[Q] Android : Cost to Vendors ? - Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

Hi,
I have this question for very long and I keep getting into debate ref the same question.
Do vendors have to pay Google, any license fees or any other amount to use Android ?
Some will say No, some Yes, hence citation /source of information is requested.
Thanks,
Shubham

Short Answer: Android is free. Source: The Open Handset Alliance website, the industry group technically behind Android: http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/android_faq.html
Complex Answer: Google isn't paid anything, but some others are. Microsoft coerced the OEMs to license its patents, and some other companies have pulled off the same. Apple's trying to get in on it with their lawsuits. So, whenever you buy an Android phone, companies that had absolutely nothing to do with it get a few cents.

guptashubham123 said:
Hi,
I have this question for very long and I keep getting into debate ref the same question.
Do vendors have to pay Google, any license fees or any other amount to use Android ?
Some will say No, some Yes, hence citation /source of information is requested.
Thanks,
Shubham
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think yes.
Because the vendors do not release the source of their ROM.

That helped, thanks
Embluss said:
Short Answer: Android is free. Source: The Open Handset Alliance website, the industry group technically behind Android: openhandsetalliance.com/android_faq.htm
Complex Answer: Google isn't paid anything, but some others are. Microsoft coerced the OEMs to license its patents, and some other companies have pulled off the same. Apple's trying to get in on it with their lawsuits. So, whenever you buy an Android phone, companies that had absolutely nothing to do with it get a few cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Many do, many don't. But that is onto vendor, but it doesn't infer vendors pay to Google.
omerjerk said:
I think yes.
Because the vendors do not release the source of their ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

omerjerk said:
I think yes.
Because the vendors do not release the source of their ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is incorrect as most OEMs don't release their source code such as HTC because they have put a lot of work to make a sense version of android and therefore don't want anyone other than themselves compiling roms from the HTC source. Android is open source but what the vendors or OEMs do with it is completely up to them.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 beta
**Press the thanks button if I have helped you.

WildfireDEV said:
This is incorrect as most OEMs don't release their source code such as HTC because they have put a lot of work to make a sense version of android and therefore don't want anyone other than themselves compiling roms from the HTC source. Android is open source but what the vendors or OEMs do with it is completely up to them.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 beta
**Press the thanks button if I have helped you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually the point is Android is licenced under open source. And it's derivatives must also be open source.
So I thought that vendors pay to google to make the derived android version closed source.

The derivative of open source, may or may not be open source
omerjerk said:
Actually the point is Android is licenced under open source. And it's derivatives must also be open source.
So I thought that vendors pay to google to make the derived android version closed source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Related

Request for kernel source code

Hello all
I have spent much time recently attempting to modify the zImage included with the Fascinate to include a working recovery image for us to use. However without source code this an extremely difficult (if not possible) goal to achieve.
I am requesting that anyone who owns this device please request the kernel source code from Samsung, so that we may be able to fully utilize our devices. Even if you do not know anything about coding or have any personal use for this source code, it is your right to request it as an owner of the device, and this code will help us all immensely once it is in the right hands.
Requests for source code can be filed on Samsung's website at : opensource . samsung.com/ (remove the extra spaces, apparently I can't post links yet)
Click on the mail icon at the top to submit your request.
Thank you for your assistance.
Requesting right now. Thanks for what your doing! Any updates since last night?
i just finished sending one in
jt1134 said:
Hello all
I have spent much time recently attempting to modify the zImage included with the Fascinate to include a working recovery image for us to use. However without source code this an extremely difficult (if not possible) goal to achieve.
I am requesting that anyone who owns this device please request the kernel source code from Samsung, so that we may be able to fully utilize our devices. Even if you do not know anything about coding or have any personal use for this source code, it is your right to request it as an owner of the device, and this code will help us all immensely once it is in the right hands.
Requests for source code can be filed on Samsung's website at : opensource . samsung.com/ (remove the extra spaces, apparently I can't post links yet)
Click on the mail icon at the top to submit your request.
Thank you for your assistance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You just want everything handed to you, don't you? Quit being so lazy and do some actual work.
But seriously everyone, please take the time to fill out the request. The sooner we get the source, the quicker we'll see some ROMs.
namebrandon said:
You just want everything handed to you, don't you? Quit being so lazy and do some actual work.
But seriously everyone, please take the time to fill out the request. The sooner we get the source, the quicker we'll see some ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This guy again, huh
Seriously, thank you to anyone who fills out the request. Remember, as an owner of the device it is your right to have access to the kernel source code, and it takes less than 2 minutes to fill out the request form. Tell your friends!
http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/reception_main.do?method=inquiryView
There's the direct url for the lazy.
Thanks for direct link. Filled one out through my phone. Made it sound pretty formal lol. Let's hope we get the ball rolling soon, starting to miss all the active development on the older phones.
Submitted a request.
frostman89 said:
Thanks for direct link. Filled one out through my phone. Made it sound pretty formal lol. Let's hope we get the ball rolling soon, starting to miss all the active development on the older phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once we get source we will be able to get a working recovery, then the floodgates will be open. My personal mission is to get AOSP/CM on the phone immediately after that happens, can't stand the TouchWiz and I intend to destroy it!!
Submitted a request. Only way I'll be buying this phone is if I can eliminate all Verizon/Samsung UI/apps. Even a vanilla ROM will do over the TouchWiz crap.
I am a little confused. What source code are you requesting?
If you go to h**p://opensource.samsung.com/, click on 'Mobile' at the top, then Ctrl-F for "i9000", you can find (what looks like) a zip containing both the kernel image and files you can plop in an aosp tree in order to build roms for the Galaxy S.
Maybe you guys are talking about source specifically for Fascinate?
partner55583777 said:
I am a little confused. What source code are you requesting?
If you go to h**p://opensource.samsung.com/, click on 'Mobile' at the top, then Ctrl-F for "i9000", you can find (what looks like) a zip containing both the kernel image and files you can plop in an aosp tree in order to build roms for the Galaxy S.
Maybe you guys are talking about source specifically for Fascinate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, we are requesting the source for the fascinate. As the i9000 is a completely different device, and we have the sch-i500
fallingup said:
Yes, we are requesting the source for the fascinate. As the i9000 is a completely different device, and we have the sch-i500
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, thanks. That clears it up.
So I guess Samsung is currently in violation of the GPL, then? (And probably other licenses).
partner55583777 said:
Okay, thanks. That clears it up.
So I guess Samsung is currently in violation of the GPL, then? (And probably other licenses).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well i am sure they will release the source, its just taking them longer than i would like. They released the source for the Epic about 3 days after the hardware was released, and we are at about a week now.
Yeah, they'll post the code soon, they're just taking their sweet time about it.
Source code released! Thanks guys!
jt1134 said:
Source code released! Thanks guys!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and source code fail!
Is the source code on opensource.samsung.com still the wrong one?
ludeboy said:
Is the source code on opensource.samsung.com still the wrong one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure yet. We've confirmed they've had at least two different files for download since last night. The original one wasn't' working. I'm at work, so can't tell you much about the second (latest) one.

[Q] Android Opensouce?

Is android truly opensource?
As I understand it, some of androids code is released under Apache License version 2.0, and some is released under GNU General Public License, both opensource licenses.
But in a discussion, someone has claimed that the core code of android is held by Google only, and is not released to public, and that only some of the code around the android core code is opensource, other code around the android core code is not opensource.
Is he right, or am I right in my thinking, that ALL of the android code is opensource, either under Apache License version 2.0 or under GNU General Public License?
Nobody to answer this one?
I would very much like to put the guy in place, if possible
I don't know but I do believe that Google have reserved the right to keep or delay what they want to.
For example, they never and have no intend to release Honeycomb source codes.
Are they violating??? I don't know but if they do, things already heat up.
AkkerDK said:
Is android truly opensource?
As I understand it, some of androids code is released under Apache License version 2.0, and some is released under GNU General Public License, both opensource licenses.
But in a discussion, someone has claimed that the core code of android is held by Google only, and is not released to public, and that only some of the code around the android core code is opensource, other code around the android core code is not opensource.
Is he right, or am I right in my thinking, that ALL of the android code is opensource, either under Apache License version 2.0 or under GNU General Public License?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is true open source, and the code is widely available on the web, buts that's aosp. Proprietary things like radio binaries, and custom guis from manufacturers (eg touchwiz from Samsung) are not, so the code for thses is not
votinh said:
I don't know but I do believe that Google have reserved the right to keep or delay what they want to.
For example, they never and have no intend to release Honeycomb source codes.
Are they violating??? I don't know but if they do, things already heat up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know about HC source code, and also know that Google claims that to be a special situation ... Have no idea whether Google are violating license terms or not, they very well could be.
But that's not what I'm after, not for such one time situation, it's the general situation I'm interested in.
When Google releases source code, do they release everything, or are they withholding something, core code or other, or both?
What I have read so fare, Google releases ALL code under the 2 different opensource licenses, but I can't really be sure.
My thoughts are also, that CM wouldn't be possible, if Google don't release all android code ... The only thing I have ever read, is that the problems with CM releases is specific hardware related code, that has nothing to do with android code itself ... But again, I can't be really sure, I'm not a developer and don't have the technical knowledge to proper argue this point.
I would very much like, if someone could provide me with the proper arguments to put this guy in place, maybe even direct me to sites, that will show him the error of his ways
icenight89 said:
Android is true open source, and the code is widely available on the web, buts that's aosp. Proprietary things like radio binaries, and custom guis from manufacturers (eg touchwiz from Samsung) are not, so the code for thses is not
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess that those things are hardware specific or specific to the phone manufacturers, and has to do with the hardware manufacturers and not with android itself?
Here you go mate: http://source.android.com/source/downloading.html
Extra info in the side bar on the left as well.
All of Android is Open Source; however as others have stated - manufacturers will develop their own radios and such (eg: Imagine buying a laptop with Ubuntu installed on it - the OS is open source, but the firmware for your WLAN adapter inside the laptop might not be)

[NEWS]HTC JB kernel sources are out

Good news guys.
The 3.4 kernel sources are avaliable: http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
The petition;:
Hello everybody!
As some of you know, I already started to work on CM10.1, but i stuck while HTC don't share the 3.4.0 JB kernel sources.
The kernel licensed under GNU GPL, but HTC violate this license. 3.4.0 JB kernel released about 2 months ago, but they didn't share the sources yet. I tried to talk with them, but they didn't help me. Now i would like to ask you for help. I hope, if you help me, and we fight together, we will get the sources and I can make a fine CyanogenMod 10.1.
Please help us with these steps:
1. step:
Sign and share this petition: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/htc-desire-x-protou-kernel-source.html
2. step:
Send this letter for HTC here: http://www.htc.com/us/contact/email/
Please select the United States as your country, because in some country they can't help us.
So the letter: (Thanks for @ekulnitsua)
Dear HTC,
We appreciate the good quality, look and feel and the design of HTC smartphone products. That’s why our developers have created many ROMs for the phone with the Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0) Kernel source code, but currently our developers are left unable to continue further.
An official HTC Desire X (codenamed proto) Jelly Bean (4.1.1) OTA (Over-The-Air) update was released almost two months ago on the 27th of March, 2013, and subsequently updated and rolled out throughout the Desire X userbase. The htcdev.com website, however, has still not been updated with the matching kernel source.
As we are sure you are aware, Android is an open-platform and is based on the GNU/Linux Kernel. The Linux kernel is licensed under GNU General Public License v2 or GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html), which, as such, means that you are legally obliged to release the source code for any derivative work within a reasonable time frame.
This, however, is not just a legal obligation; developers are working hard to bring new ROMs and continue support to your devices, which many of your customers are eager to use. By releasing the kernel source code you can improve our experiences with the device and with HTC as a company. The very openness of Android is intended to draw many people and by withholding kernel source code you are ultimately alienating your customers who may move on to purchase devices made by a different company (e.g. a Google Nexus device with pure and newest Android).
We appreciate that you have made a commitment to aid us in the development of firmware by allowing for the unlocking of the bootloader, but without the Kernel sources such gestures remain severely hampered. Similarly, we are grateful that you are continuing to support the Desire X and it’s community, but we would all be happier if your continued support was not only directed at your customers, but also in the spirit of Linux and as required by copyright law.
Our petition: gopetition.com/petitions/htc-desire-x-protou-kernel-source/signatures.html
XDA-Developers link: forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2288883
Contact e-mail: [email protected] (Attila Tóth "atis112" XDA-Developers Recognized Developer)
Yours Sincerely,
The xda-developers community.
This letter was written and is signed by the xda-developers community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
3. step
Wait
Thank you.
atis112
I appreciate everything thing you've done so far and everything you will do, and I'll be very happy to help.
These kind of letters are my speciality. I'll draft something now so we can all send them across...
How about something like this (VERY heavily based on the Desire S letter):
Dear HTC,
We appreciate the good quality, look and feel and the design of HTC smartphone products. That’s why our developers have created many ROMs for the phone with the Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0) Kernel source code, but currently our developers are left unable to continue further.
An official HTC Desire X (codenamed proto) Jelly Bean (4.1.1) OTA (Over-The-Air) update was released almost two months ago on the 27th of March, 2013, and subsequently updated and rolled out throughout the Desire X userbase. The htcdev.com website, however, has still not been updated with the matching kernel source.
As we are sure you are aware, Android is an open-platform and is based on the GNU/Linux Kernel. The Linux kernel is licensed under GNU General Public License v2 or GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html), which, as such, means that you are legally obliged to release the source code for any derivative work within a reasonable time frame.
This, however, is not just a legal obligation; developers are working hard to bring new ROMs and continue support to your devices, which many of your customers are eager to use. By releasing the kernel source code you can improve our experiences with the device and with HTC as a company. The very openness of Android is intended to draw many people and by withholding kernel source code you are ultimately alienating your customers who may move on to purchase devices made by a different company (e.g. a Google Nexus device with pure and newest Android).
We appreciate that you have made a commitment to aid us in the development of firmware by allowing for the unlocking of the bootloader, but without the Kernel sources such gestures remain severely hampered. Similarly, we are grateful that you are continuing to support the Desire X and it’s community, but we would all be happier if your continued support was not only directed at your customers, but also in the spirit of Linux and as required by copyright law.
Yours Sincerely,
The xda-developers community.
This letter was written and is signed by the xda-developers community.
(ok, I've finished tweaking now, that should be it)
Well written ekulnitsua, I hope that it will make them worry about this problem. I would wait for a reply and then (if they won't share kernel sources) report to GNU.
They haven't even released JB rom worldwide so dont expect kernel sources to come so fast.. They will release it when JB has reached to all the parts of the world.
Renowned companies like HTC usually comply with the licenses. They have a good image. Just wait for some time...
@deathnotice01 we need ur skill here
Just sharing my Idea Peace
Dear HTC,
First of all Good Day! I have used HTC Devices since 2011 and I have liked the way you guys made HTC Sense and all the components that make your devices run better than others. Starting from Froyo to Jelly Bean I have an HTC Device. A few weeks ago my friend received an OTA (Over the Air Update) for JellyBean (Android 4.1.1) and HTC Sense 4+ this update was great! it made the device smoother and cleaner and more battery efficient, even though there were some "minor" bugs this update stood out and made me more proud of my HTC Desire X, obviously this was better than Ice Cream Sandwich which came stock on the Desire X, I wrote this letter to ask you guys to please update the Kernel Sources for Jelly Bean which came with the new 3.4 kernel if Iam not mistaken.
I'am sure that you guys are aware, Android is an an open source operating system (OS) based on the GNU/Linux Kernel. he Linux kernel is licensed under GNU General Public License v2 or GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html), which, as such, means that you are legally obliged to release the source code for any derivative work within a reasonable time frame.
This however is only a request. Developers are working hard to make new ROMs for the HTC Desire X and continue support to your wonderful device. By releasing the kernel source code you can improve user experience to your device and help developers in the process.
We appreciate the things that you have done for your devices and maintaining them by series of updates and making them better everytime.
But without the Kernel sources such gestures remain severely hampered. Similarly, we are grateful that you are continuing to support the Desire X and it’s community, but we would all be happier if your continued support was not only directed at your customers, but also in the spirit of Linux and as required by copyright law.
Yours Sincerely,
The xda-developers community.
This letter was written and is signed by the xda-developers community.
Just sharing though, I was supposed to send this but I should post it here first I have re-written some sentences from the 2nd post so please don't be mad and sorry for my crappy English if HTC would not release these sources Zombies will eat them alive XD
prototype-U said:
They haven't even released JB rom worldwide so dont expect kernel sources to come so fast.. They will release it when JB has reached to all the parts of the world.
Renowned companies like HTC usually comply with the licenses. They have a good image. Just wait for some time...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thumbs Down
Been waiting for too long man. 45 days was the promise, and its been near 60 days. And there isnt even a SUPPORTIVE ANNOUNCEMENT that it will come. Why cant they even make an OFFICIAL STATEMENT, just to calm our nerves. Thats very bad image they are making in eyes of good developers like atis112 and others.
neXus PRIME said:
Thumbs Down
Been waiting for too long man. 45 days was the promise, and its been near 60 days. And there isnt even a SUPPORTIVE ANNOUNCEMENT that it will come. Why cant they even make an OFFICIAL STATEMENT, just to calm our nerves. Thats very bad image they are making in eyes of good developers like atis112 and others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am really patient.. We will definitely get it in future.
neXus PRIME said:
Thumbs Down
Been waiting for too long man. 45 days was the promise, and its been near 60 days. And there isnt even a SUPPORTIVE ANNOUNCEMENT that it will come. Why cant they even make an OFFICIAL STATEMENT, just to calm our nerves. Thats very bad image they are making in eyes of good developers like atis112 and others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
I think so too. Why should they share their sources now if we don't complain? We should decide. Either make only one letter for the whole community, or as many letters as possible so that they'll have enough to read.
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
dansou901 said:
+1
I think so too. Why should they share their sources now if we don't complain? We should decide. Either make only one letter for the whole community, or as many letters as possible so that they'll have enough to read.
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well personally HTC would not care for our letters anyway because look at this OTA? NeXus PRIME is right 45 days is promised to spread the update world wide its been 60 days and still nothing I have also done the same thing for the Desire C users ( I was supposed to buy that if i never knew HTC has a stock of DXs ) and they never responded But those kernel sources would be awesome
But its worth a shot
Peace dont flame me XD
And what should I put in the letter its asking for my full name should I put XDA-Developers? Or my name? thanks
Well ... released in all countries or not , it's still released out there and it's licensed under GPL . The product is officially out there but the sources are not . It's not like it's in a beta test or anything , at least not officially . A release has been made , regardless of its bugs , and the kernel sources should have been provided as well . At least that's the way I see it
Also , we should first wait for a response from hTC before reporting them to GNU . Maybe hTC still have some arguments & reasons for not releasing it . Maybe the cleaning lady didn't go through all the code xD
I'm really disappointed to see how such a promissing device as the DX has so little ROM-wise development . It's wierd because hTC seems to be quite the developer-friendly company , unlike Samsung for example .
This was my first hTC and even though I'm really liking the overall look , feel & performance of the device , I really , really don't like Sense xD
There's really no point mincing words and playing nice: don't think they wouldn't come down on your heads if you used some propriety HTC code / design - Beautiful widgets are a case in point.
The whole idea of Android is that it's open source, anti-copyright, a stark contrast to the world of apple & microsoft and withholding sources is completely contrary to this philosophy.
Agreed though, I think we send this letter (or variations of it, if you're not happy about the strength of the language) wait a reasonable amount of time and then report it if nothing has happened / no reasonable reply is received.
ekulnitsua said:
There's really no point mincing words and playing nice: don't think they wouldn't come down on your heads if you used some propriety HTC code / design - Beautiful widgets are a case in point.
The whole idea of Android is that it's open source, anti-copyright, a stark contrast to the world of apple & microsoft and withholding sources is completely contrary to this philosophy.
Agreed though, I think we send this letter (or variations of it, if you're not happy about the strength of the language) wait a reasonable amount of time and then report it if nothing has happened / no reasonable reply is received.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am really happy with the strength of the language. We have to show them what we want and that they are doing something wrong, so...
I think someone who has a higher position should write the letter. As a "normal" person we won't succeed.
Sent from my LT28h using xda app-developers app
Rebekka_Sun said:
I think someone who has a higher position should write the letter. As a "normal" person we won't succeed.
Sent from my LT28h using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If we act as a big community, it should work too... But if someone of us would know someone working there, this could help...
This is what we sgy users did..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1869565
The xda-developers must have a founder! Why don't we ask this person? I mean the developer of this site will get more "reaction" than some "members". Or why don't we act on Twitter, facebook, instagramm, ... There are so much people even on Facebook. We'll have a chance.
Sent from my LT28h using xda app-developers app
Rebekka_Sun said:
The xda-developers must have a founder! Why don't we ask this person? I mean the developer of this site will get more "reaction" than some "members". Or why don't we act on Twitter, facebook, instagramm, ... There are so much people even on Facebook. We'll have a chance.
Sent from my LT28h using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are high.
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
prototype-U said:
You are high.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly...
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
prototype-U said:
This is what we sgy users did..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1869565
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung is more developer friendly than HTC + they release their kernel source immidiately without people asking them
Thank you @ekulnitsua and @The Android Manual and everybody who support us. I already made an online petition too, I hope we will got a lot of sign, and we can write enough letter for HTC, and they will take it seriously. I will update the OP soon. I will add the link to the petition in the message, the link to this thread and if it isn't problem for you I add my email too, and so they can contact with me if they want, and i will share their message with you.
Thank you
atis112

ZTE working on Official cyanogenmod rom

Anyone else see this:
https://9to5google.com/2016/09/19/zte-is-working-to-bring-an-official-cyanogenmod-rom-to-the-axon-7/
Yes, it's been discussed in the CM dev topic.
xtermmin said:
Yes, it's been discussed in the CM dev topic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What most are not realizing, is that there are two versions of Cyanogen built operating systems. Cyanogen OS is built by Cyanogen Inc. for the device manufacturer and the other is community driven and is open source. These two operating systems may be identical in how they operate once on the device, but how they are developed is different. The question is which one is actually being developed?
jim262 said:
What most are not realizing, is that there are two versions of Cyanogen built operating systems. Cyanogen OS is built by Cyanogen Inc. for the device manufacturer and the other is community driven and is open source. These two operating systems may be identical in how they operate once on the device, but how they are developed is different. The question is which one is actually being developed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/axon-7/development/cyanogenmod-13-a2017u-t3457410/page10
If it is a true CyanogenMod rom, that means ZTE would have to release proprietary source codes for open source development. They have not done that as of this writing. So more than likely a Cyanogen operating system will be created for this device totally in house, thereby not allowing for future development by the "open source" community of devs.
jim262 said:
If it is a true CyanogenMod rom, that means ZTE would have to release proprietary source codes for open source development. They have not done that as of this writing. So more than likely a Cyanogen operating system will be created for this device totally in house, thereby not allowing for future development by the "open source" community of devs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I'm gathering from the discussions on the ZTE Community forums and the Cyanogenmod dev topic I linked, it seems that ZTE is sending their code to Cyanogen employee Steve Kondik to create an official cyanogenmod github for the A7, not that Cyanogen the company is going to create a CyanogenOS for the device.
Only for USA.
rikin93 said:
Only for USA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correction: Only for unlocked bootloaders, as it will not be officially signed by ZTE.
xtermmin said:
From what I'm gathering from the discussions on the ZTE Community forums and the Cyanogenmod dev topic I linked, it seems that ZTE is sending their code to Cyanogen employee Steve Kondik to create an official cyanogenmod github for the A7, not that Cyanogen the company is going to create a CyanogenOS for the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on what I have seen and heard, the difference between OS and Mod is nill. They are exactly the same. The difference between the two is how they are developed. One is open source and can be shared by the general public, the other is developed in house for the device manufacturer and proprietary information is kept in house and not shared. The two are quite often just referred to as CyanogenMod, although they are different.
jim262 said:
Based on what I have seen and heard, the difference between OS and Mod is nill. They are exactly the same. The difference between the two is how they are developed. One is open source and can be shared by the general public, the other is developed in house for the device manufacturer and proprietary information is kept in house and not shared. The two are quite often just referred to as CyanogenMod, although they are different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a huge difference between CyanogenOS and CyanogenMod behind the scenes though. Like you said, CyanogenOS is in-house, but most importantly it tends to include bloatware, especially now that Cyanogen the company is owned by Microsoft. And since it's closed source, people who want to develop custom ROMs will still have no access to the sources that would speed up development. Plus, if there are bugs or features that people want to implement, they can't, and have to wait for Cyanogen to release them. This also means that things such as security patches will have to wait for official rollout by Cyanogen.
Cyanogenmod, however, is open source, not controlled by Cyanogen the company at all, bug fixes / features can be added and addressed by the community, security patches can be applied to nightlies quickly, etc.
jim262 said:
If it is a true CyanogenMod rom, that means ZTE would have to release proprietary source codes for open source development. They have not done that as of this writing. So more than likely a Cyanogen operating system will be created for this device totally in house, thereby not allowing for future development by the "open source" community of devs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's been clarified multiple times on the ZTE forum that it will be CyanogenMod, not CyanogenOS. Unless there's some weird, first-time-in-history NDA regarding the HALs / overlay that ZTE provides for the development of CM, they will be open source.
If they did offer open source at least it would alleviate concerns on the Chinese state-sponsored company reputation
Finally, the best hardware of 2016 and all it needs is aosp love... I hope this helps to spur more development or makes it easier for our fantastic developers at XDA.
From what I read from the Employees at ZTE Forums, ZTE currently doesn't want to deal with setting up a place for Devs to access the needed resources for things, so they're basically going to just dump it all on CyanogenMod for them to sort it out. It's easier for the ZTE higher-ups to swallow that way.
Do we have any ETA on this ?
I fear than the OP3 will get more love from the dev, and that the Axon 7 will be forgotten :/
rczrider said:
It's been clarified multiple times on the ZTE forum that it will be CyanogenMod, not CyanogenOS. Unless there's some weird, first-time-in-history NDA regarding the HALs / overlay that ZTE provides for the development of CM, they will be open source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't count on anything "open" from ZTE. It really doesn't matter what they may say, the reality this phone doesn't have much more than the day it was released.
Araewuir said:
Do we have any ETA on this ?
I fear than the OP3 will get more love from the dev, and that the Axon 7 will be forgotten :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The oneplus one still gets more dev support than the Nexus 6p. Oneplus devices get pretty much the best dev support period. That being said, more devs are starting to get the axon 7, but we're never going to be at the oneplus 3 level of support. The oneplus 3 is supported by SultanXDA, flar2, Franco, despair, and dozens more. It had official cm13 support as soon as it was released. It has official support from paranoid Android, elemental x, Franco kernel, PAC rom, dirty unicorns, and pretty much every other rom and kernel you've ever heard of. I love the Axon, but I don't it's ever going to get that kind of support.
jim262 said:
Don't count on anything "open" from ZTE. It really doesn't matter what they may say, the reality this phone doesn't have much more than the day it was released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay.
xxBrun0xx said:
The oneplus one still gets more dev support than the Nexus 6p. Oneplus devices get pretty much the best dev support period. That being said, more devs are starting to get the axon 7, but we're never going to be at the oneplus 3 level of support. The oneplus 3 is supported by SultanXDA, flar2, Franco, despair, and dozens more. It had official cm13 support as soon as it was released. It has official support from paranoid Android, elemental x, Franco kernel, PAC rom, dirty unicorns, and pretty much every other rom and kernel you've ever heard of. I love the Axon, but I don't it's ever going to get that kind of support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel like the last phone I owned with that level of support was the Nexus 4.
rczrider said:
Okay.
I feel like the last phone I owned with that level of support was the Nexus 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One Plus released everything before the phone even hit the market, so there was development for the One Plus 3 from the beginning. The Axon, in my opinion, is a very good device, but ZTE has limited development of this product. It is almost as though they are perfectly happy being an iPhone/Apple wannabe.
japzone said:
From what I read from the Employees at ZTE Forums, ZTE currently doesn't want to deal with setting up a place for Devs to access the needed resources for things, so they're basically going to just dump it all on CyanogenMod for them to sort it out. It's easier for the ZTE higher-ups to swallow that way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is never a good thing. Especially when they admit they don't care.
As a Sprint subscriber I'm locked out of the Axon7 until Sprint stop being dickbags about BYOD, which most likely will be never. If that changes, I'll probably buy an A7 if CM actually appears in a timely fashion since Shamu is being dropped by Google very shortly.
...but dumping code on the community and expecting them to make it right is massively annoying at best. It is exactly what Google does with AOSP....The Nougat AOSP is seriously broken and takes a ton of effort to fix enough just to get to compile. The stock AOSP GApps packages are all in varying stages of brokenness as of now. Sure they release the source, but what you get doesn't compile without a ton of forensic work.
Nougat has been on Nexus for over a month (minus Shamu)...and it is not going well.

Best ROM MOKEE MK71 Nougat WITH OTA & HEAVY DEVELOPMENT

I am surprised that you missed that or maybe I missed it here
I dirtyflashed it over a CM13 and it seems to work
testing now
here are the roms/links
on german x820 forum its clear #1
http://download.mokeedev.com/?device=le_x2
dont forget its without gapps so flash add them when you like google stuff
Se didnt miss it but thanks anyway. That ROM was deleted from xda due to the fact that some users that dont do anything else but complaining, and attacking the dev. The dev from mokee hás informed that hes not posting anymore ROMs in xda. Nougat included
What is the dif btw release n nightlies
nosidefcp said:
Se didnt miss it but thanks anyway. That ROM was deleted from xda due to the fact that some users that dont do anything else but complaining, and attacking the dev. The dev from mokee hás informed that hes not posting anymore ROMs in xda. Nougat included
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello. You forgot to tell the full truth. The case is the dev was asked to release sources and he refused.
Regards Filozof71
Sent from my Le X820 using Tapatalk
Filozof71 said:
Hello. You forgot to tell the full truth. The case is the dev was asked to release sourced and he denied.
Regards Filozof71
Sent from my Le X820 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not true. He said he wasnt releasing the source in that day. Three por four days later he released here the source code
nosidefcp said:
Thats not true. He said he wasnt releasing the source in that day. Three por four days later he released here the source code
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Incorrect. People were asking for the Device Tree used to build Mokee, which wasn't and still hasn't been provided. XDA isn't a place for you to download roms, it's a developer community. Pretty sure the device tree would have been converted from one that was available (Probably OP3) and not sharing it is disrespectful to every developer who has worked on it previously.
https://github.com/MoKee/android_device_letv_le_x2 is empty.
mikeysteele said:
Incorrect. People were asking for the Device Tree used to build Mokee, which wasn't and still hasn't been provided. XDA isn't a place for you to download roms, it's a developer community. Pretty sure the device tree would have been converted from one that was available (Probably OP3) and not sharing it is disrespectful to every developer who has worked on it previously.
https://github.com/MoKee/android_device_letv_le_x2 is empty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
which rule say MUST share device tree?you can ask leeco share official device tree too.TRY HARDER
ffboy2009 said:
which rule say MUST share device tree?you can ask leeco share official device tree too.TRY HARDER
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who's talking about rules? This is a community and communities have standards. You're free to do whatever you like but expect people to be unhappy if you disrespect the community.
ffboy2009 said:
which rule say MUST share device tree?you can ask leeco share official device tree too.TRY HARDER
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all: THANKS for your ROMs. Second: i would really consider publishing the device tree, because there might be a few others who would like to contribute.
Although the Max 2 is a rather "specific" smartphone, which - outside of India and China - nobody really considers buying.
ffboy2009 said:
which rule say MUST share device tree?you can ask leeco share official device tree too.TRY HARDER
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Open Source rule and spirit. We share our knowledge and we don't hide it.
https://github.com/deadman96385/android_device_leeco_x2
https://github.com/AndroPlus-org/android_device_leeco_x2?files=1
I know is difficult to you to understand this. There must be a reason why you don't want to provide your sources.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=3494247
ffboy doesn't own anybody anything. He releases his ROM's for free, he doesn't force you to use them. Many rom developers don't release their source code/device trees, one reason is that people could take there hard work getting everything to work and use to build their own ROM's and get donations from them without doing any hard work themselves. Even my grandma can build a ROM when eveyrthing is handed to her. One example is the very resepected developer arter97 who didn't release cyanogenmod device trees for s6 for a while when he was developing for s6. Get off ffboy's case, he is a developer and doesn't deserve this, if there was a downvote in xda I would downvote the haters. You've already been warned by the mods yet you still pour hate on to the dev.
Edit: I agree with ffboy we should continue petitioning LeEco for device trees.
@whymoo
I am not arter97, i don't care what he does and i don't accept donations.
ffboy released his rom under mokee s name who they aclame to be "open source". Also i except to see the whole source and not part of it.
If ffboy doesn't like this he could publice his rom to a hoster like "mega"
ffboy and not me already copied code and signed the same code as his own and don't gave proper credit.
We are a big community and we help each other. We share our knowledge and don't hide it. I and other people don't like to reinvend the wheel again. This is a waste of precius time who lot of us they don't have. Yes! we can contribute, merge bugs and maybe compile other roms and yes, ffboy must accept, that maybe me or others wanna use his device tree or some other code. BUT we don't forget to give credits.
Btw i don't be warned and i don't see a reason why should be.
It's CM or stock based?
ir work?
monleylord said:
@whymoo
I am not arter97, i don't care what he does and i don't accept donations.
ffboy released his rom under mokee s name who they aclame to be "open source". Also i except to see the whole source and not part of it.
If ffboy doesn't like this he could publice his rom to a hoster like "mega"
ffboy and not me already copied code and signed the same code as his own and don't gave proper credit.
We are a big community and we help each other. We share our knowledge and don't hide it. I and other people don't like to reinvend the wheel again. This is a waste of precius time who lot of us they don't have. Yes! we can contribute, merge bugs and maybe compile other roms and yes, ffboy must accept, that maybe me or others wanna use his device tree or some other code. BUT we don't forget to give credits.
Btw i don't be warned and i don't see a reason why should be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first i opensourced kernel soucre as GPL requirement,but device tree was not GPL and you do not have the right to force me do things i dont like.
2nd i know i made mistakes on kernel source for commit authorship brcause i am not good at git tools but i have already corrected them.
i dont care you like me and my rom or not
i have released all source of mi max on my github
the only reason i dont release max2 device tree is,
Some people here is just do nothing but PUSHING AND ATTACKING me because they want my device tree to build there roms to gain Respect and donations i think.they are so rude and ridiculous
when i said "No plan to release kernel source RECENTLY" and released a few days later,they don't care and start attacking and pushing
i also dont warned by forum moderatoer by not released device tree
So ban me out of this forum if you can
ffboy2009 said:
first i opensourced kernel soucre as GPL requirement,but device tree was not GPL and you do not have the right to force me do things i dont like.
2nd i know i made mistakes on kernel source for commit authorship brcause i am not good at git tools but i have already corrected them.
i dont care you like me and my rom or not
i have released all source of mi max on my github
the only reason i dont release max2 device tree is,
Some people here is just do nothing but PUSHING AND ATTACKING me because they want my device tree to build there roms to gain Respect and donations i think.they are so rude and ridiculous
when i said "No plan to release kernel source RECENTLY" and released a few days later,they don't care and start attacking and pushing
i also dont warned by forum moderatoer by not released device tree
So ban me out of this forum if you can
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care if you like ne or not either. I gave you also a like. I don't care either to gain Respect or earn money through donations.
You are the only one here who try to gain respect or donations but your behavior shows me clearly that you are reacting like a little defiant child who felt driven into a corner.
I made a Pointment about you and you have to accept it.
monleylord said:
I don't care if you like ne or not either. I don't care either to gain Respect or earn money through donations. You are the only one here who try to gain respect or donations but your behavior shows me clearly that you are rect like a child. I made a Pointment about you and you have to accept it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be interested in the device tree so I could play around building with some custom toolchains. All my phones run ROM's I've compiled myself but I've never shared them with anybody here as they aren't my work.
mikeysteele said:
I'd be interested in the device tree so I could play around building with some custom toolchains. All my phones run ROM's I've compiled myself but I've never shared them with anybody here as they aren't my work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This will become ridiculous be smart and open with everybody we talk about a phone don't forget this please
sdevaux said:
This will become ridiculous be smart and open with everybody we talk about a phone don't forget this please
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you misunderstand. Building ROMs with custom toolchains and then posting them here would be passing off the work of others as my own, which is not on. I'm not making any source code changes.
mikeysteele said:
I think you misunderstand. Building ROMs with custom toolchains and then posting them here would be passing off the work of others as my own, which is not on. I'm not making any source code changes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand it's just that everyone should be open with others it would allow us to move forward the rom development for this model that's just my opinion

Categories

Resources