Google Outlines Feature Set For Android 2.2

evdotorrey writes "Google announced new features and improvements for Android 2.2. New features include Flash and HTML 5 support, faster browser performance using the V8 engine, Microsoft Exchange support, a Portable Hotspot feature that makes your phone a Wi-Fi hotspot, and many more exciting features." An anonymous reader adds some more on the new release, codenamed Froyo: "Google claims the operating system will be from two to five times faster thanks to advances made in the compilers and the Dalvik virtual machine it uses, and how it is ported to new processors and platforms. On the enterprise front the new operating system comes with full support for Microsoft Exchange, including access to the global address book and the ability to translate native security features to mobile handsets. APIs have also been added to allow controls such as the automatic wiping of missing handsets and other remote management features. Google is also making its voice translation and search APIs open to developers, and showed off an application developed for the handset that allowed real time translation from English to French."

Comments

Anonymous Cow

[Anonymous Coward]

Even though I've seen these features a hundred times, I can't help but take another peek at what the future without apple in my pocket may hold.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[beav007]

I just bought an HTC Desire, which is running Android 2.1. It's absolutely fantastic to use.

I have but one complaint. The RSS reader is a PITA to put a feed into unless it's a predefined/preapproved feed.

Dear Google;

Please, can we have an icon/button somewhere on the browser that shows that there are RSS feeds associated with that web page, and an integrated way to subscribe to them?

Thanks

-beav007

Re:Anonymous Cow

[a.ameri]

Try NewsRob. It syncs with Google Reader and is just a pleasure to use.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[mjwx]

Even though I've seen these features a hundred times, I can't help but take another peek at what the future without apple in my pocket may hold.

Every time I to look into my future I find the screen blocked by the sheer amount of cash I have by not having apple in my pocket.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[RMH101]

This is a fair point - the cost of Apple devices is significantly higher.
I just got an HTC Desire for £192 on a 24 month contract at £15/month. Compare to Apple, where my 3G cost me similar money, but on a £35/month contract. On the plus side, I sold my 3G for just over £200 second hand, so I'm win-win.
When I was debating the switch from Apple to Android, I thought "I can wait for the new iPhone release, pay a couple of hundred quid for the handset and be on a £35/month contract, or I can halve my monthly tarrif and basically get the phone free if I sell my old iPhone on eBay.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Hannes2000]

I just use the Google Reader mobile webapp, which really works like a charm.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[bemymonkey]

Same here - works pretty well, but I'd like to not have to mark articles as read manually...

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Spad]

It doesn't *make* you do anything. Don't want Flash? Don't download the Flash app from the marketplace.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[ElKry]

A crappy browser that makes you look at crappy Flash?

Independently of how arguable the "crappy browser" part is (I haven't found a better or faster browser for a mobile device yet - maybe my needs are minimal on a minimalistic device?), no one is making you look at anything - you can disable Flash on Android 2.2 and continue your flashless experience, which I will probably do as soon as it's officially rolled out.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[mdm-adph]

I'm not familiar with an RSS reader that's built-into Android (and that Google would even have anything to do with) -- are you sure it's not HTC's invention? You might need to be addressing your letter to them.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[bFusion]

I kind of feel this is obligatory :)

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/5/28/

Re:Anonymous Cow

[jmpeax]

I have a Desire too - it is an HTC app. The fastest way to do what the GP wants is to copy the RSS URL from the browser and then paste it into the RSS reader app. Integrated RSS support would be nice though!

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Anonymous Coward]

hey retard, flash is integrated into android 2.2. you won't have a choice about it.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[jedidiah]

This is rich coming from someone that's a shill for a product that requires proprietary binaries in place of proper websites.

Do any of the mobile devices have a non "mobile" style browser that doesn't feel like a throwback to Lynx? (iThing doesn't)

That would be a nice start.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[zeroshade]

Do some research. Flash isn't going to be built into the OS so you'd be free to not download it, or if you get a new phone that comes packaged with it, you'd be free to uninstall it.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[suggsjc]

I haven't found a better or faster browser for a mobile device yet

Tried microB (the default browser) on the N900?

FWIW, I'm also really liking Opeara Mobile 10 (on the n900) as well. I particularly like it in portrait mode as it scales very well horizontally and you are able to see a considerable amount vertically.

I don't think either one is "perfect" as I use both depending on what I'm trying to do. I'm finding Opera a little faster to render at the expense of a little stability (and no flash, which I'm ok with). MicroB is rock solid and renders everything just like on a desktop browser (including flash), and I can use it to access all of my online banking.

Conclusion, we aren't there yet, but getting closer. I doubt there will ever be (or should be) "one true" browser as competition is good and everyone is going to have personal needs/preferences. Also, froyo looks interesting...but I think the carriers are going to make it or break it (at least for the non-custom rom crowd).

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Anonymous Coward]

hey retard, flash is integrated into android 2.2. you won't have a choice about it.

hey moron, flash is preinstalled in 2.2. there's a difference.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[teslafreak]

Google provides a method for catering the user experience to the end-user's desires. There is a difference between allowing someone to make a bad UI, and simply telling them they're stupid, so you have made the UI for them (and won't allow any changes). If you happen to be so inclined as to poorly configure your Android device, that isn't really Google's fault. I for one, like to actually have a choice in the matter. As it happens, I like the usability of my Nexus One very much. This is such a tired debate anyway. If you aren't intelligent enough to setup a phone, it's not like Google is keeping you from buying an iPhone

Re:Anonymous Cow

[thrift24]

The Dolphin browser does what you are asking for and has a lot of other nice features the default browser doesn't have.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

no one is making you look at anything - you can disable Flash on Android 2.2 and continue your flashless experience

One could say the same thing about IE only sites. No one is making you look at them on Windows. You can disable IE and continue the cross-platform experience. This, of course, ignores that your having access to IE influences Web developers and results in more IE only pages being created.

Now don't get me wrong. I fully support Google's choice to support Flash and to let users install anything they want. I just wish they made a different choice and would exclude it by default from Android and Chrome as a way of trying to push it out of the market and provide incentive for a more rapid move towards open standards. As it is, Apple is carrying the ball, clearly because it is in their own best interests moving forward, but they're taking a lot of flack for a move that in the long term helps all of us.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Anonymous Coward]

haha, the person mentioning the crappy browser part doesn't even realize that the iPhone, Android, new BB browsers are all based on Webkit. In effect, all those browsers are crappy! =P

Re:Anonymous Cow

[shutdown -p now]

Opera Mobile is coming to Android, by the way. Just not there yet, but they have announced that it's in works a while ago.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[bingoUV]

One could say the same thing about IE only sites. No one is making you look at them on Windows. You can disable IE and continue the cross-platform experience. This, of course, ignores that your having access to IE influences Web developers and results in more IE only pages being created.

So you stop looking at IE-only pages. You stop using IE.

I just wish they made a different choice and would exclude it by default from Android and Chrome as a way of trying to push it out of the market and provide incentive for a more rapid move towards open standards.

Why would Google make a choice? It is your time/battery that is wasted while looking at flash videos/applications, your "principle"s are being insulted, so you "boycott" flash. Google is not here to make value judgements. It just wants to give the best device, make some money on the side, and maybe most of all - popularize mobile internet usage and make a shitload of more money from its primary competency. "Boycott"ing flash doesn't help Google in any way.

Must you look up to your device/software makers to make value judgements for you?

Re:Anonymous Cow

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

So you stop looking at IE-only pages. You stop using IE.

I'd love to and mostly I have, but unfortunately I still have to deal with things like my state's tax collection and my bank's fraud reporting pages.

Why would Google make a choice?

To provide a better experience for their customers going forward and to help promote the progress of Web technologies using the free market instead of allowing a single company to determine the rate of that progress.

It is your time/battery that is wasted while looking at flash videos/applications, your "principle"s are being insulted, so you "boycott" flash.

I do boycott Flash as much as possible, but I, as an individual don't have much influence on the market and most people don't have the expertise to make good choices themselves. That's why it is important that large, technology companies recognize the importance and value of open standards and promote them as well.

Google is not here to make value judgements.

I guess that depends upon what you mean by "value judgements". They have, in the past determined the value of open standards and worked hard to promote those standards when building services and applications. They certainly judged that the openness of the standards were important and went to great lengths to make some of those technologies more open.

It just wants to give the best device, make some money on the side, and maybe most of all - popularize mobile internet usage and make a shitload of more money from its primary competency.

Of course they want to make money, but Google often takes the long view, spending more money now to push more openness in the future to insure that revenue for as long as possible. In this instance, they're taking a shorter view to try to gain more market share from Apple right away, at the cost of keeping the state of the art less advanced.

Must you look up to your device/software makers to make value judgements for you?

Google has market position, as does Apple, MS, RIM, and a few others. They have leverage individuals lack. I can boycott Flash, but that does little to nothing to change the market. When Apple or Google boycotts Flash, major Web sites and developers take notice and start moving to more open technologies. That's why I'm sad Google hasn't done more to push open technologies using their market position.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[amRadioHed]

The built in browser has an option called "Enable plug-ins". Now I'm not positive, but I'm guessing that Flash can be disabled by unchecking that.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[bingoUV]

I'd love to and mostly I have,

My "you" was rhetoric, meaning anyone who has problems with xyz should himself boycott xyz rather than expect others to block access to xyz for everyone. Since Google does not have a problem with flash, Google does not boycott flash.

Why would Google make a choice?

To provide a better experience for their customers going forward and to help promote the progress of Web technologies using the free market instead of allowing a single company to determine the rate of that progress.

Provide better experience by not providing an option to experience a popular web-content-delivery mechanism? Funny.

Free market? In what sense is flash not free, as compared to its competitors, if any? It is much freer than Apple's app-store policy - flash developers can develop for 1 platform, make minor UI changes for UI paradigm, and run the application on an overwhelming number of platforms. Customers get cheap apps, developers get a large customer base. On the other hand, Apple's app-store like policies cause software to be written once for every device, increasing the cost and bugginess of software in general. Who is the friend of "free market" here?

And if the free market is based on lack of freedom for customers to choose flash, what kind of "free" market is it?

How does allowing flash mean "single company to determine the rate of that progress"? When flash is allowed, others are allowed too. Allowing McDonalds means single company to feed everyone? If Apple is allowed to sell iphones, it causes Apple monopoly?

Re:Anonymous Cow

[yyxx]

As someone who uses both the iPhone and iPad browser and the Android browser, let me say this: the Android browser is already nice than the iPhone browser. And with V8, Flash, and the new Dalvik, it will be great. I don't like Flash, but I am happy that I get Flash if I need it. And the fact that Apple tries to control what I install on my phone is unacceptable.

All the Apple desktops are essentially gone (one is still sitting in a corner being lonely). I am so looking forward to getting rid of the last Apple hardware that I still have once Android tablets are out.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Phoghat]

Is that an apple in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Phoghat]

Haven't bought into phony Apple mania, never will. I will take a look at this. iTunes really sucks even compared to Zune software. All I want is a phone that will let me add all my music, DRM'd or not.

Re:Anonymous Cow

[Anonymous Coward]

Flash is an optional download from the market place so its opt in rather than opt out.

No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

That clunky looking new iPhone and Apple's pathetic and half-assed fake multi-tasking and wallpapers sure as hell is no Android-killer.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

I develop on both platforms too... android's implementation is by far superior. You obviously don't understand what is going on. That's fine... keep your little fanboy. Reality distortion field going.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously know nothing about how Apple's multi-tasking works.

It doesn't. Whatever you call the thing Apple is doing on their iPhones, it isn't multitasking and it isn't particularly similar to multitasking.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[RMH101]

I've just switched from iPhone to Android. I'd jailbroken my phone to add the features Apple didn't seem to want to give me, I'd call myself a power user of the iPHone (if there is such a thing) and I just got tired of fighting Apple. Every update they push, arbitrary app restrictions (google voice?) - in the end it was an Engadget podcast that persuaded me to switch. Do I want a future of everything coming thru Apple and iTunes (with Apple nickle-and-diming me to death on each transaction), or do I want a connected handset produced by a vendor who has a vested interest in it integrating nicely with as many third-party services (twitter/facebook/flickr etc) as possible? When Apple bought the mobile advertising network it was the last straw.
I now have 2.1 on an HTC Desire and couldn't be happier. All of a sudden you're not treated like an evil hacker for wanting apps that "think different" - it's encouraged.
Case in point: forgot to copy a new album over to my phone. I realised I could wirelessly connect to my LAN, browse the content, copy an album over to my handset. Job done.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

I just switched from iPhone to Android and I find that Android devices are just too wide, too big for me. The iPhone was slim. Smoooooth. Shiny. I could place it upright on a chair and just sit on it.

But what of the Androids? They're ridiculously fat and require a concoction of KY Jelly and Preparation H to "work for me." They're so rough and unrefined -- they're the "lumberjack bears" of portable phones. Rough, I like. But I still have to go out and be able to sit down without wincing. The roughness of the operating system is fine, I'll deal with that...but please, please make something that fits in my ass! Work with me, ladies!

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[RMH101]

My HTC desire fits in my iPhone silicone skin. It's almost exactly the same size down to the last mm. YMMV.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[tagno25]

WARNING: Sitting on your cellular device voids all hardware warranties on it.
DO NOT SIT ON YOUR PHONE!
You can sit on an iPhone, but it will likely break. You can sit on a Nexus One, but it will likely break.

- -
I am not a lawyer, this does not constitute legal advice.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

They have a vested interest in having you use google services. I do not see any real long term interest in having things sync with twitter/facebook/flickr any more than apple. The difference is that apple has decided, probably correctly at the time, to restrict what an app can do (and how you can install it) in order to make for a simpler interface. (and some evil)

To be honest, most people like the dummy-proof straight jacket that apple provides on the phone.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[flajann]

I am going to studiously avoid making all kinds of jokes and puns about your cell phone being in your back pocket -- particularly in "vibrate" mode....

Whoops! I nearly slipped in stating I wasn't going to slip! So be sure to slip that phone out of your back pocket you naughty person you!

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[jo_ham]

The iPhone integrates with third party services quite nicely - twitter, facebook, flikr, etc, and the new advertising service is *optional*. It doesn't do anything that the app store doesn't have already, it just means that if an app developer wants an easy way to include advertising, they can no do so - with the bulk of the heavy lifting (ad serving and ad selection) handled by Apple (for a cut). You can still produce free apps, or roll your own ad distribution like apps in the store already have (like Shazam lite for one).

For all the crying about how Apple limit developers, you think that a new feature that makes development easier if you were going to use ads in the first place might at least be *understood* by slashdot, if not praised. (it is an ad service after all).

So Apple are "nickel and diming you to death" - compared to Android? The apps on the Android marketplace cost money too. Why is it different on there? There are free apps on both platforms, and ad-suppoted apps on both platforms. Why is it "nickel and diming" on iPhone and not on Android?

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

No multitasking is sure efficient multitasking. If I were selling a platform that only allowed one app at a time to run, and limited the resources they took, I could say it was more efficient too.

But it is like saying a Yugo can get a higher top speed and acceleration than a high end Lambo, but not mentioning the fact that the acceleration of the Yugo is off a cliff.

Apple's multitasking could be a lot better, because Android is shackled to Java which a dog when it comes to performance than native OS X/ARM binaries. However, until Steve lets people use the iPhone fully, the only way to know the difference is on a jailbroken iPhone.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope upgrading the Desire doesn't mean loosing all your personal data, like with the Hero. If Android is really competition for the iPhone, shouldn't they get this basic stuff done properly?

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious post! Thanks!

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[RMH101]

Apple aren't interested in integration: they want you consuming your media through them, they want you to use their services (Mobile Me? Yeah, that was *great*, wasn't it?) whereas Google have a vested interest in users being ultra-connected to any and all third party services.
Let me ask you: do you think we'll see a) a decrease or b) an increase in the number of ads on iPhone now there's a central mechanism for delivering them, and Apple take a cut?
App prices are one thing, but to use the iPhone I need iTunes. I need an iTunes account. If I want accessories that work I need Apple ones (put an ID chip in the video out cable? So that instead of a simple $5 cable I now need a $40 Apple version?). If I rent a movie, it expires if I've not watched it for a bit.
Apple's vision of the future is you slumped on the couch consuming music, tv and video on your iPad, and paying a small premium every single time.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[jedidiah]

Nevermind multitasking, it would be nice to crawl back into the 70s and at least get printing back.

Apple even owns CUPS now. They could port it to the iThing and be done. Although there might be some risk of a printer not being supported.

That would shatter the mystique and Jobs can't have that.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[ruiner13]

When Apple bought the mobile advertising network it was the last straw.

wait, so apple got an ad firm and that's your excuse to go to GOOGLE of all companies? I don't think you thought that one through...

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[fandingo]

You don't need iTunes anymore. On Linux, the libimobiledevice project http://www.libimobiledevice.org/ allows you to sync your iPhone with your favorite Linux app (Amarok, Gtkpod, Rhythmbox, etc.).

I've been a long-time iPhone and Linux user. I was ready to ditch my iPhone this summer, but this project has breathed new life into my iPhone.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[teko_teko]

Google is only one part of the Open Handset Alliance. Sure, they are the bigger driving force of the development, but with Android there's always an option not go with the Google-integrated phone. There is a choice. With the iPhone you don't have a choice.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

The OP's original point was that EVERYTHING was going through Apple, and that the "iAd" (retarded name if you ask me) service is just another hoop that Apple was making everyone jump through.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[IronChef]

Case in point: forgot to copy a new album over to my phone. I realised I could wirelessly connect to my LAN, browse the content, copy an album over to my handset. Job done.

Man, that was a huge pet peeve of mine too. Say I am at work and I want to put an MP3 on the iPhone... Can't do it since it has no guest sync mode. Infuriating. My BROWN ZUNE allows that.

But I found a free Windows app that can manage music on the iPhone without iTunes. This is no use to you since you switched, but others may benefit.

http://www.copytrans.net/download.php

Get CopyTransManager from here. Be sure it is that program, the third one down the page, not CopyTrans. Note that you can just download the zip instead of an installer if you want.

The iPhone is equal parts cool and infuriating. My next phone will probably be an Android too.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Chysn]

Check out the Sprint version of the HTC Hero. Doesn't have the boxiness that many Android phones have, and it's got more rounded corners than the iPhone. It should fit up there just fine.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's iAd doesn't say what data it hands over to advertisers. Who knows. It might bind a GUID to the phone as a permanent cookie for long term tracking. Or it may even send location data. In any case, I'm sure this platform for sling ads at consumers on their PAID FOR phones is not going to help privacy any.

And of course, app vendors are going to use iAd in their apps. For them, it is free money. Who would turn that down?

We will see how much or how little privacy Apple gives its captive audience. If iAd just displayed ads without handing identifying information (cookies, shared objects, private data, unique identifiers, IMEI numbers) to the ad brokers, it would not be too bad. However, I have yet to see an ad company that doesn't try their best to try to track down the proles that connect to it for a secondary data mining market.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[msimm]

That's got to be the strangest euphemism for anus I've heard in a long time. Bravo! I guess Apple is even more of a trend sitter then I'd given them credit with!

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[shutdown -p now]

Nexus One is actually thinner than iPhone, and the same size for other dimensions.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[jo_ham]

We'll see things for developers get easier. We may see an increase in ads now that there is an easy way to integrate them, although individual app makers who roll their own will have to decide whether to keep theirs or take a load off but just deal with the cut from Apple.

Those who were offering free apps before will continue to do so - if they were free before, they will likely remain free. What is likely to happen is that paid-for functionality that was previously only available in paid apps could now be available in ad-sponsored versions.

Ultimately the apps are a way for money to be made (for developers and Apple), the nature of that business model already includes ads. You make decisions on what apps you use as a consumer based on several factors - presence of ad sponsorship being one of them.

My video cable is not an "apple one with a chip in it" and it works just fine. Cost me £9 online somewhere. If you're on about MiniDisplayport, then that is the nature of all of those adapters - not just Apple's.

They dumped the proprietary Apple Display Connector that required an external box of tricks to work with DVI - it's all standard now, more's the better.

If you rent a movie from a bricks and mortar store, and you go over the time you are charged a late fee. While digital copies have no concept of "solidity" (ie, you keeping your digital rental too long doesn't mean the store can't rent it again) but the rules are simple. Apple are not unique with time-sensitive download content - the BBC and Sky operate something similar with iPlayer and Sky Player. That's what is meant by *rental*. If you don;t want to expire, you should buy it - which they do offer.

If I rent something from Blockbuster, why did I pay lest than the purchase cost of the DVD? Why can't I keep it (without them charging me for a lost disc).

You seem to want to keep your digital rentals forever.

I don;t pay Apple "a small premium every time" I listen to music I have purchased on the iTunes store. I also don't listen to it on exclusively Apple devices (and no, no format conversion - I'm using the raw mp4 files from Apple's store).

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[jo_ham]

Consider how consumers react to ads - if you unnecessarily include ads, you annoy your customers, they leave. You lose out.

If you were already using ads, all you have done is change suppliers - transparent to the consumer.

If you have a paid add and you also include ads, people are going to moan that they are being double dipped.

It's AOL in the UK all over again back in the early days of the internet - used to cost £10 per month for service, but local calls here are not free so you were paying twice for the service and the call. As soon as the freephone numbers (supported by ads) came along, people went for it like flies on shit. They also went for the free service, but subsidised by the local call cost (and no adverts). You very rarely get something for nothing. It's all about perceived value though - adverts already exist on the app store, and are pretty "self regulating". The addition of Apple's ad system just makes it easier for developers to do what they are already doing.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[Anonymous Coward]

No, to get video out of an iPhone you can no longer use a simple headphone to 3 phono adaptor cable. You have to use a dock connector to composite out, which has to have an Apple DRM chip in it. Cables that *used* to work don't since OS 3.0.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[RightSaidFred99]

I didn't lose any personal data. It's all stored in my google account, when I synced back up it all magically reappeared. Didn't lose any of my SD card data either.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[jo_ham]

You can use third party ones too - Belkin makes one that also works. The pinout on the dock connector is standard. You don;t have to buy one from Apple with "a DRM chip" in it.

Re:No Wonder Why Apple Got Dumped Into 3rd Place

[MrCrassic]

Android apps actually cost more money for functionality that I've found comparable to the iPhone. Examples: SnapPhoto (to replace the crappy crap crap camera app that comes with 2.1 stock for the G1) and Touchdown ($19.99 to provide functionality that is similar to that in the iPhone plus Tasks)

Android is pretty good, but it's nowhere near as smooth as the iPhone, just as I predicted. I miss that smoothness; it even crashes more elegantly than Android does (Force closing?!)

Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Kethinov]

I love everything about Android except one thing: Vendor/carrier OS upgrades.

As someone who wants to switch from iPhone to the HTC Evo 4G in June, I have one message to Sprint/HTC/whoever is responsible: Please make Android 2.2 available as soon as a stable build is out. If it takes months after stable 2.2 is released, I'm gonna be a very vocally dissatisfied customer.

So please vendors / carriers, do us this courtesy and we'll all love you and happily part with obscene quantities of money for quality service.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Thanshin]

I thought you could pretty much install whatever you wanted in your Android.

Are "alternative" OSs so inferior compared to the official upgrades?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Aeternitas827]

I love everything about Android except one thing: Vendor/carrier OS upgrades.

Sadly, it's not just Android that gets wrecked by Vendor/Carrier tweaks; and the larger the carrier is, the worse it seems to get. Symbian devices that are/were carried by AT&T, for example, are incredibly gimped, and that made me very sad--unfortunately, buying un-branded, non-locked (for the GSM/UMTS crowd, not entirely up on how it goes for CDMA folks) devices skyrockets you into another price bracket, unless you've got the desire to work with 3rd party homebrew software, or money to shell out...it's gonna suck.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tukz]

You can, if you install a generic Android.

Vendor or carrier specific firmware isn't anything new.
Symbian has done it for YEARS.

The carriers custom fit the firmware, either removing certain things or add carrier specific applications.
It's no different with Android phones.

Which mean what when a new Android is released, the vendors and/or carriers have to custom fit the new version to their own and then release it to their customers. As you can probably imagine, this can take quite a while.

Ever since I started with Symbian many years ago, I've reinstalled with generic firmware as fast as possible.
If HTC is as slow as I've heard, I'm gonna do the same when I get my HTC Desire next month.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

The OS is a little different. If you buy a Google handset (G1, G2, Nexus One) then you get the update pushed OTA as it's released. If you buy another vendor's version, you have to wait whilst they customise the latest OS for their handset. Specifically, HTC sell Android handsets with their "Sense" UI. Historically they've been somewhat slow to release updates - HTC need to compile a new build, and they take their sweet time to do this. Whilst you can flash alternate ROMs (waves to XDA-Developers.com) to devices - e.g. Cyanogen - you need to be reasonably tech-savvy to do so, and if anything goes wrong you've lost your warranty. Couple this with some vendors taking extra steps to make it deliberately difficult to install third-party ROMs (I'm looking at you, HTC Desire!) and the upshot is that to upgrade safely/easily - wait for the vendor to release an update. To be on the bleeding edge you can take a (small) risk and install third party ROMs.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

I got a HTC Hero.
It still runs Android 1.5 But in the US they got it upgraded to 2.1 a few days ago. And here in Europe we will get the 2.1 Update sometime next month.

So android 1.6, 2.0, 2.1 and now 2.2 has been released in the time it takes HTC to upgrade from 1.5 to 2.1
So it will still be a release behind.

Sure I got a 1.5 phone, but the way that they update softwre today, and develepers develop to the newes OS and not old OS (New API, features etc.)
Then the OS realy need to be upgraded basic when it's released

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[sznupi]

Can't you just debrand the phone? It was awlays quite straightforward with Symbian devices. As far as "skyrocketing you into another price bracket"...OTOH you can choose more affordable models and get cheaper plan/prepaid (yeah, I know, US specifics)

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

If they just made Vendors UI's module based. it would help a lot.

HTC, SonyErisson both have there own UI over the standart Android UI.
And they says that it's porting that UI that takes time, so thats why they are so long to get new firmware out. (Even that HTC have released new phones with Android 2.1 and still claiming that the UI port is given trouble so older phones must wait 2 month longer)

If they made is module based, then you could upgrade the core Android, and get the new features, and fixes.
And the Vendor then just have to supply the UI.
Or if you got the phone for the hardware spec, and not the fancy UI, you could just get the standart Android.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[matunos]

Except Google's not selling directly anymore are they?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[tagno25]

They stopped selling the Nexus One directly, but are still selling the ADP and ADP2.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

Some phones are designated Google Experience devices. They carry the logo. The Nexus One is an example. In the UK I can walk into a Vodafone retail store and buy one now. It's being sold thru a phone company, but it's still a Google device.
This is differentiated from an Android handset which runs a non-Google vendor-modified OS such as HTC Sense.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

. Couple this with some vendors taking extra steps to make it deliberately difficult to install third-party ROMs (I'm looking at you, HTC Desire!) and the upshot is that to upgrade safely/easily - wait for the vendor to release an update. To be on the bleeding edge you can take a (small) risk and install third party ROMs.

Be thankful you're not using a Motorola Milestone in the UK.

Fantastic handset dogged by a buggy gimped version of 2.1 and little hope of Custom ROM's ever allowing people to choose what they want out of their phone.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Aeternitas827]

Can't you just debrand the phone? It was awlays quite straightforward with Symbian devices. As far as "skyrocketing you into another price bracket"...OTOH you can choose more affordable models and get cheaper plan/prepaid (yeah, I know, US specifics)

De-branding gets down to desire, and there's always the risk of your PC writing a 0 where there's supposed to be a 1 and bricking the device...it scares a lot of people off, even though it's more or less a freak accident. Then there's WinMo devices which are a little bit trickier, and Blackberry devices that I vaguely understand, let alone understanding the undoing of the branding.

So far as going with less expensive models and whatnot, you're going with fewer features, particularly here in the states; hell, I've seen a prepaid phone that not only had no camera, you couldn't use MMS with it--absurd in this day in age, look at how many were up in arms when the original iPhone wasn't MMS ready. If the phone doesn't have a good amount of oomph to begin with, what's the point?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

Data point: the HTC Desire usually ships with a pretty fast ROM. I had the UK T-Mobile one and it was as quick as standard. Only customisation was a T-Mobile boot screen and a "Web and Walk" logo overlaid on the browser icon. It did, however, have a "feature" where the headphone output level was too low. I flashed the vanilla HTC OEM ROM to fix this, but speed isn't normally an issue with the latest HTC devices.
The HTC Sense UI is actually pretty damn nice, I prefer it to the Nexus One. I accept I'm gonna have to wait for 2.2 though!

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[L4t3r4lu5]

The first thing I did with my Touch Diamond 2 was install a custom ROM. Stock / Vendor ROMs are almost always out of date before shipping, and updates from the vendor are few and far between. I don't expect this to be any different on Android phones.

There's a good community at xda-developers for Android phones. Check them out.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tim C]

Data point: the HTC Desire usually ships with a pretty fast ROM. I had the UK T-Mobile one and it was as quick as standard.

While that's true (I have a Desire on T-Mobile too), I think what the parent poster meant was slow *in releasing updated versions*. I've heard that too, and may go stock Android when 2.2 comes out. (Though I may wait and see if my workmate who also has a Desire does first, to see how he gets on with it...)

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tukz]

heh, I don't even understand how he could have thought otherwise. I never said the ROM's was slow.

Anyway.

The guys over at http://www.androidcentral.com/ had a talk with HTC.

HTC said phones released this year, will get Froyo in the second half of 2010.

[...] if your phone was launched this year, we will most likely offer an upgrade for it to the Froyo version. This includes popular models like the Desire and Droid Incredible as well as hotly anticipated phones like the Evo 4G, MyTouch slide and upcoming models. We will announce a full list of phones and dates once we are closer to launching the upgrades. We are working closely with Google and our other partners to ensure we have the earliest access to everything we need to provide a complete and solid Sense experience on Froyo. We expect to release all updates in the second half of this year but can't be more specific yet.

Source: http://www.androidcentral.com/most-2010-htc-android-phones-will-get-froyo-2010

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[sznupi]

How is that risk any different during ordinary flashing?

And we're talking about unlocked, debranded Symbian phones; even if cheaper, they have all the features (except for any obvious hardware differences of course)

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[wannabgeek]

They stopped selling online. They are going to sell them through physical stores.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Threni]

I have a Desire on Orange UK. I have no idea how long it'll take HTC to do 2.2, and then there'll be another wait while Orange screw it up (don't forget to kill reformatting of text when you zoom in the browser, and to remove Google talk but leave the service running, you useless schmucks, in addition to littering the phone with useless demo versions of paid-for apps which can't be removed).

I really need to be rid of all this crapware, but since this is my first Android phone I have no idea what is stock and what is HTC/Orange. Can someone tell me please?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[ducomputergeek]

But the real question is how long until carriers start treating Android phones like any phone before it only authorizing their firmware to operate on their network and going to their "Market place"? I see that day coming soon rather than later as most carriers in the US don't want to be turned into dumb pipes. Talking with friends in Australia, it appears this has already happened down there with Android phones. They have to purchase apps through the carrier store, it blocks the Google Market Place.

The carriers great metric is "Revenue per customer". That is what they want to maximize. They saw how AT&T got pretty much blind sided by the success Apple has had with the iTunes App Store. They would rather see that 30% commission on each app sold than Google or independent developers.

I've already heard some complaints from friends with different Droid phones not being able to run the same apps. One person downloads an App that works great on a HTC, but a person with a Motorola can't down download the same app due to incompatible hardware.

As a developer, we're already charging 4x's the amount to develop for Android vs iPhone. Why? Because with Android we have test against 4 software versions and a number of different handsets and that adds a lot of time/cost in the QA phase. Not to mention keeping up with all the hardware is getting to be expensive for a small shop.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Pete (big-pete)]

The Nexus One is an example. In the UK I can walk into a Vodafone retail store and buy one now.

I tried that a few weeks ago when I was in the UK for a day, they had them in stock, but refused to sell me one without a contract (which I did not want).

I nearly bought one online from the Google shop, but I couldn't justify the price (+import tax, +VAT, etc) when coupled with the hassle of having it shipped to a UK address, and then arranging to pick it up or getting it forwarded on.

-- Pete.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tukz]

The carriers in my country, let the customers roam pretty free.

Only one major carrier is still SIM locking the phones, the rest doesn't.

So I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Besides, we got laws against this in my country.
Not allowed to lock a phone permanently to a carrier.

Sure, the carriers release applications that most likely only work on that carriers network, but that's just a feature if you use that carrier.

I see the problem with the applications though.
I didn't know it was that much of a problem, I thought applications developed for Android 1.5, would work on ANY Android 1.5 (ignoring vendor/carrier specific lockdowns here).

Some wouldrun it slower due to hardware obviously.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Aeternitas827]

The risk isn't different, it's more the willingness of the user to take that risk. The casual user is more willing to take the handset at face value than risk bricking it to get a few plums that they may never use; this, of course, is opposed to those plums being made available as a matter of course.

As far as purchase of non-branded phones, I wasn't strictly speaking of Symbian; Symbian devices are pretty well featured across the board, aside from the aforementioned hardware differences, which in some cases can be quite attractive to some users (Camera quality and whatnot, though I fail to see the point of a 5+MP camera on a phone that lacks a flash). When you get into the smartphone market, WinMo and possibly some Android devices--not sure on these, because I haven't done much research--, unbranded, can be pretty pricey (take the somewhat-antiquated Xperia X1 by way of example--I'm a bit out of the loop on more recent samples), and boast features that domestic handsets can't match for their OS--a given that the European market generally tends to get the better hardware and software than we get in North America, given the tendency for pushing customization and such.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

that's what comes of reading this via my HTC Desire! Reading comprehension fail...! Good news on the HTC update though. Hopefully this'll mark an improvement in the speed of response.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

The vanilla OEM HTC ROM is readily available if you go look on XDA-developers.com. Doesn't need root to install, you need to make a gold card using a micro SD card though. Process sounds scarier than it is, takes about 20 minutes to complete. I did my T-Mob UK with this and it's debranded and fixed a couple of niggles.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

Yeah, the network shops aren't great for this. Try http://www.expansys.com/ - they carry it for £354. I'd be very surprised if they didn't ship internationally, too. Great company, no affiliation etc

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

It's not, really. I think the poster above was just pointing out that debranding does carry an element of risk.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Totenglocke]

Just a heads up since you want to buy an Evo - I was considering breaking my contract with AT&T and ditching my iPhone 3GS for an Evo until I found out that there's a $10 / month fine on any Sprint customer who has an Evo. Even in 3G only areas too - you can use the same Android 2.1 on it that you can on the Samsung Moment that Sprint has, run the same apps, and use the same amount of bandwidth, but you pay another $240 over the two year contract. Sprint's BS justification for this is that it has a bigger screen and processor, therefore you'll download way more than the 5 GB limit they have on their normal 3G data plan. Needless to say, people are pretty pissed off about this.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think cyanogenmod can be loaded onto the milestone. Motorola locked it from custom roms. Also, I think cyanogenmod has different builds for different handsets and they aren't cross-compatible.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tukz]

Cyanogenmod isn't a generic rom, it's a modified android rom.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[hedwards]

Some already do. If you've got one through AT&T it's fully locked down. That was my only gripe about my backflip. Motorola had their locked down phone in the Milestone. One of the main reasons why I bought my Nexus one was that it would be getting all the updates promptly up until some point in the future when it's discontinued. It's really the only phone that guarantees you that it will be getting prompt updates for things that Google thinks are important.

I'd expect most other phones to take quite a bit of time as each carrier has to customize quite a bit before releasing it for the OTA update.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck is a niggle?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

ha! a minor irritant, something that bugs you.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggle

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading the list of things in Android 2.2, the first thing I thought was "oh, the carriers are going to disable that WiFi hotspot thing well before they ship any OTA updates". I imagine we have to flash with some hacked rom to get the feature back.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Joao]

Quote: "The OS is a little different. If you buy a Google handset (G1, G2, Nexus One) then you get the update pushed OTA as it's released."

No, you don't. I have a G1, and the last update was quite a while ago to 1.6. Not holding my breath to see Android 2.2 on my G1.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Fnkmaster]

Sure, they are, right here in the US. They have announced that they plan to phase out direct distribution in favor of retail distribution through carriers. Unfortunately, they communicated this so fucking poorly that half the people who read articles based on the press release thought the Nexus One was discontinued and that it was some sort of failure, or even that Google was getting out of the phone business entirely, just when Android is really starting to take off.

In fact, Nexus One is the best GSM smartphone on the market in the US right now. All the iPhone owners who see mine (my wife included) are jealous of how much it can do, and how easily it can do it. Google is obviously bad at PR - or else they would have simply said "We are responding to customer demand to see the phone first and are going to be distributing it through retail stores and carriers in the US".

There was really no need to phase out the online store at all - just accept it as a minor channel that is not going to change the game that the carriers play. Only the ubergeeks are going to shell out the big bucks for unlocked, unsubsidized phones.

Epic PR fail for Google.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Tukz]

"oh, the carriers in the U.S are going to disable that WiFi hotspot thing well before they ship any OTA updates"

Corrected it, however you're most likely right none the less.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[dargaud]

You can, if you install a generic Android.

Yes, but where do you find it ? I have a HTC Hero with the generic 1.0.0.A6288 software version (is that the same as Android version ?); but on HTC website all the upgrades are either for the Orange or the Sprint losers.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

if a compatible release comes out, obviously.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[dargaud]

Whilst you can flash alternate ROMs (waves to XDA-Developers.com) to devices

Where do those ROMs come from ? I have a Hero with generic Android on it and still waiting for HTC to release a new version. Are those HTC 'alpha' versions or just Joe Blow playing with a compiler ?

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[mdm-adph]

I wonder about the whole "carries the logo" thing -- my partner just bought an HTC Incredible, and it's got the "Google" branding on it, but it's definitely not a "Google Experience" device.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks. I was thinking you meant little black kids or something. This makes much more sense now!

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[socrplayr813]

I have an HTC Eris that was just recently updated from 1.5 to 2.1. While waiting for the promises to come through, I kept a close eye on forums and news articles to try to figure out what was going on. I never found much concrete information, of course, but my impression is that it was Verizon that held things up much more than HTC.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

XDA-Developers.com. You can't freely download these, as it would allow you to debrand your device and the telecoms companies don't want that.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

XDA-developers.com, Modaco, etc. Some are leaked ROMs, some are extracted from other devices, many are cooked up by enthusiasts. There are Android "Kitchen" utilities that allow you to bake anything you want into your own custom ROM, too.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[elrous0]

Well, at least HTC is upgrading (albeit slowly). I just got the 2.1 upgrade on the Eris. After all, they don't *have* to upgrade at all. Plus their interface is quite nice. I had pinch and zoom on my Eris when a lot of other Android users were still waiting for it.

Of course, just when I was getting psyched about having 2.1, wouldn't you know they would come out with 2.2 and Flash support? Sigh...well looks like I'll be waiting again.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=512

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[dargaud]

Mine isn't branded. Just wondering if the only option is those half-baked ROMs. How reliable are they ? Sounds like a recipe for ownage.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[elrous0]

HTC puts its own custom interface on top of the generic Android OS (that's why Eris had stuff like pinch and zoom before the standard Android did). Every time the OS is updated, they have to update their custom interface, and that takes time. That's the reason for the delay.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[3dr]

No, Google announced they would stop selling N1's through their web site once they had retail channels in line.

You can still order an N1 through the site: http://www.google.com/phone

(Looking for ways to scare up the cash for an N1.)

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

My South African friends say "niglet" or "niggerachi."

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

Though Google's direct Nexus sales is now considered a failure, this issue highlights a *big* *big* advantage of not getting your handset through a carrier.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[RMH101]

I've been using them for years on WinMo devices. There are some duds but there are some spectacular ones. Cyanogen for example.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Skreems]

But the real question is how long until carriers start treating Android phones like any phone before it only authorizing their firmware to operate on their network and going to their "Market place"? I see that day coming soon rather than later as most carriers in the US don't want to be turned into dumb pipes.

I don't see that happening in the US. At the very least, Sprint has been making some moves in the market that make me think they're trying to beat the others in a race to be the best "dumb pipe" they can, bundling a ton of extra features into their base price instead of the old $4-per-add-on model that was prevalent in the last decade. As long as one carrier is doing it, it's going be pretty hard for others to pull back, especially since between the iPhone and the Android ever carrier now has an offering that provides access to an ecosystem not regulated by the carrier. If all of them did it at once it might have a chance, but it only takes one to break ranks to scuttle the whole thing.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

But the real question is how long until carriers start treating Android phones like any phone before it only authorizing their firmware to operate on their network and going to their "Market place"? I see that day coming soon rather than later as most carriers in the US don't want to be turned into dumb pipes.

Please, put down the crack pipe and take off the tin foil hat.

But in other news, let me ask you this. Just who exactly do you think you're kidding with this troll bullshit? Practically every story that pops up on here about Android, has you slithering around on it with your bs about 4x the price this and fragmentation that. First of all, you post too much on here to be a real coder.

Now, I know and you know that you are just sitting in some cubicle somewhere at an "online reputation management" just doing your job laying down the turf. But, as an academic exercise, let's assume that you actually do have a little shop somewhere where you write your fart apps and your bank website home screen shortcuts or whatever other "apps" you shit out. There isn't any damn way that you are writing that shit faster with Objective C in X-Code than you are in Java on Eclipse and secondly, you can target 1.5 and get 99% of Android phones out there so the 4x shit is complete bs. Either that or you are just grossly incompetent in which case, you don't deserve to be in business anyway. If I, as a customer, was quoted something like that from you, I'd just laugh in your face and go to somebody else that actually knew what they were doing.

But your shop isn't even real so this is just all moot, anyway. The only thing that is sad is you have random crack smoking mods believing your shit but anybody on here that actually codes for a living knows you are full of it.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[mlts]

I also am a fan of Android. The security model is excellent where apps are well isolated, and a potentially malicious app has to ask for permissions to do something before it gets installed. The UI is well done. The app store is great (not perfect, mind you, but does the job.)

My biggest wish or complaint: If Android handset makers want to lock down their phones with signed Linux kernels and such (the Milestone comes to mind on this), it is unfortunate. However, it would be nice to have a few models which are root/modder friendly, are the latest CPU/whatever features, and have different form factors. I like a hardware slider keyboard, while other people wouldn't want the added thickness on their phone. Having the ability to have source code for the ROM images would be nice too.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[amRadioHed]

I think T-Mobile is ahead of Sprint with their non-contract phone plans and free tethering.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Skreems]

Even better. The more carriers taking that approach, the harder it'll be for the market to swing back toward a more locked down model.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[amRadioHed]

Yeah, I sure hope so. I love my current situation on T-Mo with my non-vendor phone and no contract.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[sznupi]

Well, I was looking at the issue from the perspective mentioned by the grandparent poster; the one dealing with poor upgrade timelines (not to mention castrated features...) of branded devices. That deals with flashing already.

And what do you mean "When you get into the smartphone market" after the part you wrote about Symbian?...

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[Aeternitas827]

Symbian hasn't been used exclusively as a Smartphone OS, though the offerings of Symbian devices do include a good number of them. Further, there haven't been a large number of Symbian-based smartphones (in the U.S, that is; I'm not sure of other areas of the world); the most recent that I can remember is the Nokia E71x. To count Symbian as a true smartphone player at the current time is a little generous.

Re:Vendor / carrier upgrades

[sznupi]

Symbian, for all practical purposes, deals strictly with smartphones. Sure, there's not-so-quite-open Japanese MOAP(S); or Ericsson R380, the first device sold as "smartphone" 10 years ago...a device which really wasn't one (closed).
But when talking about Symbian in this part of the world, and druing most of last decade, we don't really mean those...

Perhaps you're confusing S40, which consitutes majority of Nokia phones sold, as a Symbian derivative. But's isn't one - S40 is not Symbian. It uses different "OS", internal to Nokia.

Counting Symbian as a true smartphone player is not generous, it's factually correct - it has half of the "smartphone" market (even though it is less than 20% of what Nokia sells; but that only tells about how huge Nokia is)

DRM protected apps on SD card?

[mlts]

My question: On Android 2.1 and earlier, copy-protected apps are kept in a directory only root has access to, /data/app-private.

Since apps are now installable on the memory card, are copy-protected apps only able to be put into internal memory, or is there a nasty new DRM mechanism put in to guard the apps that are on the SD card?

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[w0mprat]

No DRM. Not having root access in stock Android carrier/HTC will sufficiently prevent casual copying of paid apps to another device. After market ROMs or a ROOT access package will most certainly have this restriction lifted. You are not DRM-locked into not being able to copy/backup your paid apps, but you will void your warranty to do so.

If there is, it will be rather easily removed with superuser permissions.

By far the best feature of Android is the thriving community of after-market OS builds. It's like upgrading your phone for free. I'm not affiliated, but right now feel obliged to shameless endorse CyanogenMod's G1/G2/Nexus One custom ROMs http://www.cyanogenmod.com./

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, there is a form of DRM: if an application is swapped out to SD card, it is encrypted for the device so you can't just mount the card elsewhere and snarf the application.

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[mlts]

Files stored on the SD are not protected by being root-only, unlike files in main memory. So, either copy-protected apps will not be able to be stored externally, or they will have some form of encryption-based DRM, or varying strength. It could be something as simple as AES-256ing the .APK files and storing the key in a root owned directory with 700 perms, to a system similar to WM-DRM which has yet to see a crack for more than a week or two.

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[kyz]

According to http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/install-location.html

* The .apk file is saved on the external storage, but all private user data, databases, optimized .dex files, and extracted native code are saved on the internal device memory.

* The unique container in which your application is stored is encrypted with a randomly generated key that can be decrypted only by the device that originally installed it. Thus, an application installed on an SD card works for only one device.

* Only new releases of apps can do this - they need to add "android:installLocation=preferExternal" to their manifest.

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[mlts]

Thank you. I didn't see that even though I was digging through the Android docs. The encryption is essentially the same method that Windows Mobile 6+ use to encrypt files on the SD card.

The mechanism is excellent -- a user can move apps from the SD card to the internal memory at will, provided there is enough room.

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[Anonymous Coward]

From my understanding the developer has to state that the app can be installed on the SD card in the manifest.

Re:DRM protected apps on SD card?

[farble1670]

No DRM. Not having root access in stock Android carrier/HTC will sufficiently prevent casual copying of paid apps to another device.

can you explain how that will work? if the app is installed on an SD card, there's no file permission (it's formatted FAT32). no one can stop you from copying the the app off an SD card.

Which phone?

[__aardcx5948]

Now the question is, should one get the HTC Desire (3.7" AMOLED) or the Sony Xperia X10 (4" TFT) ?

Re:Which phone?

[JanneM]

The X10 screen is great. Wonderful. I love it. But if you specifically want to run 2.2 then it's probably not your best option. It runs 1.6 now (works just fine) and the update to 2.1 is coming in October. But no word yet on when a 2.2 update would be available. Of course, no other maker has announced their upgrade schedule either. YMMV.

Re:Which phone?

[RMH101]

Paul O'Brien from Modaco (who is *the* guy for rooting these devices) has stated that he really doesn't like the X10. Not from a handset point of view, but because Sony has done their usual trick of fucking up perfectly good hardware with stupid software/DRM etc. If you want to be able to install third party ROMs like Cyanogen etc it's probably not a great choice.

Re:Which phone?

[sznupi]

Strictly speaking AMOLED...is TFT; "TFT LCD" in the latter case would be more precise. ;)

People forget that such choice is (or was...(*)) mostly about answering the question "do I want a screan looking great inside but weak in sunlight (OLED) or do I want a high chance of a screen which is merely good inside and...good in sunlight? (if that's transfelctive LCD)".

(*) Admittedly, in recent times various types of touchscreens, often put on top, and neglecting transflective LCDs make it even more murky

Re:Which phone?

[tagno25]

Of course, no other maker has announced their upgrade schedule either. YMMV.

IIRC, Google has said June for the Nexus One

Re:Which phone?

[JanneM]

Actually, as a user I don't find any restrictions on the X10 that aren't there on any other handset. I was pretty careful about checking that up, since I'm no fan of Sony either. There's a few DRM-laden music-buying apps added by default, but those are add-ons, not replacements, and they're not tied into the OS. The normal music player and other applications doesn't seem to have any restrictions; the phone works just fine as a developer phone; it opens as a USB mass storage device on mu Ubuntu desktop and so on.

You can root the phone already with some extra hardware and I expect a normal procedure to become available at some point. My only real concern about a third-party ROM is that phones here in Japan are SIM-locked, and I don't know if I'd be able to actually use the phone on the DoCoMo network anymore if I root it and load a different OS image.

Re:Which phone?

[RMH101]

sorry, just to clarify I mean restrictions on the os that make it harder to install custom roms. just going of modaco's findings.

Re:Which phone?

[mcvos]

It's amazing to see how some Android hardware manufacturers are doing extra work on software to reduce the value of their products. And why? Is there seriously any way they think they can lock is into their ecosystem? They don't control the Android marketplace, so what the hell is the point of doing extra work to cripple their product?

Make it as open as possible, give me root access, allow me to mess with everything I want to mess with, and then charge me $50 extra for it. $100 even. Market it as the ultimate open Android phone, and I'll pay. And that's pure profit they could have gotten out of me.

Re:Which phone?

[gorzek]

Carriers don't do this because they don't want their service to be commoditized. Much like Apple doesn't want the iPhone to be commoditized, really.

When you go with AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc. you are buying into a brand. While they all offer slightly different services and sometimes have vastly different coverage areas, in the end you are buying more or less the same thing regardless of carrier: phone service and Internet access. The custom branding and applications are designed to lock you into that carrier, so you never forget that you are on AT&T's network, or T-Mobile's network. This makes it harder to switch to another carrier. The more they can lock down the phone, the higher they can make the barrier for switching.

It also makes support easier since, if they can forbid you from modifying the device too much, your average customer won't easily fuck it up and need service.

It's not as though they don't want you to take full advantage of the phone--being able to use all the phone's capabilities is obviously a major selling point to moving the devices--but that's also tempered by the carrier's desire to lock you in as a customer and make it difficult to leave. Charging a premium for risky, flighty customers like yourself probably never occurred to them, honestly, and may not be worth the bureaucratic headache for them to bother.

Re:Which phone?

[mcvos]

That's what makes this so bizarre. Motorola is not a carrier. They sell hardware, and they're not going to get more money from me if they lock me down somehow. They sell a commodity, and it would be to their advantage to make it as attractive as possible.

Verizon, on the other hand, is a carrier. Yet the Droid is not locked down the way the Milestone is. It's completely backwards.

Re:Which phone?

[gorzek]

Take what I said about the carriers and apply it to Motorola. Motorola is seemingly betting that, if they do a good enough job branding the phone as a Motorola, your next phone will be one, too.

Re:Which phone?

[mcvos]

Motorola is seemingly betting that, if they do a good enough job branding the phone as a Motorola, your next phone will be one, too.

All they need to do for that is put their logo on the outside. If they do a good enough job at annoying me, my next phone will not be a Motorola.

It's not a cheap phone. Is it strange that such a powerhouse attracts power users? Is it strange that power users want to get as much as possible out of the phone?

Open up the phone and build a reputation for having created the ultimate Android device, and you're doing a lot more to draw customers to come back.

(Did you know that the Milestone doesn't even have their Motoblur UI? It's really just plain Android. How much do they expect to brand about that anyway?)

Re:Which phone?

[gorzek]

You are thinking of this from the engineering perspective rather than the marketing perspective.

Companies are rarely guided by what the engineering or R&D departments want. They are driven almost entirely by sales, and sales is generally influenced by marketing.

Sales and marketing don't care about "power users." They want to know: what's popular? What's marketable? Where are the trends going?

Android is a popular brand right now. It's gaining pretty wide acceptance in the smartphone market. That's why Motorola is on board--not because they want to attract power users, but because they can throw a $500 phone out there and people will snap it up.

I just about guarantee you all the assorted, branded bloat loaded onto your Milestone was spawned from the brain of someone in sales or marketing, not anyone in R&D or engineering. This is for no other reason than the vast majority of users are *stupid*, and the sales and marketing people know this. Joe Moron is who they need to appeal to, because that's where the sales are. Do you really think millions of Android phones are being bought by power users? Power users like you and I are really a small niche of the market. The vast majority of people are buying the phones because they've heard Android phones are cool and they want something that can read email, surf the web, chat, play music and movies, and provide some silly games. That's it.

Installing custom ROMs, tweaking the OS out of its factory settings, doing upgrades on your own--the typical phone owner is *never* going to do this, and that's why the phones aren't touted on those capabilities, and why the power users and hackers aren't typically accommodated.

Re:Which phone?

[mcvos]

Sales and marketing don't care about "power users." They want to know: what's popular? What's marketable? Where are the trends going?

But what they release is not just some average smartphone, it's a device that is especially appealing to power users.

I just about guarantee you all the assorted, branded bloat loaded onto your Milestone was spawned from the brain of someone in sales or marketing, not anyone in R&D or engineering.

There isn't really all that much branded bloat on it. There's Motonav, a sucky navigation app, but that's it. Below the surface are no doubt tons on proprietary Motorola drivers, but they're not branded. Not in the sense that the average user would experience them. (And are they even that closed? I believe the famous autofocus bug was fixed by someone from Google, not someone from Motorola.)

Do you really think millions of Android phones are being bought by power users? Power users like you and I are really a small niche of the market.

But they are the ones who know why they want Android instead of Symbian or WinMo. Or iPhone, for that matter. They are the ones who will pay $500 for a phone without subscription. Average users will get an iPhone or something else that comes with a subscription.

Installing custom ROMs, tweaking the OS out of its factory settings, doing upgrades on your own--the typical phone owner is *never* going to do this, and that's why the phones aren't touted on those capabilities, and why the power users and hackers aren't typically accommodated.

I don't need to be accommodated, I just don't want them to do extra work to stop me from doing something they don't care about anyway.

Whichever way you turn it, it's a nonsensical business decision. A big missed opportunity from Motorola.

Re:Which phone?

[Jagen]

Strictly speaking AMOLED...is TFT; "TFT LCD" in the latter case would be more precise. ;)

TFT, yes. LCD, no. Remind me again where the liquid crystals are in an AMOLED display, oh that's right, there aren't any.

Re:Which phone?

[sznupi]

AMOLED = "the latter case" (obviously referring to parent post), as far your EN is concerned? Interesting...

Wifi tethering

[Thanshin]

I wonder what will be the effects of millions of people carrying wifi hotspots.

If I put my happy optimistic hat, I can imagine a next generation that forgets about ownership of connection and creates a giant web of constant wifi access to the web.

A world where every little gadget can access the web as you approach, by using your phone.

Re:Wifi tethering

[LingNoi]

It's already happening, check out OLSR being ported to the android. With this your android can connect to an OLSR mesh network.

Re:Wifi tethering

[Troed]

I wonder what will be the effects of millions of people carrying wifi hotspots.

It will make location services relying on nearby hotspots instead of GPS and/or cell towers to become much more interesting at least.

Re:Wifi tethering

[adolf]

I have real, functional Wifi tethering on my 2.1 Droid, complete with basic or absolute access control, notification of new connections, et cetera. It works well.

Even though I have all access control and encryption disabled, so that anyone within earshot could use it freely, I leave it turned off unless I'm using it myself. This, despite the fact that I also carry an iPod Touch (which certainly benefits from having an always-on connection), and could easily lock the connection down to just the iPod and my laptop if I chose to do so.

Why? The answer is very practical: I don't care if anyone benefits from using my bandwidth, but as long as it impacts my battery life, I'm not game. Not even for myself.

That said, there's technical reasons why your idea won't work. A sea of miscellaneous open APs, moving about in cars and sidewalks (while you might also be doing the same) sounds like a good idea, until you realize that hopping from one to another kills any existing TCP connections, trashes any UDP sessions, and would be generally unreliable.

I currently pay $30 per month for unlimited data on my phone. And even in a world of free, cellular-backed mobile access points: I'd be very happy to continue paying that every month, just so I don't have to fuck with restarting connections (or wait while software takes care of it for me) every few dozen feet.

We'd need some new protocols, or better-tailored support from existing ones, before your idea would become useful for the sorts of things that people actually use this stuff for.

Re:Wifi tethering

[sznupi]

W8, what? How will the domination (as far as numbers go) of constantly moving WiFi hotspots help that?

Re:Wifi tethering

[unholy1]

Only when the carriers stop charging extortionate costs for data access.

Re:Wifi tethering

[Troed]

"much more ... interesting" ;)

Re:Wifi tethering

[Thanshin]

That said, there's technical reasons why your idea won't work. A sea of miscellaneous open APs, moving about in cars and sidewalks (while you might also be doing the same) sounds like a good idea, until you realize that hopping from one to another kills any existing TCP connections, trashes any UDP sessions, and would be generally unreliable.

However, just imagine a machine you fing on any public space. A fuel dispenser (however you call those), an ATM, your car, anything.

You get to it, press connect, see the many available hotspots, ordered by signal strength, so the one you carry on is probably the first. Select it. The machine connects through you. The information about the use you make of the machine can be used by your apps.

The weekend you can sit on your PC and generate graphs about your fuel consumption, the total composition of what you ate, how much exercise you've done, how much time you could have saved by using an alternative route to work...

I can't think of really groundbraking uses, but I see the potential.

Re:Wifi tethering

[mcvos]

That might be why he said "interesting", rather than "useful".

Re:Wifi tethering

[Threni]

> I can imagine a next generation that forgets about ownership of connection

I think they'll get a little reminder when the pigs kick their front door in at 4am, looking for the pervert/terrorist/criminal who downloaded kiddy porn/bomb making info/movies.

Re:Wifi tethering

[wvmarle]

A world where every little gadget can access the web as you approach, by using your phone.

It is easy to limit access like now with Bluetooth appliances. Just do not accept any new connection without user intervention. Actually I wonder what the advantage of WiFi over BT may be for handsets, considering BT was designed exactly for this purpose: short-range communication between devices.

Re:Wifi tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

Only thing, its not free.. to use the hotspot service it runs aroun $30 a month... I don't see a lot of people opting in for that, especially with the Evo's increased premium on data via Sprint.

Re:Wifi tethering

[LingNoi]

Check out my post futher up about OLSR. It already does this by connecting to a mesh network. Also take a look at MANETs which is what OLSR is.

The problem isn't the protocols. The software already runs on android! The problem is that not enough people are using it on their routers.

I doubt that going to change unless someone goes out and installs routers all around town or a manet protocol is installed by default on router firmware.

Re:Wifi tethering

[nine-times]

I think that is pretty optimistic. My first thought upon reading about the "portable hotspot" feature was, "Huh, so how are the carriers going to block that then? Are they going to make sure all manufacturers disable the feature, or are they going to forbid manufacturers from supporting v2.2 altogether?"

Re:Wifi tethering

[HeckRuler]

Easy, you have some software that swaps out the weaker connection signal for the stronger signal and re-establishes the connections.

Come on, we are dreaming of the future here, it's not that difficult.

Re:Wifi tethering

[tepples]

I currently pay $30 per month for unlimited data on my phone

Phone company: "We no longer offer unlimited data. All data past 5 GB per month is now billable by the bit."

Re:Wifi tethering

[farble1670]

if the wifi tether in 2.2 is anything like the wifi tether app you can install today on rooted android devices, your phone will melt a hole in your pants if you leave it running.

Re:Wifi tethering

[Skreems]

Me: get a better phone company

Re:Wifi tethering

[tepples]

Me: get a better phone company

The other three phone companies serving my area: "We no longer offer unlimited data either." Or did you mean "get a better country"?

Re:Wifi tethering

[Skreems]

I find that hard to believe.

Re:Wifi tethering

[horza]

"All data past 5 GB per month is now billable by the bit."

You can save 12.5% on your web browsing costs by reading my web site. I only serve up 7-bit ascii.

Phillip.

Re:Wifi tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

People are not going to walk around with the hotspots enabled. You only turn on the hotspot when you absolutely need it. If you left it on constantly, you would get 4 hours of battery life. I have a CLIQ, and I am lucky if I make it home without the battery dying if I work late. You do not get 16h of battery by running wifi all day. The 3G and GPS is bad enough.

Re:Wifi tethering

[sznupi]

Nvm "dreaming", we were talking about location services there...

Put your tinfoil hat on

[oldhack]

Have we audited the Android code enough to know that it's not phoning the mothership sending god-knows-what? Do we know there is no other "oops we didn't mean to"? It's one thing to have gov't spooks snooping on you, wholly another to have a private corporation piling dossier on you.

Paranoid? Pretty damn well justified when we are talking about Google, I say. Ask them about their data collection policy.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you audited the code of every other os you run? Oh what's that you say? You can't even audit the code, because you don't have it? Too bad.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[w0mprat]

You deserve mod points if I had them because you touch on an important issue that just doesn't seem to be discussed publicly. Is the scrutiny of open source submissions good enough? How are sources gauged for trustworthiness? It's always bothered me how much security is assumed in the million eyes principal.

Sure Android is open source, but Google's default applications are closed source. In fact developers of after market mods have gotten into trouble for including apps such as Google Maps, Gtalk etc. http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/09/29/1510232/Android-Modder-Tries-To-Outmaneuver-Google?from=rss Even if the OSS portion of the OS is clean, who knows what these collect and send back to Google?

Tighten your tinfoil hats or even consider another layer of foil. You can indeed have perfectly innocent-looking code that even does what it appears to be coded for, but can indeed to do something malicious. http://underhanded.xcott.com/ (I think they should award extra points for getting your code approved for the iPhone/iPad App store and a instant first place win for getting your code into a open project)

I have to wonder if this technique has been used to get a back door into a OSS application at any point. We wouldn't necessarily know about it. When found, often the code could appear to be just a mistake or common vulnerability, having perhaps been made to look that way and someone will fix it there and then. It's not implausible that vulnerabilities have been intentionally injected into open projects.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[mjwx]

Have we audited the Android code enough to know that it's not phoning the mothership sending god-knows-what?

I'd say so. I pretty much know what my Android phone is sending back by casual observation, my contacts are synced with Gmail, it asks if I want to participate in X program (no) or send my location to google (no).

But hey, if you don't believe me do an audit yourself. The thing about secret plots is that the more people you involve in them the harder they are to keep secret.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[Spad]

And this is different from any other Phone, or indeed software of any kind because..?

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[kyz]

You don't need to audit Android to know it sends a lot of data back to Google. You just need to use it.

• You need a Google account to use the phone. Every search you do with Google is logged-in and confirmed to be you. On the other hand, general browsing (including bookmarks and web history) is not logged to Google. You can check here if you like.
• Your entire phonebook has to go into Google Contacts - or you don't get a phonebook. As this is a fancy smartphone, it's not just useful to have name and number, but also email addresses, social media login names and even postal address (e.g. for driving directions on Google Maps)
• Every search you do with the multi-purpose search bar is sent to Google regularly as you type it - assuming, of course, that you don't turn off the Google Search provider, which you can do but it would make the search bar significantly less useful.
• Google want you to use Buzz, and they'd ideally like you to give away your location when you do Buzz, even if what you're Buzzing is irrelevant to your location.
• Google has a fantastic location-finding-without-GPS algorithm, which works by having millions of samples of "I was on this cell tower / wifi router and this is my GPS location". It used to be quid-pro-quo, where you couldn't get this estimated location for yourself without committing to uploading your location to Google for each cell tower / wifi router you encounter. However, now it's possible to check a box that says "use the location DB, but don't contribute to it".
• Speaking of location, who the fuck uses Google Latitude? A tool for broadcasting to your "friends" where you are and when?
• Even if you're not so mad as to use Latitude, you're still giving away your location to Google whenever you hit "My Location" - it shows you your location and it gets the map tiles to show from Google by asking for them with your logged-in identity. So Google knows roughly where you are whenever you look up your own location.
• This happens constantly if you use Google Maps with Navigation to get your free sat nav.
• Don't forget that Google reads all your mail if you use GMail. But there's also another regular email app on the phone, which never sends data to Google. Check for yourself.

On the bright side, all this data you have on your phone isn't available to all - Android is far more effectively sandboxed than the iPhone. Apps have to get the user to agree up front what access they're allowed to private data and phone features. For example, there are several games I wanted to install, but when I saw they wanted permission to get at my private phone data, I said "fuck that" and refused to install them.

If the user says "yes" to an app's permissions, the apps can't wangle any extra permissions. The developers need to release a new version begging for more permissions, and the user again gets the choice to say "yes" or "no". If they say "no", they still keep the old version, so you can't force them to say "yes".

Apps can't access other apps data, unless those other apps let them. So what Google collects on you is only available to Google, not any other Tom, Dick or Harry who writes an app, like on the iPhone.

Google is always looking to offer Faustian pacts - you give us an insight into aspects of your life, and we'll make your life better. And, like Steve Jobs' walled garden appstore, it's a take-it-or-leave-it approach.

Personally, I use my Android phone every day and love it, but that's because I already got hooked on Google Search and GMail years ago. Google already own me privacy. Uploading to their hivemind isn't so bad. But you don't have to if you don't want to.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[jo42]

So, in other words, Android is the ultimate spy on you product from Google. No thank you very much.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously? You mean if I use an online street maps service to get directions, it knows where I'm going to drive? Isn't that, you know, the entire damn point of the service?

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[kyz]

Well, no. I use Google Maps on my home computer when I'm planning a tip. I get several directions for several places, Google has no idea when or if I will drive any of them.

However, if I use Google Maps with Navigation on my phone in the car, Google gets the route I have ACTUALLY taken, and exactly WHEN as well.

Who would you trust with a full itinerary of your movements today?

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[GooberToo]

Don't forget that Google reads all your mail if you use GMail.

This is the only thing which isn't entirely true. Scanning and mining is entirely different from "reading". No one and I mean no one is sitting and reading your gmail. Google, like ALL OTHER MAJOR FREE MAIL PROVIDERS (Yahoo, Hot Mail, etc), are mining your data. Google is far from alone.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[mcvos]

• Your entire phonebook has to go into Google Contacts - or you don't get a phonebook. As this is a fancy smartphone, it's not just useful to have name and number, but also email addresses, social media login names and even postal address (e.g. for driving directions on Google Maps)

This is definitely by far the biggest downside for me. I don't want Google to know who I know. I do have a GMail account, but before I got an Android phone, the contact list was practically empty. I would much rather have it sync contacts with my private non-gmail email account, but that doesn't seem to be possible.

At least, by default. I can imagine that it would be possible, easy even, to make a phonebook app for Android that didn't sync with GMail or synced with some other service of my choice.

To not need a Google account at all, you need to make your own Android mod, but even that it within the realm of possibilities, I guess.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[infinite9]

And this is different from any other Phone, or indeed software of any kind because..?

Asking a question by putting the first half of the answer in someone else's mouth is annoying because...

Seriously, this is rude and makes you sound like an arrogant ass. Please stop it.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the best attack apple fanboys can think of is claiming they are big brother (How ironic) - after all they can't criticize features since android is ahead of the iPhone OS.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[Deosyne]

"Who would you trust with a full itinerary of your movements today?"

Anyone lonely enough to follow my boring life is welcome to it. If I ever decide to embark on a clandestine mission to the Circle-K, I'll be sure to go into stealth mode by pulling the battery.

Re:Put your tinfoil hat on

[amRadioHed]

What do you guys mean? In 2.1 at least you can create local contacts that aren't synced to a Google account.

No love got the G1

[LBt1st]

I'm still waiting for 2.0 for my G1. Why should I care about 2.2?

Yes I know I can root my phone and shoehorn a modded OS on there. I really don't want to hear about your 1337 hax. I want a supported update.

Re:No love got the G1

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why you're not supposed to buy the first one they throw at you.

This is like getting mad because your first ipod could only hold 5GB and not play video.

Re:No love got the G1

[Tapewolf]

I dunno about the GP, but I haven't yet seen a suitable replacement for it.
AFAIK the G1 is still the only device with a 5-row keyboard. The devices made immediately after it didn't have a keyboard at all and besides most of them are still stuck on 1.6 anyway AFAIK.

Re:No love got the G1

[LBt1st]

No I bought the G1 only a few months ago because (even now) it's the only phone with a nice big keyboard with the keys in a standard layout.
If I were to buy a phone today, I'd still buy the G1.

And unlike your iPod analogy (which lacks any cars), the G1 should be able to run the new versions. Third party OS's pretty much prove this.

Other then promoting newer phones I see no reason they can't release an update for the G1.
I'm not going to buy a new phone with an inferior UI.

Re:No love got the G1

[tagno25]

Cyanogen has a release of 2.1 for the Dream(G1) and Magic(myTouch 3G). It is currently at version 5.0.7-Test6.
http://forum.cyanogenmod.com/index.php?/topic/2688-cyanogenmod-5-for-dreammagic-would-you-like-a-pony-v507-test6-05202010/

Re:No love got the G1

[w0mprat]

I'm still waiting for 2.0 for my G1. Why should I care about 2.2?

Yes I know I can root my phone and shoehorn a modded OS on there. I really don't want to hear about your 1337 hax. I want a supported update.

I won't badger you about aftermarket ROMs and how awesome I think they are (because I do), but I will say some major mods are actually well supported with frequent updates. Carefully done , you can back up your stock rom, test drive the aftermarket ROM and if need be roll back to the stock software. I also understand that re-flashing the official firmware is sufficient to retain your warranty should you need to make a claim.

Re:No love got the G1

[mjwx]

No I bought the G1 only a few months ago because (even now) it's the only phone with a nice big keyboard with the keys in a standard layout. If I were to buy a phone today, I'd still buy the G1.

I had a Dream (G1 in the states) for a year, absolutely loved it but it was really underpowered for Android. I've just upgraded to the Milestone (Droid in the states) and I like Android 2.1 (2.2 by July sometime I hope). The keyboard on the Dream is by far and above the best keyboard on a mobile device without question but you bought a gen 1 device, despite the Dream being incredibly polished it's still first generation device and has significant drawbacks associated with that. I think your expectations are a bit unrealistic seeing as 2.0 has some hefty HW requirements.

There's always CyanogenMod 5, unlike HTC he does not have to guarantee that it will work 99.9999% of the time.

Re:No love got the G1

[mdm-adph]

Cyanogen supports the updates he makes for my G1 far more than HTC and T-Mobile does, in my opinion.

When there's a bug in the CM mod, it's usually fixed within a series of days.

Re:No love got the G1

[Locke2005]

the G1 should be able to run the new versions The Nexus One has a lot more memory than a G1; so some Kluges are required to run Android 2.1 or 2.2 on a G1. Yes, I like the G1 hardware keyboard too; I'm disappointed I can't get a phone with all the Nexus One or HTC Incredible specs, but still with a hardware keyboard. Yeah, I'm also disappointed my G1 is still running 1.6.

Re:No love got the G1

[snadrus]

Actually a good reason to care about 2.2 is that apps can now fit on the SD memory, so G1's tiny OS partition is usable now.

Which devices?

[Tapewolf]

I don't suppose it will be made available for the G1...

Re:Which devices?

[slack_prad]

don't think G1 is powerful enough to run the stock 2.2 (or anything above 2.0). 2.x and > have 3d elements built into the OS which the G1 simply is not capable of running (app list, Gallery)

They'd have to make a different 2.2 just for G1 with all that removed ..

I think cyanogen has made a 2.x port to G1. He may do a 2.2 port too.

Re:Which devices?

[Tapewolf]

I didn't know it required 3D acceleration. The main problem with the G1 is the limited amount of flash memory in the device.
I'm sure I read somewhere that 2.2 had been made more modular, with most of the google apps stuffed into a different package to reduce the overall footprint. But yes, one of these days I'll bite the bullet and give the Cyanogen system a go.

TFA!!!!!

[adolf]

First, I read the comments. There were three. I modded them all up, because they all seemed useful within the confines of Slashdot's moderation parameters. I frequently have mod points, apparently because people think my moderation is fair. However, by posting this (I refuse to jump through hoops to post as AC), those moderations were undone. Sorry.

The reason is simple: After moderating, I read TFA. Therein, I see that about every third sentence ends with an exclamation point! This artificial excitement really annoying!

For instance:

With Android 2.2, the Chrome web browser will have full Adobe Flash Player 10.1 support to allow you to view flash-based websites, play flash games, and more! This is something that not even the iPhone is capable of doing!

See what I mean! It's a very loud article!

It's like there aren't any there any others to pick from!

That said, I might be qualified to be an Android fanboi! For instance, today at work, I used my phone to help me align and plumb two antenna systems! The day before that, it helped me cook a stew! And on Monday of this week, it even walked my dog!

But this quantity of exclamatory remarks is unsettling! Please, timothy, given your lineage here, I expect better editing!

Sincerely!

adolf!

Re:TFA!!!!!

[Thanshin]

Second time this week I've wanted to post a sound instead of plain words.

Metal Gear's ' ! ' sound.

Re:TFA!!!!!

[Hinhule]

http://instantsfun.es/metalgearsolid

Re:TFA!!!!!

[skyriser2]

Top of the muffin... to you!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE7hGMMIyfE

Re:TFA!!!!!

[notknown86]

For instance: With Android 2.2, the Chrome web browser will have full Adobe Flash Player 10.1 support to allow you to view flash-based websites, play flash games, and more! This is something that not even the iPhone is capable of doing! See what I mean! It's a very loud article!

The author is simply trying to capture the sheer awesome incredibleness of a Steve Jobs keynote (!)

Froyo is flawed by Flash

[Anonymous Coward]

*NM*

Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[Qubit]

Okay, sure, Google cuts some deal with Adobe to suck up the Adobe Flash Player code and bake it into builds of Chrome. Or Chromium (whichever one is their proprietary version of the browser).

But why would they describe that support as existing in Android? I thought that Android was Google's FOSS-licensed, linux-kernel-based OS.

When Google, HTC, and other people release a phone running Android, they invariably pile all kinds of proprietary stuff on top. Other options would be nice, but they don't seem too interested in that.

Maybe it's just this particular news site being imprecise, but I'm concerned that Google is trying to peg Flash support via this browser to all Android phones. I mean, it's great for people who want to run the software, but it's shifting Android away from a FOSS project to Yet Another Proprietary Stack.

C'mon Google, you're chock full of smart engineers who want an open web, so please make sure that Android stays an open stack.

Re:Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[Anonymous Coward]

They are adding VP8 for HTML5 video support and are adding flash for the HTML4 Flash animation web.

Re:Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not sure your criticism is fair here. I got FroYo access today and Flash installs like any other 3rd part app, it is not built-in. It would be like saying that allowing Opera to run on Android would be allowing 'Yet Another Proprietary Stack' (Opera is closed source also).

Re:Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[D H NG]

FYI, Flash support won't be built into Froyo. You download the Flash plug-in from the Marketplace as you would any other app.

Re:Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[Fnkmaster]

There are other options. You can run Android just fine without any of the Google-branded proprietary apps (Google Maps, Google Earth, Gmail, etc.). They are kind of cool, whiz-bang things but you don't need em.

Their mail client is Open Source, and there's a fantastic fork called K9mail that is the most used app on my iPhone. The browser is based on Webkit and there's nothing that forces you to download/use/enable the Flash plugin. You can even download Mozilla Fennec (the alpha build at this point, but hey) if you prefer. There are customized versions of the Contacts and Phone apps out there.

As a matter of fact, there are community-built ROMs out there that don't have the Google stuff built in. Or you can easily enough remove them from your phone if they bother you.

If you want complete freedom and choice, buy the Nexus One, there are ton of custom ROMs for it. Don't buy the carrier-subsidized locked-down phones. Despite the fact that Google is shifting to a retail distribution model, the Google branded phones aren't going away. The Nexus One is currently the best GSM smartphone on the market in the US (Desire isn't available here, EVO 4G isn't GSM). Get it now, build your own ROMs or use other people's ROMs, hack-away, be happy.

Re:Isn't Android supposed to be "open source" ?

[Qubit]

FYI, Flash support won't be built into Froyo. You download the Flash plug-in from the Marketplace as you would any other app.

Ah, good. I wish that the article had been more clear about what they meant re:Flash support in Android.

I guess I assumed that Google was going to try to integrate Adobe Flash code into the browser/platform more tightly, the same way they did with Chrom[e|ium] on the desktop. Thank goodness that's not happening.

As other people have pointed out, there's also Fennec (although I don't know how well that runs on Android devices with more meager hardware).

Exactly. Cyanogenmod is your salvation

[Anonymous Coward]

I have Android Eclair (2.1) running fine on my G1 thanks to Cyanogen.

test 6 seems to be working fine. Although if you install it, there's a patch from Cyanogen to fix an echo audio bug.

A speed boost for Android? Before the next iPhone?

[Sockatume]

I guess you could say that the new compiler arrived... just in time?

Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[Namarrgon]

There's just not enough room in the flash rom. Sorry.

Re:Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[Anonymous Coward]

They said the same thing about 2.1 and Cyanogen still got a build working on it.

Re:Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[Anonymous Coward]

That information is outdated. Google has found a way to create an encrypted partition on the SD card and install stuff there. That allows them to get around the G1's limitations. They mentioned this in an interview at Google IO a day or two ago.

Re:Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't find it now, but one of the Google I/O coverage articles I read said that Google already had 2.2 running on G1s internally, and that a Google employee remarked that cyanogen could almost certainly build a ROM around it. It's usually a matter of stripping a few apps out of the ROM and adding them back latter with App2SD or the new Froyo App2SD ability.

Re:Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[mlts]

With app2sd, people with custom ROMS have been doing this for a long time by having an ext3 partition on their phone and unionfs.

Now, what I want to see is Google offer encryption functionality not just for apps on the SD card, but all data present. This way, if someone steals the phone, they won't be able to just pop out the SD card and get at all the information on that. Of course, combine this with some way of recovering the encryption key (backup to a computer, store it with a passphrase, etc.)

Re:Nope, no Froyo for the G1

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Android 2.1 can run on it. The device can be re-partitioned to allow larger ROMs - the drawback is that apps/cache/data have to be moved to the SD card.

First things first

[robinvanleeuwen]

Well great,

the new android is almost on the shelves, but nowhere i read if they are gonna support setting
a proxy for WiFi. Up until now you are unable to make use of a proxy. As far as i can tell this feature
was there in 1.x (with or without the use of 3th-party apps) , but in 2.x it is not possible to set a proxy for
WiFi.

Despite the 344-and-growing comments on http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1273 ,
in which the feature was first reported missing on Nov. 12 2008 (Two thousand and eight!!!, we're in 2010 now)
They have failed to respond or shed some light on this. And looking at:

Status: New
Owner: ----
Type-Enhancement
Priority-Medium
Component-Device
Subcomponent-Wifi

It doens't give me a lot of convidence that they are really looking into it.

Don't get me wrong, WiFi thetering is great and all but compared to making use of a proxy for WiFi,
if you are dependend on a (corporate) proxy due to missing signal from your provider, slow connections
(3G or even G),are at the whim of corporate policy or you have to pay extra for data per mb to you provider,
it's pretty insignificant to have WiFi thetering if you are unable to use the internet on droid at all...

So my 2ct's are first things first, you can't not support proxy for WiFi and push your OS as someting that
can be used in an corporate enviroment...

Re:A speed boost for Android? Before the next iPho

[Tukz]

YEAAAAAAAAAAH!

100K Android activations per day

[postmortem]

"Today at its I/O Developer event Google revealed that it is now up to an incredible 100,000 Android activations worldwide per day."

source:
http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Unveils+Killer+Android+22+OS+Update+100K+Android+Phones+Sold+a+Day/article18444.htm

After Flash support comes out, buzz will be among the masses that your Android phone does everything that PC does plus much more.

Imagine watching Hulu on your phone, anywhere.

Re:100K Android activations per day

[jo_ham]

From what I understand from my US-based friends (so, Hulu "anywhere" as long as it's in the US), the experience on Hulu lately has been "attempt to start TV show... browser crash" over and over.

Used to be great, now is rubbish.

10.1 Flash is better, but it is still a hog. I have to wonder just how well it is going to run on a handheld device.

Re:100K Android activations per day

[zeroshade]

Unfortunately due to licensing issues, Hulu has stated it will not deliver content on mobile devices via the website. Most likely there will be a native app soon, but for the time being the damn TV Companies won't let it show on mobile devices.

Re:100K Android activations per day

[Skreems]

I have never had Hulu crash my browser, and I've been using it several times a day for years.

Re:100K Android activations per day

[jo_ham]

A very close friend of mine has been getting into B5 at my suggestion and I have been rewatching my DVDs at the same pace so she can discuss it with me.

Hulu was fine for her right up until about 2 weeks ago when they apparently implemented several changes. Now it crashes her browser constantly. She hasn't changed anything about the machine she is using.

It's a widespread problem that has surfaced recently, it seems.

Re:100K Android activations per day

[Skreems]

They did push a bunch of new stuff recently... a new advertising feedback system, slightly new look, automatic bandwidth detection, etc all changed in their flash client. I still haven't had a crash, though. Must be lucky.

Gone back to cooking ROMs - BAD!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as I agree about Apple controlling the iPhone OS and the phone (and it being somewhat limited) - and there being some great Jailbroken apps - the WiFi iTunes syncing is my favourite. BUT I actually like, not having that constant desire to have the latest rom upgrade with the latest features all the time. I've just got a HTC Desire - but I honestly thought it would have the OTA updates as and when Google releases new updates.

I've realised we've just gone back 5-6yrs with Andriod, do you remember buying a Windows Mobile device (XDA or similar) and only 2months later, a new device, with a new version of Windows Mobile on it - with some great features, only to find out, that your device will not be updated for xx Months - or never.

Take the current HTC devices - the Hero is still on Andriod 1.6 no? - And people are having to hack/root them for the Andriod base to get the Hero (and other handsets) to running the latest ROMs.

I'm done with cooking roms, not working bluetooth, not functioning qwerty keyboards etc etc. iPhone - works. Simple.

Re:Gone back to cooking ROMs - BAD!!!

[GORby_]

The Hero never even made it to 1.6... Still works very well on 1.5 though, and when (or if) the 2.1 update finally comes, it should be even better.
The 'iPhone philosophy' with all phones (capable of) running the same version of the OS (albeit with a few functions disabled in v4 for some models) is an advantage. I hope the more modular updates that are promised for future android versions will remedy that issue.

Re:Gone back to cooking ROMs - BAD!!!

[bemymonkey]

You're absolutely right. I bought my Milestone thinking it would be getting OTA updates just as fast as Google could release them (since it's got no customization like HTC's Sense or anything else like that)... boy was I surprised.

That said, so far we've gotten decent support from Motorola - upgrades to 2.0.1 and 2.1 - unfortunately, you're pretty much left to the whims of your device's distributor and manufacturer...

Re:Gone back to cooking ROMs - BAD!!!

[Tim9431]

2.1 for the hero came out yesterday. Its on HTC website...now the eternal wait for 2.2 begins.

Re:Gone back to cooking ROMs - BAD!!!

[Skreems]

Yeah, 2.1 on the Hero is fantastic. Noticeably faster, much nicer Market experience, and all the little bells and whistles that we've been waiting for (plus new shiny goodies in the HTC custom UI).

The prospect of waiting for 2.2 isn't great, although within the next year or so they're going to split things out so the core can be updated by Google OTA without waiting for HTC, Sprint, or anyone else to play catch up. And even though that's a couple releases down the road, it seems HTC is keeping their custom ROM pretty well in sync across their various offerings. The Hero with the 2.1 update is pretty much identical to the Incredible or the EVO in terms of software.

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/03/google_has_a_pl.html;jsessionid=GNCKNCVMSNEYJQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN

Official dev blog link

[trawg]

The official Android developers blog post is probably more interesting than blogspam

No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[Anonymous Coward]

You can, if you install a generic Android.

Not on Motorola Milestone (the european version of Droid). Motorola has locked its bootloader so you can't install a generic Android image, unless you sign it with Motorola's keys.

There's an online petition about that issue:
http://www.petitiononline.com/freeblms/petition.html

Re:No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[mcvos]

Not on Motorola Milestone (the european version of Droid). Motorola has locked its bootloader so you can't install a generic Android image, unless you sign it with Motorola's keys.

Really? The last time I said something like that, people pointed me to sites explaining in detail how to root a Milestone.

I still haven't done it, but apparently it's not all that hard to do.

(Still, it'd be much more sensible if it was really trivial to do. What use is it to hardware manufacturers to cripple their own devices?)

Re:No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[mcvos]

There's an online petition about that issue:
http://www.petitiononline.com/freeblms/petition.html

The incredible number of typos make that petition nearly unreadable. I hope they fix the text before sending it to Motorola.

Re:No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? The last time I said something like that, people pointed me to sites explaining in detail how to root a Milestone.

Yes, it can be rooted, but it doesn't mean that you will be able to boot a custom kernel. The bootloader is locked with keys which are buried somewhere in the hardware, thus any unsigned kernel will be prevented from booting.

Re:No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[mcvos]

That would really suck. If that's true, it's time to ask my money back from Motorola.

I really love my Milestone. It's by far the best piece of smartphone hardware around. But I do want to be able to play with it.

I have read about people who were able to mod it quite a bit, including a kernel module to vary the clock speed. I hope that means it's also possible to load a completely new OS. Or at least replace significant parts of it. But any developments in this area have probably been set back for several months because of Motorola's restrictive policy.

Re:No custom ROMs for Motorola Milestone

[adolf]

Don't worry about a thing. We USians with our Droids (same hardware as a Milestone with a different radio, but without key-checking) are hard at work on making the platform the utmost of awesome. So if you guys ever figure out how to run your own kernel, the rest of the work will already have been done for you.

LOL, What An Idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

"To be honest, most people like the dummy-proof straight jacket that apple provides on the phone."

Yes, that's why Apple is in third place in mobile phone sales.

Fucking idiot.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[GORby_]

Coming from nowhere, reaching the 3rd spot in a few years isn't something I would call bad by any means, especially when you're selling your phones at a premium, compared to some of other companies' offerings.

My guess is that the Android user base will be larger than that of the iPhone/iPad/iwhatever in the near future, in part due to the larger number of available devices and the variety that brings. However, I think iPhoneOS will remain popular, and a larger part of Android's growth will come from other smarphone operating systems...

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[jo_ham]

I don;t think you're far off. Android has the benefit of being available on multiple platforms and manufacturers - that is going to increase the installed base. It is also its weakness (although not a crippling one) in that you have a varied handset base that you need to manage. The benefit of the iPhone is the very small set of hardware that iPhone OS runs on. Advantages and disadvantages to both systems, but that's just how it is.

Android is clearly doing extremely well, and good for it - if there is one thing that is going to drive iPhone development, it's a serious competitor (and vice versa). Everyone is going to be better off.

Apple's iPhone base is something like 100 million phones - I think it has well and truly "arrived" enough to always be a big player now, the same as Android - neither one is going to kill the other, they'll just both keep improving.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[mldi]

Don't forget that Android devices are also across carriers. So far iPhone is only on AT&T. They're being self-restricting.

I love Android, but I'd be curious to see what market changes occur if/when Apple decides to finally hop off the AT&T sinking ship.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[SwordsmanLuke]

I don;t think you're far off. Windows has the benefit of being available on multiple oem pcs - that is going to increase the installed base. It is also its weakness (although not a crippling one) in that you have a varied platform that you need to manage. The benefit of OS X is the very small set of hardware that OS X runs on. Advantages and disadvantages to both systems, but that's just how it is.

Hasn't seemed to to do Microsoft any harm...

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[jo_ham]

Like I said - it is something that needs to be managed. MS has to take account of a large range of possible hardware configurations. Apple only has to worry about (officially) a much smaller set - all the machines it makes.

It's not necessarily a crippling weakness to have to consider enormous platform configuration combinations - it allows you to have easy access to a wide install base, and increased flexibility, but you cannot simply ignore the issue.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[jo_ham]

In other countries the iPhone is already on multiple carriers - here in the UK you can get it on Orange, O2 and Vodafone.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[mldi]

Sorry, I was ignorantly making a post about the US market.

In response - I'm jealous.

Am I to assume then those market saturation numbers are more or less the same in the UK then as well?

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahah sinking ship. That's cute. Clearly you are one of those genius business nerds who knows anything at all.

Re:LOL, What An Idiot

[jo_ham]

We are a little behind on Android - the Desire is only really just taking off here, but it is gaining press and exposure.

Smartphone here also definitely means iPhone - we have nowhere near the penetration with blackberry that the US does.

The 100 million figure was a global iPhone figure though, not just US customers.

International Android Market Yet?

[magnus.ahlberg]

I am starting to look for a new phone and an Android handset seems like the Next Big Thing (tm). But the complete lack of purchasable apps in several countries makes a purchase completely out of the question. Google's apparent lack of interest in commenting on the matter makes me feel uncomfortable.

As a developer, I would love to port my upcoming apps to Android as well as iPhone. But Google won't let me sell my app in their market, why? Android is always pushed forward as the more "open" with regards to which apps are allowed. But the fact that you cannot even access the non-free apps in several markets makes the App Store a much better alternative for me.

So Google, any news on when I will be allowed to give you my money, or sell my apps through your store and (hopefully) providing you with revenue?

Re:International Android Market Yet?

[flyingfsck]

Sounds like you identified a market. Start your own Android app store for 'several countries'.

Re:A speed boost for Android? Before the next iPho

[wvmarle]

Yes the iPhone is one of their major competitors. Other posts talk about the iPhone bumped to third place - is that on handset lists of on OS lists? I have the feeling when I look around me that the iPhone is the nr 1 choice for smart phones. I see that one everywhere it seems.

Google's phones are likely technologically ahead of the iPhone: tethering, being WiFi hotspot, probably faster processor, better screen, and whatnot.

The one-million-dollar (literally) question remains:

Is it going to be as user friendly and easy to use as the iPhone, and most other Apple gadgets?

After all THAT is where Apple makes the difference. Not in the hardware, even though they're primarily a hardware company. It's that the software they make, makes it easy to use. And that's what's winning them customers.

Get busy, M$

[bbbaldie]

"On the enterprise front the new operating system comes with full support for Microsoft Exchange, including access to the global address book and the ability to translate native security features to mobile handsets." Oooh, better hurry up and change your top-secret protocols and break this, Blammer!

Re:Get busy, M$

[Cougar Town]

Top secret how? MSDN has all the Exchange protocols documented for all to see.

Hear, hear!

[bbbaldie]

Never considered an iPhone. Believe it or not, I'm a happy Sprint customer! I'll be springing for an Android-based phone soon. Freedom rocks!

Re:Hear, hear!

[gorzek]

I'm using a Palm Centro at the moment, but my next phone is almost certainly going to be an Android. The iPhone ecosystem frankly disturbs me and I can't stomach the thought of being closed up inside that kind of walled garden, and then having to pay through the nose for the privilege.

Something doesn't sit right with me.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Blahblahblah, iPhone user, locked down, no freedom, whatever.

The browser's just now getting HTML5 support? I thought it was based off of the same WebKit engine that Safari was? Or is it based off of WebKit's *HTML* engine but not JS? Just now getting Exchange support?

Google's trying to shoehorn Android to be right for everyone. OEMs, users, developers, and carriers, yet I can't help but to feel like something's got to give.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[soppsa]

The real thing that I find funny is that people moan about how closed the iPhone is, and how open and awesome Android is, but *tons* of consumers are screwed into ancient (OS1.5 hello) Android builds, and are forced to essentially void their warranty to update. Not to mention that 'rooting' your android is just a geeky way of saying 'jailbreak'

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[Tukz]

That's not Androids fault, that's the vendors.

Android is the OS, which is quite open indeed.
What vendors do with the firmware on their own phones, is entirely up to them.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

That's not Androids fault, that's the vendors.

Android is the OS, which is quite open indeed.
What vendors do with the firmware on their own phones, is entirely up to them.

I really don't think it should be the vendor's choice whether or not to screw their customers.

This is Android's fault. If Google used some sort of license like BSD, that handcuffed OEMs to you know, support their hardware but still leave tinkering and modding free, maybe this shit wouldn't happen. Or create a new Android License stating if you sell hardware you have to support it.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[Tukz]

I really don't think it should be the vendor's choice whether or not to screw their customers.

Really nothing you can do about that.
And they have done that for YEARS with Symbian too.

I don't see a problem with this.
It's the same with a lot of hardware.

If you don't agree with a vendors methods, use another vendor.

Regardless, the operation system can't be blamed for being TOO open, which is in reality what you're doing. They give vendors permission to do pretty much what the hell they want.

From their it's up to the consumers to choose.

I can choose to install a generic Android 2.2 on my phone if I want. However, I may void warranty with the vendor, which is perfectly understandable.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[Spad]

2.1 has Exchange support (I'm syncing my Nexus One with my work exchange server right now). 2.2 just has *improved* Exchange support.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[mjwx]

The browser's just now getting HTML5 support?

No, the browser is based on Chrome, so it's had the same level of HTML5 support as Chrome.

The browser is only now getting Flash support. 5 minutes of Googling reveals more flash then HTML5.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[mjwx]

I really don't think it should be the vendor's choice whether or not to screw their customers.

Then you should understand why I choose Android over Apple.

Out of all the companies that want to screw me, Apple wants to do it the hardest. With Android I can sever myself completely from the vendor if I so choose.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[C_Kode]

Android is getting Exchange, Flash, and HTML5 support and is that is shoehorning? They all sound pretty much like current or future standards. Where do you get "shoehorning" from?

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, because older, less capable hardware is clearly Android's fault.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[mspohr]

This is why I bought the Nexus One without a contract. No telecoms company in the middle. I also get the latest updates. This is why the Nexus One was a "failure"... the telecoms companies didn't want a phone that was too open. Google lets telecoms companies tweak Android (but you can always install the generic Android OS to get around this).

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[zeroshade]

Not to mention that 'rooting' your android is just a geeky way of saying 'jailbreak'

Only rooting an android phone isn't illegal. Jailbreaking an iPhone is. :) Just ask Apple.

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Even 1.5 had Exchange support. (Before that, I don't know...)

Re:Something doesn't sit right with me.

[mlts]

Rooting an Android device and jailbreaking are two different things:

iPhone apps run in a chrooted BSD-based "jail", where by default they have no access to the main filesystem. Jailbreaking gives the iPhone user access to the full filesystem.

Android apps have their own UID and have access to the filesystem. Rooting allows for UID 0 access which allows for kernel level items, such as tethering, having various services on the phone (FTP, ssh, http), and being able to flash custom firmware.

By default, a user has far less access to items on the iPhone than an Android device.

Article sucks

[rubypossum]

on Google's giant hairy man-breasted teat. To quote from TFA:

>> Android 2.2 will be the first mobile operating system that will have native flash support.

Excuse me, you mean that Android will finally get Flash, following in the footsteps of the non-corporate bastardized Maemo for Nokia N900 smart phone which has had native flash support for months, if not a year. Obviously this Google fanboi didn't want to pass the word along. After all, somebody might go out and buy a phone you can get flash on TODAY. Instead of in some indefinite time in the future, for a phone that's locked down to the bastards at Sprint. Ehhhh.

Re:Article sucks

[Zelos]

Flash performance on Maemo is pretty poor in my experience. BBC iPlayer worked at about 2 frames/second when I tried it.

Re:Article sucks

[rubypossum]

American here, so I can't verify that although homestarrunner.com and anything that is pure flash runs great for me. YouTube seems to do pretty well too, at least for me. The point is that it is a smart phone OS that already has Flash and has for some time. It's blindingly ignorant to claim otherwise.

I don't particularly care if the guy would've just said Android is finally getting Flash. I would've applauded that. Just don't claim to be first at something when you're not. It makes you look like an ass.

Re:Article sucks

[Aranykai]

The n900 has flash 9.4 support. Android 2.2 supports 10.1

Despite this fact, my HTC Hero(thank you sprint, you're wonderful) has had flash support since I bought it last year.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/devices/articles/htchero.html

Comparing their latest Chrome to a year old Safari

[tyrione]

One of the many improvements that Android 2.2 will bring is better performance when running applications. They have made improvements to how applications are compiled that allows apps to run more efficiently, which ultimately allows the applications to run faster and smoother than ever before. Android's web browser Chrome, has also been improved with a 2-3x javascript performance boost using the V8 engine which allows web apps to load a lot faster with Android 2.2. During the live demonstration using Sun's standard Spider javascript test, Chrome on Android 2.2 out performed the same phone running Android 2.1 and even outperformed the Apple iPad running Safari!

I sure hope it outperforms Safari on iPad seeing as it's not remotely near the WebKit nightly that's been in development for nearly a year.

Nokia N8?

[theolein]

Given SE's habit of being somewhat less open about mods to their devices than almost anyone else except Motorola, I would wait for the Nokia N8 before deciding. Nokia has always been more flexible in this regard.

No 'complex script' rendering yet

[ohell]

I was hoping this version would finally get support to render non-Latin based scripts, to make the platform interesting beyond Europe & US.
But it does not appear to have made it into this release (though users do get the ability to switch input locales, but only as long as the script is Latin based).
Bummer!
Apart from the obvious 'are we still in the 70s?' kwetch, this feature would make the platform so interesting for bespoke app development...

Re:No 'complex script' rendering yet

[wannabgeek]

Second that. I hope more and more people voice their support for full Unicode support on android forums here http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=5925 so that G bumps the priority of this issue.

Staying away

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll never use a Google/Android phone. Mark my words in some period of time they'll be apologizing for "accidentally" collecting data on their phone customers. They are not to be trusted with this. They just so happened to have accidentally collecting data on open wifi? Google is in the information business, and their mission statement is to collect all of the worlds data. I'm staying away

Re:Comparing their latest Chrome to a year old Saf

[sjonke]

What I'm wondering is why javascript performance equals browser performance? As far as I can tell, all they are talking about is javascript. Is that the main factor in browser performance? I'm not saying it isn't. I'm asking a question.

Wonder no more

[Anonymous Coward]

"I wonder what will be the effects of millions of people carrying wifi hotspots."

And the answer is: Millions of additional revenue from the inevitable "adhoc wifi" fees for VZW, ATT&T, et. al.

If you want to actually use the best features of your Android phone, you will have to pay the upcharge or throw a custom build on it and risk voiding your warranty, getting kicked from your carrier's network, and/or charged an ass-ton of fees when/if you get caught.

I don't mean to be a "Debby Downer" but you don't actually think the sociopaths who run wireless carriers give a shit about your daydreams of ubiquitous connectivity utopia do you?

But where is SVG...?

[itsdapead]

They are adding VP8 for HTML5 video support and are adding flash for the HTML4 Flash animation web.

Sadly, I see no mention of SVG support.

What with all the "Android Good - Apple Bad" fuss over Flash, which seems fixated on video, the fact that (unlike Apple) Android doesn't support the most obvious standards-based alternative to Flash doesn't get mentioned much.

OK, there is HTML5 canvas for fast, bitmapped "plot and forget" graphics, but sometimes scalable vectors graphics (as used in both SVG and Flash) are what you want.

Meanwhile, have they added proxy support for WiFi networks (or, more accurately, added a GUI for enabling it in the event that rooting your phone and executing a sqlite query doesn't "work for you")?

Remote invocation (Google Intent) - security?

[wannabgeek]

Is it just me, or is anyone else a little weary of the whole "remote control from the web" - install an app from the web, push a message from the internet to make it open a link/app automatically features? Yes, I know, theoretically nobody but the owner of the phone should be able to do that, but I'm still a little uncomfortable (and excited at the same time) about the so called "intent" feature.

No CalDAV?

[Kolargol00]

So... still no CalDAV support yet?

Two more needed improvements:

[2obvious4u]

Tabbed Browsing (or Sudo Tabbed). I'm so used to reading an article and opening the links in article in additional tabs, then either reading the tangent and returning to the original article or finishing the article and then going back and reading the tangets I found interesting.

Hulu Support. You tube doesn't having anything worth watching, but when I'm bored it would be nice to be able to pull up Full Metal Alchemist.

Re:Two more needed improvements:

[zeroshade]

Uhm, Android browser has "windows" which is pretty much the same as tabs. Also, the addition of Flash WOULD have Hulu support, if there weren't Legal licensing issues preventing them from allowing it on mobile devices. There's no technical reason preventing it.

Re:Two more needed improvements:

[ADRA]

There was a discussion about this (I forget where) that said Hulu would block the android flash player due to licensing reasons. I don't really know why but it seems that Hulu won't be on the road-map this year unless something changes from them.

Re:Two more needed improvements:

[farble1670]

Tabbed Browsing

tabs would take up too much screen real estate. even one row could consume ~10% of the vertical space. anything more than say 3 tabs would need to be scrolled off to the side or a second row.

as someone else mentioned, the android browser already has windows. menu>windows brings up a chrome-like page with a thumbnail of all your open pages. not instance access like tabs but a good compromise.

Re:Two more needed improvements:

[2obvious4u]

Thanks for the tip now that I see that I see that you can also hold down on a link to get it to open in a new window. Guess I should have spent more time playing with the browser. I feel kinda dumb now (or lazy for not looking it up...)

As for Hulu, I didn't realize it was licensing holding it up, I thought there was some additional functionality that Hulu uses that wasn't available for the Android version of Flash.

Re:Two more needed improvements:

[C_Kode]

The xScope browser (my preferred browser on my Nexus One) has tabs. They float off the top of the screen. Just pull the screen down and they reappear and you can switch tabs.

SVG ?

[balbeir]

Forget Flash. Will they be supporting SVG already ?

For some reason google disabled SVG support in their webkit browser.

The iphone's safari browser has no problems with it

Are they sure?

[sharkey]

faster browser performance using the V8 engine

Remember, V8 is NOT 1/8 gasoline.

The Bluetooth stack

[CharlieG]

How about fixing the bluetooth stack so that we can dial from out handsfree device - and making a working voice dialer

OpenGL ES 2.0

[SoftwareArtist]

A very important feature in Android 2.2 that hardly any articles mention is that it supports OpenGL ES 2.0. That means you can use OpenGL Shading Language to write procedural shaders for 3D graphics. This is a major step for Android as a gaming platform.

Life in the Fast Lane

[Mana Mana]

>>>
They saw how AT&T got pretty much blind sided by the success Apple has had with the iTunes App Store
>>>

I stopped reading after this bogosity. Fact, AT&T has had such a rush from partnering with Apple, as, a frat boy gets from free hookers and free coke. That they didn't hook up with Tyra Banks too would be looking a gift horse in the mouth. Thou doth protest too much.

US carriers != carriers

[yyxx]

But the real question is how long until carriers start treating Android phones like any phone before it only authorizing their firmware to operate on their network and going to their "Market place?

Oh, you mean like iPhone, where I get one firmware and one app store running on exactly one carrier? I don't think this is going to happen with Android. What's the sales pitch to customers: "buy our restricted Android phone and get fewer apps"? I don't think so.

In the rest of the world, carriers often don' t care. In Europe, carriers still have branded phones with modified firmware in their programs, not in order to mess with their customers, but because it's really easier for people who just want to turn on their phones and go. But you can use whatever phone you like with whatever firmware you like.

Even in the US, carriers don't really care. For example, on AT&T, there are tons of restrictions on iPhone, but if you buy a Symbian phone, you can tether your phone and run whatever software you like. AT&T on iPhone is a miserable experience, but that's due to the iPhone, not AT&T.

I've already heard some complaints from friends with different Droid phones not being able to run the same apps. One person downloads an App that works great on a HTC, but a person with a Motorola can't down download the same app due to incompatible hardware.

Bullshit. Put up or shut up: show that this is a widespread problem.

As a developer, we're already charging 4x's the amount to develop for Android vs iPhone. Why? Because with Android we have test against 4 software versions and a number of different handsets and that adds a lot of time/cost in the QA phase.

Isn't a free market great? Other software houses will be able to offer Android development for lower price than iPhone development because it's just a better platform. And companies like you that have an iPhone up their a** will just go out of business.

PS.

[sznupi]

And yeah...

Further, there haven't been a large number of Symbian-based smartphones (in the U.S, that is; I'm not sure of other areas of the world)

...where does one start with something like this...

Maybe just...look at his list (or, at the least, the table at the bottom). "Phones in boldface indicates that the phone is a Symbian-powered smartphone". Or when looking just at the table - every N-Gage, N & E-series device, most Communicators, most of C & X-series; plus many from "numeric series". Don't think about the US as anything but a very atypical market.