Related
Before we start, it may appear Motorola and Samsung will be the only ones who will have a Honeycomb product until at least May/June. The reasons being:-
1. Honeycomb supply to manufacturers have been delayed until May/June. I dont know exactly what this means except that the manufacturers I work with cannot get access to Honeycomb for their products (but it may be related to the next rumor).
2. Honeycomb wont be open sourced and a major manufacturer is working with Google on trying to secure licensing.
Sorry I cant be more specific than this. The second rumor contradicts everything Google has done so far, but if I mention the manufacturer involved, it lends weight to the rumor.
Does anyone else have any further information to collaborate/debunk these rumors?
EDIT: When I say Honeycomb wont be open sourced, I meant Google plans to close source it and Honeycomb will require a license.
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
#2. Honeycomb SDK is already published. Functional installs of Honeycomb can and have already been built from this.
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ couldn't put it better myself.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
There is a reason why this is a new account, if it isnt obvious to you.
I am not asking for speculative opinions, I am wondering if there is anyone else in the industry hearing either of these rumors.
Atleast give some sources?
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
Sorry, the market for real Honeycomb products is actually very small at the moment so any hints will reveal too much. Please, if anyone else has heard anything just PM me.
Small huh? There are plenty of devices coming out quite soon. Acer's Iconia Tab A500, for example, has just had its FCC approval granted and will be out mid-April. That's running Honeycomb, so kinda slaps your "rumours" in the chops about it not being available until June.
FloatingFatMan said:
#3. Licensing means they CANNOT closed source it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
foxmeister said:
What licence exactly?
FYI Android itself is licensed under the Apache software license, which is a non-copyleft licence.
If Google so chose, they could keep Honeycomb itself closed source, and their only open source requirement would be publishing the source for the linux kernel on shipping devices.
Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they've already released it under open license.
FloatingFatMan said:
Because they've already released it under open license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest release of Android released under the Apache Software Licence is Gingerbread - that can't be taken back.
However, anything built on top of that source can be closed source if the developer so wishes, and that includes Honeycomb!
I still expect Google to release Honeycomb under the ASL, but the point it - *they don't have to!*.
Regards,
Dave
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
tolis626 said:
Seriously guys,do you really think that in times like these we're living,Google will abandon the idea that made their OS so successful?I highly doubt that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I absolutely agree with you - I cannot fathom any reason for Google to make Honeycomb close source. This rumor (#2) is from a bigger company than the company that provided the first rumor.
Interesting news ! Thanks for the share !
FloatingFatMan said:
I'm gonna call BS on all of the above.
#1. New member, first post, no sources or company names given.
[...]
Either present us with some evidence, or quit spouting rubbish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as the troll who claimed Samsung were trying to charge networks for software updates yet everyone was willing to believe that...
I'm not arguing that this looks and smells like trolling, merely attempting to highlight that plenty of people round here seem to be quite happy to 'never let the facts get in the way of a good story'.
Sorry to double-post but Engadget has an article on the matter.
Here's a quote from Google:
Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization. While we're excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones. Until then, we've decided not to release Honeycomb to open source. We're committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it's ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Step666 said:
Sorry to double-post but
Here's a quote from Google:
Absolutely no mention of licences.
It does, on the other hand, talk of Honeycomb 'not being ready, which ties in to a lot of reviews and impressions of it as an OS.
Again, I feel this is very similar to the 'Samsung charging for upgrades' rumour - something takes a little bit longer than normal to happen and a minority start making up ridiculous rumours to try and explain it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure whether my post occurred before the Engadget article or not, but this article certainly validates rumor #1. It would be interesting to see how this affects manufacturers who have announced Honeycomb products (one poster mentioned Acer earlier). I know some are launching Gingerbread instead, which isnt ideal.
While the link between the two rumors is subject to interpretation, the two rumors were taken from different sources. The second rumor is less believable (even to me) however, the source is from a significantly larger company.
No, it doesn't validate rumour number one.
You claimed that manufacturers are unable to get a copy of Honeycomb - there's a big difference between Google publicly releasing the source code and passing copies of it to manufacturers.
Do you really think that when Google released Froyo's or GIngerbread's source code that that was the first time HTC, Samsung etc had seen it?
I really don't.
Also, as has been pointed out already, the fact that there are Honeycomb devices coming from a range of manufacturers goes some way to disproving your point.
As for the believability of your rumours, unless you can back them up with any sort of proof, I don't see any reason to believe either of them.
Well the op might be on to something at least. I'm not buying that top tier manufacturers won't be able to get the code as LG and Acer among others are going to be releasing tablets with honeycomb in the coming weeks.
http://www.androidcentral.com/google-not-open-sourcing-honeycomb-says-bloomberg
Thank you so much for this article - this is another source verifying the difficulty of manufacturers getting honeycomb source code. There is no doubt the Tier 1 companies will get preferential access to the code - the question is, who is seen as Tier 1 by Google.
Perhaps in regards to licensing, this may be just a legal formality for companies to get access to Honeycomb at the moment, and it is unclear whether these licenses will cost anything.
Thank you again, this has been a great help. This is a third party source we can use to explain to our clients why we cannot launch honeycomb at the date we promised.
I am glad Google isn't releasing the code so cheap companies can't just stick Honeycomb on crap devices and make it look bad.
Sent from my Incredible with the XDA Premium App.
Hy guys and gals, i have done some digging on the nVidia developers forums and have found a thread requesting info on if/when nVidia plans to drop the source for the HAL that we need so our amazing developers can get A2DP working
I'm posting the link below, maybe if enough of us go into the thread requesting this info nVidia will comply
EDIT: nVidia updated their forum and our topic was tossed into the archive and not brought over, to remind them that this is still a valid issue I have re-created the thread, please if you want to try at getting A2DP to work with non OTA based rom's go voice your opinion
New nVidia developers Forum
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
This would be great! Then I could finally buy a Bluetooth Stereo Headset.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
I'd love to see this happen, but I don't see it anytime soon. Nvidia has been historically bad at releasing their source code.
fcisco13 said:
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link worked perfectly fine for me, both on my TF101 earlier and just now on my g2x.....not sure why it didn't work for u
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Lets get this moving
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
lawsuit??? Lol worked for lg...
It'll never work. You can't sue them because they won't release their source code. That's like saying "Hey let's sue microsoft because they won't release the source to their kernel." It's their property, and they can do what they like with it. If android didn't run on top of the linux kernel, which is gpl licensed, I'd almost guarantee that no vendor would ever release the source for it.
Not trying to be a buzz-kill or anything, I want the source code as much as anyone else. But no amount of threatening lawsuits, bugging them through email, forums, or phone calls will change their minds. If they intend on releasing the source, they'll do it in their own time, if not, we're SOL.
mstrk242 said:
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
I was kidding about it, we can wait for 2.3.4-5 ota...
It may be Nvidia's right to keep it's code proprietary, but I can't imagine buying another Android device with one of their chips in it unless something changes.
We are evolving very fast, I don't know if nVidia can assume the Windows GPU market will always be there for them. If Android dominates the next decade or so the way that Windows did the last then manufacturers are obviously going to have to adapt or perish.
No way, there will always be a market for high end video cards on windows, simply for gaming if nothing else. Sure, they may not make it in the cell phone market (although I doubt that too, just because they are very good with hardware, they'll work out the kinks.)
You have to remember, the vast majority of people who buy these phones don't even know what a rom is, let alone the fact that they can customize it. The modding community is a small (albeit very vocal,) minority.
Also, please no one read between the lines on these posts I've made. I'm no insider, I have no information what so ever from nvidia. I'm really only basing these educated guesses based on my experience with nvidia and linux drivers. They may very well open the source, but I'm just trying to say don't hold your breath, and screaming at nvidia is absolutely pointless.
bump for updated link
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Spyvie said:
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
gaww said:
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you want to get the MI Millet MIUI phone when it is available in your country. It is a dual core 1.5Ghz Scorpion processor and they expect you to update it weekly with new MIUI builds. It is an awesome device for the low price point (1,999 Chinese Yuan or about $300.00 US).
http://product.xiaomi.com/features.html
Go salivate.
jboxer said:
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
They deleted my account. WTF?
xsteven77x said:
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd imagine its for the same reason our devices and other tegra devices can only play the tegra games hence incentive tobuy a tegra phone. I think if they released code then any dev could hack their phone and play tegra games without having a tegra chip. Just a hunch.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
HTC just sent me a link to take a survey, another good tool to blast them with.
http://survey.htc.com/worldwide
Code has been released, I like to think all our complaints helped. Feel free to lock this thread if need be!
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
We have been. I've sent them several notices on a near daily basis.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
I doubt that that link is anything more than a placebo.
http://www.htc.com/us/about/contact-by-email
Say something along the lines of "you're in violation of GPLv2 which requires that source be released along with binary. GPLv2 does not allow for anything besides release of source NOT being ANY LATER than binary distribution."
I.e., though GPLv2 doesn't specify an exact time frame, the implication of this is that the source must be made available by the EXACT MOMENT that the binary is distributed. It *does* allow for the source to be released BEFORE the binary, but does NOT allow for the binary to be released before the source.
IMO, the kernel source archive should be included within the system partition of the phone, at least for early releases while there is sufficient storage space for it all to fit. This would greatly simply source distribution.
Even though I went to that page and asked for the kernel source code to be released, it looks like they're on a pretty routine schedule as far as what and when they release things and we're probably still a little ways out on the source code. But it can't HURT to keep trying, right?
Submitted. Hopefully they'll listen up.
BiggJurk said:
We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, we have been. As unclespoon said they are on a fairly set release schedule that they must be comfortable with [legal-wise].
Read my replies here, there is another link that got me a response that was from a human:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1247374
HTC does this **** on purpose. They have a bunch of new devices coming out and if they were to release the code that would impact there profit margins. This processor can handle 1.5 ghz as a daily driver. The new HTC amaze has exact same processor but is overclocked 300mhz more then our device. And it has a 1gb of RAM. Samsung has gotten great at releasing there code within 1 week or even earlier. HTC PLEASE TAKE NOTES FROM SAMSUNG.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
FYI
I filled out a customer service survey from HTC and gave them all bad ratings in regards to their non-response for the kernel source code. A representative just personally called me and is trying to get an eta on the release if not email me a copy of the code. I would suggest everyone completes a survey with negative comments at the following location:http://survey.htc.com/worldwide. I know surveys like this affects their metrics and gets managements attention. The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Regards,
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
cal3thousand said:
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
BiggJurk said:
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess is that they'll "get back to you" in a month or however long until they would have normally released the source code. I think they're too big to be bothered by people complaining about lack of source code. Bottom line is there probably won't ever be any "consequences" as a result of them taking their time on releasing kernel source. We only complain because we want it, but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard that before, but I don't see how that's possible since Android is based on Linux. If it were based on BSD that'd be another matter.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, congrats to phone guy!! Unfortunately, either he was trying to get you to shut-up or misunderstood what you wanted them to release. Google mostly licensed Android with the Apache 2.0. This allows others to customize Android and they don't have to release their changes i.e. customizations made by phone manufacturers (it means other things too but this was Google's main reason for this license). HTC doesn't have to give us their Android source. The Linux kernel is GPL - there is no way around that. The GPL states that the source must be released at the same time as the binary is released to the end-user (it even states that the source should be no harder to obtain than the binary is i.e. we should get the kernel source with our devices - on the sd card or something). Still have no idea where HTC gets 90-120 days from the GPL wording.
I sent a note to EFF asking if they were aware of whats going on. They said they were and were researching the situation.
---------- Post added at 06:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------
unclespoon said:
but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are though. They are directly violating the GNU GPL but you are right - there are too few of us who actually want the kernel source for them to really worry. Can't believe one of the actual Linux kernel devs hasn't caught wind of this and made a statement.
I sent a couple of requests. Let's hope they move their asses.
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
HebrewToYou said:
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you were the first one to find it. I thanked you elsewhere you've mentioned it as well.
Maybe the OP can come through and update the thread title.
Edit to add - download reads 94.0MB on the HTC page, but my download over Tmo 4g is saying out of 89.6MB and my home pc is saying 89.7MB...so we'll see what's up when I get it.
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
RazoE said:
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All ready on it
Sent from my Senseless Doubleshot using xda premium
That's funny.
I just received the HTC reply to my request. I'm going to play like my request was the straw for that camel's back... Your Welcome Everybody!!!
j/k. This is wonderful news though. I'm stoked
Thread locked by OP request
In theory this should be quite useful, no?
Just putting this up here for those who may have lost hope, but on a whim I checked their source repository today and it would seem they've at least uploaded Kernel source!
ftp://Kernel_End_User:[email protected]/
Directory: Pure XL P0010UU (it's a bit of a mess, you may wish to CNTRL+F this)
I haven't checked their software repo yet for ROM source, but it was not uploaded when I initially found this information about a month and a half ago.
The kernel is only VANILLA STOCK source, I haven't compiled it or anything, I'm only linking their servers because I imagine that this isn't getting checked on a regular basis (not much to expect would happen). But, something has happened, so I figured I'd draw some attention to it.
Many thanks to those ROM and kernel devs who have been working to bring us some solid software. It's honestly my only major gripe with the phone.
We (me, acheron, root-expert) tried to compile this several times with CyanogenMod repos with no luck. It's from 7th December 2015 so nothing changed.
bemolx said:
We (me, acheron, root-expert) tried to compile this several times with CyanogenMod repos with no luck. It's from 7th December 2015 so nothing changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Darn. If only they were more willing to facilitate development.... the software is my only real issue with the phone. Thanks for your work, however.
Same thing here... I would love to have the latest CyanogenMod
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
bemolx said:
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great news @bemolx
TheLastCanadian said:
Darn. If only they were more willing to facilitate development.... the software is my only real issue with the phone. Thanks for your work, however.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity, how have other manufacturers "facilitated" this sort of development for their products?
vicks1008 said:
Out of curiosity, how have other manufacturers "facilitated" this sort of development for their products?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some lend active support to the venture, LG has a dedicated team for liason, better documentation, etc.
I think it's probably pretty telling that it's only now the BLU source has worked - and it took them 5 months to even release it.
BLU releases kernel source codes upon request instead of proactively providing them. If they're asked for on launch, then the kernel source is released shortly after. So I don't believe the claim that it took 5 months to release.
Can you show me proof of other manufacturers lending support to show BLU?
NVMD.
TheLastCanadian said:
Your belief is irrelevant. They have had many requests, and always it is a referral to the FTP site they host. This site did not populate with the kernel/rom source for quite a few months after I bought the phone, and I was already behind the curve by about 2. I purchased mine on the 30th of December, 2015. I made this post the day after I noticed they had Kernel/Rom. If the URL was still working, I could verify for you the time limit. With that said, it was approximately 5 months.
As for other manufacturers lending support.... ZTE for instance is collaborating with Cyanogenmod, LG proactively provides source and has actually tried to make the process quite simple for most of their phones, and ultimately, contacting BLU about the matter is functionally worthless, as BLU is a reseller and at the whim of Gionee. BLU can't help because they don't do R&D or software as I can tell for the phone.
I'm particularly pissed about the fact I asked before I bought the phone if source was available and it was GPL compliant and I was told yes. 5 months is just a little outside of Amazon's return policy. The Pure XL is a good phone, but the software is quite lacklustre. CM would really be the bees' knees.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'm obviously not going to bother contacting my connections at BLU with that attitude. Good luck guys!
vicks1008 said:
Well I'm obviously not going to bother contacting my connections at BLU with that attitude. Good luck guys!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I should correct myself slightly. Supposing my e-mail record is correct, they released it 4 months after the phone. I say your belief isn't relevant because a fact is a fact.... as of April 5th, I was still getting apologies from them about Kernel source not being available, specifically, "No ETA on source at this time". Ergo, it could have been longer.
As for BLU, I'm just being honest. They don't develop, they're a reseller.
bemolx said:
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a small update;
Linux kernel upstream: 3.10.104
Regenerated defconfig as well, the same branch.
I'll try it with full build today.
https://www.change.org/p/people-xio...are_petition&utm_term=share_for_starters_page
Sign the petition guys....
nothing gonna happen by going to that site.. pretty much useless..
But a petition like this gave success to moto g4 plus for getting official oreo
If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.
matcho13579 said:
If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will surely, but it might take months to release it.
Guys, let's be patient, if they released source for pretty much all their other recent devices running QCOM there is no real reason to doubt they will for this device as well, just wait, we already have stock android, so need to suffer the horrors of MIUI while we wait
matcho13579 said:
If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is not an option this time. As it is a Google device they open themselves up for a lawsuit if they don't.
Was wondering if this was gonna happen.
Also remember that the source only has to be provided upon request. Most post-it to github.com just to cut down on having to fill the request. Has anyone asked them about it?
It seems they are planning to release the kernel source within the next three months, according to this post.