Database Info

[Q] Why can't Google make stock Android/updates available to all phones?

Basically, what i want to know is, what is so fundamentally different between phones and PCs that makes it that much harder to flash a different OS on a phone than it is to to install a new OS on a PC. Even switching from Windows to Ubuntu is pretty idiot proof. Aren't there fewer varieties of processors out there for phones than there are for PCs?
Does it have to do with producer/manufacturer modifications of the OS(but that wouldn't affect the hardware, right?)? Is it because phone OS's have to omit drivers(or something else i do not know is required for an OS to function) for multiple device components to save space?
Thank you for your time.
|
|
|Irrelevant to the question
|
|
To give you some background about my level of understanding in computer science. The only exposure i have are an Introduction to Programming(Java) class that i took in college and OpenCourseWare videos of a few introductory programming lectures. And the articles etc from various tech websites like Ars Technica, AnandTech, etc.
As for my goals from asking these questions, i would like to be able to create my own custom ROMs, or apps at the very least. And yes, i know i have a LOOONG way to go.
Thank you again for reading this far into my thread.

In short, Google do make updates available to all phones. It's the manufacturers who stand in the way. They decide which of their devices get updates and when.
The whole thing is also complicated by the awful customizations that each manufacturer makes to Android OS so that every official update needs modifying to work with those customizations.
Good luck with your future endeavors

DirkGently1 said:
In short, Google do make updates available to all phones. It's the manufacturers who stand in the way. They decide which of their devices get updates and when.
The whole thing is also complicated by the awful customizations that each manufacturer makes to Android OS so that every official update needs modifying to work with those customizations.
Good luck with your future endeavors
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But then what is stopping us rooted fellas from just flashing stock Android onto our phones the same way we swap Windows for Ubuntu on our PCs?

ArdorNg said:
But then what is stopping us rooted fellas from just flashing stock Android onto our phones the same way we swap Windows for Ubuntu on our PCs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely nothing
This is why we have XDA!

DirkGently1 said:
Absolutely nothing
This is why we have XDA!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So why are all the ROMs out there phone specific? Is it possible to create a ROM that can be flashed on all phones?(is it already available? And if so, where?)

ArdorNg said:
So why are all the ROMs out there phone specific? Is it possible to create a ROM that can be flashed on all phones?(is it already available? And if so, where?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No generic ROM no. The most widespread custom ROM is Cyanogenmod but because of hardware differences between devices each build has to have the appropriate drivers to tailor it to a specific device.
Security measures are another factor too as different manufacturers use different methods to lock down the phones. This means that the process of flashing ROMs can vary as well.
When Google releases a new version of Android it is available to everyone to use but you can't just slap it onto any old device as it is and expect it to work. The chefs need to work their magic to make it compatable with the individual devices.

DirkGently1 said:
No generic ROM no ... because of hardware differences between devices each build has to have the appropriate drivers to tailor it to a specific device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My question was why can't they build the Android like other PC OSes, with drivers for all available hardware? There are definitely fewer varieties of hardware for smartphones than there are for PCs, no? Is it because of space constraints or are there other issues at play?

It's up to the manufacturers to make their devices compatible with Android rather than Googles responsibility to make Android compatable with a thousand varying hardware components, and the millions of hardware combinations that could potentially make a handset!
I'm sure they could create Generic drivers that work so-so, but i'd rather have devices that actually work well and not have to download ROMs which are the size of your average XP install.

DirkGently1 said:
It's up to the manufacturers to make their devices compatible with Android rather than Googles responsibility to make Android compatable with a thousand varying hardware components, and the millions of hardware combinations that could potentially make a handset!
I'm sure they could create Generic drivers that work so-so, but i'd rather have devices that actually work well and not have to download ROMs which are the size of your average XP install.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmmmmm. So drivers are the only constraint?
Then i guess i have a more specific goal then! If no one has done it already... I'm sure there are people who wouldn't mind the large size. Though actually writing it would probably take so long that we can only release a 2.3 generic ROM when 2.7 comes out... which kind of defeats the purpose... except maybe for the folks still stuck on pre-Froyo devices... That and how to keep the extra drivers from being bloat...

Ice Cream Sandwich Defragmenting Android

Google says that Ice Cream Sandwich will defragment the Android OS. Obviously it will defragment in terms of bringing together phones, tablets & google TV but an iDevice level of defragmentation? I.E, all devices having the ability to upgrade to the latest version of the OS immediately or even eventually? It seems possible but it doesn't seem probable, but that is where I think Android needs to eventually end up.
Obviously if your hardware didn't warrant the software upgrade they could lock you out of a certain upgrade or warn you that it may cause significant issues with your device.
I can't wait to find out more about this =]

IMO, the defragmentation comes from the individual phone manufacturer, and different phone specs, less so than the different medium.

What they really need is something like the windows phone 7 has in terms of minimum hardware specs, certain buttons required, certain hardware, etc. That still allows a wide range of devices but allows for some conaistency. Google also needs to start taking over the updating of the phones which will help as well. Relying on manufacturers and carriers does not bode well for upgrades.
Tapped from my CherryPi Atrix

termleech said:
What they really need is something like the windows phone 7 has in terms of minimum hardware specs, certain buttons required, certain hardware, etc. That still allows a wide range of devices but allows for some conaistency. Google also needs to start taking over the updating of the phones which will help as well. Relying on manufacturers and carriers does not bode well for upgrades.
Tapped from my CherryPi Atrix
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We're one step closer if ICS devices will no longer have physical buttons.

Does this mean Icecream cannot be installed on current Android phones?

SaqibArif said:
Does this mean Icecream cannot be installed on current Android phones?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It means that Devs will need to port it to older hardware, especially the phones that came out w/o 1GHz cores Single cores...Like the Legend, G1, Aria, Droid 1, hero, X10, etc...But phones with Sense or Touchwiz, or Timescape, or LG UI, will be waiting longer for a official update instead. ICS will most likely be intensive on the older phones that are weaker, Gingerbread kills many older phones already, so imagine ICS on them.

Ace42 said:
It means that Devs will need to port it to older hardware, especially the phones that came out w/o 1GHz cores Single cores...Like the Legend, G1, Aria, Droid 1, hero, X10, etc...But phones with Sense or Touchwiz, or Timescape, or LG UI, will be waiting longer for a official update instead. ICS will most likely be intensive on the older phones that are weaker, Gingerbread kills many older phones already, so imagine ICS on them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're actually correct except the fact that google said themselves at google IO before showing the digital zoom based on vocal recognition that ICS would have -no- hardware requirements so I think that it would be more intensive, but still optimized for the phones. Kind of like how you can run Linux on damn near anything.

Indirect said:
You're actually correct except the fact that google said themselves at google IO before showing the digital zoom based on vocal recognition that ICS would have -no- hardware requirements so I think that it would be more intensive, but still optimized for the phones. Kind of like how you can run Linux on damn near anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't know they stated that, well I guess that's good news for everyone then. But the performance on older phones is still questionable.

With the number of different devices utilizing different hardware sets, it will be damn near impossible to establish one version to fit all devices unless they take the windows approach on desktops and allow the user to apply driver updates separately from their device manufacturers.
Also there is the other issue with app fragmentation where folks like nvidia are paying the developers to use device specific codes to make the apps not compatible with other devices instead of utilizing standard openGL which is nearly identical.

I think that standardizing the android 'experience' with a standard set of buttons or hardware requirements is ultimately an exercise in futility. People still see the smartphone world in terms of manufacturers, not in terms of operating systems, and no amount of standardization is going to change the fact that when you look at your phone, you see Samsung or HTC, not android.
I think the question is more, do consumers really need to know or care whether their device runs android or something else? I think not. Your average consumer makes choices of phone based on hardware reliability, cost, carrier availability, aesthetic, popularity, and many other factors. I'm not completely discounting user experience, but I don't think it's as prominent in the decision making process as the enthusiasts assume (the decision making process of the general populace that is). When you consider this, fragmentation of the operating system across many different manufacturers really doesn't make much of a difference to the image of the OS itself.
The only reason that android fragmentation is even an issue/concept whose consequences need to be pondered is because on the other side of the fence we have Apple making consistent hardware that runs on the same OS, and making boatloads of money off it. On the other hand, android is doing fine (and exceeding the iOS market share in many markets) even though it has this market fragmented across many different manufacturers.

Google needs to fix the fragmentation!!!

Niksko said:
I think that standardizing the android 'experience' with a standard set of buttons or hardware requirements is ultimately an exercise in futility. People still see the smartphone world in terms of manufacturers, not in terms of operating systems, and no amount of standardization is going to change the fact that when you look at your phone, you see Samsung or HTC, not android.
I think the question is more, do consumers really need to know or care whether their device runs android or something else? I think not. Your average consumer makes choices of phone based on hardware reliability, cost, carrier availability, aesthetic, popularity, and many other factors. I'm not completely discounting user experience, but I don't think it's as prominent in the decision making process as the enthusiasts assume (the decision making process of the general populace that is). When you consider this, fragmentation of the operating system across many different manufacturers really doesn't make much of a difference to the image of the OS itself.
The only reason that android fragmentation is even an issue/concept whose consequences need to be pondered is because on the other side of the fence we have Apple making consistent hardware that runs on the same OS, and making boatloads of money off it. On the other hand, android is doing fine (and exceeding the iOS market share in many markets) even though it has this market fragmented across many different manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very well said!
I'm sure there will be plenty of ICS support for older devices from the dev community. I'd expect most, if not all of the devices currently supported by
Cyanogenmod to see an ICS upgrade when the time comes.

looks like i should wait a bit more longer b4 i upgrade some of my hardware

Lots of life left in the the super HTC Desire yet then....

Nice, I will enjoy seeing ICS hit retail, if for nothing else the conversations on this forum, lol.

yes of course...

it'll be 3 main pockets
all the hardware that was on 2.3.x GB are automatically compatible with ICS 4.x, so all those automatically will join the 4.x cloud
but we have all the 2.2 Froyo and 2.1 Eclair hardware that are too old for ICS both of those becomes 1 cloud, most 2.1 devices are already on 2.2 anyways.
so the last cloud are those super old 1.5 devices
so in reality we are better off now than before
if you imagine a pie chart it'll be like 1% AOSP 1.5.x devices 49% 2.2 AOSP devices, and 50% ICE 4.x devices
iLiberate said:
Google says that Ice Cream Sandwich will defragment the Android OS. Obviously it will defragment in terms of bringing together phones, tablets & google TV but an iDevice level of defragmentation? I.E, all devices having the ability to upgrade to the latest version of the OS immediately or even eventually? It seems possible but it doesn't seem probable, but that is where I think Android needs to eventually end up.
Obviously if your hardware didn't warrant the software upgrade they could lock you out of a certain upgrade or warn you that it may cause significant issues with your device.
I can't wait to find out more about this =]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

amaliapika said:
yes of course...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, love that you bumped a 6 month old thread with "yes of course". Struggling to reach 10 posts eh?

Few general questions about Android

Can anyone answer me these 2 questions? They're just eating away at me right now and its making me so confus.
1) Why does each Android device need to be individually updated to the latest OS? I mean they say its because the hardware is different on each device but look @ desktops and laptops, there are so many variable hardware parts yet every time Windows updates the old hardware is compatible with the new OS and updating is a breeze. Why is this so different for Android?
2) Why do manufacturers feel the need to lock phones down so much? For example, the only thing holding us back from having a functioning ICS ROM is the RIL, which Sammy refuses to release. Carriers and manufacturers alike get so much hate for always lagging on updating our phones to the latest OS, but if our phones werent so locked down they would never have to worry about updating a phone again because the dev community would take care of all of that for us. And if they decide that one of the 3rd party dev releases should be released OTA instead of forcing us to go online and do it ourselves then they could contact the developer and compensate them for their work so they could get permission to release it. They save time and the devs get money for something they normally do for free. Win win from my perspective.

It comes down to drivers. Computers are a mix of parts that weren't necessary built to work together in the exact combination, so all of the manufacturers provide drivers to make their parts talk to the OS in a common language. Android phones have this too, but the drivers aren't generally available to us a users; they're only provided to the manufacturers, or written specifically by the OEM, and may be under various types of NDAs or close sources licenses. Android as an OS isn't written for a specific phone or device combination (save for the Nexus releases) and does not include the drivers, so it's up to the OEM to compile it with all the drivers needed to run on a particular piece of hardware. Without those drivers, the OS won't work with a particular device.
As for the RIL, it's my assumption that it's under a closed source license provided to the OEM. Samsung has been pretty open about things, so it's more likely it's Qualcomm/VIA that has the controls in place and completely out of Samsung's hands.

Shrike is dead-on with drivers. Lockdown is also a support issue. Support a couple hundred desktops where every tom **** and harry can do whatever they want? Service packs, patch Tuesdays. fun fun fun. lock it down and only deal with apk's that don't work or don't play well together. manageable chaos is the goal.

How "free" is your android?

I bought my first android, a galaxy 3, about a year and a half ago... I was so excited I had a "mobile Linux" in my hand... Being a Linux user for some time I thought that I would have (almost) the same capabilities with my mobile....
After a one week I came down to earth. The only thing in common with Linux in android, is the Linux kernel. Let me explain:
In my pc, I can compile any Linux distro, or kernel, from the source, install it on my hardware, reboot, and have it working just as I want, with all the features I enabled/disabled during the build. When I started thinking of buying an adroid phone, I thought I could do exactly the same. Well, I was mistaken.
It's ok with me now. I discovered how android and Google works. But still something is not right.
The biggest "advantages" android has to offer were, and still are, that it is free (as in free speech, not free beer - thank you Mr. Stallman) and open.
Well IS it?
Google is giving away the source code, thus making it available for anyone to build it. Ok. The real problem is what you can do with the resulting build. In theory, if you flash a generic build to a phone, it should boot up and make calls. And that's it. Forget about GPS, wifi, Bluetooth. If you want to use them, you have to build a kernel with the source code provided by the OEMs and the best part is that the source has to be for the same version you are building. Thus it is almost impossible for an average user to build android for their device, if the OEM won't provide an official update to the version they want to build.
You'll say that the drivers are proprietary and OEMs don't give them. I can understand that, but what I really can't understand is why proprietary blobs for 2.3 won't work with android 4. I mean drivers are the same, aren't they? Yes, the kernels are different BUT hardware remains the same...
You'll say "get a Nexus". Yes, you as right it seems to be the best solution, but nexus one has the same fate as other phones.
A new android build only works in an emulator. I just wish it could work the same on every model. The OEMs don't have to open source drivers, just give us blobs that work with every android version. One other problem with some OEMs is the locked bootloader. I build android for a device, but due to locked bootloader I can't flash it....wait what? It is MY phone you piece of ****!!
So imo android is neither "free", nor "open". Where is freedom and openess when I can't flash any given device with any given android version? Sorry, but customisability and theming are just not enough.
Google also claims that android comes free of charge. Well, the source is, but the source alone, without being able to use it on a device, is useless. So, in order to have the latest android I have to pay roughly €500-€600 each year... (maybe once in two years if I choose nexus). Only I see a rip-off here? Google should work with OEMs and make generic builds to run on every device, just like Linux. Android is capable of this for sure.
I still like android, and continue to use it. It can't be compared to wp or ios. But I strongly believe that since we paid our devices we should be able to do whatever we want with it.
Thanks for reading guys and girls. These thoughts wee in my head for some time and I wanted to let them out...
Sent from my amazing 10.1 galaxy tab

You got point there, but nothing in this world is for free. Everybody needs to make money somehow. And that is the way of Google. I am glad with what is Android capable of and the extras we got from them. Compared to the other OS we can say that we are free

Well its pretty much the most "versatile" CELL OS outthere
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk 2

Although OP is right, I consider Andorid much more 'Open' then iOS. Just the sheer number of people developing ROMs, kernels, etc. shows how much easier it is to develop for Android then iOS. How many custom ROMs are there for iOS? The answer is none. So while the separation of versions, different vendors, and different providers may be holding the platform back, nothing is perfect, and from a development perspective, we have to realize that Android id much more 'Free" then iOS.

Jeteroll said:
Although OP is right, I consider Andorid much more 'Open' then iOS. Just the sheer number of people developing ROMs, kernels, etc. shows how much easier it is to develop for Android then iOS. How many custom ROMs are there for iOS? The answer is none. So while the separation of versions, different vendors, and different providers may be holding the platform back, nothing is perfect, and from a development perspective, we have to realize that Android id much more 'Free" then iOS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes! That's absolutely right. I just wanted to point out that it would be best if we could treat android just like our Linux distros. Oh well, I'd like to believe that the time when we will have a trully open source phone is close...
Sent from my amazing 10.1 galaxy tab

Panos_dm said:
Yes! That's absolutely right. I just wanted to point out that it would be best if we could treat android just like our Linux distros. Oh well, I'd like to believe that the time when we will have a trully open source phone is close...
Sent from my amazing 10.1 galaxy tab
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But what about Android users who never used desktop Linux before?

OptimusLove said:
But what about Android users who never used desktop Linux before?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said anything about changing the ui or the interaction with the phone. Just expanding its capabilities.
Sent from my amazing 10.1 galaxy tab

Android is definitely freeer than say iOS. However that comes at a price. The sheer amount of android devices and versions makes it harder for developers to work with it compared to iOS which is limited to a couple of devices.
It just depends on what you are happy to put up with as a user. Wiht Android you are not restricted to what you can do with the phone, whereas on iOS you are serverely restricted.

OptimusLove said:
But what about Android users who never used desktop Linux before?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like its time to put on your learning cap.
Sent for a corner cell in Arkham

Android Fragmentation

What do you think when someone asks you about the worst part about Android? Chances are, Android fragmentation is one of the first things that flies through your head. But I've been thinking about it and I haven't noticed anything to suggest that I am not alone.
It is well known that Android owns the smartphone market globally. It has done this by being open source. This has become it's greatest strength and it greatest weakness. For the first point, it is currently on over a billion devices all over the world. As for the second, I think you can guess: fragmentation. God knows how many different companies have taken Android and twisted it to their laggy and unsupported preference. I would really like to point towards the manufacturers that basically releases a new phone every month to three months. These include Samsung, Blu, and countless others. Here looks like a good place to say that I HATE THOSE LITTLE COMPANIES WITH THEIR CRAP TABLETS ON AMAZON. Anyway, Samsung probably is the worst right? With their big fancy skin and slow updates....well look at Blu! They have at least two dozen phones, tablets, and everything in between, most of which don't get a single update (to the next large update like 5.0, 5.1, etc. This doesn't include small patches, though I'm sure that they don't give many of those). Now I know that this is starting to turn into a rant, but that's OK. I'm almost ready to point out my...point. :l
If any of your friends, co-workers, acquaintances have iPhones, you might have heard the "why does my iPhone 4 on iOS 6 not support this app" complaint (or something similar). I've found that most apps work with Android Jelly Bean, ICS, or even Gingerbread, all of which are as old or older than iOS 6. Android apps support older versions of Android better than iOS does, which has very few fragmentation problems. Quick note: Some people haven't updated their iDevices to the newest version, so please don't give me crap for it. So that is my first supporting argument, which is a little harder to go against than my final point.
Quick recap: there to many different skinned versions of Android. This might seem to contradict my rage about "THOSE LITTLE COMPANIES WITH THEIR CRAP TABLETS ON AMAZON", but no one cares since most people probably agree with me on that. We should all calm down about the slow updates on our devices. Don't get angry at me and say that I must have a Nexus or a Motorola and I've never known the struggle; I have the LG Optimus G AT&T version and it hasn't gotten the official Kitkat release. Actually, I haven't even gotten an official update since 4.1.2. Thanks to custom ROMs, I'm on Lollipop right now. But that isn't the point. Maybe we shouldn't think of Android as "be together, not he same", but more like "be not the same, not together." That didn't quite work the way I hoped...
So I'm starting to think of Android a only a base and that we should think of skinned versions of Android more like Linux and it's distros. Ubuntu is based off Linux, but it isn't Linux (not actually sure if there is a pure Linux...would it be text based?). It rather another creation of it. The candied named Android versions are just new standards and aren't really necessary. I'm pretty sure that Samsung could take the current version and just add the security and new features in as they need it. Well, maybe some dev could correct me on that? Anyway, I'd like to end this summing up this thread (b/c it isn't very organized to my eyes) by saying that it's OK that you don't have the newest update and that Samsung really should add in the new features if not update the whole OS.
:silly: