 2.1 - January 12
Android version 2.2 - May 20
Android version 2.2.1 - October 1
Please, please, please tell me how five month gaps qualify as "a few weeks". Not to mention 2.2.1 is just bug fixes.
What is proprietary? The OEM's UI? Well no duh! If HTC's Sense UI was Open Source, anyone could download it to their Android phone, and thus, defeat the purpose of selling phones based on uniqueness.
I really don't understand what your argument is here. Do you hate customization? Do you love customization? Do you hate open source? Windows Phone 7 and iOS4 seem to be up your alley. Leave Android to the people who like to tinker around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trolling is what you are doing on this thread.
Obviously I was exaggerating the the number of updates to high light the point; but you already know that. So no need to comment on your flaming.
When SE closed Android 1.6 they made it proprietary. Hence it is no longer open source. That means it is CLOSED and no different from winmo or ios.
Since the X10 is C.L.O.S.E.D and N.O.T open there is little to nothing customizable about it. Absolutely ZERO difference with an iphone4. Except at least with an apple you have itunes and the latest OS and features. With the X10 you have to deal with the interference from yhe OEM add-ons that accomplish nothing more than you could have already gotten from native android. And, you do not have the latest feature which the X10 does not support.
iead1 said:
Do you know the meaning of any word that you post on here?
Open Source has nothing to do with the end user in this case. Please educate yourself: http://arstechnica.com/old/content/...se-the-apache-software-license-over-gplv2.ars
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The article you are included is absolutely correct. However, open source for software developement is not what I am speaking about and is a completely moot point as this is a total seperate topic.
Though, I think this could be a good topic for you to start in your own thread. I would be happy to contribute to this topic as well.
fm1776 said:
Since the X10 is C.L.O.S.E.D and N.O.T open there is little to nothing customizable about it. Absolutely ZERO difference with an iphone4. Except at least with an apple you have itunes and the latest OS and features. With the X10 you have to deal with the interference from yhe OEM add-ons that accomplish nothing more than you could have already gotten from native android. And, you do not have the latest feature which the X10 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So changing the entire home screen interface is "not customizable"? Adding any widget you can think is "not customizable"? Changing the on-screen keyboard to be anything you like is "not customizable"? Changing the lock screen is "not customizable"? Changing the default program for anything is "not customizable"? Can you do any of that with an iPhone? The only customization you get on the iPhone is wallpaper.
Hell, I have an iPod touch, and I'm artificially not allowed to update to the latest firmware. The internals in the first gen touch, first gen iPhone, iPhone 3G, and second gen iPod touch are all the same. Apple just says "Sorry, buy a new iPod".
Every commercial Android product is "closed", because the OEMs have added their own value-add to the base code to market it to consumers.
I'm trying really hard to play nice, but, when you say such silly things, it's really really difficult.
iead1 said:
Please, please, please tell me how five month gaps qualify as "a few weeks". .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I already stated I was simply exaggerating to express a point. This point hand absolutely nothing to do with a specific time line on Androids side.
But since you bring it up, let me explain my same point in your own terminology.
Android come out with an update every five months. But it take SE 12 month's or more to engineer their UI skins to the newer OS before it is released to the end user. And, this isn't even counting any extra time certain service providers might want to add their bit.
Well you and I just explained the exact same thing two different ways. So thank you for helping me make my point. I still think I already made it on my own, but thank you just the same.
Edit- Customization is the ability to first change the devices behavior. My X1 is by far more customizable than the X10. Heck my P910 was more "customizable" than the X10
Have to agree with iead.. Although I have no real experience of winmo, android on the x10 is massively more customizable than ios. There really is no comparison on this point they're so far apart..
Sent from my x10 using XDA and swype.
im_iceman said:
Have to agree with iead.. Although I have no real experience of winmo, android on the x10 is massively more customizable than ios. There really is no comparison on this point they're so far apart..
Sent from my x10 using XDA and swype.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, first let me say that my thread is about 3rd party UI's -vs- native android. So if we could start to return to the subject it would be appreciated.
As for your comment. I am listening to how you precieve the X10 as being more customizable than any other device. You mentioned ios, Please tell us what you find less or more customizable about either, feel free to be absolutely specific? Oh yeah and which model you had?
As for everyone else could you please get back on topic. If there is demand for the customization iead could start that topic too. I will happily come contribute.
Everytime I read mobile.engadget or any gadget site for that matter, I see posts "dogging" the Android operating system about how they are fragmented and certain apps/games won't work for older OS's/devices. Our EVOs have been out for almost 6 months now and this phone is still rock solid IMO but I wonder how fragmented (if at all) this OS is and what that means for this phone and future android devices. I'm literally asking cause I have no idea. And also what the heck is fragmented actually mean, cause all I get out of this is that the older Android devices just can't run the app or game because of the older/slower specs not necessarily because of the OS.
It would help if you posted the link. When you say fragmented, I would guess that this means that Android Users are divided between those that can run an application on said device and those that can't.
This is not any different that using M$ OS's as well. Not all applications will run on older Operating Systems. This is partly due to Hardware upgrades and partly due to marketing. If all software were reverse compatible then people would be less likely to upgrade their devices. Also the list of Drivers would get longer and longer as the Android Developers add phones to their database.
Apple only has what, 4 phones and 2 or 3 Ipod Touch's? And realistically most of the people that own these would have the 3rd or 4th Gen. Phone anyways. I think the "fragmentation" problem will exist on no matter what platform OS you are using, its just that Android is on sooooo many devices now ranging from Phones/TV and now its going into cars. It wouldn't surprise me to see it on X-box since they like to run Linux code.
So yeah.... Long story short its due to all of the different devices and the fact that no one keeps electronics for any length of time but IMHO Android will start to get a lot more life out of their electronics since the software is upgradeable like on a PC.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. We saw the same thing in the computer desktop arena. At one point you had Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, Win95, WinNT, and Win98 all running around at the same time. Going back even further all the different flavors of DOS. The PC industry survived so will Android. Eventually you will have to upgrade so fragmentation is pretty much a moot point. IMHO
My guess would be because there are phones running multiple versions of the OS such as 1.6/2.1/2.2. Some apps such as task killers will work on 1.6 and 2.1 but not 2.2+. Game compatibility seems more reliant on what that particular phone is capable of. Our phones can handle just about any game available whereas a G1 or MT3G is far more limited.
Sent from my HTC SUPERSONIC
Fragmentation refers to the fact that there are so many different versions of android the app developers have to code for. With the Iphone for example most everyone is at version 4.1 or 4.2. Android devices are being released with 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2 and soon 2.3. It makes it extremely hard to code and optimize apps across all versions. I foresee this has having no negative effects on our beloved EVO's for though.
People like to point out the fact that there are multiple android devices, and not all of them are on the newest os (like some of the sgs phones not having froyo, or the moment, or hero for example). unlike the iphone, where there is only one device of each generation, and when the update is released, everyone can get it.
My take on this is I like variety, just because I like my Evo doesn't mean it suits everyone. Just like there are a ton of people that consider a hardware keyboard a must have, yet I would rather not have one. Having to wait for HTC and Sprint to release the newest version to my phone, or wait for one of the amazing developers contributing their hard work and skill to port it for use is just fine with me. Would it be nice to get it the moment google pushes it out, probably, however I can almost bet that the Nexus line will always get first crack anyway. This is just my two cents, I hope the explanation helps.
Sent from my HTC SuperSonic 4G using the XDA app.
Brutal-Force said:
It would help if you posted the link. When you say fragmented, I would guess that this means that Android Users are divided between those that can run an application on said device and those that can't.
This is not any different that using M$ OS's as well. Not all applications will run on older Operating Systems. This is partly due to Hardware upgrades and partly due to marketing. If all software were reverse compatible then people would be less likely to upgrade their devices. Also the list of Drivers would get longer and longer as the Android Developers add phones to their database.
Apple only has what, 4 phones and 2 or 3 Ipod Touch's? And realistically most of the people that own these would have the 3rd or 4th Gen. Phone anyways. I think the "fragmentation" problem will exist on no matter what platform OS you are using, its just that Android is on sooooo many devices now ranging from Phones/TV and now its going into cars. It wouldn't surprise me to see it on X-box since they like to run Linux code.
So yeah.... Long story short its due to all of the different devices and the fact that no one keeps electronics for any length of time but IMHO Android will start to get a lot more life out of their electronics since the software is upgradeable like on a PC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
My two cents:
I think the "fragmentation" issue is primarily software related and is the fault of the manufacturers and service providers. That said, I think the most important issue is whether the fragmentation discourages developers from creating apps for Android.
As hardware and software advances there will always be features that will work on some phones and not work on others. This occurs with the iPhone too and is no surprise, however, Apple still rolls out new OS's to all phones so that the vast majority of users are on the same platform.
While Google has been releasing two versions of Android per year, it is the manufacturers and service providers who decide whether or not to roll out the updates and that seems to be a crapshoot. Since the manufacturers are not just tolling out vanilla Android, instead choosing to overlay their own UI on top (e.g. Touchwiz or Sense UI), this would require effort on their part to rework their UI to keep up with Android updates. And, sometimes they do, sometimes they don't... So, even though you have hardware in circulation perfectly capable of running newer versions of Android they don't because the manufacturers don't allow it.
I think most people would agree the number of quality apps in the iTunes store far exceeds the number of quality apps in the Android Market. However, Android has been outselling the iPhone for almost a year now. The question is: Is it the "fragmentation" keeping developers from porting their apps to Android? Or, is it something else? If it IS the fragmentation then I AM worried. I think 2011 is an important year for Android and I remain optimistic the Apps will come. It'll be interesting if they don't...
To Be Continued...
the evil fragmentation comes from low-end android phones also some developers not properly coding
Beejis said:
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
simple to answer i think, here's the thing, not every phone is going to be the same, just like not every carrier is the same, what i mean is that each manufacturer is going to have their own set of hardware and specs to follow, thus giving them an option to best choose the Android version that best suits the phone they are building.
Engadget is a huge iEverything fan, so they will help bash android and google just as much as Mr. duschbag, sorry i meant Job's, but you get the point, after all it was Jobs that first coined the whole android is fragmented war, however someone correct me if i'm wrong.
Besides if manufacturer were to listen to android about having a set standard then we might as well also be referred to as Apple, but since we're not under the dictatorship of Stevie, we don't have to worry about that.
Android fragmentation deals with both software and hardware.
Software-wise you have different phones having different Android versions -- OEMs seem to only support their phones for a year, sometimes even less, and sometimes not at all after it's release. You already see this problem with 1.6 vs 2.0 vs 2.1 vs 2.2; and as soon as Gingerbread appears you'll be seeing a sudden split between Android version share. This causes problems for developers because each Android version supports varying API levels, so some phones are inevitably left behind by developers.
Hardware-wise you have a lot of phones that are very different. You can have two phones of the same Android version and you'll still see app incompatibilities. Different CPUs, GPUs, cameras, etc., causes developers to work extra hard to make them all work; this sometimes leads them to drop support for some either because of the extra work it would take or because the hardware is just two low end. This is especially true with games and a reason why I think iOS/WP7 will be the leading mobile gaming platforms in a couple of years.
A lot of people think that Android Market will suddenly become the best once Android's market share inevitably over runs iOS; and I personally think it wont because of fragmentation. I don't think people understand just how expensive it is to develop and design an app that is of the top ~10% iOS quality -- it's in the 100's of thousands. Supporting Android is just that much more difficult for developers. Then there's the fact that a lot of the increasing market share is coming from low end phones which: 1) will probably suffer the worse from the fragmentation problem (incompatibilities with apps), and 2) would most likely not even invest into many paid apps anyway.
Beejis said:
One example of many if you google...
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/entelligence-will-android-fragmentation-destroy-the-platform/
Yeah I'm not smart enough to know if this would effect our phones or not, but who really knows as of right now? Why doesn't Android just do what MS did and make a standard for what the manufacturers need to build in order for it to be up to par for Android (for once MS did something right in that regard IMO). Is that what Honeycomb is suppose to accomplish, a minimal spec sheet for manufacturers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Intel did it, M$ did it, AMD did it, Nvidia did it and Apple is doing it now. The reason we use Android is so that Corporations don't MAKE us do it. Also, companies like M$, Intel and Nvidia have been pulled into court for things like this. In the end, they "open" back up, because thats what people want.
Brutal-Force said:
Intel did it, M$ did it, AMD did it, Nvidia did it and Apple is doing it now. The reason we use Android is so that Corporations don't MAKE us do it. Also, companies like M$, Intel and Nvidia have been pulled into court for things like this. In the end, they "open" back up, because thats what people want.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People want open? Really? People just want good phones.
Best example....
Most people upgrade their phones every two years. So it won't really matter so long in those two years we get at least one upgrade.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
novanosis85 said:
Best example....
Most people upgrade their phones every two years. So it won't really matter so long in those two years we get at least one upgrade.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you'd be okay rocking a 1.6 phone right now and for maybe another year?
This may have been an issue a year ago but if you check this link:
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
you can see that 77% of android devices are 2.1 and 2.2. Newer versions of the OS will hopefully decouple software updates from the actual service carrier and phone manufacturer, increasing this percentage even further.
Google makes available many guides for deploying your application and being able to support across all versions. Also, the sdk easily allows you to target the newest version and features while still maintaining portability to older OS versions.
Basically, unless you are developing some crazy cutting edge application then 'fragmentation' is not an issue, hardware or software. Using that as a dividing factor with regards to gauging the success of the operating system is by now a stretch from the truth.
elegantai said:
This may have been an issue a year ago but if you check this link:
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
you can see that 77% of android devices are 2.1 and 2.2. Newer versions of the OS will hopefully decouple software updates from the actual service carrier and phone manufacturer, increasing this percentage even further.
Google makes available many guides for deploying your application and being able to support across all versions. Also, the sdk easily allows you to target the newest version and features while still maintaining portability to older OS versions.
Basically, unless you are developing some crazy cutting edge application then 'fragmentation' is not an issue, hardware or software. Using that as a dividing factor with regards to gauging the success of the operating system is by now a stretch from the truth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd argue that the large share of 2.1/2.2 devices is due to the fact that Android has finally gotten popular and sales of current devices has really picked up. So a majority of phones are currently newer 2.x devices. Lets see how this is once 2.3 is released and OEMs fail to keep them up to date just as how it has been in the past.
That is one possibility, but if you look at the bottom of that page there is a stacked line graph representing the historical distribution over the past 6 months.
If you look at version 2.1 and compare its slope to 1.5/1.6 you can see that the older versions follow the same slope as the 2.1 slope, meaning that 2.1 phones were actually replacing physical phones running 1.5 and 1.6.
If you look at when 2.2 takes a steep upward slope you will not notice the same pattern of 2.1 and older following the slope of 2.2, which tells me that more people upgraded from 2.1 to 2.2.
So if this pattern holds, then hopefully it means phone manufactures are starting to realize the importance of providing newer operating systems for their devices. But as you said, we will see!
It's fragmented, but people wouldn't care if all the apps worked across all versions. That's really the only problem.
The average person does not care how many mflops their device scores in linpack or what their quadrant score is, they just want to play Angry Birds, and their phone they bought last year can't, and they aren't able to upgrade yet.
clamknuckle said:
The average person does not care how many mflops their device scores in linpack or what their quadrant score is, they just want to play Angry Birds, and their phone they bought last year can't, and they aren't able to upgrade yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
10char.
Hello Everyone!
Let me start off by reaching out to the XDA Administrative staff. I would like to thank you for keeping this awesome place in operation. Without you, and the XDA community, I'm not sure Android development would be as vibrant. Also, if this thread is in the wrong location, please shift it to where you would like it.
I am an Android user, not a developer, and I feel the future of the Android OS is not headed where I want it to. I'm writing this post to see if anyone has any further thoughts on the matter.
Google is marketing Android as an Open Source OS. You are able to download the source, modify it as you wish, and then build it. If you are running a vanilla build of Android (i.e. Nexus S) you are able to alter your experience as you see fit. The issue I foresee isn't the fragmentation of the Android versions (which is still debated as an issue), but rather the fragmentation of the user experience.
When an end-user purchases a handset from most major carriers, they receive an Android device. Between different handsets, and carriers, the features that are available to a single user can vary exponentially (i.e. the inability to install APK files, bypassing the market, on AT&T devices). This device is still based on Android, but is it still Android?
I have no problem with manufacturers adding their own code to the Android system, as long as the core functionality is kept the same. When you begin to alter the basic functionality of the system, at what point is it no longer Android? Linux Mint is derived from Ubuntu, but it is no longer Ubuntu. The system is a derivative of Ubuntu. If the base of the OS is going to be altered drastically (by manufacturer or by request of carrier) it needs to be known that the device is not Android.
As I am most familiar with HTC Android devices, I will use HTC SenseUI as an example (although, as I think about this more it may not be the best example). The core functionality of the HTC devices is similar, but not entirely the same. Most of the default applications (Browser, Contacts, Dialer) have been altered to what HTC feels is more atheistically pleasing. However, these features are additions. They are not removing functionality from the device.
With my HTC Evo (by default) there are core functionalities removed. Without rooting my device, I am unable to tether via WiFi. Even when rooting, if I want to keep the 4G experience, I need to install a third party application to tether instead of simply using the functionality that was supposed to be built in to Android. Why? Sprint has decided to bake their own hotspot functionality into the core of the OS. Yet to use it, I am required to pay an extra $30 fee on top of my [i/unlimited[/i] data plan. I am not knocking Sprint, here. As long as I have used their service, I’ve had nothing but stellar performance and the price point is perfect.
I feel with this core functionality removed, my Evo is no longer Android. It’s simply Android-based, an Android derived OS. The problem with these manufacturers, and their Android-derived operating system, is the lack-luster experience the consumers get with the product.
I started my Android experience on an HTC CDMA Hero. It took me eight months to get any major software upgrades (The device ran Android 1.5 from factory). Why? Because it was taking so long for manufacturers to bake their Features into the OS. If I was not a techie, I feel this experience would have pushed me away from the Android platform. I fear this fragmentation that is occurring could be the downfall of the Android platform.
I want to be able to buy a device. I want to be running the newest version of Android. If I do not like the ROM that came on the phone, I want to be able to change that. But I do not want to purchase a phone with all of this baked in garbage, or aesthetic features that require me to wait long periods of times for my device to be upgraded to the newest version of Android. And, I hope that I am not the only person to feel this way.
So here is my idea, pending input from the Android community of course: An open letter, with a petition, to all members of the OHA requesting for Android devices to be Android! Unadulterated Android OS from Google (With minor modifications to ensure specific hardware is working properly). Requesting that we are given access to the entire device, that we paid for, without having to exploit the operating system to obtain the ability to modify it as we see fit. If a manufacturer, or carrier, does not wish to comply with this, they will not be able to market the device as being Android. Rather, the device is based on Android.
Honestly, I’m not sure what I am looking to accomplish. Maybe, just so they know we are just as interested in Android as they are. And that we want nothing but for Android to succeed. Or maybe, that we support Android being open source, but not being heavily modified to the point where it’s a bastardized.
What do you think?
Tim, I support you in your belief that carriers, not manufacturers, are taking the wrong turn by messing with the full functionality that people pay a hefty price to OWN!
Do we truly OWN what we paid for, or are paying for? I don't believe so, for example, the SAMSUNG Vibrant t959, aka the Samsung Galaxy S i9000, same phone but the carriers decided to have certain features removed from the phone, not be MADE without these features, the FM radio HW and the FFC. Many people know these features were REMOVED, due to the leftover molding and other " skeletons"! Would anyone want to have a carrier when they know that they don't want there customers to have the FULLEST experience, like it was meant to be?
Sent from my HTC MyDesireHD 4G!
I would also like to share with you that MANUFACTURERS creating these "skins", I'm going to use HTC Sense for my example, is actually NOT a bad thing at all!
HTC Sense has opened a huge amount of rich content and functionality to there users immensely! HTC Hub, HTC Locations for example! All these add ons are very useful to users and does NOT restrict the full functionality but yet BOOSTS its functionality!
Unfortunately though, carriers decide to take these hearty and supreme names and totally rip it apart by taking away functionality, features, and the most...a good user experience! For example, my phone..the HTC MyTouch 4G aka the HTC Glacier. I received it with something called Sense on it, but any owner knows that is NOT Sense! That is not HTC Sense! After burying myself in the bowels of my new phone, I now have a HTC Desire HD Rom on it that will stay on it until I get the new HTC Sense 2.3 update! The full HTC Sense is a good thing and I strongly believe its worth waiting for!
Sent from my HTC Glacier
I agree, but believe Android is a growing mobile OS. If Google did not push their mobile OS (and let manufactures do what they want). Android probably would not have last against the competition. Its all a survival of the fittest situation. Some people are going to make use of their phones others aren't. Too bad bloatware has been the success for some Android phones. Glad someone else noticed this. Thank you for your thread.
The fact that Android is open source will inevitably have benefits and downfalls.
Benefits being that carriers and manufacturers can add cool stuff. Downfalls being that they can remove good or add awful stuff.
However Google can't have double standards. If it's open source, it's open source, for better or for worse.
An advantage of OEMs participating is that more parties are contributing to coding for android. More innovative ideas are potentially contributed.
For techies this is particularly awesome as we can port awesome features that perhaps weren't designed for our phone and disable lame restrictions. By this way we potentially can have all software benefits of more than one company brand etc.
Being an ordinary consumer in this context can suck.
Tim, while I understand your frustration (trust me, I've felt similar over the past few months), I don't fully agree.
The heart of Android is that it is Open. Open Source is a part of the openness that envelops Android, but what is meant by "Android is open" is so much more. OEM's skinning their devices is part of it; carriers stuffing devices full of their crapware is part of it; heck, even manufacturers/carriers limiting devices' use in one form or another is technically part of it. I think that Google's model with Android is that people can use in whatever way they see fit (except, you know, literally stealing it and claiming that they made and own it) and adapting it to be the OS that they want. Android gives people the freedom to do with it what they like.
I think that Google hopes that carriers, OEMs and everyone else will use it for the better and add to the functionality and maybe even contribute to the Open Source project and thus to the greater Android community and the vision thereof. Sadly, it is not always the case and then you get situations where a carrier or an OEM will limit a device in some way for a quick buck (your example of tethering on the EVO being a good one). I think that what AT&T did/does on their Android devices is as a final product a good example of what Android is not intended to be, but their actions are, technically, still in the spirit of Android.
The way I see Android, it is about the freedom to do whatever you like. Android is then also more for the thinking person as there are literally hundreds of devices to choose from and each one has strengths and weaknesses when compared to the rest. You as a user need to consider what it is that you want from your device and then select the device that is the most suited to your needs.
I want to be able to buy a device. I want to be running the newest version of Android. If I do not like the ROM that came on the phone, I want to be able to change that. But I do not want to purchase a phone with all of this baked in garbage, or aesthetic features that require me to wait long periods of times for my device to be upgraded to the newest version of Android. And, I hope that I am not the only person to feel this way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are not the only person that feels that way, I feel the same, which is why I've decided to get myself a Nexus S. It's tricky to get it to this country, but it'll be worth it. I realise that you're on Sprint which means that a Nexus device won't work, correct? A better petition IMO, would be to petition Google to release CDMA versions of their devices.
Sorry to say, but 4G is not derived from android. The phone itself will always support it, harware wise. So, what are you saying? /: Who are you complaining to? ROM chefs for not managing to make the 4G fully functional?
totally agree with you
he is complaining about gimped devices being marketed as android devices. to sum up what i think his messages is; a device should not be called an android device if it is not fully capable of all it's natively supported features, wireless tether, root access etc. but rather should be called android based device.
Good idea but never going to happen. This is driving me away from this platform...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
I'm curious as to what functionality we can get by simply rooting. I'm not seeing the huge deal I may be missing something so I'm asking
Sent from my Incredible using XDA App
To me, they should just change the launcher and add their own apps in (NOT replacing) and not touch other stuffs already. If totally not changing the OS makes them look alike. To me, thinking about Windows phone 7 in the future. Imagine seeing so many people holding a phone that has the totally same UI, its like seeing a Sony Ericsson X10 and a HTC Desire totally same except that the casing is different.
Technically, the fact that its open source is supposed to help the majority of OEMs, and in turnfilter down to end users as price cuts/ feature enhancements.
But premium features are premium features. You want some kind of 4g? You wont be getting it from end users at xda - it will come from manufacturers who build the radios and APIs into the device.
Android is a very modular os... if you want something all you have to do is a bit of research and buy the device that fits you best. If you go with one of the other systems you will simply have less choice. That is why android is cool.
aint gonna happen guys, doesnt make good business sense to make a device that does everything, why sell one model when you can sell two!
you can pick up any device out there and say, "wouldnt it be cool if it had VGA out or HD camera or x y z", they wont do it, and the same goes for the OS as well.
Open source has an inherant flaw, and that is its fragmentation, everyone believes it should be going in a direction they would like (including yourself). at the moment its not suffered as much as its desktop cousins probably because of its market place keeping one common aspect through all devices but give it time and you will be right, it will lose its "android" identification
If you want an alternative and a device that keeps its personality then get an Iphone or a new WP7 device at least until they crack that wide open too. Its a bit ironic really that WM may well suck but its very customizable and has been consistant throughout the ages
evo4gnw said:
he is complaining about gimped devices being marketed as android devices. to sum up what i think his messages is; a device should not be called an android device if it is not fully capable of all it's natively supported features, wireless tether, root access etc. but rather should be called android based device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's just the thing isn't it? Android can probably support ANYTHING. But because of that, you aren't supposed to release hardware that isn't as flexible? That to me.. is just looney.
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.
so we all know HTC is in trouble. The cellphone market is constantly moving forward and looking to the future for their next big thing. I, however, suggest that htc should take a page out of their old book and come out with a next-gen hd2. When I think about freedom in a handset, I think about this phone first and THEN android's early days. We live in a time where mainstream phone manufacturers give us a product and thats that whether we like it or not. my last 4 android phones weren't able to be rooted and so I gave up altogether. I'm currently an iphone user. Not because I think it's better but because I just gave up. I am not happy with todays offerings. I feel like phones should be more advanced now. I mean yeah there are very nice phones today with tiny bezels and crazy specs but I'm speaking more from a OS perspective. Yes pixels are nice, yes samsung has amazing phones but at the end of the day they're only still running android. Android has evolved but, in my eyes, just barely. It's still the same at its core. Back on topic, I think it would be in everybody's best interest if htc were to look back to this phone for the future. This time next year will mark the 10th anniversary of the HD2 and they're in a very troubled state right now so why not? HD3, the all new HTC HD, whatever they may call it is irrelevant as long as they just do it. The smartphone market is stagnant right now, there's countless evidence to support this claim. Manufacturers should start focusing more on operating systems than bezels. It is clearly inevitable that there will eventually be new contestants in the duopoly we have right now.
I'm not sure how to approach this but let's just put it like this. If i had it my way; it's November 2019 and HTC releases the hd3, theres a whole back to the future campaign. they trademark the phrase "the future is in your hands." it's on billboards and ads with the phone sitting comfortably in a pair of palms. there's black hands, white hands, brown hands, robot hands to show that this is the phone for everybody. it runs android by default but it is meant to run other operating systems. HTC has invested money into smaller os manufacturers and home-based devs to develop/port their existing OS. they run competitions and such for people to show off their OS offerings. Not for them to purchase and license but to show that the whole movement is about the people and their freedom phone. the device is a tinkerers dream. The app stores are limited but that isn't the point. We're approaching a time where AI is slowly eliminating the need for 6 billion apps. XDA is the go-to spot again. We need a more capable mobile OS and why shouldn't HTC be one of the first to push that with their hardware. I know microsoft will be putting out the surface phone soon and I'd be willing to bet it will run full windows 10. Why not have a legitimate early competitor to push the agenda? If I want to run ubuntu desktop or kali linux on my phone fluidly why can't I? This may very well be a niche product but it will be huge for developers and will most definitely be a big conversation. That alone would gain some traction. hardware revisions thereafter could include multiple usb-c connectors, maybe an x86 architecture, maybe modularity, maybe this maybe that. I just dream of a pocketable device that would truly feel free of restraints and I believe HTC is the one for the job. Manufacturers are always giving us what THEY think we need instead of actually leaving it up to us. Ask any savvy person what the most legendary smartphone was and they'll say the HD2, ask them why and I guarantee every answer is the same. This is something I am passionate about and I haven't slept yet and I know the format is all messed up but I just wanted to put the idea in peoples heads.
I second this motion. The HTC HD2 Leo I own is a beast. I will admit that it was frustrating at first. I must have soft bricked it half a dozen times messing with settings and software I had no business touching as I didn't have a clue what I was doing. Then I found some good tutorials and finally, the promised land. XDA DEVELOPERS FORUM.
I found that the HD2 was an incredibly versatile and robust piece of tech. I did soft brick it again a time or two, but always I was able to rejuvenate it. The downfall, I believe was Microsoft ending the 6.5 os right after release. That coupled with the power house of android and the backing and resources it had soon overshadowed the HD2. But quite a few kept a place in there heart for it. The capability of the device and the developers to modify and utilize the platform to do extraordinary things has, in my opinion, never been matched. HTC needed a flagship. They were in the pack, but had a desire and opportunity to pull to the forefront. With the HD2 they did surge ahead. They didn't fail us, the market and consumer failed them. Too many got overly frustrated as they failed to understand the accessibility and basic root to pathway to app to accessories. The various models also caused consumers, who were hearing of this wonder of Google and Android, some with the apple iPhone in hand and its "friendly yet restrictive" os, and they rage quit on the HTC.
After reading the above post, I have thought long and hard on what was, what is, and what could be for HD devices. I have several interesting observations.
1. The versatility of the HD2 opened it up to power-users, techs, devs and wide eyed dreamy technophiles like myself. The ability of the HD2 to use Java, WinMo, PPC software, Android and linux gave so many a highly adaptable device for personal preference, personalization and experimentation.
2. The HD2 could act as a PDA, Phone, PC, Diagnostic tool, Microsoft Office companion and controller... The list goes on. Yes you can do all those things with an android or apple device now, but the ability to adjust the hardware settings, application features, information export and format has been greatly handicapped by a gap between developer abilities an end users abilities. Rooting helps with this, but rooting itself is a tricky and iffy prospect. I have noticed that certain areas of focus and purpose for applications have software that does not cover everything desired, or is entirely too broad and basic to be fully accurate. I have found myself and others needing 2 or three applications to accomplish with accuracy what could be done with one openly versatile and layered 'package'.
3. The HTC HD2 is still capable of competing with most of the low to mid level devices on the market today. I can hear some of you rolling your eyes, but I stick by that statement. Even with some outdated components and slower buss and cache speeds, it can hold its own. I attribute that to the versatility.
4. The vision of the HTC HD3 MODULAR COMPONENT ENGINE. Yup. I may be insane after all. Yet my madness has reason, I am just not linguistically skilled enough in Techaneeze to put it to words. Basically, the device by itself is a fully functioning phone with the latest capabilities and trends. The average user will be able to use it straight out the box, though with multiple new options such as dual OS preinstalled, dual SD card slots, Mega More than anyone needs camera resolutions, speakers that actually work loud and clear, maybe predocked gizmos, chochkies and dodads like Bluetooth earpiece(beats me on the design so far), NFC tags or keyring fobs(whatever those are called), a hidden micro sim/sd card compartment, an actual headphone jack, plasma lighter/taser, multi use survival card, toothpick, tweezers, det-cord crimper. OK OK i am being silly, but its late and I am hungry.
The added wow factor is that the HD3 is a driver/interface for a modular expansion platform that can be customized for various trades. IT tools like frequency counter, component tester, etc.; scientific lab tools and sensors; in the field career specific tools for geologist, meteorologist, anthropologists, etc.
So far, i just have envisioned a framework buss with plug in ports for specific electronics and sensors, etc.
I will try to expand on this idea, but I am now at the point that I believe I need to poll the public. I will attempt to create an effective poll(s) at a later time when I have all cylinders firing.
Good night, and good luck!
I just stumbled on to this forum browsing xda in the new year..and as each year passes i feel sad that these HD2 forums get more and more silent ( I bot the HD2 in 2009, the year of its launch) ...strange this phone got so many people to love their device like no other, I guess people remember the joy they felt when they used it and the fact that it was probably the most modded phone on the planet....fact that it ran android marshmallow not too far back is testament to the loyalty of developers and users of this phone who never gave up on it, kept it alive and relevant .... I guess we all miss the extreme flexibility of our beloved device today, of course also miss the huge flutter of activity on the xda forums for this phone, the forums were always buzzing with something new ( ROM, app ) the phone could run or some feature that was finally made to work...so so great to see the above 2 posts in 2018, good to see activity and that people still remember this great device and are still hoping it will be reborn in some form in the future, cheers to that!!!!
Same sentiments here. I bought the hd2 on release in 2009 and it was a lovely device. I remember installing the latest Android ROMs and kernels on it, was so fun. We're at a point if perfection though, most modern devices run at well you hardly need to tinker with them anymore. My Galaxy note 9 and Huawei mate 20 pro are proof to that, these 2 phones are Android in it's perfection but the hd2 will always have a place in our hearts!
I am still amazed to see what the HD2 achieved.. I also bought it in 2009.. had loads of fun flashing it (or may i say them, i ended up having 4 of them at the same time ) whith android and windows.. I still have 2 or 3 of them laying around somewhere.. was an incredible device that gave loads of fun