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

621–630 of 658 posts

Re: Android Oreo

#621

Post by koffiezet »

weberc2 wrote: post #315
rdsubhas wrote: post #141

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…

To be fair, I have an iPhone and I'm still waiting for the "remotely sane text selection" feature to ship. Just in case you think this is hyperbole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhWz7rMj56Y

Pretty horrible indeed, though limited mostly to Safari (which incidentally is one of the places you want to use it more often than in others in my experience)

Re: Android Oreo

#622

Post by dingo_bat »

jorgemf wrote: post #606
dingo_bat wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Environment? How so?

You don't need to have all apps installed. For example: you can go to facebook web page and launch an instant app, so you have the native experience without having the app installed. Also with places like amazon or anything that you don't use very frequently. Moreover you can test an app without installing it.

Ok I get that you don't need to install all apps. But again, how does it affect the environment?

Re: Android Oreo

#623

Post by int_19h »

digi_owl wrote: post #567
int_19h wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You mean the APIs. But I wasn't talking about those, but rather the hardware - the only thing that you need there is ABI (or at least API) stability for drivers. So you can pull the same thing off with Linux, as well. Basically, modern desktop OSes can run on decade-old hardware, although they will have reduced functionality due to some missing features.

Re: Android Oreo

#624

Post by LeifCarrotson »

Spivak wrote: post #301
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can change that: don't buy a new phone every six months, and buy from a maker that supports your phone longer. I cannot change that. The ~5,000 I have spent on smartphones and laptops in the past 10 years is hardly enough. My buying choice, yours, and the GP's are just not strong and valuable enough to cause a manufacturer to pander to our desires. The economies of scale and the greater money available from the…

That's not really true on Laptops. Apple, Lenovo, and Dell all make sturdy high-end upgradable repairable laptops. Not the kinds of products you'll see at your local West Fry though.

I've worked with a Lenovo T60, a W520, a T430, and checked out the T560. They are steadily getting less repairable.

Re: Android Oreo

#625

Post by jorgemf »

dingo_bat wrote: post #622
jorgemf wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to have all apps installed. For example: you can go to facebook web page and launch an instant app, so you have the native experience without having the app installed. Also with places like amazon or anything that you don't use very frequently. Moreover you can test an app without installing it.

Ok I get that you don't need to install all apps. But again, how does it affect the environment?

that you don't have to install apps to use them? Like you go to a web page and can have native experience, with its animations and everything. Much better than a web experience.

Re: Android Oreo

#626

Post by josteink »

ksk wrote: post #610
josteink wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they do all this testing for all GSM phones in the world? All new and old? All GSM phones ever sold? I guess not. I guess instead they rely on the GSM specification to allow seamless independence between the phone and the carrier for 99.999% of the phones out there (if not more). So why do they need to "test" the remaining 0.001% when they have a update in user-facing functionality the carrier will never see or in…

Resources are finite. I don't know what your point is? That they should simply give up and do nothing? >That carriers needs to do testing is a lie perpetuated to allow for customer-hostile business-practices. Stop repeating it. Other than your opinion, what evidence do you have that this is a lie?

All of Europe? Where GSM was invented?

This kind of bullshit only happens in the US where carriers are free to bullshit as they like due to absolutely lacking regulation.

In Europe we know better, we do better.

I'd rather say the burden of evidence is on the other side of the argument: prove to me why do you need to do testing as a carrier.

Re: Android Oreo

#627

Post by pjmlp »

tomkarlo wrote: post #601
mariusmg wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> by pulling out most of the OS into upgradable components. That's not true (the most of the OS part). They untangled their own stuff (Play Store, Google services and so on) and can update those as they see fit. The OS stuff is still monolithic. Most of serious security issues still require full OS updates. Also supporting a new major version of Android runtime still require a full OS update.

Most security issues are handled by security updates, which don't require a letter update. They're issued as patches, so OEMs can issue them for an older device without updating it to a new release. https://www.android.com/security-center/monthly-security-upd...

They can, but most don't.

Re: Android Oreo

#628

Post by ehsankia »

batiudrami wrote: post #482
ricardobeat wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you take that from? To me, the new ones look way "cheaper", like ripped off WordArt.

They look more like the iOS ones. That's what's important (even though I think the overuse of gradients makes iOS emoji look dated too). Oddly Facebook Messenger seems to have the best set [1], for my eyes. [1] https://emojipedia.org/messenger/

No they don't. They look like a shitty replica of them made by someone who understands nothing about art. Just because they both have "gradients" means nothing. iOS has smooth 3D gradients. These have a plain and awful looking linear gradient from top to bottom with two colors. The messenger one you linked has so much detail and personality. These ones have neither. They are, as mentioned above, like cheap Clipart. If you honestly can't see the difference between the one you linked and these new Android ones, then I don't know what to tell you.

Re: Android Oreo

#629

Post by pjmlp »

digi_owl wrote: post #566
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Which lead to the situation that although Windows Phone failed in the market, Windows 10 seems to be on good track to win the hybrid tablets market.

All the consumer stores on my city have mostly Windows 10 hybrid laptops on sale, with the exception of a few Samsung and Huawei ones with Android.

Re: Android Oreo

#630

Post by pjmlp »

dcow wrote: post #596
dcow wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like native app development because it's not a browser. Android was the most honest manifestation of that on mobile (iOS is basically a "client OS"). I look towards domains where people are still putting powerful applications on connected hardware. Mobile is starting to look like a commodity web experience with half the history of JS, so why not just use that?

Point being the delta between what a native app and what a browser app can do has all but disappeared. BT and Graphics are the last few notable things and both will be supported by browsers soon (webgl already is and webbt is incoming). I'm not saying go use JS.. I very much do not enjoy it. Im asking why we need to build native when there's increasingly less to justify the overhead.

WebGL is a poor cousin of OpenGL 4.6.

Even comparing WebGL 2.0 to OpenGL ES 3.0, which it is based on, there are nice features like geometry shaders missing.

Post reply on HN