Slashdot Mirror
Google Says Honeycomb Will Not Come To Smartphones
tekgoblin writes "Google has officially announced that Honeycomb will not be coming to Android based smartphones. Android 3.0 Honeycomb was specifically made for Tablets according to a Google spokesperson. Although, certain features that are present on Honeycomb will become available over time on Android smartphones. Google has not offered any information to what features will be ported over specifically."
On the bright side, Honeycomb will come with disk-encryption capabilities built in.
iOS works on tables AND phones... is Android inferior?
They said the same basic thing about Tablets and the pre-Honeycomb versions of Android... ChromeOS was supposed to be for Tablets earlier on- and people went and did Tablets with 1.x and 2.x versions anyway to mostly good results. If there's not anything explicitly keeping it from being useful on phones, SOMEONE will do a phone with it.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Part of a balanced breakfast.
So on a platform that (supposedly) is already rife with fragmentation they are going to have completely different versions just for tablets? How does this make any sense? I understand that tablets and smartphones have different uses and thus different needs, but really a completely separate version?
As an aside... What does this mean for smartphone android version numbers? Will it never get to 3.0? Or will it have a different 3.0?
Android as a brand is associated with smart phones. If the OS is not meant for smart phones, don't call it Android 3.0. Drop the Android branding and only call it Honeycomb.
Calling pre-3.0 Android tablets "good results" is hilarious.
I guess that is because
Honeycomb is Big!
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah!
It's not small!
No, No, No!
So why is this Android 3.0 and not Android Tablet 1.0.
Of course it doesn't, and I'm glad it won't. The UI has been adapted for big screens!
Notifications, fragments, new homescreen layout that makes better use of the extra screen space are only some of the specific changes for tablets. I hope everyone agrees that those changes don't make any sense for smartphones with smaller screens.
Note that they mention that new honeycomb features WILL make it to smartphones. So what's the news?
Some of those criticizing that Honeycomb won't make it as-is to smartphones probably only have dealt with iOS and the iPad. I have one and its a complete copy paste of the iphone, a big iphone for better and for worse. Don't get me wrong, I truly love my ipad.
You also have "fragments"/columns, apps are great. But the OS itself has clearly NOT been adapted for tablets. It works quite well, but iOS for iPad doesnt make good use of the extra screen space for multitasking. Displaying app icons instead of an expose-like UI? POPUP notifications? come on!! News like this sound like people would want the same for android.
Not for me, please!
When did Slashdot become Engadget???
All you fucking poseurs who don't know shit about technology all of a sudden think your opinion is worth hearing just because the retards on Engadget are just as dumb as you.
Well we aren't, so shut the fuck up
You fucking retards wouldn't know real fragmentation if it cockslaped your sister's face into pieces.
At launch the iPad was running a version of iOS (3.2) customized specifically for it, and this version never was released for the iPhone. Furthermore, when Apple released iOS 4, it wasn't compatible with the iPad. It was 7 months before they released 4.2 which was compatible with both. Google could very well be taking the same route here; getting things right on the tablet while continuing to advance the phones, and merging in a later release.
The following is a legit set of questions...
First, are tablet PCs *REALLY* the future of computing? I mean, PADDs were cool on Star Trek and all, but are they really more desirable than either smaller form factor laptops and/or the iPod Touch and its ilk on a grand scale? I realize that not everyone is like me and needs to carry around an 11-pound laptop everywhere, but despite the current iPad/Galaxy Tab craze, is it really likely that tablets will be the de facto laptop replacement in five years?
Second, and more relevant to the topic, what's the major difference at an OS level in Honeycomb that makes it ideal for a tablet that's either 1.) unsuitable for mobile phones, or 2.) optimized for a tablet? I can see things at the application level that could be different (a bleeding obvious example being the Office 2007/2010 Ribbon), and making apps optimized for a tablet sized display would yield different capabilities, the least of which being a little UI scaling so there aren't unnecessary empty areas where additional controls could replace cascading menus,but at the OS level, what kind of tablet optimizations would make the code so radically different from smartphones and iPod Touch clones that it deserves its own fork?
I imagine the tablet and smartphone versions will merge in time. Maybe even with the next release. This is just a short term plan to get a tablet optimised version out the door.
Looks like Google clarified what they said a bit (original source): http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/03/google-will-not-bring-honeycomb-to-smartphones/
The original source has been updated (see: http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/03/google-will-not-bring-honeycomb-to-smartphones/ )
"It turns out there may have been a bit of confusion surrounding Kovacs’ comments at the Google event. Google reached out to clarify, supplying BGR with the following statement: 'The version of Honeycomb we’ve shown is optimized for tablet form factors. All of the UI changes are the future of Android. Yesterday’s event focused on tablet form factors, which is where you’ll first see Honeycomb.'"
Ummmm..... Hasn't google been saying the Honeycomb is a TABLET ANDROID OS BUILD since it was first talked about. Gingerbread is the new shit for Android smart phones and HoneyComb is version 1.0 for Android Tablets.
Dude, chill.
Also http://www.bgr.com/2011/02/03/google-will-not-bring-honeycomb-to-smartphones/
Aaaand the n900 community has already got honeycomb running on that hardware.
Go check out nookcolors running 2.2. Makes a heck of a good tablet.
If Honeycomb is for tablets, not phones, then Google can build an iPad competitor without pissing off it's phone partners.
So if Android Really is Open Source, it really doesn't matter what Google says, because anybody who has the ability can modify Honeycomb Android such that it *will* work well on smartphones.
Also the fact that Froyo was *not* for tablets didn't prevent many manufacturers from putting Froyo on tablets.
However I do agree that without modifications, the base builds of Android for Tablets aren't optimal for Smartphones and vice versa.
Not sure why you find it funny.
I have an Apad running 2.1 and it is a fantastic device. Best money I have spent in a long time.
Google has officially announced...
Oh really? Where's the link to Google's announcement, then? I'm pretty sure that if Google "officially announces" something, it'll be on Google's blog, or the Android blog, or something. Enough with claiming "Official Announcement!" and then linking to some random second-rate blog...
Not sure if you posted that link before or after the update was issued. If before, look at the update.
I assume this means that 3.0 is for tablets only, but 3.1 will run on both tablets and smartphones. They just haven't finished creating the small-screen version of 3.0.
And this is just Google's official stance. They won't certify any devices "with Google" unless they meet the criteria. Once the source code is out there, people will do what they want with it, port it to phones or whatever.
Credit where due.. This is the original article... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379271,00.asp
The Busy Coder's Guide to Android Development
UPDATE: It turns out there may have been a bit of confusion surrounding Kovacs’ comments at the Google event. Google reached out to clarify, supplying BGR with the following statement: “The version of Honeycomb we’ve shown is optimized for tablet form factors. All of the UI changes are the future of Android. Yesterday’s event focused on tablet form factors, which is where you’ll first see Honeycomb.”
In other words, they said it's going to be optimized for tablets first but did not specifically state that it won't be on phones.
First, are tablet PCs *REALLY* the future of computing?
No, they aren't the future of computing, anymore than any one of servers running could-enabling software, traditional laptops, smartphones and so on is the future of computing.
Like each of those other things, tablets are part of the present of computing that is bound to have a role for quite some time in the future.
is it really likely that tablets will be the de facto laptop replacement in five years?
No, its likely that tablets will replace laptops for some users in 5 years (and, for some, they already have) and that they will fill serve new roles that laptops don't currently serve for other users. The set of niches for computing devices to fill is not fixed with new devices competing over the same limited set of niches. When laptops were introduced, some of them displaced desktops, but more of them opened up new roles.
Second, and more relevant to the topic, what's the major difference at an OS level in Honeycomb that makes it ideal for a tablet that's either 1.) unsuitable for mobile phones, or 2.) optimized for a tablet?
The ActionBar and some other UI changes are pretty much the only tablet specific parts. Other bits may be more resource intensive and not appropriate for current smartphones, but I wouldn't be surprised to see all of the features make it into Android versions targetting phones eventually. (Probably many of the features will come to phones relatively quickly in Ice Cream.)
And this is just Google's official stance.
Or not. As pointed out a couple other places in the thread, Google has since clarified, saying “The version of Honeycomb we’ve shown is optimized for tablet form factors. All of the UI changes are the future of Android. Yesterday’s event focused on tablet form factors, which is where you’ll first see Honeycomb.”
I'm still waiting for google to get it's ass in gear and release the update for the nexus one. Come on, google, you said it was going to be your damn reference hardware.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Try telling that to Samsung, I'd take my Galaxy Tab over the iPad anyday.
This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
Take it back to the store!!
Bah-dum chink!
My suspicion is that the cell companies will want a dumbed down android and will not want a complicated api that is capable of things that they do not want to include because of high band width requirements for things like streaming video over 3g or 4g. Google most likely realise this and will make their tablet OS much more capable than their phone OS for good reason. Not that cell phones could not be capable of everything that honeycomb will be able to do. But the huge market for Android has to compete with Symbian for the low end market. Phone 7 or honeycomb and for that matter IOS is huge over kill for what the majority of people who just want text, e-mail, voice mail and just need a slightly less capable but agile communication device.
I do not see having a mini hdmi connection on your cell phone that can do high def video as a selling point if your band width charges then kill the consumer if they use it to receive or send high def video to and from other users or from other sources over the net. Tablets with 4g and wifi are a different matter and will replace laptops as the high end device of choice very soon.
The Ipad proved that point. Something with a slightly larger screen than a cell phone with a tap screen or a usb connection to an add on keyboard is what the consumer is going to want and the market is proving Apple to be right on the money with this release. Not that I want one but I can see that the majority of consumers really do want something that simple, and are starting to get sick and tired of updating their av and security software on their Windows based laptops.
This is not necessarily fragmentation for Google perhaps it just makes really good business sense to develop a flexible multi purpose api that is acceptable for all future high and low end communication devices. Do not forget the beauty of the Linux kernel which can run with different specs and easily accomplish this without much trouble if you have the coding smarts like Google has. All this is possible without having to use an inflexible binary OS with add ons that you have to spec and then pay others to develop for with big time bucks before you release a device. To my way of thinking the manufactures will just spec what they want and Google will deliver in no time at all and with high reliability and little to no software glitches.
Some how I do not think that the Windows phone OS will be as hack-able and will be the real reason why it will fail the same way that previous versions of Window Mobile tanked. To create a product that is competitive you need to pay huge dollars to Microsoft to make the phone OS different from your competitors phone. Right now if you buy a Samsung Phone 7 it is no different from an LG Phone 7 offerings. This will eventually really piss off the manufactures as it did with Windows Mobile devices. Somehow I do not think this will change until Ballmer is ousted once and for all. Phone 7 is doomed if they repeat the same mistakes. Or if they start to favour one company over another as they always do when a product of theirs starts to tank.
One thing Google is great at is knowing what the consumer wants, in this case the consumer is not just the end user it is the manufactures. One thing that the consumer demands in the communications market is choice, and if there is no level playing ground for the manufactures then there will be no choice.l Apart from Apple they are the only really innovative high tech company around, the only difference is that Apple goes all the way and has the goods branded with their name. Android and the Linux kernel throws a monkey wrench into the equation and levels the playing field for both the consumer and the manufacture.
Atlan: How soon can this be fitted to our space choppers?
Plaxton: Napier.
[Napier exits]
Atlan: Well?
Plaxton: What's wrong with the Mark One? It gives your space choppers TD twelve.
Atlan: Not as good as fifteen. No Space Rat likes to put up with second best.
Plaxton: Speed and violence. That's all you Space Rats think about.
Atlan: As you well know, I am not a Space Rat. But so long as I give them what they want, they accept me as their leader.
Plaxton: Mindless destruction of Federation ships. It's mindless; you don't have a plan.
Atlan: Maybe the Space Rats haven't got a plan, Dr. Plaxton. But we could have: total control over all the space trade routes.
Plaxton: I want no part of that. All I want to do is to develop my space drive.
Atlan: Fine! So how soon can this be fitted to our space choppers?
Plaxton: It can't.
Atlan: Why not?
Plaxton: Because this is the only one.
Atlan: So build [pounds table] more! We've provided you with enough raw material to build five hundred!
Plaxton: I am a scientist, not a production engineer! And the other reason why this can't be fitted to your space choppers is quite simply it won't fit!
Atlan: Why not?!
Plaxton: Because the only way to increase the power was to increase the size of the photon generator chambers. This drive was intended to be installed in a real spacecraft, not in toys driven by a bunch of murderous psychopaths.
Atlan: Our agreement--
Plaxton: Our agreement was that you provide me with the resources to continue with my work. Well, that's exactly what I have done.
Atlan: [grabs her, holds a gun to her head] You will start modification work on the Space Drive now, Dr. Plaxton. If you refuse, I will tell the Space Rats that you are depriving them of speed, and I will let them deal with you in their own fashion.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Honeycomb looks amazing on a tablet, and just like Steve Jobs said, iOS is like "baby software" compared to it.
Apple needs to make iOS on tablet more optimized for the bigger screen, and for the same reason, I don't expect Honeycomb fits the small screen of a smart phone. iOS still makes more sense on a Phone.
chrome os is for netbooks, gui is not optimised for touch
Back in as early as '09, Google was stating that ChromeOS was not intended for tablet or solely-touchscreen devices; Only netbooks and other small laptops.
- http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/google-not-focused-on-touchscreens-for-chrome-os-652656
I can't wait to see what the brilliant devs at XDA-Developers do with Honeycomb. While Google won't put it on my phone, it's only a matter of time before the XDA devs do.
Whyt he fuck does the new system, in your "Comments" section for your account, take you to the parent conversation when you click on it instead of your fucking post? It's very stupid, is this some new "default" functionality I need to turn off? Seriously, why would I want to dig through a conversation tree looking for _my_ post, instead of being taken right to it?
Kid-proof tablet..
...anyone else think this is a seriously bad idea?
You're essentially creating two operating systems to develop for. Now I don't just have to support the quirks of iPhone+iPad+iTouch/Android I have to support Android Tablet as well.
I seriously hope, and there very likely is, a plan at Google exists for merging at 3.1 or something similar. Come on Google, Android is much more developer friendly than iOS, let's keep it that way (please note that I did not say 'better'.)
Loading...
all smelly and turd-like
UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!