Slashdot Mirror
Android 4.1 Jelly Bean Review
New submitter codysleiman points out a review of Android 4.1 (Jelly Bean) at The Verge. They say the look and feel of Google's mobile operating system has improved in a few different ways. Aesthetically, it isn't trying quite so hard as it did in Gingerbread and Ice Cream Sandwich, making the UI less of a distraction. While performance benchmarks aren't much different, Jelly Bean forces 60fps throughout and lets the GPU, CPU and display run independently, so it at least feels smoother and more responsive. Another big area of improvement is notifications: "You can tap a share button on photos, calendar appointments give you a snooze or email attendees option, missed calls provide direct call-back buttons. ... Google has introduced APIs for actions on notifications and I hope that app developers take advantage of them, because it would be nice to have more actions on a variety of different apps." The new on-screen keyboard also got some much-needed updates, and Google Now looks promising.
apparently the time is still off by the GPS-UTC difference, you still can't do voice commands via Bluetooth (such as when in a car dock), and the email client sends even plain text as base64 encoded.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
So I go and check my "About Tablet" and I see... 4.04! What blather are you spouting?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
It took 4 versions of iOS before Apple let the user even switch the desktop wallpaper. Apple isn't about "thinking different." It's more about "We've done the thinking for you."
The Internet King? I wonder if he could provide faster nudity.
It seems Jelly is exactly what it should be; a refinement on ICS. I must say as a mixed mobile OS user (Touchpad ICS+ Nexus, iPhone 4, Sammy Wp7) that it is really nice to hear Google is going after lag issues. If I didn't use iOS or WP7 I likely wouldn't notice, but despite some real solid improvement since Honeycomb Android has to me never felt quite as swift. To me it was really the only thing left that Google was notably behind on and especially frustrating on high end hardware, and makes me even more secure in my Nexus 7 pre-order. I'm really glad to see that unlike fans on all sides of the issue Google is able to identify concerns and kick them fast. Bodes very well for their new tablet focus.
The problem are the carriers, not Google. Once a carrier has sold you a device and locked you in to a contract, what incentive is there to keep your device up to date? It's just a money sink to them, and they'd much rather have you drooling over an early upgrade in part because of an OS upgrade too.
Personally, i like sticking to Google's phones.
That's plain disingenuous. Firefox's a blatant example of version number inflation; there's nearly no distinguishing feature between each version. Android's a fast progressing software project; new versions are frequent, but each comes with significant (sometimes drastic) changes.
You should be complaining that your phone manufacturer/mobile provider is keeping you stuck at 2.3.5 instead of complaining Google is improving the OS.
That is one of the things I think looks really interesting.
It also seem to have improved vastly over not only the old version, but also over Apple's Siri.
Some videos of the new function:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLyuWEWqYqQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw-RzN4xYyE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHkhp6BwnGo
I mean, it's still gimmicky, but it looks like an improvement. But for me it's not gonna be practical until it support my language, Norwegian. How useful is it when it can't understand the norwegian names on my contacts? Or street names? Or store names?
Still, it looks like a really fun toy... *wants*
It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
Sure.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
On PC (x86) you can run the free Android SDK which includes an emulator, or use Bluestacks which is an easy to run environment and supports most non graphically intensive apps. A word of warning with both is don't expect native high-end speed. Bluestacks is my recommendation, but even on a nice high end PC things like Netflix are just high speed slideshows.
On PPC you can find a few VM's of older versions but they will be running via emulation an x86 option. I know for a fact that I once was able to get a few running on a G5 Quad, but they were very slow and relied on the outdated VirtualPC for Mac edition.
http://www.android-x86.org/ .
but can it run itunes?
So I go and check my "About Tablet" and I see... 4.04! What blather are you spouting?
The "blather" that very few Android users as a whole are using the latest version of the OS, with all the new features that are being promoted (like this new API for example) because handset manufacturers don't want to update old phones that are perfectly capable of running ICS, and now JB, but want you to buy a new phone instead.
The last graph I saw showed that only 6 or 7% of Android handset users were on ICS, and now JB rolls around. Google needs to address that problem somehow, but I'm not really sure what it can do given the nature of the way Android works - that freedom has unfortunate side effects in some cases.
Compare that to iOS' distribution, where a *much* larger percentage are running the most recent version, making it a lot easier for developers. the trade off, of course, is that Apple tightly controls the ecosystem.
I just bought a Nexus. Neither my Nexus S nor my Galaxy Nexus have had any problems getting updates. I expect the same treatment when my Nexus 7 gets here.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Yes. If you get the Android SDK, it comes with a VM - you can run pretty much any version. (its kind of slow, as its running a java VM on a virtual ARM processor on your x86. (Though apparently the latest version is an x86 version - haven't confirmed that yet)
Warning you now though - you're running a touch OS with a mouse. Think about the reaction to Metro that people are giving.
My point is, if you don't like running it in the VM, be aware that its a much better experience on actual hardware.
-- My Sig is a P228.
I just bought a Nexus. Neither my Nexus S nor my Galaxy Nexus have had any problems getting updates. I expect the same treatment when my Nexus 7 gets here.
Good for you - you're obviously in that 5 or 6% who have phones that receive updates (or are able to be trivially updated). The vast majority of Android users are not like you, as shown by the stats. Either they simply do not update for whatever reason, or they are unable to. It's a problem that doesn't go away (and in fact, only gets worse) if those at the top of the Android food chain with the really good devices say "I'm ok, so there's no problem". This issue still affects you, since it causes problems in the Android ecosystem as a whole.
It gives trolls a convenient talking point too ;-)
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
What is the difference between feeling "smoother and more responsive" and being "smoother and more responsive"?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm asking seriously.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It gives trolls a convenient talking point too ;-)
I'm genuinely curious here, do you think I'm trolling, or do you think there's no problem with only a fractional proportion of the Android user base using the latest version of the OS, only for that OS to be already depreciated?
Clearly the "you can buy a Nexus S if you want to update" model isn't really working.
That 'problem' is solved by time. It is an unstoppable force. It marches on. When Gingerbread came out, we heard the same complaints. 6 months later, we were still hearing that complaint. At the time, most users were not on Froyo yet. Today, 64% of users are on Gingerbread and 10% are on Ice Cream. JB gets released now, and in 6 months, we will see a small percentage on JB, more users on Ice Cream and fewer on Gingerbread. With Android, you will also see people skipping releases. Eclair never made it to very many phones. It was great for those of us that got it, but most people went straight to Gingerbread. Not getting Eclair did not hinder them in any way.
With Apple, either you are an early adopter, or you are too old to care about. On Android, we have early adopters, as well as mainstream users, and late adopters. My year old phone is on Gingerbread, and iOS still hasn't caught up to it in functionality unless you buy a specific model of iPhone. So, while you can say that everyone on iPhone is running the newest OS version, while Android users are not, you can also say that every Android user can perform voice searches while iPhone users cannot.
Simply put, worries about being on the newest OS version is meaningless FUD.
There is no problem at all. If you don't care about OS updates (and many many people don't) you buy a cheaper product from a company that does not give you one. If you think it is important you buy the top models from Google or Samsung and pay the price for it. Unlike Apple products in this case you have the choice of not to paying the premium price for future upgrades if you think you don't need them.
It's just more FUD from the Slashdot anti-Android astroturf brigade.
Reality is a little different:
The bigger view comparing ICS with other Android versions shows how ICS is the only one of them that has grown its penetration percentage in the last period, and that Gingerbread may have started its S-curve decline, echoing the one that Froyo in green below has already been through:
The takeaway here? Well, despite declines, those other OSs are still being sold and used. ICS in total, he believes, now represents about 42 million devices in use, compared to 260 million running 2.3, and 70m still on 2.2, aka Froyo.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/03/melting-point-for-ics-its-share-of-android-penetration-is-growing-while-others-falling/
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Compare that to iOS' distribution, where a *much* larger percentage are running the most recent version, making it a lot easier for developers. the trade off, of course, is that Apple tightly controls the ecosystem.
"Easier for Developers"? LOL. I have developed apps for Android and I know what's required to develop apps for IOS. First of all, Android apps can be developed on Windows (all versions), linux, and OSX platforms. Apps can even be developed on Android itself. Eclipse + ADT plugin makes it very easy. IOS apps, on the other hand, can only be developed using Xcode running on OSX. Also, its pretty easy to test your Android app while in development using the emulator but most devs prefer to side-load their app onto the device because its faster and just better than using an emulator. Let's try side-loading an IOS app....oh wait, no USB port. Of course then there's the whole tightly controlled ecosystem you mentioned with Apple...Despite that, vulnerabilities still surface but I bet there are others that Apple stays tight-lipped about and maybe fixes quietly. When Android has a vulnerability, the whole world finds out through the open system of development, arguably making Android appear less secure.
But you have that choice from Apple too - you don't have to buy the latest phone. Apple sells the 3GS still (free on contract, otherwise $99) and the iPhone 4 and they *still* gets the latest OS, despite not paying the premium price. There will be certain parts of iOS6 that are not supported on the 3GS, but it's not bad for free.
So, like unlike Apple, you get the choice of not paying the premium price for future upgrades if you don;t think you need them, since with Apple you get the non-premium phones with the future upgrades included.
That's not the point though. I have a samsung galaxy s2, and I am willing to bet a dollar that I will never get upgraded jellybean, unless I flash the rom.
Wait, you're claiming it's FUD because your one year old phone is better than an iPhone 4 (I'll pick the iPhone 4 since that was the current model a year ago), and specifically claim that the entire problem of low adoption of the latest OS release on Android, and the issue of manufacturers and carriers deliberately blocking and/or delaying updates to phones that can support them in an effort to drive sales of new phones, both of which cause big headaches for developers is "meaningless FUD" because Android users can voice search?
I think you need to lay off the Apple hate and stop framing everything as a competition with Apple. Fuck what Apple are doing, look at how Android is doing. Who cares if you can voice search on Android. Good for you! How does that have any bearing on the problems posed by the fact that a very small number of users are on the latest version of the OS and those who might want to join them either don't know about it or are blocked from getting there?
Constructive criticism of the platform and its perceived issues are not attempts to "troll" or "spread meaningless FUD".
An Android user might be blocked from getting ICS (and now JB) despite his handset being able to support it is hardly going to be placated by you spouting "well at least you can voice search! it's so much better than iPhone! lolz!". I imagine he already thinks that, since *he bought an Android phone in the first place*.
On the "you're either an early adopter or too old to care about" front on iOS, the facts simply do not bear that out. iOS6 is launching soon (likely with whatever the new iPhone will be called), but it's in developer beta now. It will support the 3GS (albeit with some features missing, like Siri) - that's hardly a culture of "early adopter or too old to care". The 3GS was released in June 2009, and they'll be actively supporting it with the latest OS. By the time iOS6 hits consumer handsets that's over 3 years, and the active support of the previous 4 model generations (3GS, 4, 4S and the new one). That's certainly doing "better" than some Android handsets that have been abandoned and can't upgrade (and for balance, doing "worse" than some Android handsets that will be supported for longer).
I have a Galaxy Nexus that was just updated to ICS 4.04 last month. It took a little while only because Verizon is my carrier. Those who really want the latest OS root their phones. Mine is not rooted but if it was, I could probably get Jelly Bean right now.
And you don't see that as a problem? The issue with Verizon? This is what I mean. I have taken serious vehement, frothing flack from mostly AC posters kneejerking to my perceived "trolling of Android" when pointing out something that is a fact - the low adoption of updates due to deliberate feet dragging or outright abandonment to force new phone sales.
My point isn't to create a dick waving contest over iOS or Windows Phone or any of that, it's to suggest that maybe Google could try to do something about it.
For a site where the very idea of a signed bootloader is causing outrage on the desktop (Secure Boot), slashdot sure is happy to let all that nonsense slide when it comes to Android, as long as there are some phones that are able to update without rooting them, as was pointed out to me earlier. Apparently the low percentage of ICS users is "meaningless FUD" because *his* phone is running ICS, and thus fuck everyone else.
If one of the licence requirements of Android was an unlocked bootloader from the start, and an inbuilt (optional, but on by default) periodic check for updates, perhaps the ecosystem could be streamlined. I don't know. I just feel that right now it's almost silly that so few Android users are on the current, bugfixed, high quality ICS despite the fact that they almost certainly could be and would be having a better experience as a result.
The 3GS? Ha ha. That old piece of shit isn't even worthy of discussion with it's pathetic QVGA screen. And don't forget the thousands and thousands of apps in the Apple App Store that will only run on the iPhone 4 and above. Not that that raggedy piece of shit will run all of the new shit like Siri. Speaking of which has been royally stomped by Google Now. Ha ha.
This discussion was about cheaper, non-premium phones. The 3GS "royally stomps" (to use your words) on some of the non-premium Android phones out there that it is currently targeted to compete with, most of which also have a similar screen to the 3GS (since the iPhone lineup is low, medium, premium with the 3GS, 4 and 4S respectively). The 3GS certainly qualifies as a non-premium alternative, especially since it is available for free on various carriers with a contract.
Just because you don't think it's "worthy of discussion" doesn't mean that a) it's not still a viable option in the market (it still has high sales, despite being 2 generations behind), or b) that Apple is not supporting it with the latest version of iOS, which it is - iOS6.
The GPP claimed that there was no alternative to the premium choice with Apple, and there is with Android. The 3GS demonstrates that both Apple and Android have non-premium, affordable options.
Google's own numbers show ~90% Android users still aren't on 4.0+, and it's been almost nine months since ICS was released.
There are still millions of Windows XP boxes even though Windows 7 is out there for years. Does that indicate that the Windows upgrade process is broken?
Android devices are sold as something a notch below Apple products (at least because it's not Apple.) Android phones cost less, and as result they are sold to customers who just want a phone. There are very few geeks in that crowd. Among geeks there are very few people who want to risk all the data that they have on the phone for sake of upgrade to a new version of the OS that they haven't seen and don't know what it does better or worse. Most people don't even know what they have and what else is out there. I have a Galaxy Tab device; I don't even know what version of Android it runs! I don't even know what versions are out there! Why? Because I don't care. It's not a quest of my life to nurture and maintain the most recent version of Android on a device that does what it needs to do already. I see no point in upgrading it. It's a tool and it works well.
Constructive criticism of the platform and its perceived issues are not attempts to "troll" or "spread meaningless FUD".
Then criticize the platform if that's what you want to do. All you've done so far is criticize the behavior of the various OEM's. You've been told over and over that if you want an Android device that gets guaranteed updates you get a Nexus. Since this article is about Jelly Bean, do you have any specific criticisms of it? Otherwise you are just continuing an off-topic rant.
It's all tied in - the OEMs are the source of the problem. I am sure Jelly Bean is great, just like ICS is great. I've used an ICS-running phone (Galaxy S2) and it was a fantastic device. The OEM problem affects the entire Android ecosystem though - even those savvy enough to buy phones that can be easily upgraded. Most people are not like that, and will not even think about that as a source of potential future problems. "Is this device upgradable?" is not something most users think about. You may say "well, they should!" and yes, they should, but most don't and you're asking for a similar result if you say "well, users should just stop getting viruses!".
The Android ecosystem as a whole suffers when the majority (or a very large number - I'm not sure the proportion of devices that can't upgrade vs the ones that simply don't know they can) of devices are left on old versions of the OS. Normally this is not too big of a problem, but let's take the new API that Google just put into JB. How many developers are going to jump on that? It may not be hugely compelling, but let's say that it is. Let's say it's an amazing new API and feature set that makes Jelly Bean an absolute no brainer. Sure, all the Nexus S people can get it, and those who've rooted their phones, but what about those who simply don't update? Either because they can't or they don't know they can?
If Joe Public is on Froyo and he sees his buddy with a cool new killer app and he wants to use it, can he, if it needs JB? That depends if his phone has an upgrade path. I think it is unacceptable that his phone should be abandoned, if it can run the latest OS. That is the problem I think should be addressed.
It's not off topic, in a discussion about Jelly Bean, to talk about just who it is who will be able to use it, and whether developers will look favourably on the new features if past experience shows them that adopting them will result in an app that is only available to 5% of the user base, assuming a similar adoption rate for JB vs ICS. It's a shame.
The issue with Verizon would have easily been averted by just withholding the GSM and CDMA updates entirely until they were both ready no one being the wiser. What they did instead was release the GSM code when it was ready and waited until the CDMA stuff was Aldo ready before releasing that. But it gives you something to troll about so I guess it wasn't a complete loss.
You still think I'm trolling? So you think it's totally ok that Android's general OEM model is one where locked bootloaders and abandoned phones is the norm?
What's your stance on Secure Boot on PCs? Do you think that it would be ok to remove the ability to disable it so that only Windows would boot on there? Then sell those machines at a discount, of course.
Whatever, if you choose to see this as purely trolling because I don't share the same opinions as you then go ahead. I'm not sure how else to rephrase it.
Well, here nothing but the lowliest cost cellphones are completely free on contact. Sure, you get discounts for locked phones, but the discounts are about the same for a Galaxy Ace or an iphone 3GS (if you are able to find one to sell in the phone operators, which you are usually not). And sorry, except for special cases, as you exemplified in your post, which are not available in most places of this world, you will still be paying a premium for a service you don't even have anymore, because you will be buying a 3 year old cellphone from Apple and paying a superior amount you would pay for much better, newer devices.
And if you never install windows, I'm guessing you'll never get Windows 8.
Going to cry about being stuck on XP? DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
I know, I know your sarcasm. But allow us to illustrate a few gentle listeners:
XP, VISTA and WINDOWS 7... with a life 3 to 5 years between sequels *rarely* encourage developers to build Applications to nag you to upgrade. Bargain bin items till about 3 years ago commonly boasted Windows 2000 backward compat*
Yet Android versions last a year and are ripe with annoyances:
Funny, it hasn't been a full 4 years since September 2008 (compare to my numbers above for full OSs).
Since that's the year of the first Android release, we can see a forced trend like NO DESKTOP^H^H^W WINTEL PC has ever required. I recall, MacOS back in 1998 did have tons of programs that condemned you for needing OS 7.1, or 7.5 or 8.1 or 8.5, or 9.0 or 9.1 to run due to library compat --though Windows still gave you the chance of downloading, say VBRUN300.dll or whatever VC or DotNET runtime you needed. I see what phonemakers learned from that boldness to just stay quiet and block you before you download.
99.9% of people don't upgrade. Get new computer, let the OEM introduce you forcibly to Windows ME, XP, Vista, Seven, Eight... profit. Those OS upgrade boxed sets are for proactive geeks with nothing to lose but some cash.
* meaning the laziest, cheapest developers who might actually pick new SDKs to look shiny don't care if you have a dinosaur PC... it's the largest companies with much to lose who actually ostracize their userbase via platform shifts
I see this getting thrown out a lot, and I've actually been responsible for using it a few times.
The big problem with that argument is not what you (the geek) can do with it's phone, it's what common people do. The success is measured with the sales of the 99% of the people that cannot do that (and it's harder than installing windows - you first have to root the phone, get into recovery, etc etc).
This is where apple shines. If an OS is available, it'll be available for every phone that supports it. Google does the same with the nexus line but big companies don't.
But you got one thing straight. The path for Android's success has to be platform independence for (most of) the OS. Windows works fine on any machine (even macs), Any version of android should run on any Android that follows a certain specification.
For that to happen, standards have to be made. Android should be able to see what hardware was there and download the optimized drivers by itself, for example. But this is all kind of utopic, so... No, I stopped doing anything about it (on my Desire) on 2.3. It's not worth the hassle to get Gingerbread running here.
Did you buy your car at a gas station? Then why buy your phone from a wireless carrier? You will get updates late, if at all. Tethering will be restricted. The phone will come loaded with crapware. Why bother?
There are not viable non-premium options from Apple. Only old trash they are trying to dump on us for an abusive price. Your non-premium "options" have premium prices for their limited value, and therefore aren't really an option unless you want to be ripped off.
If by "side load" you mean "install without going to the app store" then this is what a dev account allows you to do.
Plug in the iphone to USB, click deploy in xcode.
And you only get to choose from Apple made hardware. If you only choose from Google-made hardware, you get the latest updates too.
The difference is, with Android, you don't have to choose Google made hardware. You may not get software updates, but you do get alternate hardware options, like full 3D support, damage-proof, water resistance and other options.
Where's the drop-resistant water-resistant daylight bright iPhone exactly? There isn't one. By licensing Android to other handset makers Google ends up with older versions in use on hardware that won't run the newer OS but there's more user choice too.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)