Related
Hey guys!
Yesterday I read an article about "CyanogenMod no longer delivers support for devices with snapdragons 1"
And as our device is a "cooper one", it seems we are not gonna make it..
Source 1: "CyanogenMod ya no entregará soporte para equipos con Snapdragon S1" - bitly.com/MCS7bU
Source 2: "CyanogenMod formally confirms ceased support for Snapdragon S1 devices past Gingerbread" - bitly.com/MCSGT5
And here is the official post of Cyanogenmod's Team (from Google+):
CyanogenMod 01/08/2012
CM 9+, N1 (and other S1 SoC)
The Nexus One, along with the other first generation Snapdragon devices (devices with the QSD8x50, MSM7x25, MSM7x27 and MSM7x27T SoCs), will not be supported beyond the CM 7.x (Gingerbread) branch.
We’ve been holding off on finalizing this, looking for ways that we could make this work and be happy with the release. Sadly, it never panned out, and we’ve decided that it’s time to stop our efforts.
The Nexus One in particular would have required a custom hboot to repartition the internal memory (which itself was limited to 512 MB, like most devices of that generation) and the proprietary libs available (from 2.3) would have required compromises in the CyanogenMod code that we are not willing to make. The wide variety of MSM7x2x(T) devices, on top of these problems, also have a complete lack of media libraries that are compatible with the new APIs introduced in ICS (video decoding and encoding, specifically). The pieces just aren’t there.
Does the capability to run ICS or Jellybean exist on these devices? Yes, with enough time, effort, and hacks it can be made to work. Do we feel the experience is worth all of that? No.
To measure our releases, we use the same subjective criteria as users do: “speed”, “jank”, “butter”, but also factor in user experience (UX) and other intangibles. However, beyond this is something that we can (and do) use as a ‘pass or fail’ mechanism, the Android Compatibility Test Suite. The CTS is used by device manufacturers to ensure that their changes to Android source do not break Android API, platform and other standards. This, in turn, brings stability to the Play Store for app developers. Breaking CTS would lead to a bad and inconsistent experience for app devs, which in turn would lead to a bad experience for you guys as users. If CyanogenMod was perceived to be blatantly violating CTS, developers could eventually blacklist CyanogenMod users from using their apps (or worse, Google could blacklist CyanogenMod from the Play Store altogether). No one would win by going down that path.
If, in the future, a solution is found that passes CTS, we will revisit the topic.
For users that are adamant about trying to run ICS and beyond, options exist. We are not going to recommend other builds however, as they are more than likely breaking CTS, and therefore our quality assurance standards as well. You can find them if you look in the usual places.
-The CyanogenMod Team
Edit The list of affected devices are as follows: blade, bravo, bravoc, buzz, c660, click, cooper, desirec, e510, e720, es209ra, espresso, hero, heroc, inc, legend, liberty, morrisson, motus, one, p500, passion, robym, s5670, supersonic, tass, u8150, u8220, z71, zero
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source: bitly.com/MCSZxf
So... What do you think ?...
Damnit...
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
How bout this? That is ICS
Shadow xD said:
How bout this? That is ICS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He means future support, that means future updates will take longer because now porting is needed to make it work.
The title is wrong.
You should say we won't get future support from Cyanogenmod.
AOSP still can be compile from source I guess.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
galaxyace152 said:
The title is wrong.
You should say we won't get future support from Cyanogenmod.
AOSP still can be compile from source I guess.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can I edit it ?....
EDIT>Go Advanced. Be more careful next time.
eagleeyetom said:
EDIT>Go Advanced. Be more careful next time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, understood =/..
¬¬
We never had and never will have OFFICIAL CM9+ support. UNOFFICIAL builds are what we'll have to live on..
Is this just saying that we wont have official CM9/CM10 support (which we all knew)?
Or is it saying that we will no longer get support from them for CM7?
Sent from the cracked screen of my GALAXY Ace.
tomb20 said:
Is this just saying that we wont have official CM9/CM10 support (which we all knew)?
Or is it saying that we will no longer get support from them for CM7?
Sent from the cracked screen of my GALAXY Ace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think CM 7.2 cooper is the last rom they do for Gingerbread.....
I mean... No more Official Roms for Galaxy Ace
JuampyXnaker said:
I think CM 7.2 cooper is the last rom they do for Gingerbread.....
I mean... No more Official Roms for Galaxy Ace
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We will get GB roms.
We just won't get official CM9/10 and support from them for the above.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
Yup.. CM7.x is after which the support ends.
Cm7.3 ?
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda premium
CoolCatGetHome said:
Cm7.3 ?
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They've moved on from CM7, lol
King ACE said:
They've moved on from CM7, lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope they are further developing cm7 for the devices wich dont get official cm9/cm10 support
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda premium
CoolCatGetHome said:
Nope they are further developing cm7 for the devices wich dont get official cm9/cm10 support
Sent from my GT-S5830 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That will be awesome as Gingerbread is best for the Ace.
ICS slows it down like hell!
galaxyace152 said:
That will be awesome as Gingerbread is best for the Ace.
ICS slows it down like hell!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agree, ICS+ was made for better devices than the ace.
Gingerbread works better for the ace.
tomb20 said:
Gingerbread works better for the ace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and aosp GB works hell smoother.. even at this moment cm7 lags in front of aosp :silly::laugh:
cm7 may not see cm7.3 but it is alive for patches to existing system not further features
madman said:
and aosp GB works hell smoother.. even at this moment cm7 lags in front of aosp :silly::laugh:
cm7 may not see cm7.3 but it is alive for patches to existing system not further features
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah! I saw the quadrant for AOSP in Ace! It was some 2100 or something!
Can someone port an ICS/JB ROM onto the Galaxy Player 4.2 (YP-GI1)? I really want to update my software, the 4.0/5.0 both have ICS on it and it would be great if my device could have it too, Thanks!
Development is still small. You are going to have to wait because I believe no one hasn't build a custom rom yet.
Sent from my Chip 1.5 ROM + Entropy512's Kernal Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0 U.S.
SerkTheTurk said:
Can someone port an ICS/JB ROM onto the Galaxy Player 4.2 (YP-GI1)? I really want to update my software, the 4.0/5.0 both have ICS on it and it would be great if my device could have it too, Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ICS porting worked chronologically:
The SGP 5.0 was the first to have working ICS ports and it took months before the Bluetooth bug was fixed.
Several months after 5.0 ports stabilized, some developers ported it to the SGP 4.0.
I suspect it worked this way, because there are a larger number of SGP 5.0 owners, hence leading to more output.
And, if my suspicions are correct, then it is going to be a very long while before the SGP 4.2/3.6 see any ports respectively, as I suspect that the number of people who own those devices is smaller yet.
It is feasible, but that would mean that a lot of our devs here who have done successful ports to the 4.0/5.0 would need their own SGP 4.2/3.6 to test their builds and ports on. And, I just don't see them spending money on an already under-supported device.
But, who knows? Crazier things have happened here on the SGP forums.
Is anyone working on this device? I have seen someone on the CyanogenMod Forums say that they have ICS on it but it's very unstable. Of course I can't believe that... But people got a root working using Odin3. If there is any developer that has this device and seeing this post, please.. reply! Thanks
Check this out
did it to my sons 4.2 player,he loves the rom. Check out this thread it has everything you need to upgrade-----http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1884071--- READ and good luck!!
The thread you sent me just has rooted ROMs. I already rooted my device.
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
ok so you want to upgrade, this is what i found.the roms are rooted and you flash them using odin.
Yeah but what does it upgrade?
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Yeah but what does it upgrade?
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Being rooted is a state of existence. You can add it or take it away at your disposal. Being rooted just means that you have the Super User binaries installed on your device. You un-root by uninstalling those binaries. Flashing a ROM with or without root simply means that the ROM you flashed has or doesn't have those binaries.
So, if you flash a rooted ROM over your currently rooted ROM, that's OK. That simply means you have older or newer binaries on your device. (And, yes. You can update Super User binaries.)
there is a rooted gingerbread stock rom, but I believe the dev that made it doesn't even have a 4.2 and had to rely on others to test it, even the 4.0 has a very small number of devs on it, and half the ones we've had in the past have moved on to newer devices. I doubt there will be any ICS/JB goodness for the 4.2 simply because there are no devs that actually own one, atleast as far as users on here go, maybe some guy somewhere might be working on it but they sure aren't here.
Yeah I used that exact ROM anyway to get the rooted gingerbread ROM but thanks anyway
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Does anybody know when developers might actually try a ROM for this device?
Hi, I was interested in building an ICS ROM for the galaxy player 4.2. After compiling ICS from the source, what steps do you need to take to make it into a ROM?
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
I'm afraid it's not THAT simple. AFAIK, there is a lot of work to be done before a booting ICS can be achieved. If you have no prior experience in android ROM development, I don't think this is a task you should take up right now. ICS compiled from the AOSP will not work on the 4.2 without modification and an ICS kernel, both of which are far beyond my current technological skill. Also this should be in general. Yes, I know it IS development related, but this IS a development site. Questions belong in the general thread. Thanks.
Odp: Developing ROMs?
Well starting by practice is good way imo. I did so But wothout knowledge, you have to be extremely patient
Send from sg wifi5.0 with mine kernel
I understand, maybe I can look at how it was achieved on the other players and it might be similar?
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
I wouldn't look at the other players, as the 4.2 is pretty different from the 4 and 5. Try finding another Samsung product with similar hardware. Example: the galaxy player 5.0 is very similar to the SGS i9000 , Nexus S (crespo), and GTab p1000.
Sent from my YP-G70 using xda app-developers app
Okay, but I'm pretty sure the 4.2 is similar to nexus s?
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Compare specs. Find out.
Sent from my YP-G70 using xda app-developers app
Odp: Developing ROMs?
by specs our devices are quite similar, by kernel etc. less but still similar.
I think that good and interesting way of learning is to add same/similar modifications as on crespo/aries and try to understand how does it accually work.
Send from sg wifi5.0 with mine kernel
Thanks for the help guys. I'm quite busy at the moment catching up with school work, I'll see what I can do this weekend.
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Hell, the 4.2 might even get an official update. Unlikely, but possible. IDK if Samsung has made a statement about this, but it only came out last year. (I think)
I called Samsung and asked about official updates and they said the 4.2 won't be getting any because the specs aren't good enough....
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
SerkTheTurk said:
I called Samsung and asked about official updates and they said the 4.2 won't be getting any because the specs aren't good enough....
Sent from my YP-GI1 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats a lie. there was a device called the Galaxy Music that had an 800 mHz processor that got JB.
Samsung wont update the galaxy players because they are much cheaper compared to phones (take the s3 for example, it costs 700-800 bucks if you get it without a contract)
I'd suggest reading through the following threads if you haven't already. Then ask about the specific parts there you're not understanding.
[GUIDE] How to port ROMs to the Galaxy Players
[Guide]Rom Development for Dummies (and a few other things)
And I found this one that describes the complete process for the aospa rom. You should be able to adapt the details for whatever rom you're working on.
[GUIDE][AOSPA:v3.+] How to Compile AOSPA from Source : + Support and Maintenance
That won't work until there is a working ICS kernel though. And even after that is completed, work will need to be done on the ROM.
So i decided to Start this topic because of actually given destrictions of using and sharing a kernel,which Source Code is closed Source.actually it will affect our device in that way,that only ics could be compiled and shared... So I think we should build a kernel by ourselves,not by recompiling a OEM Source Kernel,but by deving from scratch.All related Files were given by ics Source Code
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
Our device is said to be fully backward compatible with msm7x27a or 7x25a devices ,in Software and Hardware.So it cannot to heavy to dev own aosp Kernel ,which cozld pass jb or in Future new releases
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
So really no Dev there,who has enough knowledge to build a kernel from e.g. caf-sources?
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
greeneyes2910 said:
So really no Dev there,who has enough knowledge to build a kernel from e.g. caf-sources?
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can build it, but you won't be able to boot your phone with that kernel.
atis112 said:
We can build it, but you won't be able to boot your phone with that kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how successful were you with your JB CM10.1 kernel? this must be so frustrating for you
So why are could not boot with such kernel? Every Board have its own made board files e.g. Htc Bravo... The Aosp board files are free build by cyanogen for e.g
greeneyes2910 said:
Our device is said to be fully backward compatible with msm7x27a or 7x25a devices ,in Software and Hardware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it's not. The SoC is designed to make upgrading a msm7x27a-based device easy; there's no need to alter the rest of the hardware or PCB. So the pin-out (and a few other details) are backwards compatible. This is useful to phone manufacturers, since re-designing hardware and PCB's (and getting it re-certified) is a time consuming affair; being able to upgrade a phone model just by replacing the SoC is a huge time saver and allows manufacturers to introduce a stop-gap upgrade model easily and cheaply.
However, this does not imply any compatibility with the software.Software is cheap to modify, especially in the case of an Android phone.
To draw a (perpetually flawed) car-analogy: Back in the day, you could swap the engine of a VW beetle with the engine of a Porsche with relatively little effort, as the mounting points, engine bay size and drive shaft location were roughly the same. (hardware compatibility). However, this doesn't mean the resulting car has the same performance, handling or fuel efficiency as the original beetle, and the driver had better be aware of the more powerful engine and take approriate caution (But no software compatibility).
Ok that seems clear, but why is it such a problem to bring a kernel aosp ?
greeneyes2910 said:
Ok that seems clear, but why is it such a problem to bring a kernel aosp ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because HTC (or indeed Qualcomm) made modifications to the Linux kernel, and they haven't disclosed those changes yet. Without those changes, it is nigh impossible to reproduce the kernel as shipped by the current JB rom, let alone make a modified version.
This wouldn't have been such a pain in the rear end if Qualcomm wasn't so restrictive with the amount of information they supply. In order to be able to make a kernel (AOSP has little to do with this), we need the changes HTC (or Qualcomm) made, either
By waiting until HTC releases the source code (Will probably happen at some point, but will take a while)
By reverse-engineering the changes they made to the previous kernel, and porting them to the new 3.4.0 kernel - which is a gargantuan task, and offers little guarantee for success.
We can port a kernel from a similar phone like pico guys did
Yeah something like this was my intension, because such boards or bravo, dhd, desire s, etc, are all don have original kernel sources. so this is exact same to our dx . What makes protou so different to all other devices? anyway, as in fact, that a kernel is compiled from sources (including spezific needed board files etc) it must be possible to recompile a kernel to its sources...
Its ok to wait for HTC Sources already but it also should be clear, that further apis , android os, or real development, would never be possible, when Htc decided that protou will not be upgradeble in future.
greeneyes2910 said:
Yeah something like this was my intension, because such boards or bravo, dhd, desire s, etc, are all don have original kernel sources. so this is exact same to our dx . What makes protou so different to all other devices? anyway, as in fact, that a kernel is compiled from sources (including spezific needed board files etc) it must be possible to recompile a kernel to its sources...
Its ok to wait for HTC Sources already but it also should be clear, that further apis , android os, or real development, would never be possible, when Htc decided that protou will not be upgradeble in future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it would be really difficult to port a kernel for our phone cuz we have really less no of devs. Even if we had 5 proper devs then we could have made it.
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
prototype-U said:
But it would be really difficult to port a kernel for our phone cuz we have really less no of devs. Even if we had 5 proper devs then we could have made it.
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We appreciate the hard work everybody does here, and we are always grateful. Do not feel pressured into doing something just because everybody else wants it
) > Galaxy 3 Android Development > [script] repack-zImage.sh: Unpack and repack a zImage without kernel source, V. 5
So this is nearly exactly what I mean and should be possible with our Kernel
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
greeneyes2910 said:
) > Galaxy 3 Android Development > [script] repack-zImage.sh: Unpack and repack a zImage without kernel source, V. 5
So this is nearly exactly what I mean and should be possible with our Kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I assume you're referring to this thread. I fail to see how this will help though, as this is unrelated to the kernel source in any way, shape or form. It merely extracts the initial ramdisk.
But it says that it is possible to decompile a zimage.
So it must be possible to get Board Files from it
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
greeneyes2910 said:
But it says that it is possible to decompile a zimage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't.
that s wrong. it is already possible...But that is not needed. all compiled files from kernel should be located anywhere on device
Dear Devs,
Android 4.4 is out and will support our devices too. Any one to work on to support our beloved Optimus One or All developers moved to a high end device already.
Thanks,
Kiran Kumar
Ya Google said that the low end android smartphones having at least 512mb of ram can run Kitkat smoothly. It will be new birth to our beloved Lg optimus one
Waiting for our developers reaction.
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda app-developers app
Here's a portion of what cyanogenmod posted on facebook..
Sent from my C525c using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
3ncrypt3d_Droid said:
Here's a portion of what cyanogenmod posted on facebook..
Sent from my C525c using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But... what about porting AOSP rom ?)
OMG, but one problem all developers are to lazy work with this legacy device! Sorry am bad English
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda app-developers app
Guys
We got a new problem .
Google's new launcher doesn't work without google now
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
nomancoolboy said:
Guys
We got a new problem .
Google's new launcher doesn't work without google now
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's not a problem.
-_-
You are like "I want that new 4.4 thingy, i don't know the new features but who cares cos it's New! Yeee ^_^ make it work make it".
Don't get me wrong but,
GB or 2.3.x was the best Android OS for our p500, well i still believe it is.
Why?
Cos there wasn't any Fc's, no post like "oh nooo camera image sh1ty", no malfunction on hardware level nor software,
Some dev, cavemen i believe was his name, fixed our multitouch problem, i don't think this fix was implemented on ics or jb since i've never found any evidence for it, test with "multitouch app" see what i mean.
The ICS is still in development, 4.2 JB has reached his final build, 4.3 has started it's dev.
With ICS we got less free ram, less free storage space but we gained better UI, kinda, and most important better system compatibility. Battery was somewhat intact.
With JB 4.2 we got the 3.0 kernel, more functionality and great battery drain but huge with wifi on. Less ram again, less space, new bugs, and the end of p500 gaming era xD.
Custom Rom numbers have fallen a lot too.
My point was,
Isn't better to optimize / perfect the ICS and Jb for our p500 instead of demanding new builds?
New doesn't mean better trough
(i find Talho and Ginger DX best Roms, Talho as you know for gaming and Ginger as the best customized rom, so much functionality. But I'm running JB only cos gives me the BEST sound quality.)
Cheers.
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Is the new google experience launcher work? I mean does it at least work at the basic level?
please don't expect nexus 4 or nexus 5 functions shinny gimmick but if at least the basic feature of a launcher works then it is little improvement
to experience the feel of newer OS
as for the comment about perfecting 4.0 or 4.2
I am a bit in the middle with that .
because usually newer code is cleaner, thus more efficient, and who knows it maybe backward port friendly
and I think our development for 4.0 and 4.2 has reached is max because of the kernel limitation (correct me if I am wrong)
trying to port 4.4 would be an interesting hack In my opinion . a challange
and proof of concept I know software developer / programmer likes to proof their concept
they like challenge
try and get the google experience launcher here
http://phandroid.com/2013/10/31/download-and-install-the-new-google-experience-launcher/
nomancoolboy said:
Guys
We got a new problem .
Google's new launcher doesn't work without google now
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Velvet will fix this
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda app-developers app
Interesting. Since I have few months only testing roms, i think that every new android version has to wait, is like mw sais, is not a race to get it first, is to wait until a well done version being released. And (in my case) can't urge the developers to get new roms if we only wait for it and don't help with the build. If you want a 4.4 version now, start studying, learning and do it for yourself. Other people have different priorities.
Enviado desde mi LG-P500 usando Tapatalk 4
chalo99 said:
Interesting. Since I have few months only testing roms, i think that every new android version has to wait, is like mw sais, is not a race to get it first, is to wait until a well done version being released. And (in my case) can't urge the developers to get new roms if we only wait for it and don't help with the build. If you want a 4.4 version now, start studying, learning and do it for yourself. Other people have different priorities.
Enviado desde mi LG-P500 usando Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the source is not available for armv6 devices ...so we have to wait
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
I think that cm will be habit late so why don't you drvs start with another ROM! Maybe simple aosp or a better one slimkat which is already out for nexus 4. I believe that slimkat will fit our phone perfectly as it is slim and needs less system storage.
Thx in advance! Devs are making a valuable effort! Hats off for them!
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda app-developers app
another version of google launcher
this time it is XDA version
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2506488
Velvet FCs for me. Problem may well be an armv7 jni once again. Those FCs make the launcher really fun.
There is a launcher3.apk around which bypasses the Google Now business.
Will 4.4 run on our devices? Really?
Two problems:
Armv6! Pre-compiled closed source stuff for armv7. Just like before.
Room on /system for various new libraries. I am trying them on sdext with symlinks. This is Linux so this should work. This is Android so who knows?
Newer gapps and components are bigger than ever. Sort of contradicts all the buzz.
I was wrong ..
Most of the people are using it as a primary phones :thumbup::thumbup:
Thats good
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Left4DeadMW said:
My point was,
Isn't better to optimize / perfect the ICS and Jb for our p500 instead of demanding new builds?
New doesn't mean better trough
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But I think that this time it will mean better. Because this version has been made to run on lower end devices, devices with less RAM and processing power. If Dev's are trying to create the perfect 4.x.x ROM for the P500: this very well might be it.
I think we'll have to wait before judging 4.4 as a just a bloated resource hog on this device. It may very well be the complete opposite.
Logan_M said:
But I think that this time it will mean better. Because this version has been made to run on lower end devices, devices with less RAM and processing power. If Dev's are trying to create the perfect 4.x.x ROM for the P500: this very well might be it.
I think we'll have to wait before judging 4.4 as a just a bloated resource hog on this device. It may very well be the complete opposite.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's an interesting article : http://www.phonearena.com/news/Andr...rtably-on-512MB-RAM-devices-heres-how_id49099
Sent from my C525c using Tapatalk 2
3ncrypt3d_Droid said:
Here's an interesting article : http://www.phonearena.com/news/Andr...rtably-on-512MB-RAM-devices-heres-how_id49099
Sent from my C525c using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Project Svelte is what I was referring to. So we should see some better performance than with Jelly Bean.
Logan_M said:
But I think that this time it will mean better. Because this version has been made to run on lower end devices, devices with less RAM and processing power. If Dev's are trying to create the perfect 4.x.x ROM for the P500: this very well might be it.
I think we'll have to wait before judging 4.4 as a just a bloated resource hog on this device. It may very well be the complete opposite.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps.
Never said something like useless.
And getting high expect = won't get disappointed at the end.
So kitkat4.4 would have better performance then JB?
I mean, CM team spend time porting/dev JB ROM to our, well I might as say old, p500 and couldn't perfect it, greatest issues still are camera/battery/more space same storage, as android versions progress more and more storage space is taken, as well as ram usage.
And now somehow, google will make 4.4 universal build with all features from previous versions?
Google hasn't made any ICS or JB p500 specific ROM then it would take so much time.
But, making universal builds for phones-alike would be better option but builds won't be phone specific optimized.
I doubt kitkat's realization. It's a nice though but imagine the number of phones that still run on ROMs under JB.
EDIT: (source: xda and wiki)
"video playback performance issues due to missing libraries for hardware assisted decoding since ICS"
Would this be fixed? I remember now, I could never watched those Naruto downloaded ep's, video playback was like 1frame-per-sec (online streaming still fine)