Live data from Hacker News

Android Oreo

android.com

561–570 of 658 posts

Re: Android Oreo

#561
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> VTS certified If it passed VTS it should be able to run AOSP. The new CTS will be an AOSP System image running their VTS passing "drivers". Even if your vendor doesn't push any updates. At least you should be able to run a number of newer versions of AOSP as long as Android doesn't deprecate those VTS drivers.

How in practice would you go about putting AOSP on a device without the vendor cooperating? Is there some kind of secure boot system that always accepts AOSP images?

You would still have to jump through hoops to boot a new ROM, but when you did it would actually work rather than having some drivers missing.

Re: Android Oreo

#562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that but would non Android developers even understand the feature?

I imagine there are plenty of instances where apps do not account for space well

Frankly i get the feel that most apps don't care.

They develop for a certain size and resolution, maybe what is currently on the Samsung flagship, and if it also work outside of that box they are happy. And if not they simply flag it as not supported in the Play store.

Android has had from day one all manner of capabilities for fitting a UI to different devices. But still i run into UIs that seems fixed in some manner because of some Photoshop designer with a chip on their shoulder.

Re: Android Oreo

#563
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. A bit harsh, no? If new software requires hardware, why should that be considered "crippled"? I find amazing that my 2013 iPhone5 can play games (Hearthstone) that some 2015/2016 Androids can't.

> If new software requires hardware, why should that be considered "crippled"?

Because I do not own that hardware, so for me uses the software is effectively crippled. I don't care why, only the outcome matters.

I wouldnt even mind not getting new features so much, but this also effectively means that my security updates are tied to new hardware; how is that acceptable?

Re: Android Oreo

#564
post #330

Not saying that everything else is bad, but one thing that strikes me is how much they have run out of interesting things now that they had to use fillers[1] like: Tooltips Support for tooltips (small popup windows with descriptive text) for views and menu items. Normally, this would be relegated to a git changelog in the support library. But this is on the global marketing landing page. I like to imagine a fictional…

How do tooltips even work on a touch based OS?

Dunno exactly what they are referring to, but on Fragment UIs one can tap and hold on buttons to get a small popup/tooltip.

Re: Android Oreo

#565
post #495
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do tooltips even work on a touch based OS?

Chrome OS has first class support for Android apps nowadays. You can use a keyboard and mouse through USB OTG or Bluetooth on an Android as well.

Something that has been with Android since 3.0.

Really wish i could find an android tablet with a full size A port these days that didn't run a ancient version...

Re: Android Oreo

#566
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do tooltips even work on a touch based OS?

Android has long has deep support for keyboard and mouse navigation where this could be more useful.

Indeed. It is one of those things that seems to go unspoken of, because even Google don't want to acknowledge that they once tried to pitch Android as more than a media consumption platform (Android 3.0, aka honeycomb, aka the tablet/landscape focused Android variant).

Re: Android Oreo

#567
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?

And yet, most PCs built 10 years ago can still run most modern software that is written for modern PCs.

Demonstrating how much Microsoft bends over to maintain backwards compatibility. Something that for all their other flaws they should be applauded for.

Re: Android Oreo

#568
post #131

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...

This round of updates for Moto will be interesting, as it has a light skin. Completely dependent on Lenovo ownership, and they haven't been making the best choices lately.

Supposedly Lenovo has mentioned that future devices will drop even that skin.

Re: Android Oreo

#569
post #306
post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I understand why we're in this situation. I'm lamenting the fact that it's reached this point. Maybe I'm a minority but I don't think my apps are the hottest shit around and I try to make an effort to be a good steward. IMO engineers should push back when product asks for things that clobber system resources. However the few bad examples should not ruin it for the use cases where you really do need something run…

What are these apps doing in the background? I've always assumed they're collecting/streaming device and user metrics. Running apps, location, WiFi SSIDs, etc. If that's the case, then a reduction in data collection could mean a reduction in metrics/income.

Its a mix of things.

Android by design leave apps in the background when you exit them via the home button.

Before 4.0 introduced the switcher button, and the accompanying swipe action to fully close an app, the only way to properly exit an app was to hit the back button until you exited back to the home screen.

This because the initial design of Android was less about apps and more about "activities". These were the individual parts of an app, and what enables that one app launch parts of another app to complete a user action (the most prominent likely being the share menu).

This was presented back in the day as a metaphorical stack of cards. As more user actions where taken that opened more activities, those activities would be added on top of the stack. Then as the user hit the back button he would be flipping backwards in that stack. To enable all this, Android keep apps around in RAM until it runs low, and then start to close down the oldest ones (first by waking them up and telling them to exit gracefully, then forcing them).

Thus often an app will sit in the background even though it is doing nothing.

One good way to observe this (until recently) was to run something like OSMonitor and look at CPU time of various app processes. Often they would be present but basically show no indication of actually doing anything. They would just sit there idle, waiting for user actions.

Re: Android Oreo

#570
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apps that were bad stewards of battery life and phone resources were supposed to be scrutinized by users If HN allowed emoji in comments, I'd have a U+1F923 here. Since I can't do that, you're adorable. The users, eh? The users are supposed to be burdened with checking the wake status and radio activation schedule of their apps? How was that supposed to work, exactly?

I'm not sure what your point is here and your tone indicates you're not really looking for honest discussion. But FYI Android reports energy usage statistics to the user on a per-app basis. What I don't like is Android the platform telling me the user how my phone is best used. It's pretty crippling. Let's say I'm deploying Android on hardware that is always plugged in--something kiosk-style. Why shouldn't I be able…

And if Android itself didn't tell you enough, there were apps line OSMonitor that could give you more detail (at least until Google shitcanned the permissions that it relied on for "security" reasons).
Post reply on HN