Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android Oreo

android.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 658 posts

Re: Android Oreo

#281

Post by dcow »

mjevans wrote: post #274
kevincox wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disable "Battery Optimization" per app, so this isn't very restrictive. It just applies by default.

I'd like to do that, but when I 'exit' an app and/or swipe it off of the list of program cards I want it to ACTUALLY exit (at least within 30 seconds).

What if that app is say and open source messenger app that doesn't use GCM/FCM. For that to work you need to maintain a connection with a remote service. You don't need the UI hogging memory the whole time but you definitely want messages to come in immediately. IMO the system should offer a way to completely kill and app but "killing the UI" should not stop critical services utilized by the app.

Okay so maybe you could argue that if you never "swipe kill" the app it should be allowed to have background services executing much like e.g. Slack on macOS. But you can't even do that. Having your ui in the recent tasks list does not exempt you from background restriction.

Re: Android Oreo

#282

Post by willtim »

izacus wrote: post #99
amrrs wrote: post #89

Has Google ever released a report on how much time it takes an average flagship device to get the latest android version? Even if you've paid $$$$ in getting Samsung Galaxy S8 just recently, you're not going to get Android O tomorrow morning. But that's definitely the case with iOS. That makes a huge difference in the world where Software updates play a huge role in performance and functionality than hardware update…

Just like you have to buy an Apple phone to get Apple updates immediately, you need to buy a Google phone to get Google updates immediately. Pixel and Nexus rollout is starting nowish (and beta participants are already getting the OTAs). This is really not a secret at this time anymore and should be taken into account when you succumb to Samsung marketing. Everybody else will be probably 4-6 months late.

To be fair, Samsung phones do sometimes get software features years before the Google and Apple phones (e.g. split screen multitasking).

Re: Android Oreo

#283

Post by ethbro »

fabrice_d wrote: post #106
klondike_ wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carriers generally have deals with other companies for preinstalled apps which may or may not still be active by the time it comes around for an update. Also they have to test the devices, but considering the sheer number of Android devices they probably prioritize new high end devices first. This problem is made worse on Verizon and Sprint which use CDMA 3G networks, as opposed to the worldwide GSM standard. Also th…

This is about cost: updates sometimes fail (incredible, I know), and carriers are the first place people go to get their phones back in working order. This kind of support is quite costly so carriers don't push too hard for updates to happen.

Every fifth security vulnerability in Android should cause the radio to spam reconnect attempts or similarly onorous behavior.

I imagine carrier responses would look a lot different then.

Re: Android Oreo

#284

Post by rothbardrand »

victorhooi wrote: post #176
putlake wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Apple supports iPhones for 4-5 years. Google has said they will only support their flagship Nexus and Pixel phones for no more than 2 years. For a $700 device this is unacceptable.

Apart from what Ironlink said below, there's also the fact that Google and Apple support mean different things. For Apple, updates often mean some subset of the full operating system updates, or a crippled version. Whereas Google updates tend to be all of nothing - meaning if your phone does get the update, it gets all of the features of that particular version. This seems to have changed somewhat with moving a lot o…

No, Apple updates include the full operating system update. The only time features are disabled is when they require hardware that doesn't exist (e.g. you have no finger print reader so you can't use your finger print reader) or they are too intensive for the phones CPU/GPU. That's it. Apple's propensity for hardware accelerators may make this seem like it's crippling (Eg: there is a voice recognition hardware accelerator on Apple CPUs, IIRC) and people may not know why, but Apple does not use crippling software as a strategy to force upgrades-- as you seem to be implying.

Re: Android Oreo

#285

Post by chipperyman573 »

on_and_off wrote: post #264
sumeno wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty unreasonable desire. Technology changes so much in 10 years that it wouldn't be feasible to support a generation of phones for that long. 10 years ago was the original iPhone. How much of a money sink would it have been for Apple to support the original iPhone until now?

That's not really comparable.. the ecosystem is mature now. But sure I am going far with 10 years.. and phones would need serviceable batteries to last that long.

What ecosystem becomes mature after just 10 years? A hard drive 10 years after the first one was invented in 1956 looked like this[0]. Is that mature? Phones are mature compared to 10 years ago, but whatever they evolve to in the next 10 will dwarf them.

[0]: http://images.computerhistory.org/storageengine/1966_Ferrite...

Re: Android Oreo

#286

Post by Angostura »

pjmlp wrote: post #168
kevincox wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sad thing is that it shouldn't be on Google to force them. It should be Google to enable them and the users to "force" them. They have argably been enabled for a while, but Treble is making it even easier. Hopefully this pushes the needle over the line for at least some OEMs/teclos.

In Germany there are quite a few stores still selling budget Android 4.4 and 5.1 devices, which people keep on buying.

In the UK last year, I bought a Samsung android tablet for the kid (my first Android device). It was running 4 and I ass7med Samsung would have an upgrade available. Ha! No chance.

Re: Android Oreo

#287

Post by dcow »

catdog wrote: post #278
dcow wrote: post #60

Am I the only one who's really disappointed by the platform's shift in its stance on background execution? I was originally drawn to Android because it wasn't iOS. I wanted to develop on a platform where I could run a service in the background if the user wanted that. Apps that were bad stewards of battery life and phone resources were supposed to be scrutinized by users and removed if they were too poor. You can be…

At least in Android 7 you can explicitly allow this for a specific app. This question can even be triggered by the app itself (e.g. Conversations and Signal ask you to do this if they can't use GCM). This is hopefully still possible. > It's the turning of an era for Android, and my interests have moved elsewhere (from an app platform perspective, embedded Android is still vialble since everything you ship runs as a s…

Can you point me to the relevant info? This is news to me (and sounds exciting).

No doubt we've seen it coming for awhile. But I'm still sad to see it finally come to this, at least ideologically. iOS is a closed ecosystem that's been opening up. Android was an open ecosystem that's becoming more locked down.

Re: Android Oreo

#288

Post by rothbardrand »

izacus wrote: post #163
JorgeGT wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The catch is that you can buy an Apple phone everywhere, but for instance Google decided simply to not offer the Pixel in my country. Also, they stopped updating my Nexus 4 long time ago, something that Apple does not with their devices. Hence, I am not "succumbing to Google marketing" again. I have now updated to a Moto, which used to be a Google company. Let's see how long it takes to update...

Yes, the limited availability of Google Store and Google hardware in general is a huge failing of the company. I really don't understand why they so commonly fail to bring best Android devices to markets with most Android penetration - they're practically giving the market share away to Apple's aggressive price cuts lately.

The reason is they simply cannot do it. It's very different shipping a high end phone in units of 100 million vs shipping a high end phone in units of 500,000.

This is why most android high end devices are really tiny market share.

They can't compete with Apple-- AT VOLUME. Apple's supply chain is where they are hugely competitive. This goes for Samsung etc.

So on android, genuinely high end phones are prestige items to make android look good, but the mass of android phones are low end cheap phones that can easily be mass produced.

Apple has been known to buy 10,000 prototype modeling machines and put them into production because they were the only ones on the market that could do a particularly manufacturing step that was needed for that model... google is never going to do that.

In fact, I don't think google has ever made any phones (excluding Motorola) themselves-- all the Pixels are rebrands of other makers devices.

Re: Android Oreo

#289

Post by merb »

victorhooi wrote: post #176
putlake wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Apple supports iPhones for 4-5 years. Google has said they will only support their flagship Nexus and Pixel phones for no more than 2 years. For a $700 device this is unacceptable.

Apart from what Ironlink said below, there's also the fact that Google and Apple support mean different things. For Apple, updates often mean some subset of the full operating system updates, or a crippled version. Whereas Google updates tend to be all of nothing - meaning if your phone does get the update, it gets all of the features of that particular version. This seems to have changed somewhat with moving a lot o…

> For Apple, updates often mean some subset of the full operating system updates, or a crippled version. Whereas Google updates tend to be all of nothing - meaning if your phone does get the update, it gets all of the features of that particular version.

Eh? Aren't you swapping something here? On Apple you get OS updates with nearly all features for at least 5 years, of course they can't create a NFC device into a phone that doesn't ship with one... I would love to see _any_ Android phone with support for 5 years, that does not come from google directly. it would be a no brainer if something exists in the 200-300€ range. because I don't care which phone I have, it just needs to be long liveable and have a price below 400€. currently I use used iPhones, which I get relativly cheap.

Re: Android Oreo

#290

Post by JetSpiegel »

ehsankia wrote: post #277
Asdfbla wrote: post #174

I know programming within the constraints of mobile devices isn't easy and I want to take nothing away from the release, but when you are still used to Desktop computing it's kind of funny to see how seemingly trivial nice to have features like picture-in-picture or notification dots get all hyped up in the press release.

Does desktop have good PIP? It obviously matters much less when you have multiple monitor, but I'd love to see OS level PIP support on desktop. Aka, have a video "always on top" in the corner that I can move around and resize while browsing the web, all on the same monitor. Some programs have "always on top" support but there's nothing OS level.

Window Managers like KDE and Gnome have workspaces and window pinning (shown as "Show on all workspaces") for decades.

Windows 3.1 was able to have two windows side by side before Android even existed.

Post reply on HN