[Q] ION vs PMEM What is the difference?

[Q] ION vs PMEM What is the difference? - HTC Rezound

ION vs PMEM
What is the difference?

Google is your friend - http://lwn.net/Articles/480055/

In the case of the Rezound specifically, ION is generally faster and less laggy, but has a purple tinted camera, and no working front camera (for now).

To quote shrike (I hope that's alright)
Originally Posted by shrike1978 View Post
ION is the new unified memory management architecture that Google is advancing. Prior to ION, every SoC manufacturer had their own way of doing memory management. Qualcomm's was pmem, Nvidia's was nvram, etc. It made it's debut as an option in ICS and is preferred in JB. Being unified also means that it is a good candidate for integration into the Linux kernel mainline, which would mean that Android would no longer require it's own separate branch of Linux.
So I've read this but what would that mean in terms of developement? If Android didn't have to be a separate branch of Linux, would it be easier to spread ROMs to all the different phones?
regnsy pronounced

noo_too_droid said:
To quote shrike (I hope that's alright)
So I've read this but what would that mean in terms of developement? If Android didn't have to be a separate branch of Linux, would it be easier to spread ROMs to all the different phones?
regnsy pronounced
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not a dev, but in my understanding the biggest hurdle for porting ROMS is device drivers. It is relatively easy to port a ROM from the HTC One X to the HTC Rezound, because they are made by the same manufacturer, have the same system-on-a-chip manufacturer (Qualcomm) and have a similar stock kernel based on different versions of HTC Sense.
But porting a ROM from, let's say a Samsung Galaxy III is nigh impossible, because it uses a different system-on-a-chip exclusive to Samsung phones and its stock kernel is based on TouchWiz. And even though Android is based on Linux, each of the phone manufacturers have slightly different ways of organizing system files that set the various system options. So a kernel patch that works on one device probably won't work on another. (kernel level features such as GPU overclocking, two-way call recording etc. rely on these system setting files).
Even among phones made by the same company, you may have hardware differences such as different camera technologies, different screen resolutions, etc. that make porting harder.
That's why cyanogenmod, AOKP and MIUI are so valuable and appreciated, because they organize porting of a ROM that, as far as the kernel and GUI are concerned, vary little between devices. However those projects still have to rely on what manufacturers choose to release as open source to develop hardware device drivers to port the ROM to each device.
And then you have the problem of, what level of Android is officially supported by the manufacturer? The Droid Incredible 2, for example, is still waiting for an official ICS release it may never get, which means running Jellybean as it is meant to be run is that much harder. It's hard enough on the Rezound, where we have official ICS kernel source.
That's why I give lots of kudos to people who take custom ROMs like BAMF paradigm, paranoid android and the like that were developed for other devices and port them to the Rezound. And mega kudos to people like chad who can port/re-factor underlying hardware code originally developed for another device to work on the Rezound. We're talking crazy wizard-level stuff like memory management, camera, hardware graphics optimization (Project Butter).

It makes stuff awesomer

wildstang83 said:
It makes stuff awesomer
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An answer i can understand.....thx!

Dcnovicky said:
An answer i can understand.....thx!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha, anytime my friend
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

brenuga said:
I'm not a dev, but in my understanding the biggest hurdle for porting ROMS is device drivers. It is relatively easy to port a ROM from the HTC One X to the HTC Rezound, because they are made by the same manufacturer, have the same system-on-a-chip manufacturer (Qualcomm) and have a similar stock kernel based on different versions of HTC Sense.
But porting a ROM from, let's say a Samsung Galaxy III is nigh impossible, because it uses a different system-on-a-chip exclusive to Samsung phones and its stock kernel is based on TouchWiz. And even though Android is based on Linux, each of the phone manufacturers have slightly different ways of organizing system files that set the various system options. So a kernel patch that works on one device probably won't work on another. (kernel level features such as GPU overclocking, two-way call recording etc. rely on these system setting files).
Even among phones made by the same company, you may have hardware differences such as different camera technologies, different screen resolutions, etc. that make porting harder.
That's why cyanogenmod, AOKP and MIUI are so valuable and appreciated, because they organize porting of a ROM that, as far as the kernel and GUI are concerned, vary little between devices. However those projects still have to rely on what manufacturers choose to release as open source to develop hardware device drivers to port the ROM to each device.
And then you have the problem of, what level of Android is officially supported by the manufacturer? The Droid Incredible 2, for example, is still waiting for an official ICS release it may never get, which means running Jellybean as it is meant to be run is that much harder. It's hard enough on the Rezound, where we have official ICS kernel source.
That's why I give lots of kudos to people who take custom ROMs like BAMF paradigm, paranoid android and the like that were developed for other devices and port them to the Rezound. And mega kudos to people like chad who can port/re-factor underlying hardware code originally developed for another device to work on the Rezound. We're talking crazy wizard-level stuff like memory management, camera, hardware graphics optimization (Project Butter).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll hit that thanks button just for that essay you typed
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app

Related

Developing on SGS2 slow/hard?

Hi,
first of all i want to say that this thread is in no way meant to offend or me being impatient about anything. I am just asking the question to know the answer.
I noticed, that many dev´s for the SGS2 (such as codeworkx and others) have big/giant trouble to bring a new Version to our Phones.
The problems seem to be that big that they have to wait for a Kernel from Samsung to make it even work a bit.
From my other/previous Phone, the HTC Dream i know that there weren´t such big problems.
It got 4 perfectly stable main iterations (2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3) of Android after its updates were discontinued and it already has a 4.0 version that has only 2 issues left to fix. All that without a kernel beeing released from HTC for the specific OS version. (i remember that the Camera drivers for 2.x were completely created from scratch to make it work [or so] )
My question is:
Why is it so much easier/less complicated to make a total new version run on the HTC Dream than on the SGS2? without the help of the manufactor

I'm not sure but I think its because other phones get source code releases for all the hardware or at least most of it to make porting/dev easier. Whereas Samsung hasn't released source for all the hardware in the sgs2 because of contractual obligations/restrictions from other hardware vendors that provide some the chips inside...
I also believe Samsung has modified Android quite heavily and badly in their quest to have the touchwiz interface, which also makes things difficult to reverse engineer etc...
I don't its anything actually difficult about the actual hardware itself
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App

[Q] Question about kernels

So my current understanding is that a kernel is essentially the software that connects android with the hardware of the phone. Somewhat of a driver in terms of Windows?
Now I understand that different versions of Android will require different kernels even if the phone is the same (is this true?). For instance ICS for say... Phone X will have a kernel of X.Y.Z while Gingerbread for Phone X will be A.B.C.
Now would the kernel be the same for say gingerbread 2.3.3 and 2.3.5 and 2.3.7?
Also... Would it be possible to take a "shotgun" approach so to speak with the kernels for the Android phones?
For instance write one kernel that covers all android phones. The kernel file itself would be HUGE, but would it be possible or is there too much variation within the hardware. I know a lot of people are currently waiting for the HTC Desire HD's ICS rom to be released by HTC in order to get that ICS Kernel Source code.
The reason I ask is because having one universal kernel could potentially solve a lot of problems especially for the less popular phones. With this combined with the Easy Development Studio (being developed: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1446233) this could be pretty beneficial in my opinion at least.
I'm not a programmer and recently got into Android so that's why I'm asking. I just figured ask and learn more. So any opinions and even teachings that you have that you guys are willing to share with me would be awesome.

I think there is to many problems with writing kernel for all hardware... This is just linux kernel compiled for Android platform... Linux kernel is free but hardware specification not always free, there is already two different ways to write code for this hardware:
1. Write some code which would works on your device (but it does not mean that it would works on all devices which the same model).
2. Or you can go to hardware manufacturer and tell something like 'Hi guys, could you give me specifications of Phone X?' - (as i know it is commercical secret...maybe i am mistaken here)
Linux kernel (~Android kernel) is commonly support a lot of devices (include TV, Routers etc), but i think that enhance code of this kernel for each group device or for each manufacturer it is only one way to get stable and fast work with your gadget...

wlfpck said:
So my current understanding is that a kernel is essentially the software that connects android with the hardware of the phone. Somewhat of a driver in terms of Windows?
Now I understand that different versions of Android will require different kernels even if the phone is the same (is this true?). For instance ICS for say... Phone X will have a kernel of X.Y.Z while Gingerbread for Phone X will be A.B.C.
Now would the kernel be the same for say gingerbread 2.3.3 and 2.3.5 and 2.3.7?
Also... Would it be possible to take a "shotgun" approach so to speak with the kernels for the Android phones?
For instance write one kernel that covers all android phones. The kernel file itself would be HUGE, but would it be possible or is there too much variation within the hardware. I know a lot of people are currently waiting for the HTC Desire HD's ICS rom to be released by HTC in order to get that ICS Kernel Source code.
The reason I ask is because having one universal kernel could potentially solve a lot of problems especially for the less popular phones. With this combined with the Easy Development Studio (being developed: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1446233) this could be pretty beneficial in my opinion at least.
I'm not a programmer and recently got into Android so that's why I'm asking. I just figured ask and learn more. So any opinions and even teachings that you have that you guys are willing to share with me would be awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Now I understand that different versions of Android will require different kernels even if the phone is the same (is this true?). For instance ICS for say... Phone X will have a kernel of X.Y.Z while Gingerbread for Phone X will be A.B.C"
The kernel is basically a collection of device drivers and services which needs to be loaded to work as a mediator between the OS (ROM) and the phone hardware and it is off course device specific. And kernel does not depend on ROM rather ROM depends on kernel. The different kernel available for same device will have almost same structure excepts some specific drivers and services may be different . Same kernel may work with different roms if the rom is ported to or complied to work with that kernel. So even a GB kernel may work in ICS.

hm... I see.
I guess then that leads to another question of...
What about a universal kernel for each phone manufacturer? I believe that there is a way to find out the specific hardware within a phone. If that's the case, targeting just HTC or just Samsung, could allow for the shotgun approach to work since the overall target is smaller.
Wouldn't it also be possible to say to take a HTC Inspire 4G existing kernel and the rest of HTC's existing phones and consolidate the kernels?
I'm not a programmer so I'm just trying to learn but maybe I am over simplifying things.
@sos1g3: I see what you are saying as well but couldn't the hardware specifications be obtained from the existing kernels?

wlfpck said:
hm... I see.
I guess then that leads to another question of...
What about a universal kernel for each phone manufacturer? I believe that there is a way to find out the specific hardware within a phone. If that's the case, targeting just HTC or just Samsung, could allow for the shotgun approach to work since the overall target is smaller.
Wouldn't it also be possible to say to take a HTC Inspire 4G existing kernel and the rest of HTC's existing phones and consolidate the kernels?
I'm not a programmer so I'm just trying to learn but maybe I am over simplifying things.
@sos1g3: I see what you are saying as well but couldn't the hardware specifications be obtained from the existing kernels?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Wouldn't it also be possible to say to take a HTC Inspire 4G existing kernel and the rest of HTC's existing phones and consolidate the kernels?"
Not exactly, it is only possible if the hardware is same . But off course a part of it will be same.
hardware specification can be obtained from a kernel source only . Not from the compiled kernel.

musarraf172 said:
"Wouldn't it also be possible to say to take a HTC Inspire 4G existing kernel and the rest of HTC's existing phones and consolidate the kernels?"
Not exactly, it is only possible if the hardware is same . But off course a part of it will be same.
hardware specification can be obtained from a kernel source only . Not from the compiled kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I am not mistaken, HTC and Samsung provide their source codes for their kernels.
"Not exactly, it is only possible if the hardware is same . But off course a part of it will be same. "
So then it's not possible to create a kernel that covers say a Snapdragon processor and a Nvidia Tegra 2?
I really wish the android world was more consolidated... of course that wouldn't do well for the phone manufacturers.

wlfpck said:
If I am not mistaken, HTC and Samsung provide their source codes for their kernels.
"Not exactly, it is only possible if the hardware is same . But off course a part of it will be same. "
So then it's not possible to create a kernel that covers say a Snapdragon processor and a Nvidia Tegra 2?
I really wish the android world was more consolidated... of course that wouldn't do well for the phone manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well , to make it more clear you should know that a full linux kernel ( desktp / server ) does have support for different hardware, peripherals, gpu etc, even for different cpu. Only limitation is that the processor architecture should be same i.e various x86 processor can be supported by a single kernel but a single kernel will not support both x86 , x64 or ppc , ARM architecture . (By the word architecture I mean the instruction sets on which they work). It is called a generic kernel.But for mobile devices the kernel is trimmed down to the specific set of hardwares and peripherals because of resource limitations. A full generic kernel will size will be much bigger approx 80 to 120 MB. But a kernel for mobile device is arround 5 to 6 MB. So make an universal kernel for all mobiles , the size will be bigger which won't fit in the current device setup. So theoretically we can write a kernel which will support both Snapdragon processor and Nvidia Tegra 2 as they both uses ARMv7 instruction set.

Been wondering this for a while.....

Please help me to understand this..........
If android runs on top of lunix
and all android versions eclair gb, ics etc start off as basically aosp then get maufacturer specific things like blur and sense.
Why is it so hard for CM9 and 10 to fully work on the E3D when CM7 worked perfectly on the Evo4g which are both htc phones?
Its a random question and even though I just recently became a member here, ive been with XDA since i hade the original moto click which was 2 yrs ago.
Also,
What do I need to do to create themes? Ive been wanting to for a while.
Thx in advance

Deep breath. It basically comes down to the huge variety of hardware. Linux has to support hardware in it's kernel (basically a software layer that tells the operating system how to use that hardware) and each new variant of the kernel is supposed to be backward compatible (though support for very old hardware is dropped so the kernel doesn't get out of control). Now Android is a completely different branch of linux (at the moment), and each manufacturer further branches aosp and creates a different kernel for every mobile phone with different hardware. The manufacturers have to release the kernel back to the community after they upgrade but this is slow and even when they do the kernel only supports the variant of android (in this case sense). Finally if they don't release an OS upgrade at all then the kernel becomes outdated and won't support features in the new OS.
Devs feel free to correct me...
Sent from my Evo 3D GSM using xda app-developers app

CM7 is by now quite old, meaning developers have had A LOT of time to test, modify, run and perfect it, even several years ago a lot of phones had perfect CM7 ports/builds.
Both CM9 and CM10 are still quite new, and thus developers have not had that much time to modify it to run as well as CM7, but in time it'll get there, no doubt about it.
And it also depends on which developers are actively working on developing for a specific phone. As for example we now have Agrabren working on a CM10 build (GSM side) doing amazing work, while other phones do not have such developers, thus it will take longer time for those phones to get perfected.
As for the themes, it depends on what ROM you're using. There are several different ways to theme something, and they're very different if you're running either Sense 3, Sense 3.6, Sense 4, CM7, CM9, CM10 or MIUI 2.3 or MIUI 4 (etc.), so you'll have to be more specific. But it would be a good start to look in the "Themes and Apps" sub forum.

grrratt said:
Deep breath. It basically comes down to the huge variety of hardware. Linux has to support hardware in it's kernel (basically a software layer that tells the operating system how to use that hardware) and each new variant of the kernel is supposed to be backward compatible (though support for very old hardware is dropped so the kernel doesn't get out of control). Now Android is a completely different branch of linux (at the moment), and each manufacturer further branches aosp and creates a different kernel for every mobile phone with different hardware. The manufacturers have to release the kernel back to the community after they upgrade but this is slow and even when they do the kernel only supports the variant of android (in this case sense). Finally if they don't release an OS upgrade at all then the kernel becomes outdated and won't support features in the new OS.
Devs feel free to correct me...
Sent from my Evo 3D GSM using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Moonbloom said:
CM7 is by now quite old, meaning developers have had A LOT of time to test, modify, run and perfect it, even several years ago a lot of phones had perfect CM7 ports/builds.
Both CM9 and CM10 are still quite new, and thus developers have not had that much time to modify it to run as well as CM7, but in time it'll get there, no doubt about it.
And it also depends on which developers are actively working on developing for a specific phone. As for example we now have Agrabren working on a CM10 build (GSM side) doing amazing work, while other phones do not have such developers, thus it will take longer time for those phones to get perfected.
As for the themes, it depends on what ROM you're using. There are several different ways to theme something, and they're very different if you're running either Sense 3, Sense 3.6, Sense 4, CM7, CM9, CM10 or MIUI 2.3 or MIUI 4 (etc.), so you'll have to be more specific. But it would be a good start to look in the "Themes and Apps" sub forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey thx guys, I got a better understanding now. I appreciate you taking the time to explain that to me.
As far as themes, i will look into that thread.
BTW this site is awesome. You guys have done a great job making all of this accessible for people who refuse to hampered by the limits of a locked s-on phone.

Jelly Bean Sense

Any odds of some dev porting this ROM to our phone? http://goo.gl/U2GMQ

onex+ uses tegra 3 processor
nearly impossible
odds are so slim it cannot be seen

I'm well aware of the processor differences, that tends to be more kernel sided though, does it not. Look at the EVO 3D, sense 4 and ICS were ported to that in just a couple of weeks and at that time there wasn't even anything close to a functional ICS ROM or kernel. Here we already have a fully functional JB ROM and kernel.

Your comparing a qualcomm device which had a port most likely from another qualcomm device to porting from a tegra device to a qualcomm device. It's not impossible but it's damn time consuming. Especially if anything is proprietary, it would have to be reverse engineered. It's sense and it's similar hardware but the rom is built around the way the hardware works, changes to the kernel to support our phones will most likely break other things in the rom since it is two different chipsets

Yeah I'm not sure what device that pretty was from, I think it was the One S though. Still the S4 and S3 SoCs are vastly different.
Alright though, I just thought it was worth bringing up while waiting for an official build for our device or a leak for ours, or I suppose the One S or AT&T.
Maybe the ROM can help toast with porting the imagesense libraries though at least. Last I heard he we was still working on finishing that up, wasn't he?

A backport on similar architecture is still easier then porting between 2 different architectures

it could be done but odds of fully functional are not promised mostly sound calls wifi etc would be broken, not to mention you'd need a sense kernel built for the port specifically. It can be done but porting something over that wouldn't work completely and spending hours, day's months getting things to work. it would most likely be abandoned.

What's wrong with CyanogenMod?

Hi! This is my first post on XDA.
As a user of CM for more than a year ago on my i9300, and after enduring a lot of bugs, I wonder: What happens to CM?
It's a known fact that the Exynos platform is a headache for developers because there is no documentation or open sources from Samsung. So, things like the camera, the sound system, the HDMI output and the GPU do not work as they should.
However, here are many good developers who have fixed these bugs, or at least improve them a bit. And most of these fixes are open source and accessible by everyone on Github.
So, what is waiting CM to implement them? Giving credit to their authors, obviously.
CyanogenMod announces itself as an alternative to the stock firmware that lets you take full advantage of your smartphone, making it better and more stable. Now they are also a company: Cyanogen Inc. As a reputable brand, it should offer a higher quality firmware. ROMs like Nameless (I'm using it right now) works better even being "not official".
This is just an opinion as a user. I'm not criticizing or forcing anyone to do anything. But if there are hundreds of people using a ROM with bugs that were fixed, why not implement them? I would be the first to help, but my skills are just about webdev.
Respect and thanks for i9300 developers on XDA, and sorry about my bad English. When I use my native language I express myself MUCH better. Trust me. lol
Thanks for reading.

There's no i9300 maintainer, and they accept pull requests (on gerrit) when somebody sends them.
Also, the fact that there's no i9300 maintainer is directly connected with what you already said - lack of proper documentation. Nobody wants to fix the mess that has been created since whole this time. The amount of hacks required to make AOSP work on i9300 is too damn high. I'm slowly fixing this mess, making i9300 a bit better supported, but it's still a long way until it's done. Take a look at ArchiKernel for example, why I had to create my own kernel? Because smdk4412 sources were so much outdated that they finished around update7, right after sudden death fix. XXELLA, 4.1.2 Android times, hello. So first thing was to cleanup the kernel mess, use up-to-date samsung sources (used for stocks) and make them work with AOSP. Now, if I commit my work to CM, they'll deny this instantly because new kernel supports only i9300 and this commit would break all other exynos4 variants from compiling. Yes, together we COULD fix it, make it work with other devices. But I have better things to do than trying to fix whole exynos4 family, I focus on i9300.
This is one of the reasons why we won't see any official cm12 nightly for i9300. Because nobody is going to maintain that. Even if we can fix something, nobody is going to commit that, unless we put serious effort for making it universal across all supported devices.

That's a real shame the device is in such a mess.
Actually, to be fair, using Omnirom 4.4.4, I'm finding that the only thing that doesn't work properly is the notification led (no one seems to know why it only works 3 times out of 4).
I'll probably end up buying a new phone next year, anyway, since buy this time next year the i9300 will be almost 4 years old. In smartphone terms, that means it's getting along a bit.
(oh, and thanks for all your work on it, JustArchi!)

JustArchi said:
There's no i9300 maintainer, and they accept pull requests (on gerrit) when somebody sends them.
Also, the fact that there's no i9300 maintainer is directly connected with what you already said - lack of proper documentation. Nobody wants to fix the mess that has been created since whole this time. The amount of hacks required to make AOSP work on i9300 is too damn high. I'm slowly fixing this mess, making i9300 a bit better supported, but it's still a long way until it's done. Take a look at ArchiKernel for example, why I had to create my own kernel? Because smdk4412 sources were so much outdated that they finished around update7, right after sudden death fix. XXELLA, 4.1.2 Android times, hello. So first thing was to cleanup the kernel mess, use up-to-date samsung sources (used for stocks) and make them work with AOSP. Now, if I commit my work to CM, they'll deny this instantly because new kernel supports only i9300 and this commit would break all other exynos4 variants from compiling. Yes, together we COULD fix it, make it work with other devices. But I have better things to do than trying to fix whole exynos4 family, I focus on i9300.
This is one of the reasons why we won't see any official cm12 nightly for i9300. Because nobody is going to maintain that. Even if we can fix something, nobody is going to commit that, unless we put serious effort for making it universal across all supported devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for answering my topic. The opinion of a developer like you is very appreciated.
This situation only seems to give more reasons for not buy a Samsung phone again. This lack of support from the manufacturer is a disrespect to the user's investment. And fragmentation strikes again. Sad but true.
Thanks again for your great work of keeping this device alive for all of us.

StephenJSweeney said:
That's a real shame the device is in such a mess.
Actually, to be fair, using Omnirom 4.4.4, I'm finding that the only thing that doesn't work properly is the notification led (no one seems to know why it only works 3 times out of 4).
I'll probably end up buying a new phone next year, anyway, since buy this time next year the i9300 will be almost 4 years old. In smartphone terms, that means it's getting along a bit.
(oh, and thanks for all your work on it, JustArchi!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried OmniROM few months ago, but it had some annoying bugs (like camera crashes) and I missed some customizations of CyanogenMod. Anyway, I'll try it again. My next buy might be a Motorola phone. The AOSP support is priceless.

ouch01 said:
I tried OmniROM few months ago, but it had some annoying bugs (like camera crashes) and I missed some customizations of CyanogenMod. Anyway, I'll try it again. My next buy might be a Motorola phone. The AOSP support is priceless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had the camera crash on CM11 M11, and switched over to Omnirom shortly after that. I'm using Google Camera with an Omnirom nightly from November, and I've never had a camera crash.
Agree with you about getting a Motorola. I'd love it if the next Moto G refresh (if there is one) came with some more RAM, increased storage (16GB instead of 8), 4G, and a multicolour led. Being able to customize the colours to suit the category of app is something I love about custom ROMs. That should be baked into Android, to be honest (but at least there's LightFlow).

JustArchi said:
There's no i9300 maintainer, and they accept pull requests (on gerrit) when somebody sends them.
Also, the fact that there's no i9300 maintainer is directly connected with what you already said - lack of proper documentation. Nobody wants to fix the mess that has been created since whole this time. The amount of hacks required to make AOSP work on i9300 is too damn high. I'm slowly fixing this mess, making i9300 a bit better supported, but it's still a long way until it's done. Take a look at ArchiKernel for example, why I had to create my own kernel? Because smdk4412 sources were so much outdated that they finished around update7, right after sudden death fix. XXELLA, 4.1.2 Android times, hello. So first thing was to cleanup the kernel mess, use up-to-date samsung sources (used for stocks) and make them work with AOSP. Now, if I commit my work to CM, they'll deny this instantly because new kernel supports only i9300 and this commit would break all other exynos4 variants from compiling. Yes, together we COULD fix it, make it work with other devices. But I have better things to do than trying to fix whole exynos4 family, I focus on i9300.
This is one of the reasons why we won't see any official cm12 nightly for i9300. Because nobody is going to maintain that. Even if we can fix something, nobody is going to commit that, unless we put serious effort for making it universal across all supported devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i feel you

SlimRoms is the answer
unlike CM, Slim has a I9300 maintainer, has support, every weekly update works properly.
Devs should really take a look at Slim's Gerrit and Freenode/#SlimDev

StephenJSweeney said:
I had the camera crash on CM11 M11, and switched over to Omnirom shortly after that. I'm using Google Camera with an Omnirom nightly from November, and I've never had a camera crash.
Agree with you about getting a Motorola. I'd love it if the next Moto G refresh (if there is one) came with some more RAM, increased storage (16GB instead of 8), 4G, and a multicolour led. Being able to customize the colours to suit the category of app is something I love about custom ROMs. That should be baked into Android, to be honest (but at least there's LightFlow).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing with Motorola is that their stock roms are basically just stock android. No laggy touchwiz skins, just a google launcher. Bloatware is at a minimum. A low spec phone like the moto G still is great because of how vanilla its experience is.
Rumours have it that the galaxy S6 international variant will have an exynos processor. I found a thread comparing the leaked info of the snapdragon 810 vs the next exynos processor and it seems that the exynos is getting a lot of popularity from users on the thread and it ain't no slouch. As it is now, phone's are so fast, that it's very hard to find a way of improving them. Like who compares app opening times nowadays? That will be much the case for 2015's flagships as well. I doubt I'd be disappointed if I had the next Samsung release if I thought I'd be in for a laggy UI, it's just whether I can tolerate the touchwiz experience or if I wanna switch to a vanilla aosp rom. That's where the problem arises.

arashvenus said:
SlimRoms is the answer
unlike CM, Slim has a I9300 maintainer, has support, every weekly update works properly.
Devs should really take a look at Slim's Gerrit and Freenode/#SlimDev
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But only in your imagination. There is noone at slimrom. Just check their gerrit.

whatsgood said:
Rumours have it that the galaxy S6 international variant will have an exynos processor .... I found a thread comparing the leaked info of the snapdragon 810 vs the next exynos processor and it seems that the exynos is getting a lot of popularity from users on the thread and it ain't no slouch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aren't the Exynos processors the cause of much grief in the open source community, though? Aren't Qualcomm processors, such as the Snapdragon, much more popular because they're easier to work with..?

StephenJSweeney said:
Aren't the Exynos processors the cause of much grief in the open source community, though? Aren't Qualcomm processors, such as the Snapdragon, much more popular because they're easier to work with..?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct.

Eleve11 said:
Correct.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well then, no more Samsung phones for me, then. Not unless they use Qualcomm..!

StephenJSweeney said:
Aren't the Exynos processors the cause of much grief in the open source community, though? Aren't Qualcomm processors, such as the Snapdragon, much more popular because they're easier to work with..?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that's what i thought but people are showing interests due to how powerful the processor is. I think they're saying it's more powerful than the snapdragon 810. I'm not that techy but they were mentioning that the new exynos will be smaller in size or something, whilst the snapdragon will be bigger. Apparently smaller is better, but yes the problem is open sourcing. If you want to install a stock android custom rom, it will be difficult for developers to build a rom that can push your phone to it's full potential. Snapdragon doesn't have this problem.
Basically if you love flashing different roms that are fully functional a snapdragon 810 phone is for you. If you like what Samsung offers in it's next flagship and won't be tempted to flash other roms then the exynos is for you

whatsgood said:
Yes, that's what i thought but people are showing interests due to how powerful the processor is. I think they're saying it's more powerful than the snapdragon 810. I'm not that techy but they were mentioning that the new exynos will be smaller in size or something, whilst the snapdragon will be bigger. Apparently smaller is better, but yes the problem is open sourcing. If you want to install a stock android custom rom, it will be difficult for developers to build a rom that can push your phone to it's full potential. Snapdragon doesn't have this problem.
Basically if you love flashing different roms that are fully functional a snapdragon 810 phone is for you. If you like what Samsung offers in it's next flagship and won't be tempted to flash other roms then the exynos is for you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I prefer to have less powerful processor, with full documentation how it works, rather than exynos and big giant hackish black box, which noone understands.
The problem is not with the exynos, but with Samsung. Judging from Exynos4, their kernel sources and own experience, exynos may look like it works, but amount of hacks and dirty workarounds to make it work, is too damn high. This could all be solved if Samsung changed their policy from "respect GPL, f*ck the rest" to "respect developers, show them that our SoC can be developer-friendly, too".
The problem is that we're not even 0.01% of Samsung sales, so why should they care. I'm not going to buy Samsung phone again, regardless if it has Snapdragon inside or not. The problem is not with the Exynos, the problem is in Samsung's policy.

JustArchi said:
I prefer to have less powerful processor, with full documentation how it works, rather than exynos and big giant hackish black box, which noone understands.
The problem is not with the exynos, but with Samsung. Judging from Exynos4, their kernel sources and own experience, exynos may look like it works, but amount of hacks and dirty workarounds to make it work, is too damn high. This could all be solved if Samsung changed their policy from "respect GPL, f*ck the rest" to "respect developers, show them that our SoC can be developer-friendly, too".
The problem is that we're not even 0.01% of Samsung sales, so why should they care. I'm not going to buy Samsung phone again, regardless if it has Snapdragon inside or not. The problem is not with the Exynos, the problem is in Samsung's policy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah +1 for that. My next Phone will be definitly a Sony or a One plus. I think both are the developer friendliest in android ...

what for get android with huge ram but still lag? i won't go for android for sure. just stick with ios better. with android 8gb & asop, cm etc still can't fix the bugs. android received update so slow than ios.

khanmein said:
what for get android with huge ram but still lag? i won't go for android for sure. just stick with ios better. with android 8gb & asop, cm etc still can't fix the bugs. android received update so slow than ios.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah you are right but i think the most decent phone is the htc one......i would buy a windows phone rather than an iPhone

http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/2qn8s4/new_impressive_lollipop_touchwiz_gives_nexus_line/
This is an interesting article on the new touchwiz that appears in android lollipop on the galaxy note 3. Surprisingly I can see nothing but praise from this person, apparently it seems to be running very well in comparison to touchwiz on KitKat. Is Samsung finally doing something good?

whatsgood said:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/2qn8s4/new_impressive_lollipop_touchwiz_gives_nexus_line/
This is an interesting article on the new touchwiz that appears in android lollipop on the galaxy note 3. Surprisingly I can see nothing but praise from this person, apparently it seems to be running very well in comparison to touchwiz on KitKat. Is Samsung finally doing something good?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its useless even if they port it to our i9300..1gb of ram..maybe its time to upgrade to more stronger phone..

Better Mobile App

welcome