Google To Merge Honeycomb and Gingerbread

eldavojohn writes "In Barcelona, Google's Eric Schmidt has been revealing future plans for Google, saying that the next release will merge smartphone and tablet versions of its mobile operating system Android. Aside from bragging about Android's growth, Schmidt tiptoed around a question of Google acquiring Twitter, instead offering the very nebulous statement that YouTube doubled its revenues last year."

Comments

I haven't had lunch

[Toe, The]

Can't they pick different codenames? Makin' me hungry.

Re:I haven't had lunch

[A. B3ttik]

Seriously, I am going to give this food combination a try.

Re:I haven't had lunch

[scotty.m]

Awwww yea, honeycomb gingerbread!
yum

Re:I haven't had lunch

[FatdogHaiku]

Hey! You got Gingerbread on my Honeycomb!

Stays crunchy in milk

[Drakkenmensch]

Will it be sandwiched between delicious silicon wafers?

Re:Stays crunchy in milk

[jgagnon]

Wheat or white?

Re:Stays crunchy in milk

[A. B3ttik]

Eet's WAPHER THEEN!!

Re:WHAT UNHOLY THING IS THAT GOING TO BE THEN !!

[Haedrian]

Clearly some sort of gingerbread cookie coated in honey

Meaningless statement

[It doesn't come easy]

Youtube doubled its revenues last year

So, was that $13 to $26 or $13,000,000,000 to $26,000,000,000?

Re:Meaningless statement

[santax]

I was about to ask, what is minus 289.000.000 when you double it, and is this good?

Re:Meaningless statement

[camperdave]

Youtube doubled its revenues last year

So, was that $13 to $26 or $13,000,000,000 to $26,000,000,000?

Double is double, so return to your toil and stop making trouble.

Re:Meaningless statement

[ILMTitan]

How do you achieve negative revenues (as opposed to profit, where negative values make sense)?

Re:Meaningless statement

[MozeeToby]

Youtube doubled its revenues last year. Emphasis added.

The statement says nothing about profits, or profit margins; it's entirely possible to make a $1 billion profit one year, double your revenues the next year and suddenly be losing money. In Youtube's case it is probably a very good sign though, since no one really had any idea 5 years ago how to go about monetizing it.

Re:Meaningless statement

[santax]

I don't know, ask the guys that run youtube, sjee.

Re:Meaningless statement

[jackbird]

..or costs. Like, um, bandwidth bills. And lawyers.

Re:Meaningless statement

[h4rr4r]

Nope, those come out of revenue and would give you a loss, or a negative profit if you like. It would not give you negative revenue.

Re:Meaningless statement

[hedwards]

Actually it's really important. Revenue isn't the same thing as profit. I might own a restaurant and observe that last year to this I doubled my revenue. I might very well still be going out of business because the revenue might still be insufficient to cover my costs. Which is the GP's point to an extent, doubling from $13 to $26 is doubling, even if it's less pocket change than all the employees put together possess.

Re:Meaningless statement

[tehcyder]

Nope, those come out of revenue and would give you a loss, or a negative profit if you like. It would not give you negative revenue.

Nope, those come out of expenses and would give you a loss, or a negative profit if you like. It would not give you negative revenue

Re:Meaningless statement

[h4rr4r]

Yup, Said it better than I did.

Re:WHAT UNHOLY THING IS THAT GOING TO BE THEN !!

[Toe, The]

That's where you're wrong. It's more likely some sort of gingerbread house made out of honeycomb cereal.

Sheeze. Don't you know anything about technology?

Re:Who gives a rat's ass.

[MozeeToby]

Developers who would rather write to one target slightly fragmented target than to two significantly fragmented targets?

Where's Gingerbread?

[TheSeventh]

Shouldn't they focus on something like, oh I don't know, actually Releasing Gingerbread for existing phones, like they said they were doing "in a few weeks" back in November/December?

No updates, no word from Google about why they aren't sending it out. Looks like things might be falling apart over there.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[wsxyz]

What do you mean? Good DID release Gingerbread for existing phones. They released it to the OEMs.
Oh, your OEM declined to make it available to you? Too bad...

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[PitaBred]

But it's only on the Nexus S. They were going to release it for the Nexus One and others, but those plans seem to be on hold. I'm using 2.3 on my N1 via the nightly Cyanogen builds but it's definitely got a bunch of quirks in it still. I'm betting Google is going to just release 2.4 as their next "standard" release that's widely distributed.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[mswhippingboy]

Gingerbread is out and has been since December. It's the handset manufacturers that are slow about putting it out on the phones.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[DeathFromSomewhere]

It's up to the manufacturers or adventurous third parties to port Gingerbread to their phones. The source code and SDK have been released for some time now.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[TheSeventh]

I have the Nexus One, so my "OEM" is Google.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[idontgno]

Gingerbread? 2.3?

It's released.

Oh, do you mean, "Shouldn't they focus on pressuring Android phone manufacturers and network providers to release their own OTA updates to existing phones?"

Google don't play that.

May I recommend Cyanogenmod nightlies? I'm running CM7 Nightly 30 and it's rocking Android 2.3.2 flawlessly on my CDMA HTC Desire. If you're waiting for your network-providing gatekeeping overlords... well, I hope you enjoy waiting.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[mrops]

Well I still don't have it on my Nexus One, so its not an OEM issue. Of what I have heard, they are doing some changes so Gingerbread 2.3, will release 2.4 so Honeycomb dual core applications run on Gingerbread single core phones. Which is why most OEM are waiting for 2.4 as it takes effort to do their thing before they can release it. They don't want to release 2.3 and then 2.4 just to support apps from honeycomb.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[secondsun]

OP was referring to the Nexus One (Google's phone). Gingerbread hasn't OTAed to the Nexus One yet. In December they said it would be in a few weeks and it has turned into in a few months.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[mswhippingboy]

I'm betting Google is going to just release 2.4 as their next "standard" release that's widely distributed.

Better hedge that bet.

Motorola Atrix coming in March will be 2.3 (actually 2.3.3 I believe).

Most of the dual-core phones coming out the first half of the year will be 2.3.3 because of it's better dual-core support.

2.4 (Ice Cream) is still a ways out from release, so most of the new phones will be 2.3 (Gingerbread) and new tablets will be 3.0 (Honeycomb).

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[FunkyELF]

Right.... CM7 is quirky on N1, what makes you think Google's version is any better if they even have one?
I doubt Google is sitting on a stable 2.3 update for N1.
While I say that... I'd bet there are exclusivity deals between Samsung and Google regarding updates, but those time periods can be used to polish and fix bugs anyway.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[TheSeventh]

Gingerbread? 2.3?

It's released.

Oh, do you mean, "Shouldn't they focus on pressuring Android phone manufacturers and network providers to release their own OTA updates to existing phones?"

Google don't play that.

May I recommend Cyanogenmod nightlies? I'm running CM7 Nightly 30 and it's rocking Android 2.3.2 flawlessly on my CDMA HTC Desire. If you're waiting for your network-providing gatekeeping overlords... well, I hope you enjoy waiting.

Yeah, see I have a Nexus One, so I'm not sure how they would pressure themselves . . . ? And with no updates and no word on when it will happen, I figure something must be falling apart over there. Apparently these days, Google doesn't play much at all. But they do like to talk about how much they are doing.

I'll give it a few more days and then I'll go the cyanogenmod route. I was just being too lazy to want to deal with any quirks or bugs not worked out yet with the nightlies.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[ChunderDownunder]

which is why the Android model of open source is fundamentally broken, imho. But then it was never about the customer.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[idontgno]

Yeah, I saw that you replied to another poster about having a Nexus. My clever post and yours crossed in the mail, I guess.

Still, most Nexus Ones were HTC-made, so it's probable that Google doesn't have as much leverage as you might think.

I've had no problems with CM7, after rooting my Desire. Battery life is somewhat better than the stock Android 2.1 that came preloaded.

So, yeah, I'm fairly happy with the nightlies, but I'm looking forward to when the nice people at CM get a definitive 7.0 official release out there.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[TheSeventh]

And apparently it isn't about existing users either. No updates and no word about what's going on. Eric Schmidt, their twitter account, and their blog all said 2.3 was coming out in a few weeks, and this was in November/December, and the Nexus One was supposed to be among the first to get it, but it's now the middle of February and Nothing!

No explanations, no apologies for the delay, just a bunch of hype last year that it was coming out and then silence.

You'd think a multi-billion dollar global corporation would have better PR than this.

And if they're holding it back to boost sales of new phones, then they are in fact Evil and I'll throw this crap away and get something that isn't Android or iPhone because I trust Apple about as much as I trust M$.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Facegarden]

But it's only on the Nexus S. They were going to release it for the Nexus One and others, but those plans seem to be on hold. I'm using 2.3 on my N1 via the nightly Cyanogen builds but it's definitely got a bunch of quirks in it still. I'm betting Google is going to just release 2.4 as their next "standard" release that's widely distributed.

While I also am using CM7 on my N1 and wish Google would release a damn stable version already, I imagine they're pretty busy. I'd *much* rather they spend all of their energy on making Honeycomb kick ass than releasing Gingerbread for more phones. Gingerbread is a nice update, but Honeycomb tablets will be shipping soon (supposedly) and they really want to ship them with the best possible software they can. Not only am I much more interested in a honeycomb tablet than stable Gingerbread on my phone, I also want regular people to choose honeycomb over the ipad.

Also, the Nexus one (and maybe the older dev phones) and the only ones google has any ability to "release" updates for. For the rest of the phones out there, its up to the manufacturer. Clearly cyanogen/koush et al have been working their asses off and they aren't done, I don't see any reason why the manufacturers would be any farther.
-Taylor

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[TheSeventh]

I know T-Mobile has nothing to do with it and won't support it, and HTC would only support the hardware, so I'm pretty sure it's a Google thing, but no posts on their twitter account and no updates or apologies after they didn't deliver when they said they would makes me think things are seriously falling apart. If I worked there I'd switch over to Facebook too like so many other googlers have done (not to mention the stock options for working at Facebook before the inevitable IPO). Is this why Eric Schmidt is leaving? Things are a mess and he doesn't want to deal with it anymore?

There's always been certain things about Android that weren't all that great to begin with, but you deal with it because there should be another update coming along soon to hopefully fix those things and provide a better UI. I mean, there isn't even a way to empty the trash folder on the built-in email software. Is this really something they haven't been able to figure out yet?

But if they lie about the OTA release dates, or are incapable of meeting deadlines, or can't fix bugs in their software on a timely basis, it's no longer worth dealing with and you switch to something more reliable.

If the Nexus One isn't updated by this weekend I'm putting CM7 on it, and will not be buying an Android anything in the future.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[mlts]

This isn't really Google's fault. I'm sure that most of the devices out on the market that hardware wise could easily support 2.4 will never receive an official update to it, other than Google's, and at best, the ROM makers will have to kexec in the new functionality, assuming there isn't a mechanism that prevents that from happening.

It is sad these days, but the only Android phones worth buying are the ones from Google due to signed kernels, e-fuses, and other crap.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Facegarden]

which is why the Android model of open source is fundamentally broken, imho. But then it was never about the customer.

This is such a stupid fucking argument.

"Oh my god they released in December and it takes months for manufacturers to port to their devices! Android is broken!"

You don't realize it, but this is the right way to do it. How would you expect it to work? Embedded development takes time, there's no way to avoid that. Even on full PCs there is a delay. Take Windows - they come out with new releases only once in many years, so they can easily delay the release 6 months to allow manufacturers to port their drivers - and thats what they do. Microsoft has a Release Candidate of windows ready many months before they "release", but no one complains about that. If google told us "Yup, the next version is done, so we're releasing to manufacturers and you'll see it in 6 months." people would get just as upset. And it wouldn't make sense to do - some people port faster and can use the new features sooner - so just release all the source and let the OEMs sort it out.

You could look at Ubuntu - it releases all at once to everything - but then, thats where computers differ from phones. Computers have enough extra space and resources that PC operating systems like Windows and Ubuntu just include drivers for every piece of hardware they can - windows has many hundreds of megabytes of *extra* stuff on the disk just to make sure whatever network card you happen to have will work. Phones don't have all that extra space. Computers are also all built with certain things being constant. Phones have to be highly optimized though, so everything about them varies. The notification lights are hooked up to different pins on the microcontroller, different features on a bluetooth chip are enabled depending on space requirements, etc. All the code for every component has to be ported to exactly how that device is laid out. So far NO ONE has come up with a good solution for building a mobile phone OS that can be universally upgraded without issue. Thats something google is trying to do with Android, but thats one hell of an undertaking. They say Gingerbread includes some features that will help, but dude, this stuff is all new, it takes time.

So chill out and think about what you say.
-Taylor

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[amRadioHed]

Google is entirely responsible for the software on the N1 and NS, not the hardware manufacturers. Google uses these phones to develop the OS, so an update for these phones already exists before a new version is ever released to the public.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[shutdown -p now]

I think GP was referring to the fact that e.g. HTC has recently announced that they'll be going straight for 2.4 for their existing pre-2.3 phones.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[RocketRabbit]

You just explained why people are choosing not to code applications for Android.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[shutdown -p now]

This isn't really Google's fault.

How is it not Google's fault that Nexus One - a phone with Google branding that was sold by Google and touted as the device to buy if you want it to remain up-to-date with respect to Android releases - still doesn't have 2.3, months after it is available on Nexus S?

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[shutdown -p now]

Still, most Nexus Ones were HTC-made, so it's probable that Google doesn't have as much leverage as you might think.

The whole point of Nexus One (and now also Nexus S), aside from being "officially rootable", is that they run stock Android with no modifications. HTC was only involved in putting the hardware together for Nexus One; they don't control its software, nor is their participation required in updating it. Not pushing that update is solely Google's fault.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Facegarden]

which is why the Android model of open source is fundamentally broken, imho. But then it was never about the customer.

This is such a stupid fucking argument.

"Oh my god they released in December and it takes months for manufacturers to port to their devices! Android is broken!"

You don't realize it, but this is the right way to do it. How would you expect it to work?

Like iOS?

Apple says "oh hey new version of iOS is out and you can instantly get it for any iOS phone that's been out the past 2 or 3 years with a simple update"

Takes months for manufacturers, maybe, if they actually were trying. They could have been experimenting with the beta version of Gingerbread and have it working by the time it was officially released. Hell what about all those Android phones still on 2.1, or worse, 1.6?

Wow, you really don't get it. Apple tests iOS with every device they release it for, because, uh, there's only like 10 of them, and they created them all.

And actually, I checked and what you said isn't even fucking true. iOS 4 came out last summer for phones and ipod touches, but not until fall for iPads. And it wasn't compatible with anything made before the iPhone 3GS - so, half of the iPhone models got left behind. So you're full of shit.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/08/iphone-os-4-0-unveiled-shipping-this-summer/

And yes, the nice thing about apple controlling every piece of hardware is that they can release for many devices at once, but that's not how Android works and I hardly consider that broken. If you want to work with multiple manufacturers using open source code, you have to accept that not everyone will jump on a release immediately. I'd much rather have many manufacturers than one, so like I said, I hardly consider it broken.
-Taylor

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[shutdown -p now]

Oh... two months to release a major upheaval in system updates, you poor baby.

What's major in 2.3 compared to 2.2?

Meanwhile, Microsoft is pushing on 4+ months or something for WP7 to release the first minor update allowing copy&paste.

It's just as annoying, but it's not a minor update (it's not just about copy&paste - it's just that this is the single most obvious missing feature, which is why it's always mentioned first).

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

You could have fooled me. There's no shortage of developers working on Android software.

If you want your app to run on everything from $120 Huawei Cricket phones to the Motorola Atrix, Android is your choice.

If you want your app to be on the most popular smartphone platform, Android is your choice.

If you decide to forgo being on the platform your customers use because you can't handle compatibility testing, then your customers will decide to become customers of another developer who is less lazy.

Writing software is hard work. We do not live in a homogeneous world and you cannot expect a single device model to meet everyone's needs. You can accept that and try to work within that framework (with the understanding that it's not as bad as the pundits say - Google has done a lot of work to abstract away the differences between devices). Or you can decide that it's not worth your time and money and develop for a smaller fragment of the market.

You may wish that we lived in a world where everyone uses the same hardware. We don't. Android gives you the ability to target an incredible range of devices at the cost of additional compatibility testing and workarounds. You may not be willing to accept that compromise, but your competitors almost certainly are.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[alostpacket]

Yeah! Amen!


errr...

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Merk42]

So does development 'take time' or is it that the OEMs shouldn't feel obligated to do it? Hmm I heard the Windows 7 SP1 went RTM, I hope {insert OEM} tests it for every computer they make so users can download the version specific to what they have. Oh, I know, Android is FOSS so it's different...okay. I heard Ubuntu 11.04 is coming out end of April, I hope {insert OEM} tests it for every configuration so I can download the specific Ubuntu version for my hardware. Also, nice job saying iOS wasn't released for iPad until later when I specifically said "iOS Phone". I'll concede that I was wrong in its availability, it's only for iPhone 4 and 3GS, which is still twice as many as Gingerbread.

I don't really expect OEMs to jump on it immediately, but it would be nice if they jumped on it AT ALL. Two months after it was released with the Nexus S, and not a single phone has been upgraded to Gingerbread, not even Google's other dog fooding phone, the Nexus One.

The truth of the matter is that is it far more lucrative for Telcos and OEMs to not support upgrades in any Android phones, instead making the user shell out more money for newer hardware/contract.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[BitZtream]

I want my app to be the most profitable, you loose.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[BitZtream]

I know of at least one person who didn't by an iPhone because that update would solve his problem and he'd be happy and not want to switch.

So their PR worked, he didn't buy one in December ...

However, instead he was more pissed off last week when finally got tired of waiting and bought an iPhone :/

And now the PR was worse than if they had said nothing at all.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[BitZtream]

Shouldn't they focus on something like, oh I don't know, actually Releasing Gingerbread for existing phones, like they said they were doing "in a few weeks" back in November/December?

The source is available, has been for a while. OEMs could have it running on their phones now, but they haven't done so yet, why should they, wheres the profit?

No updates, no word from Google about why they aren't sending it out. Looks like things might be falling apart over there.

Its not falling apart, its the same now as it was the day the Nexus One went on sale, you're just now noticing.

If you want OEMs to actually provide updates and do so in a timely manner, you need to incentivize it.

If Google wants OEMs to upgrade old devices they need to provide a way for that upgrade to make money for the OEM/Provider.

iOS gets upgraded because Apple adds new features that make them more money, so its in their financial interests to make sure all their phones can run it and users want to upgrade too it.

You want HTC to get 2.3 on a phone quickly? You're going to need to come up with some sort of motivation like Apple has to do so.

These OEMS are corporations. They're legally required to try to make money. Yes, I know that corporations don't have to focus on making money, but all the ones making smartphones DO have their charters based on profit so that argument doesn't matter here. They could almost argue that its illegal for them to provide updates as it is a cost with no immediately visible or guaranteed return on it (which would be things like customer loyalty due to happiness) and you may cause them to wait longer between updates meaning you also lost a device sell.

Open source or not, theres its not cost effective to concern yourself with updating phones already sold.

If you want people to sell devices that run OSS software and you want them to support it, you are going to have to pay for it somehow. No one is bothering upgrading Android phones so you have no incentive to switch to someone else, which means they have no reason to worry about upgrading you to keep you, so they have no incentive. They win. You aren't going to beat them by being a bunch of OSS vegan pussies and making empty threats about shopping elsewhere (which is going to buy you the same thing anyway), you're going to have to play their game and balance that with keeping the Android open enough for your tastes.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[RocketRabbit]

I do not view Android developers as my competition, as $92 out of every $100 spent on mobile applications in 2010 was spent on the iOS family of devices. Why would I fight with a legion of other people for what amounts to a much more pitiful market full of people who are cheap and got the generic Android that their carrier tossed in "for free" when I can go for both a more numerous and affluent group of consumers, especially if I need to separately test for "an incredible range of devices?"

That's just silly.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[headbulb]

Google has the proper driver versions, while CM7 does not.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[ChunderDownunder]

they can easily delay the release 6 months to allow manufacturers to port their drivers

I thought we were talking about updating existing hardware to a new release. In other words, the drivers are already written.

PC operating systems like Windows and Ubuntu just include drivers for every piece of hardware they can

These operating systems are released in binary form for generic hardware. The process of building a release for a specific device ought to be much simpler. The hardware is known exactly in advance. A device manufacturer can submit a hardware profile to a buildbot and an image can be built on the fly - unique to that hardware profile.
Where drivers can't be submitted upstream in source form, binary blobs can be linked as part of the build process. e.g. Nokia's xorg drivers that dynamically build a kernel module.
This process can be automated via continuous integration. Nightly builds, regression tests, deploying updates over the air. Using a mixture of physical devices submitted to Google's build cloud and manufacturers submitting hardware emulation profiles to qemu.
Where a vendor wants to lock down the device to a custom experience, that ought to be part of the build process too, even. Custom shells, look and feels, custom apps can all be added to the nightly build by linking against Google's ever evolving API and notifying the vendor of breakage - well in advance of an official release.
With an automated process, vendor QA can download releases at frequent intervals. As a release nears and the bugs have been progressively eliminated, we're talking days and weeks not months. New devices naturally take time but for upgrades from one release to the next, it's not rocket science.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Zebedeu]

I guess you mean for the Nexus One?

Apparently they ran into problems, and have been fixing them. This was supposed to be done by January, but it got delayed, and rumours are that it should be out soon: http://phandroid.com/2011/02/16/nexus-one-getting-gingerbread-within-a-few-days

I'm also worried about this, as I just got a Nexus S exactly because I wanted to get updates on time, and the way they treat Nexus One now is a good indicator of how well they'll treat the Nexus S in ~1 year (at least, I hope :-)

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[MorpheousMarty]

That's Ok. Android is a Trojan horse. Sure, right now the handset manufactures and cell phone companies drag their feet it getting things done, but eventually the tech will be so cheap that no one will be able to hold it hostage. Take a look at this phone:

http://thedroidguy.com/2011/01/ces-rewind-huawei-unveils-the-x-5/

It runs stock android, is comparable to the nexus one, and sells for around $250 in the third world, unlocked. That combined with Google Voice means this is the last year you will need a contract to have a smartphone in the US. That will shift the power from the Telcos quite heavily, and sets the stage for what Google needs to finish the power shift, and improve the software update process: release reference specs for their phones, the same way nVidia does their graphics cards.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Merk42]

The X-5 Comes with 2.2 however it wont be updated to 2.3.

So how exactly is this phone an example of easy/quick upgrades?

Even if Google Voice eliminates the need for a contract, it's still the OEMs that would stand to make more money from people buying a new phone unlocked rather than upgrading their existing one for free.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[Rosyna]

I have one word that discredits everything you just said: Apple

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[MorpheousMarty]

The X-5 Comes with 2.2 however it wont be updated to 2.3.

So how exactly is this phone an example of easy/quick upgrades?

Even if Google Voice eliminates the need for a contract, it's still the OEMs that would stand to make more money from people buying a new phone unlocked rather than upgrading their existing one for free.

You're absolutely right. I was using that phone as an example of just how quickly unsubsidized Android phones will be changing the user/manufacture/carrier relationship. The main advantage carriers have over us is that we can't really afford these phones without a subsidy, and they won't give it to us without expensive plans. Breaking that link is the first step to real hardware/network independence. And you're right, that has nothing to do with software upgrades.

You are also right that OEM will benefit a lot from that change, the but competition will be fierce. The easiest way to lower development costs will be to eliminate any software customization. That will improve the upgrade cycle.

The only other thing I think Google could do to improve the process after that is release a reference hardware to eliminate the development costs for manufactures almost entirely (like nVidia has for their cards), and then take over the software updates on those phones.

Re:Where's Gingerbread?

[deoxyribonucleose]

I have one word that discredits everything you just said: Apple

What an extraordinarily silly comment! Were you trying for humour?

OT Question

[MozeeToby]

The new comments system... is it supposed to be hiding responses to low rated comments? Take this one for example, it will start out life rated at 2 (including the karma bonus) but won't be visible on the page unless you have set filtering to -1 because the GP is rated at -1. This seems extremely broken to me.

Re:OT Question

[xehonk]

This new behaviour made me switch back to the classic comment system - in D1 the comments will still show up no matter how the parent is rated.

Re:OT Question

[pavon]

How do you get to the options to do this? Ever since the change, when I click on the Options link at the topp, the page flashes grey, then nothing happens. I had written user CSS that reverted D2 to it's old style, but the last tweak to the site broke it, and I'm tired of fighting with it.

Re:OT Question

[ToasterMonkey]

The new comments system... is it supposed to be hiding responses to low rated comments? Take this one for example, it will start out life rated at 2 (including the karma bonus) but won't be visible on the page unless you have set filtering to -1 because the GP is rated at -1. This seems extremely broken to me.

My problem is that you have replied to a -1 post without quoting any of it and expect your voice to be heard over what you are responding to. This is bad, for you and everyone, because it ends up with a bunch of wasted competing up/down mods due to confusing/misleading/lack of context. It also, naturally, pisses off non-moderators reading it.

They can't make you quote stuff, but they can hide you behind hidden posts, where you wouldn't make any sense showing through anyway.
(Or they could treat the post hierarchy with some fucking respect, but I'm not holding my breath.)

Re:OT Question

[Kalriath]

Wrong option. You need to click on "Account". If the Ajax continues to get in the way, right click on Account and select "Open in New Tab" or "Open in New Window".

I'll miss inline expansion and commenting, but by dammit that new style was beginning to piss me off.

Re:OT Question

[Tubal-Cain]

I've got to try that. I love the hotkeys, but the recent redesign hides all child comments when the current comment is collapsed.

And it is called....

[bobby1234]

It will be called Honeybread cause for some reason Gingercomb just doesn't work!

Sent from my iPad!

Re:And it is called....

[game kid]

I expect it'll be called Cutie Honey, after the ginger.

Re:And it is called....

[drb226]

It will be called Honeybread cause for some reason Gingercomb just doesn't work!

Sent from my iPad!

Don't forget that's what they said about "iPad". If you have momentum with the sheeple, you can make anything work.

It's?

[war4peace]

"of it's mobile operating system Android."
Please correct to: "of its mobile operating system Android."

...And before you call me "grammar nazi", please remember English is not my native language.
I just feel sad when a website EDITORS disregard the correctness of their mother tongue.

Re:It's?

[DittoBox]

English is a stupid language full of exceptions. It took me years to get the apostrophe out of, "its," when used possessively. If we referred to it as, "Google's mobile operating system," it'd be correct. When we use the pronoun we remove the apostrophe while it's possessive, because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."

We native speakers get it wrong because English—in spite of its advantages—is a language chock full of weird rules that always have exceptions. Not that it's an excuse for the editors though.

Re:It's?

[RazzleFrog]

At least we don't have to deal with things like "der" "die" and "das". And many languages have dialects that are so different that they almost should be separate languages.

Re:It's?

[angus77]

...because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."

Not "because". Otherwise we'd have trouble disambiguating "Google's" (possessive) and "Google's" (for Google is). Just admit the rule is arbitrary.

...in spite of its advantages...

These kinds of statements always bother me. English's advantages have nothing to do with its grammar, syntax or lexicon. It's the de facto lingua franca for science and business right now, but the fashionable language changes every couple of centuries or so, and for reasons that have nothing to do with anything inherent in the language.

Re:It's?

[bluefoxlucid]

Advantages of English? I know some advantages of Japanese....

Re:It's?

[painandgreed]

Other languages have that issue also. I remember a German friend saying how the Berliners wouldn't be able to understand her if she spoke in her normal Bavarian dialect that she was using with family and neighbors two days earlier.

Re:It's?

[arkenian]

English is a stupid language full of exceptions. It took me years to get the apostrophe out of, "its," when used possessively. If we referred to it as, "Google's mobile operating system," it'd be correct. When we use the pronoun we remove the apostrophe while it's possessive, because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."

Ummmm. Actually we don't 'remove the apostrophe' its is the third person gender neutral possessive pronoun like 'his'..... it's its own word.

Re:It's?

[war4peace]

I beg to differ.
"it's" is a contraction of "it is" all the time.
"its", however, means that the subject belongs to the referred object, so to speak.

Generally speaking, all languages are full of weird rules, exceptions and so on. This ain't an excuse, it's (NOT "its") a fact and we have to live with it, because all native languages are organic and have a varying degree of randomness. But if we can't be arsed to learn the mother language properly... well I just think it's kind of sad.

Re:It's?

[shutdown -p now]

There are many silly things in English (just as there are in most natural languages, to be honest), but "its" vs "it's" is not one of them - it's entirely logical and consistent, and easy to distinguish if you understand the difference between the two. I'm actually surprised at how many native English speakers get it wrong repeatedly - in my experience, foreign speakers seem to have a better grasp of it, especially among young people. Perhaps it is because in other languages, the same two concepts are rendered by words which are much more distinct in the first place.

Re:It's?

[vakuona]

I read somewhere where someone was arguing that there are 2 English languages, the spoken and the written, and that they may as well be completely different languages. A lot of people for whom English is their first language cannot write it properly. Non native speakers seem to do better, and perhaps that has to do with the fact that they learn both at the same time.

Re:It's?

[Registered Coward v2]

At least those have nice clear rules and are fairly portable across languages. English has dialects so far apart they are not easily understood by other native speakers. I once offended a Dell support person when I asked to be transferred to someone with better English and he informed me he was in the Southern US and a native. An Indian would have been far easier to understand.

Just cousin youins chain't unner stand usen ifin yawl ain't from round heruh ain't usein's fahwlt.

Re:It's?

[exomondo]

I once offended a Dell support person when I asked to be transferred to someone with better English and he informed me he was in the Southern US and a native. An Indian would have been far easier to understand.

Sounds like an issue with accent rather than language.

Re:It's?

[exomondo]

"it's" is a contraction of "it is" all the time.

Except when it's "it has".

Re:It's?

[BitZtream]

"it's" is a contraction of "it is" all the time.

Except when it's "it has".

I can't think of an example where using it's would fit in place of it has.

Re:It's?

[exomondo]

"it's" is a contraction of "it is" all the time.

Except when it's "it has".

I can't think of an example where using it's would fit in place of it has.

Wow...really? It's been raining here lately.

Re:It's?

[dunkelfalke]

Nobody else (maybe except Austrians) understands Bavarians. For many Germans it is actually often easier to understand Dutch than Bavarian dialects.

Re:It's?

[war4peace]

Ouch. True. The disadvantage of not having English as mother language is on me.

Re:It's?

[h4rr4r]

Forget the Bavarians, try talking to a northerner one time.

Wir kÃnnen alles ausser Hochdeutsch.

Re:It's?

[Curate]

English's advantages have nothing to do with its grammar, syntax or lexicon. It's the de facto lingua franca

The english language is the french language, got it. :)

Re:It's?

[angus77]

The "franca" in "lingua franca" doesn't refer to French. It was originally italian for "Frankish Language". Frankish was a Germanic language.

Although something like 75% of the English lexicon comes from French, and even a bit of our syntax.

Re:It's?

[angus77]

Every language has those kinds of arbitrary rules. English has ditched gender, but it sure doesn't lack in arbitrary, crufty complexity when it comes to syntax, irregular plurals, irregular verbs, verbs that mean one thing when they're transitive and another when they're intransitive.

Even Esperanto hasn't escaped from this arbitrary cruft---the "-in-" bullshit, and why does "brusxi" become "brusxo" while "kombi" becomes "kombilo"? If you can't keep that stuff out of a constructed language, could you have any hope of finding a natural language that's free of it?

Re:It's?

[angus77]

The example (while totally correct) may not convince everyone. I have heard people expand such a sentence to "It is been raining here lately." Just as many people write "could of" instead of "could've". Just try to explain to these people why they're wrong.

Re:It's?

[angus77]

Good point. I read once that a real test to see how well a foreign speaker of English knows the language is to see if they use "then" and "than" correctly. A foreign learner will learn the spelling first, and thus will actually pronounce the words differently. If they get to a high enough level of speaking, they will learn to pronounce them the same---and then come the spelling mistakes.

New version every 6 months...

[FunkyELF]

Google has promised Android updates will arrive every six months

Consumers don't care about Google's promise of Android updates unless they actually reach the customers.
Developers don't care about Google's promise of Android updates for the same reason... unless those updates reach customers developers wanting to target that huge android base need to target the lowest common denominator.

http://designdare.com/how-to-buy-an-iphone-at-the-worst-possible-ti

Re:New version every 6 months...

[ebs16]

Consumers don't care about Google's schedule for Android updates for two reasons:

1) Average consumers are still used to dumb phones. The concept of upgrading the device never crosses their minds. (Hell, most average users I know don't even install security updates on Windows, even when nagged by me and the OS. And don't get me started on Java or Adobe.)

2) Anyone who would want to update their Android phone still has to wait for their device manufacturer to release a device-specific update. You can't just install any old Android build on your phone without issues (anything from usability bugs to toasted hardware).

Re:New version every 6 months...

[GweeDo]

Yeah, this whole fragmentation thing is just killing us Android dev's right???

Or not: http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html

90% of all users that connect to the Market are now on Android 2.1 or greater. Android 2.2 and 2.3 haven't brought any kind of huge API changes that require you lock out 2.1 users to get some awesome new feature. The new "big thing" is going to be the Fragments API and it will support all the way back to Android 1.6.

Now, don't get me wrong. I want everyone that can be to be on 2.3 yesterday, but it isn't exactly a big deal.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[JanneM]

Consumers don't care about updates.

Most people get a phone - smartphone included - and use it. They don't particularly care about different OS versions, follow release announcements or read blogs that obsessively list the changelogs from minor update to minor update. They get their Samsung or HTC or Xperia and use it. If an update comes their way it's something between a delightful surprise and an unwelcome source of anxiety.

Ask most Android or iOS users and they'll have no idea what version they use. They are likely to know when a new phone model is available, but not the version of the OS.

The people who care about OS versions and want to run the latest at all times are geeks. We are a small minority, and we're only a vocal minority on the geek blogs and geek websites that only geeks visit.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[hedwards]

The main irritation I have with the delays is that there's still functionality in my Nexus One that Google hasn't unlocked.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[GweeDo]

Far from it. 2.2 brings the JIT compiler which offers some great performance boosts. This doesn't affect dev's in a feature sense, but faster phones are faster phones. 2.3 really only brought NFC to the API and right now, that doesn't do much for us. It did bring some new basic UI elements that look really nice, but again...that doesn't change my code or lock out 2.1 users.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[roc97007]

When a new OS comes out, updates do matter because they solve significant bugs or add significant functionality. As the OS matures, updates become less and less important.

The update from 2.1 to 2.2 does have some importance to non-geeks because 2.2 has flash support. Even as a geek I'm not sure what 2.3 will buy me if anything, which indicates (at least to me) that we may be getting up on the mature end of the curve.

Not to name any names -- SAMSUNG -- but the update to 2.2 is important. After that, maybe not so much.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[TheSeventh]

I heartily disagree.

The levels of these phones, both Android and iOS, and still pretty new, and therefore lack a lot of desired functionality when compared to computers, Android just recently acquired Flash capability, iOS still hasn't. That's a large part of the internet that isn't available.

With all the publicity around the phone and tablet releases, people are paying much more attention to OS releases, and feature upgrades. Comments such as "the new iPhone is coming out, but I just got mine 6 months ago, but at least they'll upgrade mine to have some of the new functionality" are very common.

With most people locked into device upgrades only 18 - 24 months, you bet they are concerned about new functionality, especially when everybody around them has a phone that can do things their phone can't, unless they get an upgrade to provide some of those same capabilities.

Re:New version every 6 months...

[Snaller]

"Consumers don't care about Google's promise of Android updates..."

Period.

Consumers don't care. A small group of nerds care. But the big majority don't give a crap. They bought a phone based someone they needed (facebook, twitter, music whatever) - and they are happy with it.
They don't check for updates every 30 seconds. Nor do they keep replacing the phone.
They keep it and use it for a long time and are happy with what they have. If there suddenly is an update that is an unexpected surprise - they have no idea of version numbers or nick names and they don't care.

Name that author

[Toe, The]

Is this an obscure reference, or does everyone know this one?

Gritty Kitty ain't so pretty, but it's really thick
It fits my cat box oh, so snug, it always does the trick

I love to pour it on my toe, and squish, and squish, and squish
It ne'er offends my tender nose like a smelly fish

Its texture is a joy to me, it's just as smooth as silk
It makes my little whiskers twitch; it stays crunchy, even in milk

I may not be the President, I may not be the Pope
But as long as I have Gritty Kitty, I shall never mope.

Re:Name that author

[omi5cron]

is that from Ren & Stimpy? sounds vaguely familiar, but its been many years.

Re:Name that author

[ColdWetDog]

it stays crunchy, even in milk

No you fool. We're nowhere near that erudite. It's from a stupid breakfast cereal,

Re:Who gives a rat's ass.

[gorzek]

I guess you give enough of one to post a reply, eh?

Sucks but thats the way it is

[FunkyELF]

Interesting how Apple is also interested in selling more devices yet they still ship updates to their older phones.
That must piss off the networks but Apple can get away with it because of the limited number of models it has to support.

Re:Sucks but thats the way it is

[mlts]

Apple makes money because of the ecosystem involved. It is in their financial interest to keep older devices updated, because it means customers continue to buy from their App Store.

It is in Google's interest to keep providing updates as well for the same reason. However, the real sticks in the mud are the cellphone makers and the carriers. They hate the thought of upgrades because they don't make money from app stores, only from handset turnover.

Re:Most likely a good thing

[AndrewNeo]

I just think that it's ironic that Chrome OS is less useful than Android.

Twitter acquisition

[vlueboy]

Great... big scary companies that can't earn our trust force us to "sign up" by purchasing their replacements that we did trust. First it was USA banks getting gobbled up, and our diversity perks disappearing after the acquisition. Now, big web companies either create "sign into Yahoo with your Facebook ID" kind of mergers. TFA mentions the twitter question "dodge" very shortly, but to me it counts as guiltily "pleading the fifth"*. When they acquire twitter, they can get data on my habits that I chose NOT to give up when everybody opted-OUT of joining Google BUZZ exactly 12 months ago.

Youtube refused to let me in with my 4-year old YOUTUBE username to view a video yesterday... apparently they don't care; they want me to sign in with a Google address. Nothing is stopping me from faking data and so on, but nothing will fool their geolocation tracking and their silently associating my video playlists with the content of those emails I receive. Twitter data would provide my outing habits and random data to mine. Eventually it will be a giant single company out there with access to everything, and in the end, we'll have nobody left to trust.

* amendment of the USA constitution against self-incrimination

Re:Twitter acquisition

[acecamaro666]

Hey Glenn Beck, u mad... http://idle.slashdot.org/story/11/02/15/1349242/Glen-Beck-Warns-Viewers-Not-To-Use-Google

And a new name

[Anonymous Coward]

They are going to re-label it 'Diabetes'.

I shall try to do the same.

[Grael]

It sounds quite delicious.

Re:iPhones getting bigger and smaller

[Jesse_vd]

Why not offer iDevices in every major size increment?
Tiny- Shuffle
1.5" screen- Nano
2.5" screen- iPod Classic/iPhone Mini
3.5" screen- iPod/iPhone (mostly likely becomes 4" soon)
7" screen- iPad Mini (or iSlate or something else equally vomit-inducing)
9.7" screen- iPad
11"+ run OSX

Re:iPhones getting bigger and smaller

[Sepodati]

I was thinking something along the same lines today. Offer a smaller 7" iPad. Larger and smaller iPhones. iPhones with slide-out keyboards. I know it's not trivial to shrink a 10" iPad to a 7" or add a keyboard, but it's a one-time engineering deal. Otherwise you instantly lose out on the 7" market or phone with keyboard market. I know I'm not the first to think/wish along these lines. Apple will be Apple, though... who knows why they do (or don't do) certain things.

-John

Re:Most likely a good thing

[Tacvek]

ChromeOS will likely get folded into Android proper after the Google TV source (minus the Google-specific apps of course) is finally released.
The OS of Google TV is Android, but Google claims the browser is actually just the standard Linux Chrome with some UI tweaks to blend in as a coherent whole. If that is true, as I suspect it is, much of the ChromeOS code can be folded in, where and as applicable.

They have

[Snaller]

2.3 is Gingerbread

And 2.4 when its out will still be Gingerbread.