Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Android Go Will Make the Most Basic Phones Run Smoothly (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the next-billion-users dept.

Entry-level phones may cost less than big hitters, but they come at the cost of space, speed and efficiency. Google's looking to change that with Android Go. From a report: Android Oreo (Go Edition) will launch tomorrow as part of the Android Oreo 8.1 rollout and all Android Oreo devices with 512MB to 1GB of memory will be optimised for Android Go. Google says this will allow them to function properly as smartphones while doubling their available storage space. The experience includes: An improved operating system with better performance, storage and security features; a new set of lighter Google apps, suitable for first-time web users; a Google Play store that highlights apps designed to work best on entry-level devices.

13 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. Great... by YuppieScum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...so are they going to back-port it to my 4-yo Samsung, so I can finally get an upgrade from Android 4.2?

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
    1. Re: Great... by hackertourist · · Score: 3, Informative

      Computers shouldn't be disposable items. 4 years is perfectly reasonable for many uses, and no more than should be expected from a $700 device.
      I'm not using my phone for more demanding tasks than my 2003 Palm TX could handle just fine.

    2. Re: Great... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Informative

      Computers should last at least 5-10 years. The idea of throwing one out because the OS is outdated is stupid -- I'm typing this on a 6 year old Thinkpad which works beautifully once upgraded with 8GB RAM and SSD.

      Our throw-away society is just contributing to pollution from manufacturing devices and from disposal of e-waste (recycling is a nice idea, but somewhat of a myth in reality).

    3. Re: Great... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      How about this: expect an unlocked bootloader so you can install your OS of choice on it.

    4. Re: Great... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about this: government mandate that people be allowed to control their devices? Because it's in humankind's and the Earth's interest to reduce e-waste.

  2. So what? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Will the low-end of Android Oreo smartphones be slower than the entry-level Android Go smartphones?

    Why can't all phones run Android Go? Wouldn't it make all phones faster and make batteries last longer?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:So what? by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It kind of reminds me of the Windows LTSB:

      Microsoft: Hey, we're releasing a build with all the crap stripped out, and with a stable and predictable update and support schedule. That way, you can use it on very special devices when you need to...

      Everyone: Oh, that sounds great. I'll just install it on everything.

      Microsoft: No! It's only to be installed on very particular devices, when absolutely necessary.

      Everyone: But... why? What you're describing is what we want. Stable predictable releases with all of the crap stripped out.

      Microsoft: But then we can't spy on you or put ads into your start menu.

      Everyone: ... yeah... that's what we want.

      Microsoft: And we can't install random updates and reboot your computer at arbitrary times outside of your control.

      Everyone: ...

      Microsoft: If you use the LTSB on your normal workstations, we won't really support it and we'll make it harder to upgrade when you want to.

      Everyone: *sigh* Fine.

    2. Re:So what? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      There is the idea that if we take software designed for a slow system and put it on a fast system, it will out perform the same tasks on software designed to the bigger system.

      A newer faster device may not work as well on Android Go, vs Normal Android.

      For example lets say on an old phone, We don't turn on predictive caching, on some tasks, because the slower device will spend a lot of time predicting what it will need and storing it in memory, so 1/3 of the device performance is saved by not doing this. This will probably speed up the device for its usage, because there may be a 50% chance of not reaching the predicted outcome. Vs on a newer devices where doing the same action only take 1/10 of the devices performance. So the reward of getting it right 50% of the time, is better then the combined attempts of failures.

      Different technology components operate at different speeds and have different relationships with each other. So the Ram on your top of the line device may be twice as fast as the old device, the CPU may be 5x faster. The different architecture designs requires different approaches.

       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:So what? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 2

      Makes sense. It seems like Android Go is optimized primarily for phones with very little memory. Maybe they limit some background processes too and shut down all but the foreground app. That can be annoying - and unnecessary on a device with enough memory.

      My question is - who's going to make these devices. if all they're really skimping on is memory vs today's low-end devices, and they're not really much cheaper (there are lots of great deals on pretty powerful Android hardware in emerging markets), then the only reason to produce Go phones would be to slightly increase your profit margins by making devices with 1GB of memory instead of 2GB. Really?

      Of course, if this is a carrot vs. stick push to get low-end OEMs to release devices with Oreo - and project Treble, which should make them much more upgradable, that could be a nice start toward curing the android fragmentation problem. And if Google provides the upgrades (since for sure, the low-end OEM's won't), then it could be an important step.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    4. Re:So what? by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everyone: *sigh* Fine. *Navigates to www.thepiratebay.org to download LTSB release.

      FTFY. Just like when downloading movies vs buying blurays, the pirates end up being those people with the best quality product.

  3. Re:Do they still make phones like this? by b0bby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's for the developing world, trying to keep the costs down.

  4. Why is 512MB low end? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

    The first computer I had with 512MB of RAM ran Windows 2000, StarOffice, Visual Studio, and Netscape Communicator, with WinAMP playing music in the background. It didn't run them all at the same time, but it typically had 2-3 of them running at once. The monitor was only 1024x768, and wasn't using a compositing windowing system so I realise the requirements for the graphics will be higher on a modern phone, but is 512MB really such a small amount for a device that's typically running a single user-facing application at any given time?

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  5. Good Enough Phone. by Zorro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I DON'T make it a habit of walking around with $500 or a Gold coin in my pocket all the time.

    WHY would I wan't to carry a expensive very fragile thing around all the time?

    Star Trek data pads are pretty much disposable no one gives a f*ck if they lose or break one, that is how phones should be!

    What I can get for $300 is the most I will spend. If I break or lose it I won't need a grief counselor or a finance company to replace it.