Related
Please, forgive my ignorance here, but I'm new to Android after coming from WM, and I have some gaps in understanding that I'm hoping maybe you guys could help to fill in.
Given the so-called "open" nature of Android, I'm a bit puzzled why it seems so difficult to get the latest versions of Android running on our phones. If the SDK and resources are freely available and the basic drivers, etc. are a part of the ROMs themselves, why is it so difficult to just update the core of the OS to Gingerbread, for example?
I would have assumed it would have been simpler than it appears to be and Google touts it as being simple, so what am I missing? What's the stumbling block?
Android 2.3 was released very recently, developers are hard at work at it.
Sometimes, it is not always up to Google. As of right now, the Vibrant has access to various 2.2 leaks... HOWEVER! the kernels for vibrant has not been open-sourced. So this limits development (OC, UV and so on). The I9000 kernel source is available, but they drain battery for vibrant users and its not worth using these kernels (in my opinion).
For users without rooting, you can blame the manufacturer and/or carrier for the delays.
Pure Google: Google -> Update
Manufacturer: Manufacturer ports Android on top of their skin (HTC Sense, TouchWiz, Motoblur, and so on) -> Carrier (Adds bloat; removes features e.g. tethering, etc) -> Update
The latest leak (to date) is JL5 which contains 2.2 but not 2.2.1? Is that correct?
I've seen some builds floating around with the designation XXJPX and I don't know if XX in this case is a blank place holder, or if it signifies a series number later (alphabetically) than JL5, even so, J comes before P last I checked, so is XXJPX a later leaked build than the JL5?
donalgodon said:
The latest leak (to date) is JL5 which contains 2.2 but not 2.2.1? Is that correct?
I've seen some builds floating around with the designation XXJPX and I don't know if XX in this case is a blank place holder, or if it signifies a series number later (alphabetically) than JL5, even so, J comes before P last I checked, so is XXJPX a later leaked build than the JL5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe JPX is the I9000 ROM
Ah, yes, I think so.
So, the JL5 is 2.2 but not 2.2.1?
donalgodon said:
Ah, yes, I think so.
So, the JL5 is 2.2 but not 2.2.1?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
JL5 is 2.2
We have no official 2.2, and no leak of 2.2.1
That's an example. I can't understand.
Is it that there are so many significant or major changes to the OS between 2.2 and 2.2.1 which would make it so difficult to shoe-horn into a cooked ROM for the vibrant based on JL5?
I had this picture of Android in my mind of being a developers paradise/playground from listening to Google's PR team. Not so, I guess.
Two words:
Platform fragmentation.
If Google did what most of us wished they would do and unilaterally told carriers to make updates on time and to stop skinning Android, we might not be in this situation...
synaesthetic said:
Two words:
Platform fragmentation.
If Google did what most of us wished they would do and unilaterally told carriers to make updates on time and to stop skinning Android, we might not be in this situation...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was under the impression that Google was making (de)fragmentation a priority. As it stands, it really does seem that Android is in danger of becoming another Windows Mobile 6.5.x
I was trying to escape that by selling my HD2.
synaesthetic said:
Two words:
Platform fragmentation.
If Google did what most of us wished they would do and unilaterally told carriers to make updates on time and to stop skinning Android, we might not be in this situation...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skinning isn't really a fragmentation issue. I don't know of any OEM skins that keep ppl from running anything off the Market.
Fragmentation, as used in regard to Android, is the gap between 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2, and now 2.3, in performance and compatibility with things developers code. Meaning they can't make a single APK run on all these fragmented code-bases. Think Win95, WinNT, WinXP, WinVista, etc., but all being released within 2 years, instead of spread out over a decade and a half.
-bZj
down8 said:
Skinning isn't really a fragmentation issue. I don't know of any OEM skins that keep ppl from running anything off the Market.
Fragmentation, as used in regard to Android, is the gap between 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2, and now 2.3, in performance and compatibility with things developers code. Meaning they can't make a single APK run on all these fragmented code-bases. Think Win95, WinNT, WinXP, WinVista, etc., but all being released within 2 years, instead of spread out over a decade and a half.
-bZj
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the end user, the skins do seem to have a big impact, such as in the case of Samsung, who skins Android with TouchWiz and drags its feet on releasing updates as a result. Same thing happen with HTC and Sense. Sony is much worse.
They could, of course, just leave the UI alone and let the pure Android goodness flow (or hire enough people to get the job done on time if they want to skin, which I'd actually prefer, since some of those innovations really do improve the UI) but all this does seem to impact user experience, since those updates don't get to the phones in a timely manner... at least not like Google had told us they would.
It's always ALWAYS your carrier.
Froyo was released many months ago and stock Android phones, like Nexus 1, got it almost immediately. Gingerbread comes with Nexus S and Nexus 1 is getting it very soon, if it wasn't on Nexus 1 already.
So if fast official OS updates are your main concerns, I suggest you getting a stock Android phone.
Why is it that there isn't just one version of android that will install on all phones? I mean, you can install windows on any pc regardless of spec and it automatically finds drivers for internal parts and makes them work? why can't this be done for android? would be miles easy for developers if you could just take a rom from say a dell streak and put it on say a galaxy s and vice versa, seems ****ing retarded to me that this isn't the case with android? Love my streak and android as a whole, but would be so much easier if the updates were dependant on the companies that made the phone and were just dependent on when google updates the software!!
Alexanderbooth said:
Why is it that there isn't just one version of android that will install on all phones? I mean, you can install windows on any pc regardless of spec and it automatically finds drivers for internal parts and makes them work? why can't this be done for android? would be miles easy for developers if you could just take a rom from say a dell streak and put it on say a galaxy s and vice versa, seems ****ing retarded to me that this isn't the case with android? Love my streak and android as a whole, but would be so much easier if the updates were dependant on the companies that made the phone and were just dependent on when google updates the software!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, first of all, are you genuinely serious? I loved the os of the ps3 why cant I have that on my xbox 360, come on mate, really. If that was the case, then we would probably just need 1 type of phone with every release of android software, example iphone.
Android allows people to have a nice choice of phones from different manufacturers.
I personally, think android is 10 times better than any other simply because of the control the users have, we can purchase an android phone and customize the hell out of it to our liking, yet you have no choice to jailbreak an iphone to have half the options android users get out the box.
Sent from my Dell Streak using xda premium
Yes in a perfect world that would work, "one OS for any phone" but the truth of the matter is that it is a driver issue, and manufacturers want to make a profit. There are too many different manufacturers of components and not all of them are compatible with each other, get out dated or don't meet recommended minimal specs. Example is trying to put Windows 7 on a P2 machine. Maybe it will install, but you are not going to get much if any of the benefits of the new OS. Or if you put win 7 on a Mac. Sure it will work, but it is not going to be on a machine that it was designed to run on spec wise. Believe me, I wish it was that simple, but unfortunately it is not. We can dream though.
It has a lot to do with the drivers, unless every phone was identical internally (or each generation identical internally) there are no drivers for that specific device.
PCs are much more standardized when it comes to hardware working with drivers. Most important components like video/audio/ I/O have standard fallback modes and their specific drivers. That's why you can install windows or linux or whatever on a system and at least expect it to boot and most of the stuff to work. They have generic drivers that will do the minimum required for it to function, but not much more.
From a user perspective drivers are much more diffucult with regards to *nix then with windows, this is especially true with regards to android (as it uses the linux kernel)
Windows has standardized (as in they have published the specs and adhere to it) driver frameworks and spend a good deal of testing time making sure 3rd party drivers will remain reasonably compatable. Usually it goes smoothly enough when releasing a new standard, when it goes bad you get what happened with vista where the drivers were the main cause of instability. Most of the time you can use drivers written for win 95 on win7 x86 and there's still a fair chance it might STILL work depending on how well the driver was written (this is a gross oversimplification, there's an entire class of win 9x drivers that wont work, but the other class will).
With linux driver compability is much less clear cut, many important drivers are available as source, and it's very possible (but requires a fair deal of planning ahead) to build a pc and only use source code drivers.
If something is only available as binary drivers you're at the mercy of the manufacturer to keep it updated and working.
This is why android is so difficult to roll out timely updates. The kernels in 2.2 are very different from 2.3/3.x and rewriting the drivers for it is what accounts for ~90% of the work (assuming your device is powerful enough to update in the first place)
The full driver sourcecode isnt often made available for android devices, so you either have to spend time writing your own or attempting to adapt the binary drivers to make it work. This is what is happening with streakdroid 2.x
The other critical point is that the bootloader must be willing to load 3rd party code.
There's a fair amount of devices that have had android ported to them because they were:
1) Able to load 3rd party code (either by hacking the bootloader or it allowing it on it's own)
2) They either had comparable drivers or were willing/able to write their own
3) There were enough devs to take the time to accomplish this in the first place
4) Android is open source so it's possible to write your own drivers in the first place (techinally all you might need is the driver sdk, but no mobile os has only a driver sdk available, it's either all or nothing)
Being open source has absolutely nothing to do with being able to install it on any device.
Winmo 6.5 is closed source (sorta, it's somewhat like shared-source) but it's just as easy to port over. But there's little to no interest to porting it to new devices.
Win8/arm might be like how windows is on the pc IF they keep drivers the way they are. If ms decides to incorporate them the way linux does it wont be any different then what android is experiencing now (though it's kinda unlikely, windows has always loaded drivers as seperate modules, and they're likely actively paying attention to that with win8)
I will just add that in my very humble opinion the OP wasnt by NO MEANS asking a dumb question (and it would rule to have standardized drivers for phones)
(and btw, great writeup manii. this might as well fit in some android related blog.)
markdexter said:
Haha, first of all, are you genuinely serious? I loved the os of the ps3 why cant I have that on my xbox 360, come on mate, really. If that was the case, then we would probably just need 1 type of phone with every release of android software, example iphone.
Android allows people to have a nice choice of phones from different manufacturers.
I personally, think android is 10 times better than any other simply because of the control the users have, we can purchase an android phone and customize the hell out of it to our liking, yet you have no choice to jailbreak an iphone to have half the options android users get out the box.
Sent from my Dell Streak using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
O M G!!! android fanboys!! your worst than apple fanboys, when did I even mention the iphone or what makes android so good? or installing other peoples software on to other hardware, I'm only talking about android and its phones you turn everything into android is better than ios blah blah blah blah blah!! Shut the **** up and go to another thread!!
The other people in the thread, yeah I kinda knew it was down to driver issues, but I didn't think it was that complex. Android imo is the best os I've ever experience in my life, even better than windows 7. But for me, I actually think the only 1 draw back the os has, is the fragmentation of the updates. Is this possiblity of one android os to work on all android phones, so you can just download the update.pkg from google and just install it on any android phone, or is this something that was never intended and because of how its developed its to late to go back and change this? or is it something google has in the pipeline?
Alexanderbooth said:
O M G!!! android fanboys!! your worst than apple fanboys, when did I even mention the iphone or what makes android so good? or installing other peoples software on to other hardware, I'm only talking about android and its phones you turn everything into android is better than ios blah blah blah blah blah!! Shut the **** up and go to another thread!!
The other people in the thread, yeah I kinda knew it was down to driver issues, but I didn't think it was that complex. Android imo is the best os I've ever experience in my life, even better than windows 7. But for me, I actually think the only 1 draw back the os has, is the fragmentation of the updates. Is this possiblity of one android os to work on all android phones, so you can just download the update.pkg from google and just install it on any android phone, or is this something that was never intended and because of how its developed its to late to go back and change this? or is it something google has in the pipeline?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I am glad Alexander cleard that up. I totally see now tht he was referring to one android update for all "android" phones. Which in theory, would be nice and possibe be the solution to so mny segmented releases.
Android fanboy?? Grow up, first of all I wont as you say **** off to another thread, you didnt get my point, but thats ok I can tell by your answer and generally by your original question that your not that bright, thats ok buddy.
I own an iphone 4, to run apples os I have to own an apple product (the phone) which for me is too small, I would like a bigger screen, so im stuck.
With android different manafacturers are in competition for what the people want and offer a huge variety of phones. Yes its a bit of a pain in the arse to install custom roms on them but once you know how its pretty easy.
At the end of the day to have one os that would go on any phone would be nice but then really whats the point in having a whole bunch of different phones. I like the way android is, I own as I said a earlier an iphone 4 and a dell streak, I find myself using the dell more, simply because I can make it my own.
Also ....me fanboy, you said you like android better than windows...the most popular os al over yhe world.
Sent from my Dell Streak using xda premium
Rico ANDROID said:
Well I am glad Alexander cleard that up. I totally see now tht he was referring to one android update for all "android" phones. Which in theory, would be nice and possibe be the solution to so mny segmented releases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I know, coming from having the dell streak, and only having one upgrade while I've had the phone, I just can't understand why phone manufacturers go to all this trouble creating there own version of android when they could easily outsource this part of the phone to Google. I'm sure it would also make it easier for app developers to make there app work on all android phones. Seems so strange to me growing up with windows and being able to just buy a new pc and just get your windows cd out and bosh on windows, and it works. Does anyone know if this will ever happen or do the phone manufacturers want to have there own version of android, so they can fill it with there own apps?
To me even if they did still want there own versions of android, they should still give you the option of returning to stock android and just going to google for the update.
markdexter said:
Android fanboy?? Grow up, first of all I wont as you say **** off to another thread, you didnt get my point, but thats ok I can tell by your answer and generally by your original question that your not that bright, thats ok buddy.
I own an iphone 4, to run apples os I have to own an apple product (the phone) which for me is too small, I would like a bigger screen, so im stuck.
With android different manafacturers are in competition for what the people want and offer a huge variety of phones. Yes its a bit of a pain in the arse to install custom roms on them but once you know how its pretty easy.
At the end of the day to have one os that would go on any phone would be nice but then really whats the point in having a whole bunch of different phones. I like the way android is, I own as I said a earlier an iphone 4 and a dell streak, I find myself using the dell more, simply because I can make it my own.
Also ....me fanboy, you said you like android better than windows...the most popular os al over yhe world.
Sent from my Dell Streak using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your saying I'm not bright, but your comment to my original question had no relevance to what I was asking at all, you didn't even slightly attempt to answer what I had asked.
our desire x runs with more than 512mb of ram and samsung galaxy s3 has the same android version so will we get it or not?
I don't think so. The update to KitKat would need HTC developers upgrading our kernel along with their proprietary drivers, so we would have to do that on our own...
I imagine lots of these threads being started and closed as they were for Jellybean & Sense5, So i'll try to sum it up... If we get it officially (Highly unlikely) then we'll be waiting quite a while and then alot longer for kernel sources, A custom rom will most likely be in the Works Once a simialar device (e.g. OneS) gets an update or Rom. And we will most Likely Get a CM Port aswell which will also take a while to be fully working.
So don't expect it anytime soon, and before anyone says "But the One/Max/S4/S3/etc Already has it" Just to Remind some new users The DesireX is not a flagship Device and is therefor Probably not on the first halve of HTC's priority Support/Update list.
And Just heads up, Mods will probably start Locking these threads and dealing out warnings to people constantly making these threads, Spamming, or Trolling/Flaming
Well it will have a better support for lower-medium end devices,so it might be easier to compile it for our device,then previous versions. But i strongly doubt that there will be an official official release.
Thank you :victory:
Yes! we will get kit Kat! XD
Edit:
HTC wrote: "Hi, Christopher. Our priority will be updating the HTC One family. At this point, we're still working to determine whether we’ll be updating other devices in our product portfolio. Continue to follow us here and we'll keep you posted on upgrade info. Thanks for your patience."
Sent from my HTC Desire X Android KitKat 4.4
As it's fairly unlikely, at least for now, that this device will get the 4.4 update there's no point in keeping this open.
If it's confirmed to get KitKat eventually then I'll get this reopened for discussion.
Until then, thread closed!
I'm new to this and don't know the proper forum to ask about updates. Google seems to be releasing monthly software updates to address software vulnerabilities.
With my Verizon Android phone, I understand (and am unhappy) that there are precious few updates, unless of course they in some way benefit Verizon. The phone remains on 4.4 a full year after Lollipop came out, and there are still vulnerabilities that are not being fixed.
Frustrated that my Galaxy Tab 10.1 languished on Honeycomb, I rooted and installed the AOSP ROM by decatf. Except for the Amazon Kindle App and some video weirdness, all the apps I use seem happy. My question is, "is it correct to assume that the ONLY way my tablet will get security updates is if decatf decides to recompile his custom ROM and make it available?" (That seems unlikely, unless he personally owns and uses one of these old Galaxy Tabs.)
I am thrilled to have new life in my old Tab, and happy decatf is so generous with his time and effort. In addition, a case can be made that my Tab on this 5.1.1 ROM is more up to date (and secure) than more modern tablets which are not being updated by their manufacturers.
Do I understand the situation correctly?
Yes, one of the downsides of flashing custom software, in most cases, is that you no longer get OTA updates and have to manually flash them.
Hi everyone,
I can't find a satisfactory answer on my favorite search engines, so I thought I'd come here and ask. Sorry if this question has already been put on the table, carved, sliced and gobbled, I couldn't find trace of it in the forum's search engine either.
My phone's a Leagoo T5c that will forever be stuck on Android 7.0, it seems, because the OEM has already lost interest, and because its SoC makes it difficult, if not downright impossible, to find a suitable custom ROM.
The latest ROM I could find and install on this phone goes back to August of 2018 (no-no, no typos), and its Security Update is even one month older (July 2018).
My question is in the title: Is it possible to install Security Updates without reinstalling/updating/upgrading the firmware itself, like you would in, say, Windows or any other OS, I presume?
UglyStuff said:
Hi everyone,
I can't find a satisfactory answer on my favorite search engines, so I thought I'd come here and ask. Sorry if this question has already been put on the table, carved, sliced and gobbled, I couldn't find trace of it in the forum's search engine either.
My phone's a Leagoo T5c that will forever be stuck on Android 7.0, it seems, because the OEM has already lost interest, and because its SoC makes it difficult, if not downright impossible, to find a suitable custom ROM.
The latest ROM I could find and install on this phone goes back to August of 2018 (no-no, no typos), and its Security Update is even one month older (July 2018).
My question is in the title: Is it possible to install Security Updates without reinstalling/updating/upgrading the firmware itself, like you would in, say, Windows or any other OS, I presume?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With android 10 were introduced Google play security updates that lets you received security updates (not all of them unfortunately, some requires to upgrade) without updating the full OS. You can't do it because you're stuck with the wrong Android version
Hopefully you won't have any issues with hacking but consider buying a new phone when you'll get a chance
Security updates get rolled out as OTA by OEM/Carrier if they consider it's necessary. You can't force it. Theoretically, all Android smartphones should get around two years of security updates. However, the reality is often very different.
The Leagoo T5c is a small-budget phone what was sold for 99 USD - so more or less a disposable item. You cannot expect OEM/Carrier to have any interest in providing updates for such a phone.
Thank you both for your explanations. I understand that Android works differently when it comes to updating itself, mostly because Google isn't the only party to have a voice in the chapter; still, it's unnerving to see that the end-user is more or less captive anyway.
It kinda defeats the very purpose of an open-source OS, to have to wait for an OEM to release (or not) an update, when you could install the patches yourself.
As for buying another phone, well, as soon as I've got the dough, I will, believe me. Not because I'm dissatisfied with this one, but because I don't like the idea of totting around with a phone that hasn't seen a security update in over two years.
I'm also seriously considering moving to Ubuntu Touch, though there again, my phone's exotic platform could be problematic. Custom ROMs seems to be as complicated an avenue as others, too.
All in all, Android isn't what they sold me: It's not secure, it's not "free", it's just another way to make you shell out bucks for new hardware every couple years.
Android is just iOS without the eye-candy, you ask me...
UglyStuff said:
Thank you both for your explanations. I understand that Android works differently when it comes to updating itself, mostly because Google isn't the only party to have a voice in the chapter; still, it's unnerving to see that the end-user is more or less captive anyway.
It kinda defeats the very purpose of an open-source OS, to have to wait for an OEM to release (or not) an update, when you could install the patches yourself.
As for buying another phone, well, as soon as I've got the dough, I will, believe me. Not because I'm dissatisfied with this one, but because I don't like the idea of totting around with a phone that hasn't seen a security update in over two years.
I'm also seriously considering moving to Ubuntu Touch, though there again, my phone's exotic platform could be problematic. Custom ROMs seems to be as complicated an avenue as others, too.
All in all, Android isn't what they sold me: It's not secure, it's not "free", it's just another way to make you shell out bucks for new hardware every couple years.
Android is just iOS without the eye-candy, you ask me...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android isn't iOS precisely because you can break free from your OEM by flashing a custom ROM. You can develop one for almost any device as long as the OEM releases the kernel source code. And most OEM do (expect for some very unknown phones).
Custom ROMs like GrapheneOS are made to free you from google Services and are truly privacy oriented. And all of that is possible because Android is open source.
Trust me, the Android community has always worked actively to counter aging of their devices (including me).
Just buy a phone with a solid community behind and you'll be able to keep it up to date a looong time
Raiz said:
Android isn't iOS precisely because you can break free from your OEM by flashing a custom ROM. You can develop one for almost any device as long as the OEM releases the kernel source code. And most OEM do (expect for some very unknown phones).
Custom ROMs like GrapheneOS are made to free you from google Services and are truly privacy oriented. And all of that is possible because Android is open source.
Trust me, the Android community has always worked actively to counter aging of their devices (including me).
Just buy a phone with a solid community behind and you'll be able to keep it up to date a looong time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you in principle, but if I must take an example: I have this Early 2006 MacBook Pro with a Core Duo CPU that precludes me from even installing Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" on it, because the CPU is 32-bit-only, and Lion requires a 64-bit CPU.
The machine itself works very well, albeit a bit slowly, but then it's got only 2 GB of RAM and a 120-GB SSD. When I got fed-up with OS X applications not updating/upgrading and Firefox addons not installing because my copy of Firefox was too old, I partitioned the SSD, installed rEFInd as boot manager, and installed Zorin 15.2 (now 15.3) Lite 32-bit.
I now spend more time on the Linux side of this Mac than on the OS X side, and updating/upgrading it is a breeze, either via the dedicated application or in Terminal. I know there'll be an end-of-the-line there too, someday, but at least I'll keep using this Mac until it truly dies on me, not when Apple tells me it's dead.
This, for me, is the very essence of open-source: Not just the fact that it's free, but that you can revive an old machine and keep it running long after Apple et al have decided that it had gone the way of the dinosaurs.
The same doesn't apply to Android, alas. Here, you must have a compatible SoC/chipset/what-have-you, a Treble-compatible device, you must have this, you must have that...
In the end, only a fraction of Android users really get to enjoy everything their device has to offer for as long as they choose; the others just pop into the nearest phone store, be it brick-and-mortar or cyber, and must produce their credit card.
My question was as much a challenge to myself as anything else. I would really like to learn how Android works, but the tutorials and articles I've found here and there are all a bit cryptic.
That's why I'm regularly prowling this forum, I guess.
"Hunting high and low", as the song goes... :laugh:
yep, good question but google & manufactures are in it for the moola not the users 2 yr old phone.
hiitsrudd said:
yep, good question but google & manufactures are in it for the moola not the users 2 yr old phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't I know it! It's true that even budget phones have decent specs nowadays, still, why dump a perfectly functioning phone simply because you can't update/upgrade the software?
I understand Google's rationale, of course: They invest tons of money year after year after year to keep the whole boat afloat, and they need a steady income. OK. Still, to not be able to keep your phone ***safe*** is a no-go for me.
I'm seriously beginning to think about installing Ubuntu Touch on the device. I think I'm going to try that next weekend.
I'll probably come back here with my eyes red, asking for help in unbricking my phone, though.
Stay tuned! :good:
A followup, if you are mindful of your own security it's conceivable to get more usage of that android. I don't use a banking app, but if need be use a good browser( thats updated of course) And update all often used apps via playstore. I'm still running Oreo on my phone. FYI you iOS ppl need to do critical updates asap