Related
http://www.xda-developers.com/andro...her-phones-heres-our-frequently-updated-list/
Thread title says it all.
They have the AOSP source code so yes many phones have gingerbread right now but not an official release or anything like that
cyanogenmod 7 nightlies start next week.
Moved to general
Allenfx,
I went to several of the sites and as I understand it what has been done is release the stock Android 3.0 Honeycomb stuff to the developers. But now they will have to tailor it to the hardware of the individual devices. I did see tegra2 stuff where I looked.
So I think you might say it is coming. But it will depend on how long it takes to get all the drivers and settings to work.
It will not be a quick process like the updates for VEGAn, TNT, etc. Much more work and detail to be done.
If this doesn't answer the question, someone straighten me out!
Rev
Nice to know its being worked on
Not sure it makes any sense to spend too much time working on GTablet ports to Gingerbread (i.e. Android 2.3) when I'd expect that Honeycomb (Android 3.0) devices will be out shortly and the Honeycomb source will drop for AOSP use within a couple of weeks of the first device -- which looks like it may be the Motorola Xoom...
As mentioned, Cyanogenmod 7 will be Gingerbread and will likely be the first ported to the GTablet (assuming that there isn't too much driver tweaking involved between Froyo and GB)
2.3-3.0
I think we will see gingerbread in early summer officially released by viewsonic, although modders here will most likely have a great Rom based on 2.3 before then. My bet(just my opinion) we wont see Honeycomb on the G tab until sometime in the fall.
Would love to be wrong and see 3.0 sooner.....
WantADroid said:
I think we will see gingerbread in early summer officially released by viewsonic, although modders here will most likely have a great Rom based on 2.3 before then. My bet(just my opinion) we wont see Honeycomb on the G tab until sometime in the fall.
Would love to be wrong and see 3.0 sooner.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is your source for Gingerbread being available in summer from Viewsonic?
Source Please?
Notice how he said "I think" and "my opinon". The source is himself.
markalanlewis said:
Notice how he said "I think" and "my opinon". The source is himself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was a little joke for my amusement.
But thank you, I think you made my point for me. I had made a comment in another post and gave my opinion and wantadroid asked me to site my source of information (inside info). I posted that I have read... and I got this reply:
"Please give us your inside info on the hardware problems.... I haven't found A thing to make me believe the G tab won't EVENTUALLY get Honeycomb."
I'm just curious but since ICS is coming, what does that mean for us? All I've heard is another UI overhaul for phones to give them more honeycomb, but what do we get? If Hardware Acceleration is in then I would be happy, but there doesn't seem to be anything in it for us tablet users.
Unless I'm missing something.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2393797,00.asp#fbid=eHhpmAndRdICant really say kinda early..heres something I found but still unsure
I hope it means an update and AOSP!!
Not sure what the link was for...... Didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. Sorry. But I'm just not sure if I would be excited about ics on my Xoom.
Imma say that it will be on the original Xoom's without a doubt. I read in an article that ICS will be able to run on older devices, thus it's almost a guarantee the Xoom will see it officially. Annnnd for some reason it does not... have no fear, as the devs will be here to solve that problem! The OG Droid was left out of the update loop awhile back because newer models replaced it, but we still have the most current updates on it thanks to the brilliant devs. Just gotta have some faith in your XDA community, and they will figure something out.
But again, I think the OP wants to know (...like I also do) what's the big improvement gonna be?
As I stated on another recent post, the big deal for me as I see it is that (presumably) the SC for HC will be released and then the ROM goodness will follow. But if it's anything like what happened with Froyo, etc, the Honeycomb custom ROMs will kick the stock Icecream Sandwichs' ass.
-No?
Psychokitty said:
But again, I think the OP wants to know (...like I also do) what's the big improvement gonna be?
As I stated on another recent post, the big deal for me as I see it is that (presumably) the SC for HC will be released and then the ROM goodness will follow. But if it's anything like what happened with Froyo, etc, the Honeycomb custom ROMs will kick the stock Icecream Sandwichs' ass.
-No?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for being the only reply actually related to my post, but Google had stated a long time ago that the SC for hc will never be released as the SC for ics will be released instead. But since phones will get more hc goodness, what do we get?(which is the main question in the topic)
I think at this point, it's a wait-and-see kind of thing.
But I think finally having the source code is the biggest news here. I think it will be the dawning of a golden age for the XOOM, so to speak.
Also, one advantage to the phone side getting lumped in to the same OS is that we will see a boost in apps that are tablet optimized since the devs will be able to work all of it into one .apk instead of focusing on two separate projects.
These are the two things I'm personally looking forward to the most as far as the tablet side goes.
Of course, it would be nice to be surprised, too.
kenfly said:
Thanks for being the only reply actually related to my post, but Google had stated a long time ago that the SC for hc will never be released as the SC for ics will be released instead. But since phones will get more hc goodness, what do we get?(which is the main question in the topic)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I think, since ICS will be open source, we will get additional development for the Xoom, beyond the wonderful feature additions and enhancements we have gotten with the limited HC.
Don't you think so?
From my understanding, Ice Cream Sandwich is an over haul for phones to bring out an honeycomb interface while allowing for tablet support as well and it will be more controlled by the king them self, Google.
What this means? All android devices will now be updated at the same time as it'll be more tightly integrated which means developers will need to start just making widgets for there own devices instead of a completely different interfaces like they do today. In a way, it'll be exactly what Honeycomb tablets are today (if you look at all the honeycomb tablets that's out, the interface is the same, only differences is that others will have widgets and/or wallpapers designed just for there tablets (i.e., samsung has the touchwiz) but can be upgraded all the same).
This is supposed to be more more uniform support and faster updates.
Will this go into effect right away? Probably not since the manufacturers will still need to make to update go through but we should also expect to see faster updates as well (there's still a lot of users out there still waiting on Gingerbread releases for there devices so with this making it more uniformed should allow for faster releases).
This is only from what I've heard, though.
This is from a PC World article this morning:
Although Google has kept its cards close to its vest about ICS, a number of things have been reported about it.
Widgets will be richer and resizable, as they are in the tablet version of Android.
More multitasking will be added to the system and the OS will be open source.
The system will be tailored to take advantage of devices that use the Texas Instrument's OMAP chip.
As with any Android upgrade, what Android devices will be eligible for the new system will remain with the manufacturers, but two good bets for the upgraded OS are the Samsung Nexus S and the Motorola Xoom.
---
I think it is important to understand one thing about ICS. It is intended to reunify the OS on all device types (like iOS). What this means for tablet (and conversely smartphone) users is that app development will improve and we will get better apps. These apps will make it easier to share functions between your tablet and your smartphone.
We would have found out more next Tuesday, but the announcements for ICS have been postponed. The postponement was for a good reason though. We still don't know what the reschedule date will be, other than sometime this month.
I really want some ICS love! Anyone know any thing about any ROMs based off of ICS or.... even better.... CM9? I am new to this rooting thing so...
Wow. Just search through all the topics in the skyrocket forum and you'll find your answer
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
This is like some kind of Platonic Ideal of a post here.
But, I'm pretty sure they're going to release ICS at the big Samsung/AT&T/Google event tomorrow.
Savitt said:
I really want some ICS love! Anyone know any thing about any ROMs based off of ICS or.... even better.... CM9? I am new to this rooting thing so...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before you ask a question, please search the forum first, therefore other members will not give you harsh answers.
If you are looking for answers to rooting your device, please go here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1383464
If you are searching for rom developments, please go here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1383
If you are searching for information on Ice Cream Sandwich, best luck is to search google or in the general section. There is NO certain release date of when ICS will be available, but there are rumors and some information that states it will be in Q1 of 2012.
Good luck to you.
Please press "Thanks" if I have helped you in anyway.
What event? Do you have a link. ?
I think he's referring to the CES 2012 event on January 9th.
Oh thats not tomarrow lol tomarrow is the 5th . Darn i was hoping there was some att/sammy event tomarrow.
Phoneguy589 said:
I think he's referring to the CES 2012 event on January 9th.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed. That is the only upcoming event that I am aware of.
I wasn't...LOL. I can't afford to buy another phone. I just pre-ordered the Transformer Prime so I'm out of money...so my wife says.
silver03wrx said:
Oh thats not tomarrow lol tomarrow is the 5th . Darn i was hoping there was some att/sammy event tomarrow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha me too my friend l lol the hope jumped up through my body!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
No, I was being mean. There's not event tomorrow and ICS is but a distant dream. Enjoy your device now and don't sweat the OS version number. ICS is not going to give much more over what you have now.
I'm sort of with the OP in wanting to know about any rom based on ICS. I've searched the forums and google to no avail. I'm seeing other devices getting a version of CM9, but nothing for the Skyrocket yet.
So, my question is this: Is anyone working on an ICS rom for the Skyrocket such as CM9? If I had the know-how I'd be all over that since we have such a great and powerful phone. I know AT&T and Samsung will eventually release ICS, but it'll never compare to the likes of CyanogenMod.
No no ones working on it. Why make a hacked up version. Thats not very functional. When our update is just around the corner. We will see ics, and mabye cm9 but.not until theres a leak for the skyrocket or the actuall update.
silver03wrx said:
No no ones working on it. Why make a hacked up version. Thats not very functional. When our update is just around the corner. We will see ics, and mabye cm9 but.not until theres a leak for the skyrocket or the actuall update.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Like some others I'm an impatient type...especially after using ICS on my HTC Incredible. Can hardly wait to have it on my Skyrocket, but will sit quietly (maybe) and wait.
Not saying this to start a flamewar or anything but why are so many people with talent focusing on old roms and tweaks and not ICS? IMO this is what is hurting Android with better development etc, it seems like iOS hacking and tweeking seems to be more tight-knit and innovative, where Android seems to just have (almost) the same thing over and over again.
Now, I am not saying it is the same, there are obviously very difficult functions and programming that needs to be done, but I don't get why all efforts by everyone wouldn't be focused on ICS since it is what Android needs, a fresh new OS that could change the game.
Turbojugend said:
Not saying this to start a flamewar or anything but why are so many people with talent focusing on old roms and tweaks and not ICS? IMO this is what is hurting Android with better development etc, it seems like iOS hacking and tweeking seems to be more tight-knit and innovative, where Android seems to just have (almost) the same thing over and over again.
Now, I am not saying it is the same, there are obviously very difficult functions and programming that needs to be done, but I don't get why all efforts by everyone wouldn't be focused on ICS since it is what Android needs, a fresh new OS that could change the game.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so you want us to randomly pull kernel source for ICS (linux kernel 3.0+) out of our ass?
samsung has not provided us with enough driver libraries/binary blobs that work properly with AOSP GB, let alone ICS.
the problem here is the manufacturers. they control the proprietary hardware/drivers we need to focus attention on something. we could hack something together, but it wouldnt be worth a crap, and by the time we got something working half decent, Official would be dropped on us with source and we would have to basically start fresh....
tl;dr: it is not worth the time it takes to try to hack something together until we have 'something' from samsung.
Pirateghost said:
so you want us to randomly pull kernel source for ICS (linux kernel 3.0+) out of our ass?
samsung has not provided us with enough driver libraries/binary blobs that work properly with AOSP GB, let alone ICS.
the problem here is the manufacturers. they control the proprietary hardware/drivers we need to focus attention on something. we could hack something together, but it wouldnt be worth a crap, and by the time we got something working half decent, Official would be dropped on us with source and we would have to basically start fresh....
tl;dr: it is not worth the time it takes to try to hack something together until we have 'something' from samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly its not as simple as ics source code being out, you also need proper drivers for the hardware
Pirateghost said:
so you want us to randomly pull kernel source for ICS (linux kernel 3.0+) out of our ass?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That answers a lot for me, like I said I am not too familiar coming from Iphone (day one, I just got a Samsung Galaxy S II LTE (Skyrocket))
So obviously you need the kernel to work with the OS, I didn't know they were not released.
draztikrhymez said:
....you also need proper drivers for the hardware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it harder for phone hardware? Seems to be a lot of open source, or scene made drivers for, say video cards.
Turbojugend said:
That answers a lot for me, like I said I am not too familiar coming from Iphone (day one, I just got a Samsung Galaxy S II LTE (Skyrocket))
So obviously you need the kernel to work with the OS, I didn't know they were not released.
So what exactly is open about Android then? If you are at the mercy of the manufacture's to release the kernel, how is that open?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android itself is OPEN. you can go and build your very own version of 4.0 ICS right now from source code. there are very few phones you can STABLY and RELIABLY run it on though.
The NEXUS line of phones exists for a reason. they are untouched by carriers (verizon teabagged the Galaxy Nexus a little), and do not have some stupid overlay on them. they are developer devices in that it is the first phone to get android updates straight from google (no manufacturer interference required).
every other phone is tainted with a manufacturer's UI. Touchwiz on Samsung phones (galaxy nexus is a samsung but they provided the hardware not the software), Sense on HTC, 'non-blur' on Motorola, whatever Sony calls theirs...lol, LG, etc
on top of that tainted Android interface is a carrier branding or lockdown (doesnt apply to the entire world, but im only referring to US here)
so google releases new version of Android
manufacturers build phone, and customize android to fit their model (this is where android almost stops being OPEN)
carriers get a hold of the manufacturers build of android and tweak and modify it themselves (more than likely they just tell the manufacturers what they want), as you know they love to include bloat and lock it down from the user
you receive your android phone after it has gone through all those steps....long process huh? we dont get updates to newer versions as quickly because of that long process...and they would rather us buy new phones instead of improving perfectly good hardware.
Android is open in the sense that manufacturers can use it however they wish, within reason. it is not necessarily meant to be 'open' to the average end user, and manufacturers dont want you messing with the phone they built. its the reason XDA is what it is today, albeit with roots deep in WinMo hacking.
Hey Pirateghost Really great in-depth info with your permission I would like to add this info for noobs here.
Pirateghost said:
Android itself is OPEN. you can go and build your very own version of 4.0 ICS right now from source code. there are very few phones you can STABLY and RELIABLY run it on though.
The NEXUS line of phones exists for a reason. they are untouched by carriers (verizon teabagged the Galaxy Nexus a little), and do not have some stupid overlay on them. they are developer devices in that it is the first phone to get android updates straight from google (no manufacturer interference required).
every other phone is tainted with a manufacturer's UI. Touchwiz on Samsung phones (galaxy nexus is a samsung but they provided the hardware not the software), Sense on HTC, 'non-blur' on Motorola, whatever Sony calls theirs...lol, LG, etc
on top of that tainted Android interface is a carrier branding or lockdown (doesnt apply to the entire world, but im only referring to US here)
so google releases new version of Android
manufacturers build phone, and customize android to fit their model (this is where android almost stops being OPEN)
carriers get a hold of the manufacturers build of android and tweak and modify it themselves (more than likely they just tell the manufacturers what they want), as you know they love to include bloat and lock it down from the user
you receive your android phone after it has gone through all those steps....long process huh? we dont get updates to newer versions as quickly because of that long process...and they would rather us buy new phones instead of improving perfectly good hardware.
Android is open in the sense that manufacturers can use it however they wish, within reason. it is not necessarily meant to be 'open' to the average end user, and manufacturers dont want you messing with the phone they built. its the reason XDA is what it is today, albeit with roots deep in WinMo hacking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...of the year 2015.
moderators: I'm very sorry (not really) for the sarcastic spam, but I've grown more and more unhappy with Samsung in regards to them keeping their promises. At this point, other than my P6210 tablet, I've sold every single one of my android devices that are controlled by samsung.
I still have a galaxy nexus, but thankfully the source for that is controlled by google - not samsung.
Q1 has come and gone. No ICS. Hell, they STILL won't release the source for the damn wifi driver! The same source that qualcomm (who owns atheros) released under the GPL, but samsung says that they (samsung) get to choose between GPL and BSD and they are choosing BSD. Why? What good does it do Samsung to NOT release the source? If Apple.. er.. samsung wants to treat their customers this way, I can take my future business elsewhere.
If I wanted a closed platform, I'd buy an iphone or ipad.
Gary
I agree
And I feel that with the increasingly number of similar tablets that Samsung puts in the market, the hopes for further updates are extremely low. Maybe we will have a first revision of ICS, but better it is good, because I don't think they will fix whatever is wrong.
I will agree with Gary in terms of how closed Samsung is making their "open" device. Though that is coming from a developer. From a consumer perspective having or not having ICS makes no difference to them. Unfortunately as our world becomes more tech illiterate the more these devices will become more and more locked down and cause stagnation in innovation.
Sorry to hear you leaving though you were a great help here.
I'm not leaving the p6210... its the only samsung device I'm keeping. However, until and unless Samsung gives me something more than incomplete and outdated source, there's nothing else for me to do. I can't fix the wifi bugs, because Apple..er..Samsung won't release the source.
If they ever get around to pushing out ICS (big "if" there) AND they release the source, I'll play with that. I might even find the time to just port AOSP (or even better - AOKP) over.
After using a galaxy nexus for a few days, I don't miss touchwiz at all.
Well that's good to hear... It sounded as if you were leaving us there. Though supposedly someone is making headway with wifi with the cm9 ics build. You might want to check in there.
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
Even Huawei Springboard (my 2nd tablet) already received ICS, I also disappointed a bigger company like Samsung get update slower then Huawei
Sent from my GT-P6200 using XDA App
fewt said:
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GPL is not a driver, GPL is a open source licence.
Yes, I know the difference between GPL & BSD (both are OSS licenses.) I was asking if the GPL version would work if it was updated with the p6210 WIFI PCI ID.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
fewt said:
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For doing an AOSP type implementation where 100% of the source is available, yes - it might.
For trying to do a kernel that would work with the rest of the samsung firmware, no - it won't. There are 3 parts that have to work together here: the actual driver (ar6003.ko in samsung's firmware), wpa_supplicant (which, on stock p6210 implementations has a ar6003 specific interface compiled in) and the rest of the firmware (settings page, etc.)
The "rest of the firmware" calls wpa_supplicant to do the dirty work of the wifi driver, and wpa_supplicant makes calls directly into the driver.
I'm sure I typed all this before, in another thread months ago, and went into great detail. The short version is this:
I need the source for the ar6003 driver and the source for wpa_supplicant (for the ar6003 interface.) Both of these are released in "GPL/BSD" dual licenses by their authors, meaning that samsung can, in theory, choose which license model to use when they include that code. Samsung has told me that they are claiming BSD for both and therefore will refuse to release the source to any modifications that might be included.
I've tried pulling in the generic ar600x code from mainline linux, but it wasn't working for me with the rest of the samsung stuff... and I simply don't have the time to mess with that for endless hours just because samsung is trying to be apple-like and make android a closed platform.
garyd9 said:
For doing an AOSP type implementation where 100% of the source is available, yes - it might.
For trying to do a kernel that would work with the rest of the samsung firmware, no - it won't. There are 3 parts that have to work together here: the actual driver (ar6003.ko in samsung's firmware), wpa_supplicant (which, on stock p6210 implementations has a ar6003 specific interface compiled in) and the rest of the firmware (settings page, etc.)
The "rest of the firmware" calls wpa_supplicant to do the dirty work of the wifi driver, and wpa_supplicant makes calls directly into the driver.
I'm sure I typed all this before, in another thread months ago, and went into great detail. The short version is this:
I need the source for the ar6003 driver and the source for wpa_supplicant (for the ar6003 interface.) Both of these are released in "GPL/BSD" dual licenses by their authors, meaning that samsung can, in theory, choose which license model to use when they include that code. Samsung has told me that they are claiming BSD for both and therefore will refuse to release the source to any modifications that might be included.
I've tried pulling in the generic ar600x code from mainline linux, but it wasn't working for me with the rest of the samsung stuff... and I simply don't have the time to mess with that for endless hours just because samsung is trying to be apple-like and make android a closed platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wpa_supplicant is what's probably killing you if it has been forked, more so than the driver itself. Makes perfect sense why it is such a pain.
Do you know of a thread somewhere that describes how to get started building kernels for these things? I'll play around with it, I don't have much experience with Android outside of some hacking with adb but I know my way around Linux as well as most.
I'll start poking around more, but thanks for the short version it is appreciated.
Zadeis said:
I will agree with Gary in terms of how closed Samsung is making their "open" device. Though that is coming from a developer. From a consumer perspective having or not having ICS makes no difference to them. Unfortunately as our world becomes more tech illiterate the more these devices will become more and more locked down and cause stagnation in innovation.
Sorry to hear you leaving though you were a great help here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree that consumers don't care. Call me naive that I didn't scour the internet deep enough to find good, honest feedback, but the only reason I chose the more expensive Samsung 7.0 was its IR blaster and its advertised ability to control the home theater components with it. That feature is bolded and blaster all over Samsungs feature list and descriptions.
So I get me GT7+ 2 months ago and how does it work? It doesn't do what I want. Peel, the only IR app available for the tablet force closes every time, and updates have proven fruitless. I email the developers of Peel and what do they tell me? They won't fix (or can't fix) the problem until they get updated ICS drivers for the SG7+. So for now I am **** out of luck until Samsung updates. I try to get a hold of Samsung tech support and get nowhere. The best I got was from a "Live Chat" bot that said ICS will be available in the future. No more specifics could be given.
And to add insult to injury, the screen on my Tab is fritzing out and needs to be sent back for service already. On paper the SG7+ looks great but for me it's been nothing but a hassle.
I want ICS so I can have everything work as advertised. It probably never will so I'll chalk this one up to experience and sell the POS.
Just remember that samsung never actually promised ICS for this device. There were "leaks" (completely unofficial) and "targets", but never any legally binding promises.
Why should samsung spend the money developing ICS for people who own a device when that device is ALREADY 6 months old? At the rate samsung is coming out with new devices, they need that money developing for newer devices.
In a sick kind of way, this makes sense to me. (Samsung seems to be forgetting, however, that I buy a new tablet every 6-12 months and my next one will NOT be a samsung device due to the experience I'm having with them over this one.)
What doesn't make sense to me is the way that they are withholding source code. It just doesn't profit them or even save them money. There isn't even anything proprietary in the ar6003 drivers and wpa_supplicant code. No trade secrets. It's almost as if they are deliberately chasing AWAY technical people... but that just doesn't make sense when your primary OS is an open one that depends on geeks.
The only thing I can figure out is that they are, in fact, hiding something. Perhaps they are embarassed about the programming? Perhaps they cut corners and don't want it to become public knowledge? Maybe they just have a nasty streak and are deliberately trying to prevent any repeat customers. I'm just taking wild guesses here - I honestly don't know.
The flip side to that is that you are aware of the fact ICS will have an impact to functionality on a current situation. Most people won't, as you put it, scour the internet to find the solution or future solution, to a problem and actually understand that an OS update will have a great impact on their experience with their current product. I had a discussion with someone the other day on this mindset and how it has been driving me nuts. (This person also considers them self an average user and not like most of us on this forum) You know that android 3.2 is on your your Tablet. YOU know what android 4.0 ICS is and how it impacts you. Most don't. That is what I was trying to conveying.
Though I am surprised that you are having issues with it on account I have had no problems with it (even though I haven't used it much).
P.S. Sorry about the irritated tone I do not mean any harm it's just a sore subject with me :/
Zadeis said:
The flip side to that is that you are aware of the fact ICS will have an impact to functionality on a current situation. Most people won't, as you put it, scour the internet to find the solution or future solution, to a problem and actually understand that an OS update will have a great impact on their experience with their current product. I had a discussion with someone the other day on this mindset and how it has been driving me nuts. (This person also considers them self an average user and not like most of us on this forum) You know that android 3.2 is on your your Tablet. YOU know what android 4.0 ICS is and how it impacts you. Most don't. That is what I was trying to conveying.
Though I am surprised that you are having issues with it on account I have had no problems with it (even though I haven't used it much).
P.S. Sorry about the irritated tone I do not mean any harm it's just a sore subject with me :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest release od Peel finally has it working on such a basic level that's it is no more useful that the remoate that shipped with my television. It can tuen my TV on & off, it can change channels, and it can adjust the volume of the television. When I want to add another device such as a cable box or AV receiver? No go. It will power the device in setup but it will not save it to the application for future use. I blame buggy peel software. It can obviously fire the codes it needs but they're going to blame Samsung and say it's a driver issue. The only way I could believe that possible is if the radio frequencies vthe two devices used were too close together to be discerened by the GT7+. Regardless, it's a feature which does not work as it explicitly advertises and, as Gary points out multiple times, they refuse to release the source code so crafty & eager developers (which I am not) can make their own functional software.
Peel doesn't use RF... it fires the infrared emitter on the device. I actually played with the "peel" software once. For about 10 minutes. I found it a complete joke and froze the software. I never really cared much about that aspect of the tablet. To me, its for reading ebooks, playing games, and "tinkering." Okay, more for tinkering - but don't tell my wife that. She already yells at me about how expensive my toys are.
garyd9 said:
Peel doesn't use RF... it fires the infrared emitter on the device. I actually played with the "peel" software once. For about 10 minutes. I found it a complete joke and froze the software. I never really cared much about that aspect of the tablet. To me, its for reading ebooks, playing games, and "tinkering." Okay, more for tinkering - but don't tell my wife that. She already yells at me about how expensive my toys are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought this Tab for the exact same reasons, I was actually going to get the Kindle Fire as all I really wanted was an e-reader, but the IR Blaster changed my mind. I set up Peel for my home theater and used it once than decided my universal remote for my dish actually works better and haven't used it since. I came in knowing from reading teh threads that Samsung wasn't the greatest at support or putting out updates but all I wanted really was the ability to root it to remove bloatware. IMO HTC devices are much better and easier to customize as HTC is more open about sharing the source code and also provide their own program to unlock their devices. But they at one time were as tight fisted as Samsung and getting updates out of them is still excruciatingly slow. Hopefully Verizon will be getting a One X device soon as I'm up for an upgrade in July and right now the best HTC device they have is the Rezound.
fcorona76 said:
The latest release od Peel finally has it working on such a basic level that's it is no more useful that the remoate that shipped with my television. It can tuen my TV on & off, it can change channels, and it can adjust the volume of the television. When I want to add another device such as a cable box or AV receiver? No go. It will power the device in setup but it will not save it to the application for future use. I blame buggy peel software. It can obviously fire the codes it needs but they're going to blame Samsung and say it's a driver issue. The only way I could believe that possible is if the radio frequencies vthe two devices used were too close together to be discerened by the GT7+. Regardless, it's a feature which does not work as it explicitly advertises and, as Gary points out multiple times, they refuse to release the source code so crafty & eager developers (which I am not) can make their own functional software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would Peel blame Samsung? From what you described, the hardware is working properly but the functionality to save multiple devices is missing in software.
I think this is what Zadeis is trying to get at with regards to expectations - Peel sounds like it's either broken or not designed to meet your expectations. Either way, it's not something that's going to be addressed by an ICS update.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that the GT7+ doesn't work as advertised. But the proper course of action here is to seek remedy with Samsung, not wait for a software update. When you get a bad meal at a restaurant, you send it back. You don't eat it, then hope dessert will be better.
Apologies if my tone comes off as harsh or unsympathetic, I do not intend to be either, but pinning too many hopes on to an OS update is just setting yourself up for more frustration down the road when it doesn't match your expectations.
---------- Post added at 06:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------
garyd9 said:
What doesn't make sense to me is the way that they are withholding source code. It just doesn't profit them or even save them money. There isn't even anything proprietary in the ar6003 drivers and wpa_supplicant code. No trade secrets. It's almost as if they are deliberately chasing AWAY technical people... but that just doesn't make sense when your primary OS is an open one that depends on geeks.
The only thing I can figure out is that they are, in fact, hiding something. Perhaps they are embarassed about the programming? Perhaps they cut corners and don't want it to become public knowledge? Maybe they just have a nasty streak and are deliberately trying to prevent any repeat customers. I'm just taking wild guesses here - I honestly don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you already answered this question in what you meant as a joke earlier... Apple.
Samsung makes Apple's SoCs. GT7+ uses Samsung's own Exynos SoC. I think chances are good that Exynos and the A5 share IP and therefore, Samsung might be withholding the source code because the modifications they've made include IP that is covered by whatever NDA exists between Apple and Samsung.
so what is the latest news on ics update for the 6210 ? , guessing samsung said no ics love for us ? , or .... just wondering what latest news is ..
h2g2 said:
Samsung makes Apple's SoCs. GT7+ uses Samsung's own Exynos SoC. I think chances are good that Exynos and the A5 share IP and therefore, Samsung might be withholding the source code because the modifications they've made include IP that is covered by whatever NDA exists between Apple and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are a bit confused, I think. The exynos isn't the problem. While samsung hasn't exactly given us full technical documents on it, they added support for it in the mainline linux kernel - publishing enough source. They pretty much HAD to do that, as CPU support in linux can't be done as a module, and therefore must be opensourced in order to run linux at all.
The issue, at least in the case of the 7+, is the wifi chip/driver. It's an atheros 6003 chip. Qualcomm (who owns atheros) released the driver for that under the GPL. Samsung has claimed to me that they (samsung) are licensing it from Atheros under terms that allow them to choose to re-release the driver under either GPL or BSD terms and that they (samsung) are choosing the BSD model (which doesn't require the release of source.) In theory, Qualcomm could FORCE samsung to release the source, but I doubt qualcomm really cares too much. In fact, the module itself as released in binary form in the 7+ firmware (at least up to LA1) actually claims GPL licensing. (Can be verified by using modinfo on ar6000.ko) However, only the copyright holder can enforce the licensing.
A nearly identical situation exists with wpa_supplicant and the intergration between ar6003 and wpa_supplicant. In that case, I know for a fact that the author allows either GPL or BSD terms so wouldn't force the issue.
Those are the only two things I, personally, care about right now. If I had the source for those two parts, I'd be able to not only FIX the wifi issues on the p6210, but also enchance the functionality. I'm also unable to make certain unrelated changes to the kernel, as doing so without being able to recompile the ar6003 driver will render the existing ar6003 non-functional.
Yes I read reviews.
I owned a Oneplus One years ago and I gave up waiting for an upgrade and bought something else.
I here that OnePlus is better at upgrading today than they were four years ago. Is this true ?
Like I said I read and I know OnePlus 6 has available an Oxygen Beta (Android Pie) but it has not been officially released ? Is true if I buy a device I may need to wait several months until they Officially release Android Pie.
Now I know you will say just run the Beta it is stable but here is the make of break question I need Android Pay and Wear OS. My experience tells me if I flash a Beta required apps like Android Pay and Wear OS may stop working.
If I buy today I think the safe thing will be to wait for Oxygen OS (Android Pie) to be released. Customer ROMs or Beta OS will break for sure Android Pay.
Other than hating to wait for official releases this device looks fine.
No wireless charging sucks but I can live without it.
The Pixel camera maybe better but I read the OnePlus 6 camera is not bad
The OnePlus 6T will be out in November but ..... THERE IS ALWAYS A NEW DEVICE around the corner. Wait for the OnePlus 6T..... oh but it a few months this will be released.
This device gives better value for the dollar.
Android pay is not working in Beta, you should read the OP forum in the beta thread to see all the things being said.
The 6T rumor is that it will come with Pie installed but since it isn't out yet nobody knows if it will really be installed out from the gate.
Personally, I think Oxygen OS is a mess and from what I see on the threads for Pie, they're just patching it yet again and putting a new UI on it over starting from scratch. All they keep doing is carrying over bugs from previous versions and then trying to re-patch them again for either the new device model and/or new Android system. Considering treble is now installed on both the 5 and 6, IMO they should have started fresh and should have been working on coding an entirely new OS 2 years ago.
If I were you, I would wait until Pie is released in the fall and see how it goes and what the complaints are before buying anything.
Official Pie has been released, you can already download the firmware and flash it.
As for updates and kernel source upload speed, the OP6 gets both the fastest among all devices I had.
As for taking pics, use the gcam port for great picture quality and the oos cam for [email protected] recording.
The Official build for Android pie has been released today which is nice as it took only about 1.5 months after Google released it themselves.
Thanks I jumped on a sale, and ordered one.
I am not even sure at this point I care about the Pixel, it may have a better camera but I am sure ordering the One Plus 6 I saved hundreds of dollars.
The OP 6T is set to be released in the next couple months. Unless you're in need of a headphone jack, I'd wait to get the latest version.
floridaman said:
Android pay is not working in Beta, you should read the OP forum in the beta thread to see all the things being said.
The 6T rumor is that it will come with Pie installed but since it isn't out yet nobody knows if it will really be installed out from the gate.
Personally, I think Oxygen OS is a mess and from what I see on the threads for Pie, they're just patching it yet again and putting a new UI on it over starting from scratch. All they keep doing is carrying over bugs from previous versions and then trying to re-patch them again for either the new device model and/or new Android system. Considering treble is now installed on both the 5 and 6, IMO they should have started fresh and should have been working on coding an entirely new OS 2 years ago.
If I were you, I would wait until Pie is released in the fall and see how it goes and what the complaints are before buying anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
... That's not how android works .. even less since treble... You don't simply "patch" your Android version up to date, especially when it's a major revision that is changed. Most oftenly they start from scratch with some cherry picks. And rebuild blobs whenever necessary... files come from AOSP in it's normal form, then every time android releases a new version, this has to be merged with the current existing release yes, but that means that every difference from x that y has changes into x (x being the updated file, any of em, Y Being the old, already installed one)... Bringing something on /system over from one of the earlier oos, to a newer oos, would break alot. I mean.. we can't even run ob3 custom kernels on GM pie... Because changes... Having something stick around doesn't mean it hasn't been touched, porting is another thing, and there is also maybe a chance that it's the same group of devs handling this as it was back then. It's still oneplus. Also. Oos isnt nearly as bad as you make it sound.. Oos is by far the best fork of Android I've seen launched as an OEM specific android experience, and I've seen alot of phones. Simply due to its close resemblance of the pure experience, with it's small addins for simplicity, performance, and ease of use. The UI is Google's own new material guideline. Not oneplus'. And there was 3 pie betas wherein other Companies reach up to 18-20 betas... Are we owning the same device?
efinityy said:
... That's not how android works .. even less since treble... You don't simply "patch" your Android version up to date, especially when it's a major revision that is changed. Most oftenly they start from scratch with some cherry picks. And rebuild blobs whenever necessary... files come from AOSP in it's normal form, then every time android releases a new version, this has to be merged with the current existing release yes, but that means that every difference from x that y has changes into x (x being the updated file, any of em, Y Being the old, already installed one)... Bringing something on /system over from one of the earlier oos, to a newer oos, would break alot. I mean.. we can't even run ob3 custom kernels on GM pie... Because changes... Having something stick around doesn't mean it hasn't been touched, porting is another thing, and there is also maybe a chance that it's the same group of devs handling this as it was back then. It's still oneplus. Also. Oos isnt nearly as bad as you make it sound.. Oos is by far the best fork of Android I've seen launched as an OEM specific android experience, and I've seen alot of phones. Simply due to its close resemblance of the pure experience, with it's small addins for simplicity, performance, and ease of use. The UI is Google's own new material guideline. Not oneplus'. And there was 3 pie betas wherein other Companies reach up to 18-20 betas... Are we owning the same device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't say they were patching Android, I said they were patching their OS. Yes, I know they are 2 different things and I know things are working differently since treble. They can fully keep taking their Oxygen OS and throwing it over the latest version of Android and patch it to make it work with the new code, which is exactly what they've been doing. Yes, they get a guideline, that doesn't mean they are stuck doing only that and making no improvements/changes. There are literally hundreds of options they can code for, but don't.
I'm sorry, but it's not only simple, it's downright beyond basic even to what Google turns on and codes for features. Spare me the dribble of "pure android" please, it's a ridiculous mantra. I've not put the beta's on my phone but have been reading the forum and I have not yet received the stable update that has been just pushed out. But I already see some of the complaints coming in and no I'm not talking about the nonsensical postings.
If you think that OP is doing a great job on their OS, then you and I clearly have different standards. I'm glad you love it so much, to each his own in that regard.
floridaman said:
I didn't say they were patching Android, I said they were patching their OS. Yes, I know they are 2 different things and I know things are working differently since treble. They can fully keep taking their Oxygen OS and throwing it over the latest version of Android and patch it to make it work with the new code, which is exactly what they've been doing. Yes, they get a guideline, that doesn't mean they are stuck doing only that and making no improvements/changes. There are literally hundreds of options they can code for, but don't.
I'm sorry, but it's not only simple, it's downright beyond basic even to what Google turns on and codes for features. Spare me the dribble of "pure android" please, it's a ridiculous mantra. I've not put the beta's on my phone but have been reading the forum and I have not yet received the stable update that has been just pushed out. But I already see some of the complaints coming in and no I'm not talking about the nonsensical postings.
If you think that OP is doing a great job on their OS, then you and I clearly have different standards. I'm glad you love it so much, to each his own in that regard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To each their own indeed. And it's not a ridiculous mantra.just as countless many others, I do prefer to be able to switch over countless amounts of phone but still have the same familiar, debloated and resource friendly UI. Having to learning all the different "UX"s gets pretty dull, as soon as ie Samsung gets settled with one, they change design language. And that, for me, is a deal breaker, I don't feel like having to relearn the same basics over and over, and where I usually have to install another AOSP based ROM on ie my Xperia, HTC or Samsung. Whilst the OnePlus just has the familiarity and non-rubbish feel to it that AOSP has. But don't get me wrong, as you said, to each their own, and if it wasn't for people like you that don't want the stock feel, we wouldn't have custom kernels and/or ROMs. And I've ran all the betas except ob3 and currently run the stable... And I've yet to run into any app not loading, crashing, or features not working as intended. But I would recommend not jumping on the bandwagon as I regret doing so, until there are some more data and user reviews of the stable branch. And I'm not trusting anyone doing a forum post not being previously recognized or a proper reviewer. The stable build is solid, but it's still early to tell.