Slashdot Mirror
Android O Is Now Officially Android Oreo (theverge.com)
Android O is now officially going by the name of Android Oreo. The operating system is available today via Google's Android Open Source Project. OTA rollout is expected to arrive first to Pixel and Nexus devices, with builds currently in carrier testing. The Verge reports: The use of an existing brand makes sense for Google here -- there aren't a ton of good "O" dessert foods out there, and Oreos are pretty much as universally beloved as a cookie can be. There's also precedent for the partnership, as Google had previously teamed up with Nestle and Hershey's to call Android 4.4 KitKat.
Oh, sorry - wrong product placement.
#DeleteChrome
Because they did with KitKat:
https://techcrunch.com/2013/09/03/google-strikes-bizarre-licensing-deal-with-nestle-to-name-next-android-kit-kat/
Hoped they'd go with Orangutan feces, but that's just me.
thats racist!!!!
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
From the privacy violations, and unpatchable security holes, to the advertisements for junk food, it is truly is something out of a dystopian comedy novel.
Now I'm going to have Weird Al stuck in my head all day.
Oh oh oh oh oh
Oh Oreo
The white stuff
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Fix your definition of suitable. Anything smaller than a Pixel XL is too small to be usable.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Call it 4.4 KitKat, and I'm fine, call it "KitKat" and I don't know WTF version you are talking about, or if it's newer or order than Marshmallow or Lollipop. Android 8 Oreo. OK. Ubuntu and Debian can kiss my ass, too.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
You can see which codenames are stable, testing or unstable. The third paragraph starts "The current "stable" distribution of Debian is version 9, codenamed stretch", and you can scroll down further for the index of releases. So now you know the number too, but most Debian users will say they run "stable" or which release they are on if they are not stable (like jessie or stretch).
Is your complaint that most of the Debian community use codenames instead of numbers? Or that it is too hard to find the information that I have linked you. The secret is very few people care about anything except tracking stable and unstable.
Ubuntu's numbering scheme is nice because the version number is also the year and month. But you have to be a disciplined team to have your release date baked into every part of your distro well in advanced.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Android 8.0
Is that clear enough for you?
But really, what's so awful about naming something? Do you similarly object to the names they give to major storms, or the names they give to any newly discovered celestial objects?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
What I want is an Android phone that has as at least as many years as an iPhone. For example, iOS supports back to the iPhone 5s. That is four, soon five generations, back to 2013.
Are there any Android phones still getting updates from that vintage? Unless it is supported by LineageOS, the phone isn't getting updates at any Android OS level, much less the latest.
Of course, an unlockable bootloader is a must as well, so if there is a community willing to build a ROM for it, they can.
These are not world-shattering features here. People actually use their phone past the release date of the next model. Four to five years is not unreasonable, especially for a device that is used that often and can be a pain to upgrade.
Or, perhaps, if you don't know what version they are talking about, it probably doesn't affect you and you don't need to worry about it.. Do you also expect people to call eachother by social security number or drivers license id number? Probably not... we each have a name, after all. Sure, you can use the number where it matters, but if you don't recognize the name, then generally it's not something you should be concerned about.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I think GP was talking about Android version naming--you know, ON TOPIC.
I agree. This trend of using code names is a serious pain in the ass. Debian is a huge offender here.
But I have a solution for you -- I google for (err, excuse me, search for) "what version is debian codename" and one of the first hits that comes up is the cheat sheet from the debian.org site.
But it always pisses me off that it's necessary to do that. Just go with version numbers, people!
Oreo is a biscuit of some sort, possibly synthetic in composition.
Yes, and a mildly unpleasant one at that. Unless you do as I do: eat the creme filling and throw away the rest.
Of course it does - especially when it comes to Ubuntu versions, but android apps will say something like "requires Android Marshmallow or better." It lost it's kitsch a long time ago.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Let's be honest, the Nexus 5X was a bad, unreliable, sloppily designed smartphone. One of the biggest disappointments in the history of all of Google Nexus brand. Even ignoring the bootloop issue which was supposed to show up only on 15percent of those phones, they had plenty of other flaws. Only 2GB of RAM (the only smartphone using SD808 SoC with so little RAM) making 5X effectively a single-tasking phone, poor audio quality because of poor shielding from other phone components, the useless included USB-C to USB-C cable which you could not connect to anything besides the charger, yellowing screens, and charging system that can't charge your phone with the screen on.
But despite all those problems, these phones do get swift security and OS updates, which makes them still somewhat interesting at this point.
Orange Sherbet.
Orange Velvet Cake.
Oatmeal Cookie.
Do they not have anyone that can coo- oh wait...
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Call it 4.4 KitKat, and I'm fine, call it "KitKat" and I don't know WTF version you are talking about, or if it's newer or order than Marshmallow or Lollipop.
Android releases are named in alphabetical order, so you ought to be able to answer some of your questions yourself.
Breakfast served all day!
But it always pisses me off that it's necessary to do that. Just go with version numbers, people!
Google Android engineer here: In most cases I don't actually know what the numbers are without looking them up. I kind of get the complaint in Debian's case, since the choice of Toy Story character is arbitrary, but both Ubuntu and Android have been going in alphabetical order (though Ubuntu has to wrap, or something, in October), so it's just as easy to tell which release is before or after another as if they were numbered. Internally, we pretty much only use the code names (or letters, before the names are announced).
Actually, Android does have a number sequence that I track closely: API level. The OS version number doesn't mean that much to me.
I do know 8.0, though. I added a feature to Nougat that binds Keystore keys to OS version and security patch level as another layer of defense against rollback attacks (where the attacker pushes a legitimate but old OS that has known vulnerabilities). Keystore is used for disk encryption keys, among other things, so when Keystore keys break, the device doesn't boot. Due to an error in the version number management on internal testing devices (which are used by large numbers of employees as their everyday phones), we had to roll back the version number. I found a workaround, but for a while it looked like we might have to wipe everyone's phones.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Also, the OP author is obviously an iPhone user, because that's not how Android OS upgrades work. You upgrade your Android OS by waiting 6-12 months until it's preinstalled by the vendor in the phone you want, then throw away your current phone and buy the new phone with the new OS version on it.
The real problem with Android is how users aren't using the new releases
That would be better phrased as "user's can't get the new releases". It's not the users' fault, it's the vendors' fault that the phone the user buys is a legacy product the minute their payment clears. What's fucked up is the ecosystem, not the users.
Orange Sherbet would look too much like 2.2 "FroYo". That's why 4.0 "Ice Cream" was changed to "Ice Cream Sandwich" before release.
When I read Oreo, I read high fructose corn syrup, or "poison".
He's talking BS. You adjust scaling, not resolution in macOS.
I would never pay such insane amounts for any phone. Which is why the iPhone is an expensive toy for people who like paying good money to be locked up in a walled garden.
... both Ubuntu and Android have been going in alphabetical order (though Ubuntu has to wrap, or something, in October), ...
That's the thing, though - it is so US centric (and I know, there will now be a stream of comment along the lines 'But America invented reality and everything'). Don't get me wrong, I don't hate America - there are things about you guys I love, like your absence (sorry, only joking, couldn't resist) - but when it comes to finding cool names, you are just so juvenile.
And Ubuntu's naming strategy is toe-curling, IMO; what will it be when it rolls over? "Anal Abcess"?
Maybe it has to do with it being too difficult, or perhaps even impossible, to upgrade to a newer version.
I only just upgraded from 5.1.1. I bought a Moto G because, at the time, Motorola was owned by Google and I expected good long-term support. It shipped with 4.3, got a quick upgrade to 4.4, eventually got an update to 5, and hasn't had security updates for well over a year. I reflashed it with LineageOS to get a new version (7.1), but that's well beyond the abilities of most users. The hardware is still completely adequate for all of the apps that I want to run, so I have no desire to replace it. I suspect a lot of users are in a similar situation. My old cheap phone has vastly more CPU and GPU power and about as much RAM as the computer that I did all of my work on as an undergrad - it's perfectly adequate for now.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yes, and a mildly unpleasant one at that. Unless you do as I do: eat the creme filling and throw away the rest.
Or even better: throw away the whole thing; I tasted it once. Only once, never again.
I came here to say the same thing. You can now buy Oreos in the UK, but only one flavour, and few people eat them as they're inferior to (and more expensive than) custard creams.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
A cookie is a uk biscuit but not a us biscuit. A us biscuit would be most like a savory scone
I've wondered about this terminology. So, savoury biscuits are the salty ones, right? But then, surely the sweet ones are unsavoury? I mean, it stands to reason, doesn't it?
It's always weird when you furriners start complaining about the use of American English and US references on this American web site.
It's fine if you want to eavesdrop on a conversation among Americans, but it doesn't make any sense to complain that we're speaking American to each other.
Oh, it's only for Americans? Could you keep it inside your own borders, then? Alternatively, get your head around the fact that the internet is international, and that there are a lot fewer Americans than un-Americans in the world, so stop trying to pull rank or whatever it is you imagine you are doing - we aren't impressed.
"Oreos are pretty much as universally beloved as a cookie can be" no some people think they taste foul ...
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
But eventually they do. These devices are sold because they connect to the internet, and internet services move on, and end up requiring newer versions of applications, which are not normally back-ported to older versions of the OS.
So after a period of time, you end up with a very expensive telephone.
But it always pisses me off that it's necessary to do that. Just go with version numbers, people!
Google Android engineer here: In most cases I don't actually know what the numbers are without looking them up. I kind of get the complaint in Debian's case, since the choice of Toy Story character is arbitrary, but both Ubuntu and Android have been going in alphabetical order (though Ubuntu has to wrap, or something, in October), so it's just as easy to tell which release is before or after another as if they were numbered. Internally, we pretty much only use the code names (or letters, before the names are announced).
This, average people don't talk in version numbers. Numbers are computationally convenient but very user unfriendly. The names give users an easy point of reference for people not intimately familiar with the product. Besides, many products with numbers in the title aren't always in order, Windows 7 is newer than Windows 95.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Here's a better solution: Don't buy stupidly expensive phones.
Instead of spending $700 on an iPhone, spend $300 on a high end, well made and more powerful Android phone from someone like OnePlus, Motorola, Xaomi or even LG. Then replace it after 2-3 years when the software updates stop coming.
OnePlus do two years of OS updates, for example, and then you just get security patches from Google. Then get a nice new phone, new battery, upgraded features, more storage etc. And give the old one to your kid to use as a toy, or keep it as a spare in case you drop your primary one in the toilet. Or install LineageOS and carry on using it.
No need to carry on with 4 year old hardware just to get your money's worth.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
What's Nabisco's cut?
That's the thing, though - it is so US centric
How so? Because it's based on the Latin alphabet? That's more Western-centric than US-centric.
when it comes to finding cool names, you are just so juvenile.
Playful, not juvenile :-)
And Ubuntu's naming strategy is toe-curling
Well, you can't pin that one on the US. Not that I think Ubuntu's names are bad.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
it's just as easy to tell which release is before or after another as if they were numbered.
Yes, if that's all you want to know. If, however, you want to know which version a release is in more absolute terms, then you have to count letters. This is less of an issue with Android than other OSes (and applications), but it's still an annoyance.
If I'm looking at software that specifies am OS version, or if I'm reading documentation or instructions specific to an OS version, I don't just want to know which releases the version is between, I want to know its place in the entire run. Alphabetical names do let me do that, but it requires me to translate from letters to numbers to accomplish it. It's a pain.
The names give users an easy point of reference for people not intimately familiar with the product.
This is actually my complaint -- they don't do this. They obscure the product's place. I understand the desire to be playful, but in this case it comes with a cost that I am annoyed that I have to pay.
Besides, many products with numbers in the title aren't always in order, Windows 7 is newer than Windows 95.
Yes, and I actually blame Microsoft for starting this fad.
I wish I could upgrade my Verizon Ellipsis 10 from Lollipop to anything - Marshmallow, Nutela or Oreo. I have a 128GB SD card on it, while the internal flash drive is just 16GB & almost full. If I could do this, I could assign the SD card as primary storage, the internal flash as secondary, and just let everything be on the SD card.
The real problem with Android is how users aren't using the new releases.
Only 13.5% of Android users are currently using Android 7.x.
32.3% are still on Android 6.x.
29.2% are still on Android 5.x.
Even 16% are still on Android 4.4!
Maybe it has to do with a lack of decent Android phones.
Maybe it has to do with users hating the new versions.
Maybe it has to do with it being too difficult, or perhaps even impossible, to upgrade to a newer version.
I really can't say for sure what the reasons are.
What I can say, however, is that this poses a huge problem for us app developers.
We're stuck targeting Android 4.4, despite there being Android 5.x, Android 6.x, Android 7.x and now Android 8.x that came after it!
Something is seriously fucked up when there are more users on an ancient release like Android 4.x than there are using Android 7.x, which has itself already been out for almost a year.
This should be a good indication to Google that something is really wrong.
They need to release a phone that people will want to buy, and that people will be able to buy, in order to get more users using a more recent version of Android.
It has more to do w/ the difficulty in upgrading. Before 5.x - Lollipop, it was impossible to upgrade b/w major Android versions. From Lollipop onwards, they ostensibly made it so that one could upgrade from 5 to 6 to 7 to 8, but my Verizon Ellipsis 10 is still stuck on 5.1. I'd love to upgrade to 6 or above, so that I can make my 128GB SD card the primary storage. So far, can't do it!
This depends on what you're using the phone for.
I use my phone to access the internet, but I don't think I'm using any services that "move on" to the extent that I need to update software or they stop working.
Email, web, VPN, etc... all of these things have remained constant enough that apps that could handle them 10 years ago still can.
If you're talking Facebook, etc., that may be a different matter -- but that stuff is a far cry from being all that is useful on the internet.
The real problem with Android is how users aren't using the new releases.
Why is that a problem?
It's a problem if users want new OS versions and can't get them, yes. But there are a lot of users (I would even say most of them) who don't really care if they're using the latest version or not, as long as the one they are using is still doing the job.
Oreo, for instance, does not provide anything that I consider compelling enough to make me want to update to it, so I'm very likely not going to.
Truly a new standard for retardation.
Android and Ubuntu both use the exact same alphabetical naming scheme.
I was in a small, regional Tesco (UK market chain) just the other day, and there were plenty of flavours of Oreos there. Perhaps not quite so many as I might find in the US, but certainly more than just plain vanilla.
On the other hand, I don't much like the other flavours, so plain is just fine with me.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on television.
Yes, if that's all you want to know. If, however, you want to know which version a release is in more absolute terms, then you have to count letters.
Interesting. I have a good feel for where letters lie in the alphabet, and in relation to one another. I can't necessarily subtract them to know that, e.g. M - F = 7, but I have a good rough feel for how far apart they are. I also don't know that I've ever needed to know that Froyo was seven releases before Marshmallow.
I don't just want to know which releases the version is between, I want to know its place in the entire run.
Why? I can't think of a time that has ever been useful information. The closest is that sometimes I'm interested in knowing when a release came out, in order to place it in the larger context of what was happening in the world and in technology at the time. The Ubuntu year numbers are outstanding for that purpose, but neither letters nor ordinary version numbers are helpful.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
phone from someone like OnePlus, Motorola, Xaomi or even LG.
Small note: if you go for some relatively known brand (some that are established on the market instead of some fly-by-night noname asian), that releases relatively few different hardware variants (i.e.: keeps the same device for some time - and all the model XyZ have the same internal, maybe except modem due to regional restrictions - instead of selling whatever comes from the workshop at that precise moment - and you end up with 4 completely different chipsets for the same official model),
then you chances of finding a well tested and stable LineageOS custom ROM for it are higher.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
When I'm reading docs or explanations that talk about a specific version of something, I find it very helpful to know exactly what version is being referenced. Often, this lets me adapt what the documentation is saying so that it fits the version I have. Knowing precisely where the version sits in the lineage is very helpful for that.
You're correct -- strictly speaking, I could get by without that. However, lacking that reduces my confidence and increases the amount of time and energy required to be sure that I have the correct understanding.
No, not really... Ubuntu might be doing that now, but they haven't always. And what are they going to do after Z to keep it alphabetical? The whole concept is kitschy, but moronic.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
For example, iOS supports back to the iPhone 5s. That is four, soon five generations, back to 2013.
As a side note :
- Jolla released their smartphone back in year 2013 (November)
- as of 2017, it's still receiving updates of SailfishOS (once it exists beta, the next 2.1.1 will also be available for it).
(though as a counter point : the Android compatibility layer used to run Android Apps is still stuck at the un-suported 4.1 Jellybean)
And if you look into it, the reasons are the same :
- Apple has a very small number of hardware platforms ("five generations ago" = means that there are litteraly only five models since then)
(and Jolla has very few platforms that they officially support : Jolla1 smartphone, Jolla/Aigo/Youyota tablet, Jolla C/Intex Aquafish smartphone and the upcoming Sony Xperia-based smartphone).
- Apple is directly in charge of the software that runs on these few platforms they write their update and deploy them to the end users.
Compare the situation with android:
- there are a fuckton of different hardware platforms on the market. Thousands of different Android smartphone.
- Google isn't in charge of developing Android directly for all of them. Google only develops directly for a few of their demonstration platform (the various Google Nexus devices). For the rest, they just develop the base android system and make it available for licensing (or pure opensource usage).
- Very often, specially the small asian no-name, manufacturers aren't even themselves directly in charge of the software running on the phone. Often, they use more or less available component (chipsets and re-usable PCBs) for the chip manufacturer (who generally just forks the kernel used by the current android version and slaps binary-only drivers on it), that the manufacturer only adapts to their final device (i.e.: they pay an intern to quickly recompile the current android du jour on the provided kernel by the chip manufacturer). There's nearly no follow up.
If a newer version of android comes - the manufacturer doesn't necessarily have a newer kernel for that specific chipset (that part of the reason why some platforms can't be upgraded beyond kit-kat even with lineageos. the only available kernel and binary drivers are extremely old and only support up to a certain API level, newer android require newer APIs that simply aren't available on the only drivers).
And the intern isn't working there anymore to do a complete port/recompile of this newer version.
And the manufacturer, if by random chance they still exist after all this time, are busy allocating all their available resources to producing a yet another newer model, based on a completely different chipset (whatever they managed to get cheap in the required quantities).
- And that's without factoring all the asinine weirdness of "carrier-exclusive" that happens in some stupid countries like the US.
There often the carrier themselves act as yet another filter deciding what software is available on the phone. Often they "customize the end-user experience" (=install a boat-load of bloatware to get some extra money) and would need to recustomise any eventual updates.
In other words :
- Apple has an easy job. Just release for the latest 5 models.
- Android on the other hand is a giant clusterfuck where nobody is really in charge and everybody tries to duck responsibility and it's always someone else's fault.
- LineageOS (formely CyanoGen mod) is the closest to an actual player trying to bring a little bit order in this madness. They release regular updates, and there's a community out there further porting to even more devices.
On the other hand, the post-Android era is still a little bit better than what was before.
Nowadays, nearly every mobile chipset manufacturer (Qualcomm, Mediatek, etc.) do release at least a few android-compatible linux kernels.
The base Android it self is opensource.
That enables efforts like LineageOS to make easily custom
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
When I'm reading docs or explanations that talk about a specific version of something, I find it very helpful to know exactly what version is being referenced. Often, this lets me adapt what the documentation is saying so that it fits the version I have. Knowing precisely where the version sits in the lineage is very helpful for that.
Sure. For me at least, letters do that exactly as well as numbers do. There is no difference. The only exception is library numbering where the specific meanings of major, minor and sub-minor versions would be difficult to replicate with letters -- well, actually, letters would do fine but no one does major, minor and sub-minor letters. But with system releases that's really not an issue and no one does it with numbers either.
In the case of Android, the library API is numbered -- Oreo is API level 26, for example.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Of course. But the fact is that Facebook, Instagram, What's App, etcetera etcetera is what most people use their smartphones for.
And the web of ten years ago doesn't bear much resemblance to the web of today, for better or for worse, it's a "platform" now, not just a bunch of HTML pages.
Naturally, you know all of that, and are about to protest that the above mentioned items are of no value. Nevertheless, the fact remains, that those things are the things that people want their phones for.
This may be the dumbest thing I've read today.
Oh Henry!?
and are about to protest that the above mentioned items are of no value. Nevertheless, the fact remains, that those things are the things that people want their phones for.
Indeed. I was not going to make any such protest -- if fact, I implicitly acknowledged what you said when I said "It depends on what you're using it for".
yeah, only since their 3rd major release. my apologies.
wrap around back to A, like they have said? you experience two 8 o clocks in a 24 hour period, yet have little issue inferring which people are talking about. two letter B's in the past 12 years though, man.
not to mention the default is to either refer to them by number, or by both name and number.
That's a relief. It's always so annoying when slashdotters fail to acknowledge the extent to which their particular use-cases tend to be outliers.