Slashdot Mirror


Android M Arrives In Q3: Native Fingerprint Support, Android Pay, 'Doze' Mode

MojoKid writes with yet more news from the ongoing Google IO conference: Google I/O kicked off this afternoon and the first topic of discussion was of course Google's next generation mobile operating system. For those that were hoping for a huge UI overhaul or a ton of whiz-bang features, this is not the Android release for you. Instead, Android M is more of a maintenance released focused mainly on squashing bugs and improving stability/performance across the board. Even though Android M is about making Android a more stable platform, there are a few features that have been improved upon or introduced for this release: App Permissions, Chrome Custom Tabs for apps, App Links (instead of asking you which app to choose when clicking a link, Android M's new Intent System can allow apps to verify that they are rightfully in possession of a link), NFC-based Android Pay, standardized fingerprint scanning support, and a new "doze" mode that supposedly offers 2X longer battery life when idle.

83 comments

  1. Android is for luddites. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Modern app appers use apps that run on apps!

    Apps!

    1. Re:Android is for luddites. by koan · · Score: 1

      I prefer iOS with its text based restart.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  2. Laugh by koan · · Score: 2

    "these aren't the droids you're looking for"

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're a fuckwit.

    2. Re:Laugh by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      I know, right? A boneheaded miss on a slam dunk reference.

    3. Re:Laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when you die, your parents and siblings will throw a party, their only regret being you weren't aborted

  3. useless without updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The most common Android version in the wild is still.. Jelly Bean.

    Android has dropped the ball on OS updates. Apple didn't do it perfect, but they are much better and mostly you can update devices to at least one or two more versions before it beomes obsolete.

    Google needs to up their game around OS updates or it doesn't matter what they put in it, if nobody is running it.

    1. Re:useless without updates by afgam28 · · Score: 1

      Among the changes are bug fixes and improved battery life, which are immediately useful to anyone who installs M, regardless of how many others don't.

    2. Re:useless without updates by NormAtHome · · Score: 1

      I thought from what I read that because there's so much customization by each manufacturer for each model that updates or whole version upgrades (i.e. Ice Cream Sandwich to Jelly Bean or Jelly Bean to Kitkat) have to come from the manufacturer? That you can't just install a generic version from Google and have all features work?

    3. Re:useless without updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, as with so many pseudo-open source operating systems, the issue is binary blobs that drive hardware.

    4. Re:useless without updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would blame the manufacturers and carriers about as much as Google themselves for this update mess we have ourselves in. The Droid Turbo was supposed to get the latest OS a while back but Verizon and Motorola keep delaying the update.

    5. Re:useless without updates by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Verizon finally updated my Ellipsis 7 to KitKat after a while - but now, I have lost the ability to save files to my 32GB SD card. I was told that for this device, KitKat only supports up to 16GB. But it took a while to upgrade. They had the same issues qualifying Windows 8.1 for Microsoft, and now, Verizon no longer offers the Lumia Ikon.

      In the above case, doesn't Motorola == Google itself? If Google has certified an OS, why wouldn't it be available on every Google device that meets the hardware requirements? Currently, I have a Moto-X w/ Lollipop: I'm not going to toss that phone to get M. Currently, my iPhone 5s doesn't support Apple Pay, but when my contract is up, I'll get a 6 or 7, whichever is nearer.

    6. Re:useless without updates by rasmusbr · · Score: 3, Informative

      The most common version is now KitKat with 39.8%. Jelly Bean is second with 39.2% and Lollipop has just under 10%.

      https://developer.android.com/...

      Keep in mind that a lot of Android users have low incomes and/or live in countries where an over the air OS update would be a significant cost to the average person. We might think that a smartphone is useless without at least a 1GB per month data plan, but hundreds of millions of users in the developing world think otherwise.

    7. Re:useless without updates by pauljlucas · · Score: 1

      Assuming that's true, it shouldn't be. Manufacturers shouldn't do proprietary customizations. Why they even want to do this and incur the expense is beyond me.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    8. Re:useless without updates by NormAtHome · · Score: 1

      I'm just repeating what I read, I can't find that specific article but this one provides similar details: http://www.howtogeek.com/12927... so in actuality it is true.

    9. Re:useless without updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/Google/Verizon and the other telecoms/

    10. Re:useless without updates by DrXym · · Score: 1
      I've been developing Android since 1.x and there is a pie chart in the dev console which shows market share. The majority platform always lags behind the cutting edge but it changes over time. New versions of Android start as tiny slices and then grow to be the majority until the next version takes over. It's hardly surprising if a version from a year or so back is dominant. It's always like that.

      I don't see it being a big deal though since the general rule of thumb of developing on Android is you choose the API level which supports what you want to do in your app. Most apps don't need proximity payment services or fingerprint reading APIs so they'll use a lower API level and they'll work across any device that supports that level.

      There are obvious advantages to what Apple does, but it is a monoculture and there are disadvantages to that too. The biggest one for handset owners is once you're cast into the darkness by Apple you're pretty much screwed. Android devices might not get so many firmware updates but they tend to still get the latest apps from Google and updates for other apps that already work on their platform.

    11. Re:useless without updates by ICommentGenerator · · Score: 1

      They started collecting the data from visits in Play Store, which immidately increased the average version.

    12. Re:useless without updates by rasmusbr · · Score: 2

      True, but if you're not visiting the Play Store you're probably either not using your phone for anything that would benefit from an OS update, or you're using Cyanogen or some other custom build.

      If you look at the distribution of people who actually download your app from Google Play it will be even more skewed towards newer versions of Android, because people download a lot more apps in the days and weeks after they buy a new phone.

      I have an app that currently sees about 20% Lollipop and 45% KitKat in new installs.

    13. Re:useless without updates by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Assuming that's true, it shouldn't be. Manufacturers shouldn't do proprietary customizations. Why they even want to do this and incur the expense is beyond me.

      It's called differentiation. Manufacturers want to make their phones unique, distinct and more desirable on the shelves. So if you're deciding between two phones with otherwise identical specs (same processor, RAM, flash), you'd look to their customizations as the differentiating factor. Because there's only so much a manufacturer can do - processor choices are limited, RAM choices are limited, flash choices a limited, and there's only so much you can charge for it.

      So rather than a manufacturer having to compete against a dozen otherwise identical phones and the consumer pretty much randomly choosing one of them, they hope to make theirs custom so the user will choose theirs over everyone else because it works the way the user does. Hopefully.

  4. Have they fixed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have they fixed (by fixed, I mean made granular) the apps permissions?

    1. Re:Have they fixed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup

    2. Re:Have they fixed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, actually. They did.

  5. M arrives by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    but is it Bernard, Judi, or Ralph?

    1. Re:M arrives by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      but is it Bernard, Judi, or Ralph?

      Presumably you're deliberately excluding Robert.

  6. Native Fingerprint Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok, so just Indians then?

  7. Large change with app permissions by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They talk about how it's a stability release, but if you are going to compile your application with the newer dev tools you are going to have to do some work adapting to the iOS style permission model.

    I'm really glad to see Android adopted this model, the previous model made no sense from any standpoint - it was worse for the users, and worse for security. Now that Android will ask for permission when you actually want to use some protected resource, they can make a way more informed choice if they should allow it or not - and on the fly decide an app can access some things and not others (say allowing Contacts but not location).

    It's just a shame the older style permission model will be supported for some time to come, as it greatly eases the ability of spyware to operate on Android.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Large change with app permissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if they'd just make the majority of the API available to anything other than some ridiculous clusterfuck of Java 6 and XML.

    2. Re:Large change with app permissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A log of applications will crash hard if denied permissions on the fly. This cause a lot of older apps to stop working.

    3. Re:Large change with app permissions by robmv · · Score: 4, Informative

      Older applications not targeting M, will show permissions at install time and be granted by default, but the user will be able to revoke them, the platform will just give empty data or fail. From the preview documentation

      Note: On devices running the M Developer Preview, a user can turn off permissions for any app (including legacy apps) from the app's Settings screen. If a user turns off permissions for a legacy app, the system silently disables the appropriate functionality. When the app attempts to perform an operation that requires that permission, the operation will not necessarily cause an exception. Instead, it might return an empty data set, signal an error, or otherwise exhibit unexpected behavior. For example, if you query a calendar without permission, the method returns an empty data set.

      If you are worried that old applications can use the permissions immediately after installation, before you have time to disable the permissions, take into account that applications are installed on a stopped state, there is no programmatic way for it to auto start itself. Start on boot may work but it is not precisely immediately. So I think the best action is to go to those old applications just after install and remove every permission you don't want to grant before starting it.

    4. Re:Large change with app permissions by c · · Score: 4, Informative

      Older applications not targeting M, will show permissions at install time and be granted by default, but the user will be able to revoke them, the platform will just give empty data or fail.

      ... and for those concerned about old apps failing under those conditions, Cyanogenmod's privacy guard has been doing this for quite some time and I've never heard of an app failing because of it. So it's possible to do it in a safe fashion. Whether that's how Google has actually implemented it remains to be seen.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    5. Re: Large change with app permissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good.

    6. Re:Large change with app permissions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the fail safe fashion is returning an empty dataset, which Android M will do for *some* API calls. Others will fail in different ways, which is likely to cause the app to crash:

      Examples of (pseudo) empty datasets:

      Give me a list of calls for the last week. Yes, here's the complete list of the 0 calls made last week.

      Give me a list of apps installed: Yes, this phone has two apps installed: Google Play and /proc/self/exe.

      Give me the current GPS position: Sure, I am at Taco Bell, 38.8709972,-77.0559713

  8. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Is that Dice? Little Registry Cleaner now installs a ton of crap by default. Look at the latest reviews. You can still get a clean install by reading each of the dialog boxes but the point is it comes bundled with crap in the first place.

  9. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    News since 2013...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  10. Will it run on Nexus 4? by mystikkman · · Score: 1

    The preview doesn't say it will run on Nexus 4, hopefully the final version will run because it's powerful hardware, 2GB RAM and Quadcore. Forced obsolescence of good hardware is annoying and hope Google is not bad as other OEMs.

    1. Re:Will it run on Nexus 4? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      google isn't an oem

    2. Re:Will it run on Nexus 4? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Will the make a nexus 4 or 5 since a 6 is to fsking big to be useful and costs 2x as much.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
  11. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have a story from 2013 of the Sourceforge staff locking out the person from their account to push crapware installers? [citation needed]

  12. Re: Google is as evil as Apple nowadays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google services is actually the OS. This is Google's answer to slow upgrades of the core OS, because unlike Apple, they have to coordinate with hundreds of manufactures. By moving a lot of the OS features into an auto-updating application, Android is no longer as dependent on everybody to coordinate every single incremental change.

    So, when you see Google Play Services, think about it as a common library that every one of your applications benefits from.

  13. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. It's the crapware that started popping up when Dice bought Sourceforge.

  14. wat? by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

    "For those that were hoping for a huge UI overhaul..."

    Yeah, because we haven't had one of those in a whole year.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A year ago? That's practically prehistoric for the "UX designers" of the world.

    2. Re:wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Sad Truth

    3. Re:wat? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Some people may not want a new UI every year, some are unhappy with which UI was left when the music stopped.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  15. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    No I have a story from 2013 where GIMP stopped using sourceforge, and announced it on their very own webpage. Download from sourceforge at your own risk, everyone knows it's utter shit.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  16. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, but that's not what the current story is about. Reading comprehension. Do you have it?

  17. No... by robmv · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, they grouped them in categories that are granted or revoked at the same time (group => non granular). What they made is make those group be revocable by the user and be able to request them at use time instead of at install time

  18. App Permissions ring hollow by Voyager529 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The App Permissions seem to be missing the crucial ability to deny internet access to an app. There are apps where network data connectivity is the problem. Similarly, I wonder if Google will have this permission setting capability on its internal applications. I know that I have a rather tightly worn tin foil hat when it comes to Google and the information they get, but the Xprivacy 'deny' list on my phone is a mile long, and that's with most of their apps frozen or forcibly pulled out, I find that Google's data access on the platform demands a tight leash, leading the 'privacy' and 'permissions' charge to ring of hypocrisy - "we'll make sure that only we have your location" doesn't mean much to me :/

    1. Re:App Permissions ring hollow by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Uh, are you aware that Google owns AdMob, the main mobile ad provider?

      They would probably not want to make it easy for users to block ads by turning on and off internet access on a per app basis.

    2. Re:App Permissions ring hollow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 insightful.

      Not to mention that every app developer relying on ads for income would suddenly have an income of zero as people just said "yeah, I don't feel like having ads today."

      They can pretty much do it already by shutting off networks, replacing /etc/hosts, etc but disallowing ads would be cutting developers off at the knees as well as Google. Not even CyanogenMod's privacy settings turn off internet access entirely.

    3. Re:App Permissions ring hollow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If "developers who rely upon ads" would consistently offer a paid version of the app which didn't have ads, I'd feel way less bad about them being cut off at the knees.

    4. Re:App Permissions ring hollow by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      The App Permissions seem to be missing the crucial ability to deny internet access to an app. There are apps where network data connectivity is the problem. Similarly, I wonder if Google will have this permission setting capability on its internal applications. I know that I have a rather tightly worn tin foil hat when it comes to Google and the information they get, but the Xprivacy 'deny' list on my phone is a mile long, and that's with most of their apps frozen or forcibly pulled out, I find that Google's data access on the platform demands a tight leash, leading the 'privacy' and 'permissions' charge to ring of hypocrisy - "we'll make sure that only we have your location" doesn't mean much to me :/

      The ability to block internet access would effectively block ads. On the plus side, there are plenty of firewall apps in the Play store (though they do require you to have a rooted device).

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  19. Can't really complain... want more encryption by mlts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Lots of evolutionary fixes. The privacy stuff is better than nothing... but still all of nothing with legacy apps. The fingerprint standardization is good, because it allows an app that keeps keys to have an easy way to validate that the user is authorized.

    Mobile payment - works with credit cards, as opposed to ACH debits, so thumbs up there. This means there is some way of rolling back fraudulent charges should something happen. With ACH based mechanisms, once the crook sucks the money out, there is little or nothing one can do.

    Of course, there is one thing missing -- a standardized way to encrypt data on SD cards. Yes, /data is protected, but each device maker has their own way of securing SD card data. What is needed is protection similar to Blackberries in the past:

    1: Offer compatibility with vfat and exFAT filesystems, by using loopback encryption (EncFS), as well as adding UNIX permissions via UMSDOSFS to keep apps separated. UMSDOSFS hasn't been used in ages... but is ideal for enforcing basic UNIX permissions while allowing for MS-DOS based filesystems to be used underneath.

    2: Encrypt the entire SD card's partitions entirely similar to how /data is encrypted. This is the ideal choice, but it keeps the card from being able to be popped out and used with other devices.

    1. Re:Can't really complain... want more encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does the app need to be aware of how data is encrypted? The device manufacturer just needs to provide a standardized store_encrypted and read_decrypted method pair. It's unclear as to whether that's what you're suggesting, or if you want a specific encryption mechanism.

    2. Re:Can't really complain... want more encryption by mlts · · Score: 1

      The goal is to have something that isn't limited to a device. This lessens the amount of code that is locked to one make, or even worse, one model. It also reduces the chance of security issues, since one company's EncFS implementation may be brain dead, while another's is quite up to par with security.

      Same with device encryption. If each maker did its own thing with regards to encrypting /data, it would be difficult to make a ROM for that platform that would be up to par with security. At best, a factory ROM would have to have everything disassembled and the pieces used (with a lot of testing and even more luck) for the feature to work.

      The more security in base Android, the better. This at least provides a baseline that we know is good. For example, we know any Android 4.x and 5.x device offers encryption of /data, and 5.x devices -should- encrypt that filesystem automatically (although there are exceptions.)

      Limiting code to one make/model isn't good. For example, there are features of my old Atrix 2 which no new phones have, and likely would never have.

  20. Missed the point with Permissions again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Biggest issue with the app permissions was the fact the developer couldn't fucking tell the user what each permission was actually being used for in the app. Many users don't know what the permissions mean, or are going to be *used for* and instead we're subjected to googles overly broad 'can do all of X' when it would be entirely more helpful and less alarming for an additional dialog "developer says: this is so you can share data with other users, or email your data to a recipient"

    Instead we have "can read and write files" instead of the developer saying: " app wants to store some data on your memory to improve performance (or something like)"

    1. Re:Missed the point with Permissions again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let crapp developers lie right in the permissions request screen too, that is surely a good idea. Permissions should be fine grained, not giant all or nothing sets where the same permission to control the light also controls making calls or blowing up the battery.

  21. Google Smoogle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Teh G exists to serve you to those will to pay it. Are you dinner? Are you breakfast? Are you lunch? Are you SUPPER? Yes to a!!

    Android is a perversion of highest order.

  22. Expect to be rolled out to my phone 2017 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like some nice new features, even if it is more evolutionary in nature. I anticipate Samsung will begin rolling this out to customers sometime in the coming years...

  23. Google's Useless About Updates by billstewart · · Score: 2

    Well, thank you very much, telling me that I'd get better battery life if I installed the new Android version. As far as I can tell (at least with all previous Android versions), Google's instructions for installing the new software are "What? You don't have one of these three Google-brand phones? Then wait for your carrier!".

    That's bad enough for my phone (which has a carrier, and Samsung's a reasonably major brand, though my previous HTC phone never got upgraded), but my tablet's Wifi-only, so there's no carrier, just a manufacturer who sold that model 2 years ago and doesn't have that tablet easily located on their website, and as far as I can tell, if I were to dump IceCreamSandwich for Cyanogen (who at least tell you what hardware resources you need for each version), I'd lose access to the Google Play Store?

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Google's Useless About Updates by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google Play works fine with cyanogen.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Google's Useless About Updates by RJFerret · · Score: 1

      You'd have access to the Play store, also could use the Amazon market, as well as FDroid, the free focused app resource--I have all three on my Cyanogenmod wifi-only tablet.

    3. Re:Google's Useless About Updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Apptoide.

    4. Re:Google's Useless About Updates by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Google Play works fine with cyanogen.

      Assuming you mean CyanogenMod and not Cyanogen, Inc.: they have yet to release a stable (or even a snapshot) build of Android 5 or 5.1. I like CM, but I'm hesitant to sign on to CM12.1 when the forum threads for nightlies are bug report after bug report.

  24. Re:Fuck Dice.com!! by ne0n · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think the theory behind that shit is, if you've already got infected by Windows, what's a little more malware gonna hurt?

    --
    $ :(){ :|:& };:
  25. Re:Google is as evil as Apple nowadays by ne0n · · Score: 2

    You either consent to wifi passwords etc being backed up or they don't get sent to Google afaik. It's during initial setup of Google services. If you chose it, your fault for not reading some extremely well labelled checkboxes and plain text descriptions.

    --
    $ :(){ :|:& };:
  26. "Location" should have two settings: know vs. save by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first should be, "Let apps know my location".

    The second should be, "Save location data."

    In other words: I should be able to use my map to get somewhere, without it saving my every location into a database!

  27. 'Doze mode...? by grcumb · · Score: 1

    I've clearly been on Slashdot for far too long. I read 'Doze Mode in the title and thought, 'Goddammit, if you're going to talk about Windows Mode, just fucking call it "Windows"!'

    And then I realised that it actually is 'Doze Mode'. Because 'Naptime' was taken, I guess.

    --
    Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    1. Re:'Doze mode...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, presumably it will reduce the power consumption by slowing the system down to half speed, so both definitions of "doze mode" fit.

    2. Re:'Doze mode...? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Which is quite a coincidence, because my new Windows phone is actually quite good at not draining the battery when I'm not doing anything. The other day I was still at 95% battery by the end of the day because I was too busy to use my phone. My old Android phone on the other hand would easily go through 25-50% of it's battery in a day, even if I didn't use it for much. Most of the time I would plug it in at the office because if I didn't, it would be below 20% by the end of the day.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  28. How about Undo? by Qango · · Score: 1

    Are they finally going to implement a global "Undo" function?

  29. Apps on the SD card by Qango · · Score: 2

    I'm also sure many Google apps could reside happily on the SD card instead of taking up space on the built-in memory.

  30. Re: Google is as evil as Apple nowadays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recently noticed that my album app had a checkbox for backing up my photos checked. I have never and would never make that choice. This is the problem. Android is not designed to work for the user. It is designed to spy on the user from the ground up and to make it almost impossible to avoid it. And as usual, EULAs are just a mess. It's not unique for Google. I'm sure Apple and the others do the same. I would be happy if these companies were slammed hard and basically were forced to destroy all of their storage and fined to non-existence for bad conduct. But that's never going to happen.

  31. Following Microsoft's Every Other Version pattern by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    Lollipop is to Android what Windows Vista was to Windows: Nice looking, but slow and buggy. It lags a lot, sometimes to the point of entirely freezing up. If they speed it up and clean it up, I'll be very happy.

  32. Can't wait ohwait by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    I can't wait to get...
    oh, yeah... Verizon.

    1. Re:Can't wait ohwait by allquixotic · · Score: 1

      We'll be lucky to see the first device running Android "M" on Verizon by Q2 next year.

      Nexus 6 launched on November 3, 2014 as the first Lollipop device. Seven months later in May 2015, my Note 4 is updated to 5.0.1.

  33. Re:Following Microsoft's Every Other Version patte by Ayanami_R · · Score: 1

    My sons Moto G disagrees with you, every bit as fast as my Nexus 5. Perhaps you had a dirty flash?

    --
    "Science is the power of man"
  34. No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's talk about how Google is going to create a fingerprint database using cellphones, to provide to their co-conspirators at the NSA/FBI/DHS