Slashdot Mirror
Google's 'Project Treble' Could Lead To Faster Android Updates (arstechnica.com)
Thelasko quotes a report from Ars Technica: Ahead of Google I/O, Google has just dropped a bombshell of a blog post that promises, for real this time, that it is finally doing something about Android's update problems. "Project Treble" is a plan to modularize the Android OS, separating the OS framework code from "vendor specific" hardware code. In theory, this change would allow for a new Android update to be flashed on a device without any involvement from the silicon vendor. Google calls it "the biggest change to the low-level system architecture of Android to date," and it's already live on the Google Pixel's Android O Developer Preview. This is not a magic bullet that will solve all of Android's update problems, however. After an update is released, Google lists three steps to creating an Android update:
1. Silicon manufacturers (Qualcomm, Samsung Exynos, etc) "modify the new release for their specific hardware" and do things like make sure drivers and power management will still work.
2. OEMs (Samsung, LG, HTC) step in and "modify the new release again as needed for their devices." This means making sure all the hardware works, rebranding Android with a custom skin, adding OEM apps, and modifying core parts of the Android OS to add special features like (before 7.0) multi-window support.
3. Carriers add more apps, more branding, and "test and certify the new release."
1. Silicon manufacturers (Qualcomm, Samsung Exynos, etc) "modify the new release for their specific hardware" and do things like make sure drivers and power management will still work.
2. OEMs (Samsung, LG, HTC) step in and "modify the new release again as needed for their devices." This means making sure all the hardware works, rebranding Android with a custom skin, adding OEM apps, and modifying core parts of the Android OS to add special features like (before 7.0) multi-window support.
3. Carriers add more apps, more branding, and "test and certify the new release."
More and more I just want a mobile linux device that isn't android and isn't easy/consumerified and just has mobile data and I can use SIP or other IP-phone.
What I don't need is for my mobile device to update more often! What I need is for it to want updates less often.
I don't want new features unless there is hardware that is finally small enough to be mobile. And when it happens, I want it to use one of the existing computer interface paradigms.
More and more I just want a mobile linux device that isn't android and isn't easy/consumerified and just has mobile data and I can use SIP or other IP-phone.
What I don't need is for my mobile device to update more often! What I need is for it to want updates less often.
I don't want new features unless there is hardware that is finally small enough to be mobile. And when it happens, I want it to use one of the existing computer interface paradigms.
Yes, but KB0337827328 fixes the Tagalog rendering issue!
That's been on our books for years now, and it's something you want!
This will allow third party ROMs to be built and released for nearly every phone much more easily. I envision the golden age of customized ROMs on the way.
best is to buy a brand new phone so you can be protected again, for real, not this fake news from google - ain't never gonna happen! Been what, 10 years and every few of those googlie fake news this spiel.
Is it just me, or did Google's PR team just announce a hardware abstraction layer and everybody went nuts?
So, what will this do for the Android 4.2, 4.4 and 6.0 tablets I already own and are stuck at those versions? Do they continue to be abandonware?
If Google tells me I just need buy one more tablet, and it'll get system updates, "for real this time, no matter what the hardware manufacturers say or do", they can go fuck themselves. I'm done with Android.
... that the OEMs regard "Android Updates" as broken. They don't, its purely by design that a device get's as few updates as the OEM can get away with. Also, they assume, that the OEMs are going to play ball. They won't. This is what made WindowsCE .... er... i mean WindowsMobil.... crap, WindowsPhone .... argh, whatever the last "mobile OS" from Microsoft made it a non-starter for most OEMs, MS could update it, bypassing the OEM -> basically didn't happen. And it wont on Googloid...
Android updating (and the lack thereof) has been a clusterfuck for years. It's the reason I finally bagged my Android devices and went back to an iPhone. Even the Nexus line was damaged by this (dropped by Google support after 2 years, and now wanting iPhone prices for the Pixel). Good luck, Androiders. You're going to need it.
Shouldn't the "editors" at lest read the posts before publishing them?
As it stands, this post absolutely contradicts itself: "...change would allow... without any involvement from the silicon vendor..." which is followed by "1.Silicon manufacturers...modify..." ?!??
If you RTFA, the *next* sentence after the slashdot excerpt explains things: "Project Treble is only addressing step 1". So, the 3 steps represent the *current* situation, and project treble will allow bypassing the first one.
Somehow the summary only presents the problems of the current situation (pre-project treble), instead of summarizing the key ideas of the proposal (which is very interesting, by the way). Some excerpts from the link that would help understand:
Project Treble aims to do what CTS [Compatibility Test Suite (CTS), more than a million tests to validate API compatibility] did for apps, for the Android OS framework. The core concept is to separate the vendor implementation — the device-specific, lower-level software written in large part by the silicon manufacturers — from the Android OS Framework.
This is achieved by the introduction of a new vendor interface between the Android OS framework and the vendor implementation. The new vendor interface is validated by a Vendor Test Suite (VTS), analogous to the CTS, to ensure forward compatibility of the vendor implementation.
Google is talking about removing Step 1 from the steps in the summary. That still leaves OEMs and Carriers' responsibility for updates. Maybe if it's less onerous more of them will continue updating for a longer period of time, but if Samsung can't be arsed to update their massively-selling flagship phones beyond two years right now I'm not holding my breath.
If the vendors like Samsung... like SAMSUNG... don't want to role out Android updates in a timely manner, you still won't get them in a timely manner. Or ever.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
So, basically, Google is going to push Agile updates on everyone, and turn the userbase into alpha testers instead of just beta testers.
I can't wait.
nice that it's modular. sucks that the phone maker, chipset foundry, and carrier are still in the mix, because they don't move an inch on old phones they no longer make. so, great effort and cost for nothing. sorry, still as stiff as Gargoyle on updating.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I Wonder what this means in the kernel.
But a shame as this would seem to remove a lever to help push hw vendors to GPL their drivers.
Why don't Google push vendors to open source if they want to be part of Android. Which is a pretty big stick.
Do the carriers really even want to update ? I think they want the OS to grow stale and to use that as a reason to force users to update to this weeks new hardware. The cost of maintaining the branded OS and apps on last springs 'in' phone or device is not worth it for them, they just want you to by the 'new' fashion accessory phone. Cobalt blue is the new 'secure' device dejour.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
You do realize that mobile networks cost money don't you? Do you think the monthly fee you pay for "unlimited" usage actually covers the cost of our advertising^H^H^H^H^H^H networking fees or our automated help system^H^H^H^H^H^H highly trained support staff? Suggesting that users have access to phones that do not come bundled with our carefully tailored targeted marketing assistance packages and demographic archiving tools which we only share with carefully selected partners who have only your best interest at heart and a complete and profound respect for your privacy is tantamount to inciting communist revolt. Feel free to call us so we can report you^H^H^H^H^H discuss this further at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely. Momcorp
/You dumb bastards.
the entire lot of us stick it to the manufacturers, who refused to provide updates, in the form of a series of class action suits
Under what legal theory would a remedy be available at law? My first guess is the implied warranty of merchantability, that Internet-connected computers without security updates are not "fit for the purposes such goods are ordinarily used." But if you plan to sue on grounds of failure to honor the implied warranty, I thought it was common practice for manufacturers to disclaim implied warranties after a product's express warranty has expired.
If it depends on the jurisdiction, use the United States as an example. It's the home country of Alphabet and Slashdot Media.
No more updates, please, I've had enough. I'm full.
Google has already done that partially by putting a lot of functionality into Google Play Services, but it would be nice to be able to get security fixes from Google instead of having the OEM's in the way.
The law, specifically around automobiles, stipulates that manufacturers must allow aftermarket parts to be manufactured and sold, so there are still parts available and plenty of places to have a vehicle serviced even after the manufacturer shuts down the lines.
Not so for phones.
Are John Deere tractors more like automobiles or more like phones? See "American Farmers Are Still Fighting Tractor Software Locks".
"Why don't Google push vendors to open source if they want to be part of Android. Which is a pretty big stick."
The end of the blog post says:
"In addition to the architectural changes, we're working with our silicon and device partners to take their code changes, such as features for a carrier network in a specific country, and move them into the common Android Open Source Project (AOSP) codebase. For example, Sony and Qualcomm contributed dozens of features and hundreds of bugfixes to Android O so they no longer need to rework these patches with each new release of Android."
It genuinely looks like Google is doing their part to address the problems, we can only hope consumers are clever enough to buy models from OEMs who do their part too.
Maybe you mean the GPLv3.
I meant GPLv2.
The GPLv2, the version of the licence used by the Linux kernel, was written before software patents were such a problem, and doesn't have soecific requirements regarding patent licensing that the GPLv3 has.
Though the patent provisions the GPLv2 are less "soecific" than those in the GPLv3, they still exist. GPLv2 section 7 bans licensees of Linux from adding patented code under a royalty-bearing license and then distributing the result:
GPLv2 section 8 even had a geographic limit option that appears to have been dropped from GPLv3: