I somewhat read what the difference between the two were, but I don't quite understand it completely. I was wondering (based on user preference) which is better.
I was using a ROM that was Non-CAF and now I'm using one that is, and I don't notice a difference really. I was wondering if someone could help me understand better.
+1
TheKnux said:
I somewhat read what the difference between the two were, but I don't quite understand it completely. I was wondering (based on user preference) which is better.
I was using a ROM that was Non-CAF and now I'm using one that is, and I don't notice a difference really. I was wondering if someone could help me understand better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Caf relates to code aurora forum (Google it).. Its where Qualcomm updates its stuff regularly. While aosp is googles kernel branch. Caf has more updates and optimisations for Qualcomm chipsets. The difference... I can't say there is much since our phones are already quite powerful to handle most things thrown at it.. But again, as I mentioned its optimisations and etc, so on paper better performance, battery and what not.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
CodeAurora (CAF) - These are Qualcomm's reference sources for their platform. This is what they provide to OEMs, and what nearly all OEMs base their software off of. As a result - nearly all non-Nexus devices are running kernels/display HALs/etc. that are derived from a CAF baseline.
Google's software baseline, or AOSP - Usually when Google starts working on a new Android version, they'll fork from CAF at the beginning. Very often Google will be adding "new" features specific to the new Android version, while Qualcomm will continue with performance enhancements and bugfixes against the "old" baseline.
So when a new Android revision comes out, you have two baselines: CAF which is usually "ahead" in performance but "behind" in features, and AOSP which is the opposite.
from what i've noticed CAF is better, i get less stuttering this is the sort of thing that optimizations usually improves on.
Related
News started to trickle out this week about a new Android build called Linaro. Basically, it takes stock Android 4.0.4 and makes it super-fast, and super-awesome(er). In fact, it can boost performance by up to 100 percent over stock. Considering how fast and fluid stock Android 4.0.x already is (especially compared to older versions of the OS), that's quite impressive. Don't take my word for it, though, here's one of the main Linaro guys, Bernhard Rosenkranzer, showing it off on a TI Pandaboard. The Pandaboard features the OMAP 4430 processor (the same one that's in the Droid RAZR), so this is definitely a real-world example of what Linaro is capable of:
As you can see, the Linaro build finishes long before the stock Android build. That's not the best part though: the parts of Linaro that make is so efficient and fast are coming soon to Cyanogenmod 9.
Basically, parts of the Linaro code have been submitted to the CM9 gerrit and are currently awaiting approval. Once commited, these tweaks will be added to the main CM9 code, giving all supported devices a drastic increase in performance.
The good news doesn't end there, though: Galaxy Nexus owners can already take an unofficial CM9 build with the Linaro bits for a whirl. From what we've read, this build is noticeably faster and more fluid right out of the gate. Awesome.
Since the first rule of CM is don't ask for ETAs, we have no idea when we could start seeing builds show up with Linaro code, so for now, we'll all just have to take comfort in knowing that things in the CM9 world are getting ready to get a lot faster.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...e-and-now-parts-of-it-are-being-added-to-cm9/
It has been posted on the kyorarom serenity thread that our kernel is incompatable and that there were errors during building of it
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA
You could have searched before posting
There is already another thread by Persian sphinx
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA
Hey Guys,
As we got now some quite impressive selection of both android 2.3 and android 2.2 and even some android 4.x based ROMs, I was actually thinking about opening this discussion-thread to see what arguments can be brought forth for the named android versions on our galaxy 3.
It should help others to decide which ROMs based on which android version is the right one for them and to clarify the differences between these android versions.
This thread should NOT in any kind of way devalue the works of any developer on any newer or older android version, because it’s actually them that keep our legacy devices alive! Instead I’m hoping to see some different perspectives and experiences that you have made with the ROMs based on different android versions on our galaxy 3!
To start this discussion I summed up the features that are highlighted by Google for Gingerbread on http://developer.android.com/about/versions/android-2.3-highlights.html to question those benefits according to our present status of android 2.3-based ROMs:
- improved user interface for simplicity and speed through changed menus
- Better and faster keyboard experience
- Improved power management through visualization of battery consumption and better managing of apps
- Internet calling and NFC-capability (NFC not for our phone)
- Enhancements for gaming through performance optimization (concurrent garbage collector, faster event distribution, updated video drivers)
- Native development optimizations (audio, graphic, sensors)
- Dalvik runtime optimizations
As I selected only some of the newer features to sum up I tried it without regarding my personal opinion, but as selections and accumulations always mirror my personal perspective regarding what is important and what not, feel free to add any features that you find important and do question the things that I’ve mentioned.
Looking at the newer features I ask myself, will we actually benefit from those compared to a Froyo-ROM (maybe also thinking about missing implementation of OpenGL ES 2.0 in android 2.3 – correct me if I’m wrong)?
Are those newer improved user interfaces an argument? Thinking about the modding and themes which our themers provided to make our SG3 a beautiful device!
What of these features improved your personal user and/or developer experience over android 2.2 on our phone?
Did you notice those differences?
So hoping for some different perspectives: let the discussion begin!
(As I said, feel free to criticize and question anything that I’ve mentioned)
I've not got a N4 yet but it will be interesting to know which is preferred. On my Note the clear winner is CM with stability, battery life and performance. Obviously AOSP has more customisations but performance is sacrificed.
CM seems less popular here with people going with PAC or PA. Maybe CM is more infantile here?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Your question doesn't really make sense. CM is AOSP. All ROMs are based off AOSP.
You're getting your terminology wrong here. Unless you mean AOKP rather than AOSP?
Personally I don't use CyanogenMod because it lacks the feature of changing the navigation height/width; whereas, other ROMs have that feature.
shure2 said:
I've not got a N4 yet but it will be interesting to know which is preferred. On my Note the clear winner is CM with stability, battery life and performance. Obviously AOSP has more customisations but performance is sacrificed.
CM seems less popular here with people going with PAC or PA. Maybe CM is more infantile here?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
on a legacy platform cm rules everything and nothing touches it. most other roms will either base on cm completely or depend on its build trees.
this is nexus, we get source, drivers, kernels and vendor blobs directly from google. developers can just start programming - no one needs to hack through locked bootloaders or bs like that. it reverses the rules, aosp roms will be popular ofc because they are usually faster up to date, have less fallouts and bring more features.
zephiK said:
Your question doesn't really make sense. CM is AOSP. All ROMs are based off AOSP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, but you got to stretch it to make room for hundreds of incompatible devices that want a slice of google android. much of it you can branch out, some of it you have to mix into the android sourcebase. theres more weight to it and greater responsibility.
The big hype surrounding Android L’s unveiling caused us all to skip one important change, the debut of the Linux 3.10 kernel in the ARM world.
If you take a closer look at defconfigs, you might notice that there are some experimental configs available for various platforms. For example, there are files with configs for MSM8974 architecture, widely used in various flagships like the OnePlus One, HTC One (M8) or Google Nexus 5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
[XDA]
Kernel 3.10, the long term release that Google is going to use, will add even better ARM and 64 bit support, more improvements to the F2FS file system, better virtualization support, better encryption support for ARMv8 chips (which can encrypt stuff with AES up to 10x faster compared to the ARMv7 architecture), and lastly support for big.Little chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
[Androidheadlines]
Linux kernel 3.10 has added support for big.LITTLE processors, which should help developers port Ubuntu Touch to the Samsung Galaxy S4 and other devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
[Phonearena]
Qualcomm MSM8226 (Moto G) config also available.
GIT: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/msm/+/android-msm-dory-3.10-kitkat-wear/arch/arm/configs/
that is fantastic. if moto g is considered in this kernel then we will have full featured android l with proper kernel.
Great news! I was wondering if they were going to update the kernel in the L release and was a little dissapointed to see 3.4 in the preview.
Could have been better though, it´s still more than a year behind mainline.
With further f2fs improvements, a performance gap between GPE and other models may become more obvious. Unless of course, Google make GPE f2fs also with Android L.
lost101 said:
With further f2fs improvements, a performance gap between GPE and other models may become more obvious. U
the latest f2fs patches are already in come of the custom kernel and i dont feel a thing (could new format will bring some improvement?)
good possibility that f2fs could be default. Although new kernel is good news, i was hearing that the latest kernel will be fully inline with main kernel and will be most uptodate. they have again taken the stable base approach. a tad disappointing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lost101 said:
With further f2fs improvements, a performance gap between GPE and other models may become more obvious. Unless of course, Google make GPE f2fs also with Android L.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Changing the filesystem requires a full format, I doubt devices will just get that over the air...
Sent from my XT1033 using Tapatalk
vlt96 said:
Changing the filesystem requires a full format, I doubt devices will just get that over the air...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point, and that's probably what will happen. GPE will continue to use EXT4.
Asking the average user to accept a complete data wipe would be a hard sell, even with cloud backup.
I don't think I fully understand how ROM's device drivers work. Stock is supposed to be more stable because most manufacturers use closed source drivers, which have to be reverse engineered for any non stock ROM (is that correct?).
But on my Nexus 4, I've had the same problems with stability as any other device, despite the open source drivers. Apps still frequently cause my phone to reboot, which from what I understand can only be caused by driver bugs, otherwise the app would simply crash.
Am I just expecting stability AND features and wondering why I can't have my cake and eat it too? I'm running the stable version of SlimKat atm and usually go for stable versions of ROMs that go for speed and stability, no experimental bleeding edge features or anything.
Could anyone explain what I seem to be missing. I'm an amateur programmer so technical details appreciated.
v1nsai said:
I don't think I fully understand how ROM's device drivers work. Stock is supposed to be more stable because most manufacturers use closed source drivers, which have to be reverse engineered for any non stock ROM (is that correct?).
But on my Nexus 4, I've had the same problems with stability as any other device, despite the open source drivers. Apps still frequently cause my phone to reboot, which from what I understand can only be caused by driver bugs, otherwise the app would simply crash.
Am I just expecting stability AND features and wondering why I can't have my cake and eat it too? I'm running the stable version of SlimKat atm and usually go for stable versions of ROMs that go for speed and stability, no experimental bleeding edge features or anything.
Could anyone explain what I seem to be missing. I'm an amateur programmer so technical details appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish someone could answer this because I'm considering one of the new Nexus devices because I thought I could have this best of both worlds that he speaks of. Is this not the case, do open source driver devices like Nexus phones suffer with the same issues as other unlocked phones that have closed source drivers?