Related
i tink that LG was waiting for cooking a stock rom based on android 2.4 (instead of the 2.3 promised) because of their similarities, in fact the gpu accelerations for 2D, rumored for the 2.4, can only help our P500 performance.
i hope this, and you?
Ps: i tink that a P500 at 150$ with 2.4 in the very next month can bring android for many doubtful people..
I'm not really keeping my hopes up. I bet the last official update we'll receive is Gingerbread. Most companies focus on their flagship phones, and despite the O1's popularity, I don't think it'll receive much.
Also, IMHO, Google is going too fast. Manufacturers are having a hard time catching up and stuff.
But if you ask me, I'm contented with Froyo. Unless, of course, there's a really badass killer feature available only to future releases.
And I think this should be in the General category
kpbotbot- It's more like manufacturers use the differente Android os'es for marketing uses . Look at samsung , they're waiting to release the native 2.3 devices and bearly then will they release gingerbread for their current flagship : Galaxy S . It's a dirty world .
Yeah. Here's a super thank-able screenshot I took weeks ago
LG and Samsung seem like very different companies. The Optimus line is a very good buy for most carriers. It will convert a lot of users to the Android world like me. LG seems to catter to their users too.
The manufacturers should understand Android devices should follow Googles releases. It seems like most manufacturers just barely make the software and communities like xda do the actual bug fixing and create a more robust system with the custom kernel & ROM releases.
Sent from my VM670 using XDA App
why would companies spend money and time in the software when
communities like xda do the actual bug fixing and create a more robust system with the custom kernel & ROM releases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@orlox - Imagine buying a phone that doesn't come with an operating system.
I prefer if companies release only the lifeless phone, and xda would give life to it.
So androids will be much cheaper
ccdreadcc said:
I prefer if companies release only the lifeless phone, and xda would give life to it.
So androids will be much cheaper
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the idea!
Post delivered via piece of paper tied to a brick... sorry 'bout the window! XD
The reason I chose this phone is because, for me, it's a small portable computer. If only every bit of hardware of this phone had a corresponding device driver (that we can get hold of), I think there's nothing stopping us from using a full Linux desktop, or other operating systems capable of running on the ARM architecture.
Not so relevant note: Some say the bootloader is locked. True?
kpbotbot said:
The reason I chose this phone is because, for me, it's a small portable computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true!
I am very satisfied with my first Android experience, in spite of all the bugs and hardware limitations of this cheap phone. Almost anything I needed but couldn't do before on my "dumb" phone became possible with this micro computer. So I don't really care if it's running Eclair, Froyo, Gingerbread, Ice Cream or Milk & Toast & Honey.
You would care if it was running Cupcake.
P.S There really is a possibility for us to get 2.4 on our phones. It is still called Gingerbread but it will support Honeycomb apps.
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA App
there are some questions to answer, why people buy a smartphone in general. We must see the differences between users who "use" the mobile as a daily instrument, users who use the mobile to play 3D games, users who read in the internet and communicate with it and users who are tweaking/hacking (not so sad as i write here). Most of users are using their device for communication, and so the manufacturers can say "why we should develop so fast as google? Our users doesn't need the new features like NFC or other". When communities like XDA, Cyanogen,CodeAurora,androidcentral or others develop their ROMs to their needs, they should do that - they are users who "want" the features. So, manufacturers can invest more time and money in new devices for more experience and for advanced users (like technical freaks). We (users who are lucky for while) can buy the "new" device at a later time, so we can save some money. Nothing other does LG,Samsung or HTC - they are developing for the feature. The money and time to invest in updates or bugfixes are too much for the most - this could be one reason for hold back updates or dont develop. As a developer i can say, the time to spend for Gingerbread development is not small - i have needed 3 monthes to develop a rom, that have just some bugs, and i've do that for fun. for a manufacturer this is not fun
kpbotbot said:
Yeah. Here's a super thank-able screenshot I took weeks ago
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This makes perfect sense from the carrier's perspective. If people had to pay to upgrade to the next version the carriers might have more incentive; as it is now they aren't seeing any more money so why bother investing time on something that could blow up in their face.
andy572 said:
there are some questions to answer, why people buy a smartphone in general. We must see the differences between users who "use" the mobile as a daily instrument, users who use the mobile to play 3D games, users who read in the internet and communicate with it and users who are tweaking/hacking (not so sad as i write here). Most of users are using their device for communication, and so the manufacturers can say "why we should develop so fast as google? Our users doesn't need the new features like NFC or other". When communities like XDA, Cyanogen,CodeAurora,androidcentral or others develop their ROMs to their needs, they should do that - they are users who "want" the features. So, manufacturers can invest more time and money in new devices for more experience and for advanced users (like technical freaks). We (users who are lucky for while) can buy the "new" device at a later time, so we can save some money. Nothing other does LG,Samsung or HTC - they are developing for the feature. The money and time to invest in updates or bugfixes are too much for the most - this could be one reason for hold back updates or dont develop. As a developer i can say, the time to spend for Gingerbread development is not small - i have needed 3 monthes to develop a rom, that have just some bugs, and i've do that for fun. for a manufacturer this is not fun
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah , bro , but you're one man fighting against the tides . It's bound that LG has at least a reminder of 5 man cell team working on getting gingerbread out . And besides they have other ways of getting info and ironing out bugs faster then you can .
Sad that they didn't place on the internet a god damn ETA by now .... thus I guess may or june might a realistic launch date
Oh and to be on-topic with the thread , I guess we'll see 2.4 by CM7 if any of the legendary devs still take interest in this phone ofc
+1 i second that...plus i heard that not all the code used is even OPEN..I mean mik somewhere mentioned that some libraries had no corresponding code in the source code archive....thats gotta stink plus porting of android is different than developiing Linux Distro..I mean no mailing lists and not such a big community of "porters"....but tahts just my take..
sarfaraz1989 said:
+1 i second that...plus i heard that not all the code used is even OPEN..I mean mik somewhere mentioned that some libraries had no corresponding code in the source code archive....thats gotta stink plus porting of android is different than developiing Linux Distro..I mean no mailing lists and not such a big community of "porters"....but tahts just my take..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you're right:
many libraries are closed source, it's like a driver from nvidia for Linux X.org.
The only way to port it to a new android version is to test if it works - if not, we have a problem. manufacturer does not support communities, so we have to build many workarounds or rewrite the code so that it works. i would wish, the manufacturers opens their drivers and codecs for playing audio and video - so we can develop faster, more stable and uncomplicated:/
back to topic:
i've readed the last days that gingerbread 2.4 is the internal 2.3.3 - let's check, if apps for honeycomb work on this version: in 2.4 there should be compatibility for the honeycomb apps^^
andy572 said:
you're right:
many libraries are closed source, it's like a driver from nvidia for Linux X.org.
The only way to port it to a new android version is to test if it works - if not, we have a problem. manufacturer does not support communities, so we have to build many workarounds or rewrite the code so that it works. i would wish, the manufacturers opens their drivers and codecs for playing audio and video - so we can develop faster, more stable and uncomplicated:/
back to topic:
i've readed the last days that gingerbread 2.4 is the internal 2.3.3 - let's check, if apps for honeycomb work on this version: in 2.4 there should be compatibility for the honeycomb apps^^
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if everything's open then it is unlikely they make money. Then they close down and there won't be any phone.
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA App
@yanuk... seems to be like u have not used linux before...Let me tell you how it works...Theres tons of companies (apart from thousands of enthusiasts) that write OPEN SOURCE DRIVERS for their hardware and submit it to the LINUX KERNEL maintainers(Linus torvalds included) example INTEL..If i m buying an ANDROID phone, i only want to pay for the hardware and not software..All drivers developed by the manufacturer shud be open source ..BUt instead its more like an abuse of the OPEN SOURCE community ..HOw CAn devs go ahead and hack the crap out of their phones, when they have trouble even porting newer OSes because of "some f****** proprietary driver" ...Screw the manufacturers ..I wish OPENMOKO had taken off when it had the chance..OPENMOKO = OPEN SOURCE OS +OPEN SOURCE HARDWARE with all datasheets, spec, circuit diagrams available..RUn whatever u possible can run on an it !!! My dream of having a completely Open (gtk runnin) geek device is still very distant..
sarfaraz1989 said:
@yanuk... seems to be like u have not used linux before...Let me tell you how it works...Theres tons of companies (apart from thousands of enthusiasts) that write OPEN SOURCE DRIVERS for their hardware and submit it to the LINUX KERNEL maintainers(Linus torvalds included) example INTEL..If i m buying an ANDROID phone, i only want to pay for the hardware and not software..All drivers developed by the manufacturer shud be open source ..BUt instead its more like an abuse of the OPEN SOURCE community ..HOw CAn devs go ahead and hack the crap out of their phones, when they have trouble even porting newer OSes because of "some f****** proprietary driver" ...Screw the manufacturers ..I wish OPENMOKO had taken off when it had the chance..OPENMOKO = OPEN SOURCE OS +OPEN SOURCE HARDWARE with all datasheets, spec, circuit diagrams available..RUn whatever u possible can run on an it !!! My dream of having a completely Open (gtk runnin) geek device is still very distant..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems like you have not worked in and managed any technology firms before.
I'm sincerely hoping your dream come true where you will own a successful openmoko company develop cutting edge technology with over 100 staff and offer your sw and hw for free with no claims to patent rights. All the best!
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA App
This is sort of a technical question regarding the architecture of the Android OS and possibly its licensing, etc... For most Windows computers, you can simply download, or buy a copy of Windows directly from Microsoft, install it on any x86 hardware and it will be fully optimized (speed, battery life, etc...). Why can't Google make a build of Android like this so I can simply buy a copy from them and install it on my phone with OEM hardware overtop of their bloated and skinned version of Android? For example, why can I not buy, say a Galaxy SII, and then buy a copy of 'Vanilla Android' from Google and install it legitimately and have it work? I realize that I can flash a copy of CM7 or some other custom ROM from open source developers but I would like to be able to just simply buy a copy of stock android, directly from Google, install it on my device, and have it work, just like with a Windows computer. Is the reason Google does not do this due to licensing issues? Or is there some other reason for this seemingly obvious solution to all the annoying OEM and Carrier bloatware that most Android phones are subject to?
Note: I realize this question has already been asked but I was hoping for a reason for why Google can't (or won't) provide an alternate build of android that works on all devices in addition to the stock builds that come with phones. As well, why do device manufacturers insist on being total d'bags and not just simply release all the drivers for their phones so we can choose the best phone for the reasons you want to (i.e. speed, build quality, price, specs etc...) and not because of the stupid bloatware or lack thereof?!?
Because, stock Android means absolutely NO drivers installed for a specific device so your phone WILL NOT function (No Touchscreen, No signal, etc). Samsung releases their own firmware after compiling their own Baseband, Kernel and ROM. This contains their touchscreen drivers, wireless drivers, etc. When you change the ROM, you essentially void the warranty, so manufacturers do not encourage it, but they do allow you to combine their components together for you to make your own custom ROM (using their baseband, kernel and/or Samsung official rom as their base roms)
They build their own ROMs so that they know what they are managing, and what they need to fix and update. Also there's also a USP for every product released, let's say, Sony Ericsson's UI with Timescape, Samsung's Touch-Wiz UI, Motorola's Blur, etc. If you want a stock phone then I suggest you go for the Galaxy Nexus, or one of those Nexus phones that Google themselves maintain.
If you want a stock copy of Android OS on the Galaxy S II, try CyanogenMod, it is a custom ROM which is very stock and runs on every device, BUT each device, you need to download a DIFFERENT rom, because their different drivers. If you expect Google to release drivers for each phone for their stock OS'es, they will go insane as their are an uncountable amount of Android devices released on a weekly basis
Great answer Nicholas I read this about an hour ago & spent 10 minutes trying to come up with a detailed answer that would make sense to a user of any experience level. Then I gave up
I'm referring to all smartphones not only SGS2 here.
Ad part 1 - It could be difficult. Every device is different and going this way Google would have to prepare/upgrade it's OS for every device on the market. This is hell of a job, so it's up to device manufacturer or community to do this. I think smartphones differ to much (much more than PCs), so it's not possible to create one system for all. Besides, warranty issues - manufacturer of the device could not be responsible for problems caused by someone else's OS (this is understandable). It's also worth to notice that flashing a smartphone is a process completly different than installing OS on PC as PC cannot be bricked in this process. Give users easy way to flash anything on their phones and you have another gate to problems as they will surely flash everything including windows dlls on their phones. You say that on PC any OS can be installed, I say FOR NOW. In a few years You will have a choice - cheaper PC, windows only, OS only from manufacturer or more expensive one and you install anything You want. Why do you think UEFI was created? It will happen unless PC market collapses, because according to some market analytics we are entering post-PC era and mobile devices will became our main devices.
Ad part 2 - It's just business model. Manufacturer/carrier does not sell You the device (that's how they see it), they sell You some bunch of features and have no interest in You adding more of them to Your device. SGS2 is a flagship phone and it's kernel sources are released. It has unlocked bootloader also. You payed accordingly - so you free to do much more things, and use full hardware potential. With lower-end devices - manufacturers prefer that You buy another device instead of upgrading current one. Market insist on lower prices, but with every device unlocked/released drivers etc. prices would be much higher and smartphones much less affordable. Devices like SGS2 are created for very specific users - power users/devs/businessmans/enthusiasts.
I think that You want impossible. IMHO it's almost miracle that Samsung released some smartphones with unlocked bootloader so You can flash everything You want. (btw. it was the reason for me to choose sgs2). And about that "bloatware obsession" - I just don't understand why some people are sooo obsessive. I don't find some app usefull - I don't use it, period. But TBH I must say that Samsung put some serious s**t preinstalled on SGS2. Sometimes it outranks even worst market junk.
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.
I am about to buy this phone because it is just so damn good for it's very low price tag, however one thing is bugging me about it. I came here to find that there are no Marshmallow ROMs for it yet and the main reason for me wanting to upgrade my phone in the first place is so that I will be able to run the latest Android ROM's without performance problems. I am currently on CyanogenMod 13 on my old Samsung Galaxy S3 and I like it, but it is slow. The Redmi Note 2 doesn't even have CyanogenMod support.
Is this because Xiaomi are going to release an official MIUI based on Marshmallow? I don't want to buy this phone if it means I am going to be stuck on MIUI or on an older version of Android. I am a bit perplexed because this phone sold a lot so why hasn't anyone made Marshmallow for it yet?
Do you think that development is going to pick up for this device or is this device a bad option if you want to run the latest Google Android (not MIUI)?
Certainly, the RN2 is a lot of hardware for the money, but without source code, things are limited to either repacked/tweaked roms, or roms that are built from source, but have significant hardware functionality imperfections because source is not available. It doesn't seem clear to me whether Xiaomi will release a Marshmallow-based MIUI for the RN2 or not. Some people say yes, some people say no, so until it actually happens (if it ever does), who knows. I also bought the RN2 because it was so much hardware for the price, but I am also disappointed with the lack of CM and similar. This is certainly not for a lack of people not trying, but it seems like certain parts of the hardware will never become functional with CM unless the necessary source code is released. If you don't happen to use these parts of the hardware, well, maybe it doesn't matter. Personally, I have stuck with sMIUI because all the hardware is completely working, but I sure wish a CM version with all working hardware will eventually emerge.
verbage said:
Certainly, the RN2 is a lot of hardware for the money, but without source code, things are limited to either repacked/tweaked roms, or roms that are built from source, but have significant hardware functionality imperfections because source is not available. It doesn't seem clear to me whether Xiaomi will release a Marshmallow-based MIUI for the RN2 or not. Some people say yes, some people say no, so until it actually happens (if it ever does), who knows. I also bought the RN2 because it was so much hardware for the price, but I am also disappointed with the lack of CM and similar. This is certainly not for a lack of people not trying, but it seems like certain parts of the hardware will never become functional with CM unless the necessary source code is released. If you don't happen to use these parts of the hardware, well, maybe it doesn't matter. Personally, I have stuck with sMIUI because all the hardware is completely working, but I sure wish a CM version with all working hardware will eventually emerge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the explanation. It seems really unfortunate that they haven't released the source. I guess I should either buy the more expensive Mi4 (which I believe the source is released for) or I can just wait it out and see if the source code get's released for the RN2. It seems strange to me that they wouldn't release Marshmallow-based MIUI for such a popular, fairly new phone. I think they will release it. If they release MM-MIUI then will that enable other developers to bring stock Android Marshmallow or CyanogenMod to the RN2?
M will deffo be released for RN2. Main reason we still dont have it is:
a) first "official" device with M is supposed to be mi5
b) MTK prolly didnt polish 6.0 yet
Major companies that use X10 (eg Sony & HTC) didnt realse M for their devices either, at least as far as i know, however they are planned. So yeah M will arrive eventually, which is great, but that doesnt mean custom roms will get any better. And knowing xiaomi, and their kernel release policies, this is pretty much 100%. Pretty sure they still havent released any kernel source for their older MTK powered devices.
I think I'm going to buy the Mi4 rather because its kernel is open. I want to know that I'll be able to get android roms of any new releases. It's a real shame because the Redmi Note 2 is cheaper and a more superior device, but I have read that Mediatek are scumbags when it comes to releasing kernels because they want to force you to buy a new device when your OS becomes outdated which goes against the open source licence of Linux. Oh well, I guess that's business.
rimpy said:
If they release MM-MIUI then will that enable other developers to bring stock Android Marshmallow or CyanogenMod to the RN2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they release MM-MIUI for the RN2, unless they release the source code, this will still mean that roms are cooked/repacked, or built from source, but probably imperfectly due to lack of source. Though MIUI is based on Android, I don't think there are free and open MIUI repositories where one could grab the necessary source code for the RN2.
At this point, like everyone said, it is very unlikely that Xiaomi will ever release the source code for the RN2. Without it, custom ROMs will never be proper, and it's the reason there are no MM builds yet.
However, even though MIUI is horrible and God knows that I hate it, it's quite usable. A version of the Xposed framework that works on the latest MIUI builds has been released a couple of days ago, and with it you can get most of the functionality a custom ROM provides. It's not perfect, and I'd prefer AOSP, but it is, IMO, the best this phone has to offer at the moment.
I only got mine about three months ago, and while there were many times I came to regret my purchase, every other phone in this price range and slightly above has inferior hardware. With that said, if you want a phone running AOSP or something very close to it, you'd be better off getting a Nexus or a device that is officially supported by CM.
Thanks all. I was just about to buy the RN2 but I am glad I posted here first. I've learnt a lot and I don't think I would be happy with a phone that has a closed source kernel. The Mi4 has a smaller screen, no SD slot, slower, and costs more, but its kernel source is released and it is supported by CM13. Still very good value for money so that's gonna be my next phone.
It actually isnt slower. Benchmarks only. If you run them side by side with either MIUI or CM youll see than Mi4 is actually much faster than RN2, so yeah, its a better option if you have the money
i have heard that Sailfish os is being built for sony X right? So when will it release....im so exciting....
Who you heard it from that it's being built
fezta said:
Who you heard it from that it's being built
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mate, check this Link for further information.
If you're a fan of Jolla (a mobile platform that's part Linux, part Android and loosely based on Nokia's MeeGo project), good news. The company has announced it will be releasing an official version of its Sailfish operating system for a number of Sony Xperia handsets. The news came from the firm's press event at MWC this morning, and adds a big-name brand to the currently mixed list of devices that the plucky (persistent?) mobile software has officially been ported to.
The first device to work with Sailfish, or rather, the first handset to be shown running it at MWC, is the Xperia X. Jolla says that there will be more compatible models, but the X is what it chose to show it off. Of course, Sailfish is technically available on many devices already, if you're willing to work with an unofficial port, but this time Jolla's partnered with Sony and its Open Device Platform for better compatibility.
Despite Jolla showing Sailfish on a working handset here in Barcelona, it seems there are still a few kinks to iron out. A representative told me features like "double tap" (to wake the device) aren't working yet, and support for 64-bit devices isn't as comprehensive as it is for 32-bit models (if you're into custom software, you'll likely know which yours is).
It's always nice to see alternative operating systems finding their way to mainstream phones, and seeing a Sony Xperia X running something other that the default Android certainly makes it a little bit more eye catching. I tried it for a few minutes and could see that the basic navigation was working no problem. But mostly, if you're into Jolla (which enjoys a steadfastly loyal community), then this is above all a good sign that Jolla's still committed to what it's doing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want the official version, you'll still have to wait though. Jolla says it won't be out until late spring/early summer.
Regards
Very nice going to have a read up on this later then see what I can find out
I'll have to make my rom quick enough for people to try
No one on xx device will know me but I'm festa20 and can't get on my account. I did team Xperia roms was a long time ago but with the lack of support for this device I'm guna have a dig around with some stuff see what I can make