Related
And I think I like windows better, just because I can't seem to customize the screen on the andriod mode and it seems very limited ....what is the best Andriod ROM out there that is like a a full version of the andriod OS?
Same here, I only just started using Android last week. At first it was hard to get exactly what I wanted in the OS, but then I found out that if you press the Windows hardware key on the HD2, that brings up a settings menu for things.
I'm currently using the "Mdeejay eVo Sense v. 2.3 rEVOlution" ROM.
FenderGuy said:
And I think I like windows better, just because I can't seem to customize the screen on the andriod mode and it seems very limited ....what is the best Andriod ROM out there that is like a a full version of the andriod OS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've played around with it for a while now and it has pros and cons. The ROM below works well. The home screen can add widgets. My preference is still for WinMo.
Hate to say it, but I'm still a huge fan of WM as well. Even after testing out many solid Android 2.2+ Nexus, EVO Sense, and Desire Sense builds on the HD2, and using iPhones for years, WM is still better for my daily needs in regard to getting work and basic operations done. Plus, the WM combination of voice command and bluetooth for hands free use still outperforms Android by magnitudes here. Moreover, I still prefer Core Player, Pocket Player, NanoGroove, Scilors Groove, MS Office & Exchange, ThumbCal, Mobile Invoice, iGuidance, iGo, Elecont Weather, etc..., as well as customized Sense with CHT over any Android or iPhone counterparts or equivalents at this time. That said, there are parts of Android I like much more, including the market, speech to text, live wallpapers, many of the 100,000 apps and games, lol..., as well as the ever increasing kernel development. Guess it really comes down to what apps and operations you use the most and are most comfortable with. For work and basic stuff, it's all WM here. For fun it's trying out new Android builds, launchers, themes, as well as testing new apps, and gaming with Android and iOS, lol...
As far as good builds of Android for the HD2, there are many, including NexusHD2 v1.5 by tytung (my favorite at this time), HyperDroid and HyperDroid Sense by pongster, Mdeejay's EVO and Desire Sense builds, plus lots of other excellent builds that I'm forgetting at the moment. If you use Exceller's Multiple Build Loader, you can easily switch and test out as many as you can fit on your memory card at once.
Best to all,
R
I'm using the core series V4 which has the Andriod boot built into the rom, its really cool but not all andriod roms seem to work with it. I wonder why?
I've really grown to love android over the last few months, but I still don't want to completely replace winmo. Android has a lot of apps and is really user friendly, but winmo is still way more customizable and seems to have more functional, better apps... even though there are less to choose from. 95% of android apps are useless and pointless.
I like android and winmo both pretty equally right now. I'm sure my next phone will be android as winmo isn't being actively developed for anymore like android is.... but for now I can have both OS's on my phone, which is perfect for me.
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
It is a long time which developers attracted to WP7 and android, and I've never attracted to new builds in this section.
of-course it was started for me when I've tried the first customized ROM with my HD2.
When I had Diamond, the Cooked ROM were better than the Original ones but on my HD2, the original ones are better and more stable.
Any comments?
any Idea?
please give me your opinions.
wrong section.
stock roms better than customs in HD2? you havent tried many then.. or at all.
I had diamond too and there were really good custom roms but that time there was NONE this big jump from stock to better usability.
try elegancia for example and you find really stable, fast, eye candy rom with great stuff in it.
My HD (Blackstone) was abandoned by HTC with windows 6.1 and Manilla 2.1... the amazing Devs of XDA made it a WM6.5 Sense super-machine. The HD2 (Leo) is still the best WM phone out there and microsoft themselves aren't pushing out anything much new... so the Dev's haven't got the same amount of raw material to work from to take the HD2 beyond stock (not within WM anyway).
And as the post above says, "wrong section"!
I think that Marketing drives development, because from free development You can get money with support or with custom dev.
On WM6.5 there is no more marketing around by Microsoft, at least since WP7 was commercialized.
It's just because of Windows Mobile is dying. You can't help it. No new things to port, to tweak and to achieve on our devices. Add to that Android and Windows Phone 7 working perfectly on HD2 and there is your answer.
But I have to admit that there are few heroes supporting Windows Mobile, like sir Sternas who is still improving his ROM with his own Software. I have to say that WM is very useful and capable OS, it's just no one is developing and creating for it no more. I found it troublesome to find one decent twitter client (except Peep of course) for WM, whereas on Android I just head to Market, type twitter and BAM, dozens of twitter clients, one better than other, appear. I love Sense and tried hard to use Windows Mobile (best OS to use just as a phone and basic internet browser), but if I wanted to something more than it's included in phone, it's almost impossible. You understand me?
What ROM is Sterna's?
Sternas rom is here
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=612580
"Stop worrying about Windows Mobile. The name is changing. It's not a big deal. It isn't a dead platform. (At least not yet, anyway. )"
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11975316&postcount=1423
Cooked ROM on HD2
Check and search XDA for ROMs on my signature.
I agree, there have been no news for applications, I mean on the WM 6.5.5.
Developers, I believe, have given up developing apps for an already dead platform
nbee said:
"Stop worrying about Windows Mobile. The name is changing. It's not a big deal. It isn't a dead platform. (At least not yet, anyway. )"
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11975316&postcount=1423
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The page you reference clearly says that there will be no more phones with anything other than WP7. The other devices are specialized for a certain purpose, or are tablets / pads, etc. Not phones.
I love WM despite it's flaws, but I don't expect more applications. The people from which I have purchased WM software are only updating android.
nbee said:
"Stop worrying about Windows Mobile. The name is changing. It's not a big deal. It isn't a dead platform. (At least not yet, anyway. )"
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11975316&postcount=1423
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for quoting the info.
Many people are visiting here everyday. Windows Mobile is not dead. The cooked ROM is updated more frequent than the official stock ROM. It is still alive
As an application developer I loved Windows Mobile as it was a very capable platform (I have apps that I wrote for it that I couldn't have written for other mobile device) and the development tools (Visual Studio, SQL Server CE, etc) rock, so I'm not really happy or understand why WM is dying, but it seems it is. The question is what to replace it with. XDA Developers seems to jumped over to Android, and likely I try developing something for Android, but no doubt it will take some time before I find something I like better then Windows Mobile (I'm still writing apps for WM as its the platform I like to use myself and the ROMs here rock, for example I'm using the Energy HD2 ROM and can't find a reason to leave it, what does Android give me that Energy doesn't have?)
Android
DukeNukem said:
As an application developer I loved Windows Mobile as it was a very capable platform (I have apps that I wrote for it that I couldn't have written for other mobile device) and the development tools (Visual Studio, SQL Server CE, etc) rock, so I'm not really happy or understand why WM is dying, but it seems it is. The question is what to replace it with. XDA Developers seems to jumped over to Android, and likely I try developing something for Android, but no doubt it will take some time before I find something I like better then Windows Mobile (I'm still writing apps for WM as its the platform I like to use myself and the ROMs here rock, for example I'm using the Energy HD2 ROM and can't find a reason to leave it, what does Android give me that Energy doesn't have?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is the way to go. It has a brighter future that windows 7. It is becoming a very nice os. Windows 7 is a dead duck cant do anything with it.
What do you find in this ugly Android? Except the faster reaction comparing to WM.
It's even a problem to find a good dialer for Android.
Rest Windows Mobile rocks. Very flexible and customizable. Lot of dealers for your choice. Lot of other software.
I don't understand why people jump to some other system.
I better use WM7 then Android.
DuQ3r said:
What do you find in this ugly Android? Except the faster reaction comparing to WM.
It's even a problem to find a good dialer for Android.
Rest Windows Mobile rocks. Very flexible and customizable. Lot of dealers for your choice. Lot of other software.
I don't understand why people jump to some other system.
I better use WM7 then Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is better because the development is continuing (unlike Winmo).
You will know why is Android better if you use Android as native (in Android handset not in HD2)
Cheers..
silverwind said:
Android is better because the development is continuing (unlike Winmo).
You will know why is Android better if you use Android as native (in Android handset not in HD2)
Cheers..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on my experience with the LG G2X (I have two of them) android is a battery sucking nightmare that can't even download emails on a regular basis. Not to mention all the privacy concerns and ridiculous amounts of ads. It is useless as a business phone. It seems to be a toy OS for kids.
My HD2 with Elegancia by Steve runs flawlessly. If I want android toys and games a SD version works fine.
My wife wants to keep her G2X, but mine is going back because it is a piece of crap.
jcbofkc said:
Based on my experience with the LG G2X (I have two of them) android is a battery sucking nightmare that can't even download emails on a regular basis. Not to mention all the privacy concerns and ridiculous amounts of ads. It is useless as a business phone. It seems to be a toy OS for kids.
My HD2 with Elegancia by Steve runs flawlessly. If I want android toys and games a SD version works fine.
My wife wants to keep her G2X, but mine is going back because it is a piece of crap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand about battery sucking in Android But it also happens with Iphone and BB
So, it doesnt mean Android is bad...
I think the development of Battery technology is far left behind from the development of the device and os..
The disadvantage is as you said about privacy and ads, I do agree with you
About WInmo, dont get me wrong, I still keep my HD2 and it runs smooth with Platinum Series (see my sig). Only that, you dont have market to play with. Windows Market is not interesting to me So, I rarely play with my HD2, instead I use it more with SD Android ...
Cheers...
I can't seem to find much on this, so I thought I'd ask the question. I personally use a Samsung Galaxy Nexus and was a previous owner of a Galaxy S1. I also sport an Apple Macbook Pro and I love the computer.
There's been a constant "reminder" from various articles how developing for iOS appeals to the developer more than doing so for Android.
This topic has spawned countless of times, and with the recent intro of Instagram to Android, that topic has been re-written once more to show why iOS is "dominant" among developers compared to Android. Article HERE.
Thing is, with all this talk about developing for iOS being better, I find myself asking "if that were true, then why do developers still develop for Android? If that were true, Instagram wouldn't even bother coming to Android...especially since it's free."
So what would make developers for Instagram want to make an app for Android when according to these articles:
Developing on Android is "harder" because it has to adapt to countless hardwares
Android developers make less than iOS developers
Do you develop for both iOS and Android? What's your take? What actually entices you to want to work on the Android platform?
It would be nice if a developer who works on both platforms can give some insights. Please no fanboy or anti-apple talk here...I am sure many of you Android users like me, would have had your friends who are iPhone users bring up such a topic on how they've read that developing for iOS is better, and you can't explain to them why people still make apps for Android cause there's little material online to covers that topic. I'm genuinely curious to know from a developer's perspective
Developers want to get their program out to as many people as possible so they develop for platforms where the customers are at. The two biggest phone operating systems right now are iOS and Android.
Developers choose iOS first because their is a lot less device diversity with iOS devices so developing an app is probably easier. It has also been shown that there is more money to be made selling iOS apps than Android apps which could be due to the fact that people who are on a tight budget may see an Android device as a better deal or may have a carrier that doesn't even sell the iPhone. Piracy is an issue on both platforms but it could be argued that Android is easier to pirate on since apks can be sideloaded without rooting where as iPhones have to be jailbroken. But sideloading apks is used for legit reasons as well, like testing betas, nightlies and other apps that aren't distributed through App Stores.
Android apps have to account for multiple screen resolutions, ratios, and densities. Most regular apps scale just fine. Games seem to be where there are the most issues and I really wish Google would address the issues. It seems each GPU type needs its own support (PowerVR, Nvidia, Adreno, etc). I really wish Google would implement something like DirectX so games can be played on any GPU with enough power. iOS has the advantage here because only a single GPU type is used, PowerVR I believe, so all games can be optimized for it. Couple that with the fact that iOS tends to bring in more money and this is why the game developers usually favor it over Android.
Thanks for the insight. I figured gaming would be difficult for developers but didn't understand why, I just naturally assumed that "if the app seems more complicated, it naturally equates to more complications making it run on various hardwares".
Am I right to say then that when tech reviewers write about how Developers favor iOS to Android, it's mostly pertaining to gaming?
What about non-gaming apps? Is reaching as many people as possible the only incentive to go Android? Take Whatsapp, or Instagram that recently came out...it's free on Android, it also has to deal with multiple hardwares (though now I'm assuming it's actually not as tough as it sounds to accomplish if the app's fairly simple)...is there an incentive for developers to create an Android App...cause the guys at Instagram or Whatsapp could have gone "Well there's nothing here for me, I'll just stick to iOS"...because from what I see, it looks like opening it to the Android market meant having to stress their servers with a sudden influx of users, which mean spending more money to maintain them so it doesn't slow down too much...it seems like a lose-lose situation from where I'm standing. =\
I guess for some apps, google ads are what keeps them going...like Draw Something. I do wonder though how Whatsapp and Instagram manages its upkeep when it doesnt have ads...and if the answer is that they use the money earned from iOS to manage their expansion, is it really worth it if the goal is just branding purposes.
If there is a market to reach developers will develop. Web developers had to put up with the terrible non standard supporting ie6 for years. It was a real pain to develop for but had a large user base that couldnt just be ignored. Android is the same way, developers go where they can reach the consumer. Luckily android its nowhere near as bad as ie6 was.
Sent from my Touchpad using Tapatalk
spunker88 said:
If there is a market to reach developers will develop. Web developers had to put up with the terrible non standard supporting ie6 for years. It was a real pain to develop for but had a large user base that couldnt just be ignored. Android is the same way, developers go where they can reach the consumer. Luckily android its nowhere near as bad as ie6 was.
Sent from my Touchpad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the input! From your take, it seems like developers make apps for Android not because they want to, but they have to.
Do you or any of the developers reading this, can testify that there are some ups to developing on Android as compared to iOS.
Please use the Q&A Forum for questions &
Read the Forum Rules Ref Posting
Moving to Q&A
lufc said:
Please use the Q&A Forum for questions &
Read the Forum Rules Ref Posting
Moving to Q&A
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, sorry the topic may be [Q] but it's meant to generate comments and thoughts pertaining to the Android platform as per the sub header for Android General
Could it please be sent back to Android General? The Q&A section seems to be a place for people to post technical questions they need help solving.
Anyway, anyone else able to share their thoughts? Do you develop for both iOS and Android? It seems so far that people prefer to develop for iOS and lesser for Android, but they do it cause they have to as a means of reaching to the masses, but not really because they want to.
Anyone beg to differ? Do you have a reason why you actually prefer developing for Android over iOS?
Hi,
I'm a web developer, and when I decided to try mobile development, I made the choice to develop only for Android, for various reasons, but mainly because I'm not a fan of the Apple ecosystem.
This is not fanboyism here, I'm not bashing Apple, they make great products. But I prefer a fragmented ecosystem, with various companies, various devices, various app markets, etc. because this is a great source of opportunities. I also like the fact that android is open-source, leaving the availability to study the source code and hack around.
As for the difficulty to develop for various devices, I'd say that I'm used to it, being a web developer. Web devs are used to cope with various browsers (some of them being pretty old) and different screen sizes. See for example the mediaqueri.es site (cannot post link since I'm a new user)
thibaultj said:
Hi,
I'm a web developer, and when I decided to try mobile development, I made the choice to develop only for Android, for various reasons, but mainly because I'm not a fan of the Apple ecosystem.
This is not fanboyism here, I'm not bashing Apple, they make great products. But I prefer a fragmented ecosystem, with various companies, various devices, various app markets, etc. because this is a great source of opportunities. I also like the fact that android is open-source, leaving the availability to study the source code and hack around.
As for the difficulty to develop for various devices, I'd say that I'm used to it, being a web developer. Web devs are used to cope with various browsers (some of them being pretty old) and different screen sizes. See for example the mediaqueri.es site (cannot post link since I'm a new user)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your 2 cents! Am I right to assume that in fact, having to deal with different hardwares and screen sizes are actually a norm among developers before iOS came along? In other words, yes, Apple is right to say criticize that other platforms are harder to work with compared to iOS but that's because iOS is the exception among developing platforms where it's system is easier to work with?
spunker88 said:
I really wish Google would implement something like DirectX so games can be played on any GPU with enough power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But Android and iOS already have something like DirectX - OpenGL ES 1.1 and 2.0.
The_R said:
But Android and iOS already have something like DirectX - OpenGL ES 1.1 and 2.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the additional input...if there always is a direct standard like Open GL in both iOS and Android, what's the difficult part about manufacturing games for Android?
iOS required Apple computer to install their development environment. And You must pay 99$ per year for being the official iOS developer..
ayen1234 said:
iOS required Apple computer to install their development environment. And You must pay 99$ per year for being the official iOS developer..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd actually say that it is worth it.
yeahyeahright said:
Thanks for the additional input...if there always is a direct standard like Open GL in both iOS and Android, what's the difficult part about manufacturing games for Android?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think its large number of the types of Android devices. It really isn't as simple as just supporting different screen sizes. Doing that is actually a really simple task using OpenGL.
With my own games I've experienced that what generally works on my test device won't necessarily work the same way on someone else's. For example, some devices support textures of any size while some devices have a constraint of the texture size being a power of 2. On many of my games which need multitouch, I've experienced that it doesn't always work the same on all devices either. On some it is downright broken while on other it just works fine.
There are many such other issues which you'd be aware of only after experiencing them.
The reason for this is the different hardware and the different software implementations that each phone manufacturer brings in. Even if the game "works" on a wide range of devices, there is always a different feel that you get when playing on a different device because of the hardware variations. You might get a good frame rate on a high end phone but have you tried playing it on a low end one? I've seen games from even the big publishers working fine on a high end phone but it just is completely glitchy on a low end one.
Now for a small developer with limited resources it can get really hard to test on and support as many devices as possible. This is one of the main reasons I feel that it can get really hard to develop games on Android. It just requires more effort if the developer wants to guarantee a good experience on a wide range of devices.
The other factor as stated before is that the iOS platform is more uniform. And moreover there are more people who are apparently willing to pay for your game on iOS than on Android. With one of my own games I've experienced that I've made more money in the last 10 days by selling it on the iOS App store than on Android in the last one year with ad revenues.
I actually started developing games on Android initially and one of the really big disappointments for me has been that I am not able to sell my games on the market(now Google Play) because Google checkout for merchants is only available in a few countries. This was the main reason for me to consider moving over to iOS. I think I could sell on a different market like the Amazon App store if I really wanted though.
Inspite of all that I'd say that Android is a great platform.
Wow thanks a lot for the insight! It's great to understand it from a developer's POV, especially one who works on both platforms.
I realise people do comment a lot about Android users less committed to pay for an app, I wonder why...I don't think it's due to their budget, my guess is that their afraid it may not work well on their devices...to that I think Google could really push hard and promote it's 15 minutes refund policy which I think a lot of users are not aware of....I use the 15 minute window a lot and it helps me to decide if something is worth my time buying or not.
I guess the "openness" of Android has allowed phone manufacturers to get really creative with their products (Touchwiz, Sense, Dual Screens, Qwerty Keypads etc) but at the same time, makes it harder for a developer to create stuff, probably even harder than creating stuff on a Windows Desktop.
Do any of you think that having "game settings" like you get on a Windows PC will help change this experience? Either one where the user gets to tweak the graphics (low, med, high) and performance, or perhaps one where the game will adjust graphics to the "recommended setting based on your hardware"? Is this even possible on Android or it's more complicated than you'd get on Windows?
yeahyeahright said:
Do any of you think that having "game settings" like you get on a Windows PC will help change this experience? Either one where the user gets to tweak the graphics (low, med, high) and performance, or perhaps one where the game will adjust graphics to the "recommended setting based on your hardware"? Is this even possible on Android or it's more complicated than you'd get on Windows?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I have actually seen a few games that do that, and it does help. But it also requires some extra time and effort on the developer's part.
In some of my games too, I've added some simple settings in order to change the control schemes, so that if one of them doesn't work for you, you could choose the other one. Graphically, though, my games are really simple.
yeahyeahright said:
Thanks for your 2 cents! Am I right to assume that in fact, having to deal with different hardwares and screen sizes are actually a norm among developers before iOS came along? In other words, yes, Apple is right to say criticize that other platforms are harder to work with compared to iOS but that's because iOS is the exception among developing platforms where it's system is easier to work with?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having to deal with different hardwares started to be a thing of the past, with the explosion of web apps. One platform for all, what a dream! Then came smartphones and tablets, and developing for a native platfrom became cool again.
Anyway, building for the web is still the only way to reach anyone with an internet access. The only problem with web apps is that it's harder to monetize. But the web's decentralized architecture is not a bug, it's a feature. That is what guarantees it's freedom and independance. You don't have such guarantees on a centralized market managed by a single company, whose first goal is profit.
Well, this post was slightly off-topic, sorry about that.
Thanks both of you for the really good insight. I guess Android is great as a supposedly "open" phone os, it certainly has a lot of hurdles to clear in order to please and entice developers the way iOS does, I'm not certain it can get there, but I do think they do make an effort, like the just upgraded emulator which shows Google's commitment to better developed apps (talk about timing!).
I'm certainly happy with my Android phone and from what I've read about the negative results developers gain from working on Android than on iOS, I take my hat off to those that stick around on this platform and try to make things happen. *clap*
=)
I choose Android for one reason. It's much cheaper. Only 25$ one time. iOS is 99$ every year
Hey guys,
I'm a writer for PhoneArena.com and I'm working on a piece about Android development. The idea is inspired by Koush saying that he is considering "adopting an Android 4.0+ only app development policy", and I wanted to get some ideas as to what you all see as the pros/cons to this approach.
I understand that dropping support for 2.x leaves out just under 50% of the market, but I guess I'm wondering how much you find that those users use apps. Koush and some commenters have insinuated that the Play stats for apps show that most users that actually download apps are on 4.x anyway.
What do you think? What are the pros/cons of developing only for Android 4.0+?
Thanks!
-Mike
I still code all my apps 2.3.3+ because there's not much I need in the later versions because of the great work of ActionBarSherlock, Android Support and Holo Everywhere. I run an app development company at android-app-development.ie, clients are usually local companies and the apps aren't exactly earth-shattering. They don't need many features but I get an earful if a customer can't install on their Galaxy S2. Still a great and hugely popular phone, most of them running 2.3.3.
A quick brief history of my skills, I started out back in the 80's teaching myself Z80 machine code for ZX spectrum and then thanks to Alan Sugar's 1512 I unerased some second hand 5" Floppy Discs and retrieved a copy of Turbo Pascal Ver.1 this went on through the years learning Delphi C+ pearl javascript PHP etc etc until my retirement in 2018. Now bored and in lockdown I have decided to learn more about android. I have flashed plenty of phones and tablets with stock roms., but a few years ago I bought a CR*P Auravisor VR headset which was a useless UI and I thought, lets find out what makes it tick and learn android. It is running on Android 5.1.1 lollipop with a Nibiru vr interface that locks after a few minutes of use. no rom updates were ever available as the crowdfunding company whos dream it was shut down.
now the question and i am not bothered if i brick it cos it just acts as a doorstop anyway. could I just load a clean version of lollipop and then install the likes of cardboard/daydrean and vr apps from google play. or is there a way i could extract the stock rom off the headset to try to somehow rewrite the UI I am currently learning Android Studio and Unity