Sigh....The Android fork has arrived

[rudeguy]

Not only will Honeycomb be version 3.0, but it will also be exclusively for tablets. This likely means that Android development has been branched off into two projects--phone and tablet. This doesn't necessarily mean that there won't be a "Honeycomb" for phones. It just means that it won't look anything like the tablet version (2.4 anybody?)."

http://www.androidguys.com/2011/01/05/google-shows-android-30-honeycomb-exclusively-tablets/

 

[zerocool84]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2132843

 

[shortylickens]

This is so not news, man.

 

[Bateluer]

Not very surprising, and not really a bad thing. The tablet and phone versions will likely use the same code base underneath, with some changes to better support the strengths of tablets.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

It's exactly what we expected. I don't know how you could have thought anything different could happen.

 

[ultimatebob]

So, let me get this straight... Google now has separate OS's for their cell phones (Android 2.x), tablets (Android 3.x), netbooks (Chrome OS), and servers (Sorry, that one isn't public yet)? Who do they think they are, Microsoft?

 

[UNCjigga]

So...is Ice Cream a 2.x or 3.x release? I'm assuming Ice Cream will be for phones?

 

[akugami]

So, let me get this straight... Google now has separate OS's for their cell phones (Android 2.x), tablets (Android 3.x), netbooks (Chrome OS), and servers (Sorry, that one isn't public yet)? Who do they think they are, Microsoft?

It's not truly separate OS's. It's really the same OS. But there are some differences because of the different screen sizes and the need for some different API's to support apps that will make use of the larger screens.

It does make sense for a dedicated team to concentrate on making the OS for tablet use as good as possible and that means not having to worry about cell phones. This is really no different from the slight divergence and version differences in Apple's iOS. The iPad was running a different version of iOS with different features from iPhones. Lately they've been merging back the versions but it'll still contain differences.

 

[Pliablemoose]

So, let me get this straight... Google now has separate OS's for their cell phones (Android 2.x), tablets (Android 3.x), netbooks (Chrome OS), and servers (and they're all free?) (Sorry, that one isn't public yet)? Who do they think they are, Microsoft?

Fixed that for you...

 

[ultimatebob]

Fixed that for you...

Not really... Google has their own proprietary version of Linux for servers with a custom distributed file system. They're not sharing it with the public, either

 

[UNCjigga]

I think the greater issue here is whether or not Honeycomb will be released as AOSP. I've got a sneaking suspicion that because it was developed with specific devices in mind, it may not see an AOSP release. I hope I'm wrong though.

 

[rudeguy]

I think the greater issue here is whether or not Honeycomb will be released as AOSP. I've got a sneaking suspicion that because it was developed with specific devices in mind, it may not see an AOSP release. I hope I'm wrong though.

Meh

I'm done worrying about when or what Google or manufacturers will release. I can't imagine what it would be like relying on stock firmware. If you want new or updated software, its basically a must that you root. Either that or providers will have to go back to 12 month contracts and charge more for phones.

 

[DivideBYZero]

You got forked.

 

[Deeko]

The iPad OS isn't *exactly* the same as the iPhone OS, either. Its a customized version for tablets. I don't really see a problem with it, so long as the underlying OS remains similar enough and apps are compatible.

 

[gsaldivar]

The iPad OS isn't *exactly* the same as the iPhone OS, either. Its a customized version for tablets. I don't really see a problem with it, so long as the underlying OS remains similar enough and apps are compatible.

This.

 

[JD50]

Sounds like different spins, kind of like Kubuntu vs. Ubuntu. No big deal, it's done all the time in the Linux world.

 

[BoberFett]

Not very surprising, and not really a bad thing. The tablet and phone versions will likely use the same code base underneath, with some changes to better support the strengths of tablets.

In which case, why the need to fork it? Forking it complicates updates and fixes because now you have to maintain to diverging codebases.

I can't for the life of me understand why it required a fork rather than simply one new version with a properly designed UI that can be modified per device.

It's not truly separate OS's. It's really the same OS. But there are some differences because of the different screen sizes and the need for some different API's to support apps that will make use of the larger screens.

In that case, why fork it? Are there separate versions of Windows for 640x480 and 1920x1200? Apparently MS can figure this out but Google can't?

It does make sense for a dedicated team to concentrate on making the OS for tablet use as good as possible and that means not having to worry about cell phones. This is really no different from the slight divergence and version differences in Apple's iOS. The iPad was running a different version of iOS with different features from iPhones. Lately they've been merging back the versions but it'll still contain differences.

No, that makes no sense at all. There's no reason that resolution differences couldn't be easily handled by the exact same OS with minor tweaks. People have been skinning applications for years. I'm not sure why Google is having such a problem here.

 

[rise]

^^^

i'm no coder but i think windows examples and just skinning to different res on other OS is a poor example as they aren't running on touch screen, rotating screens. or when they did, they pretty much sucked. not to mention, droid tablets are all over the map with resolutions, unlike the ipad.

 

[BoberFett]

^^^

i'm no coder but i think windows examples and just skinning to different res on other OS is a poor example as they aren't running on touch screen, rotating screens. or when they did, they pretty much sucked. not to mention, droid tablets are all over the map with resolutions, unlike the ipad.

You may not be a developer, but I am. I've written several commercial applications, all of which had interfaces which resized appropriately based on screen real estate and/or were easily configurable to modify the layout.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koIzhLaRJJo

For chrissake, look at this video with Andy Rubin from Google talking about how now Android will allow the Gmail app to display the mail list and body side by side rather than top and bottom. It's like everyone in UI design went full retard as soon as smartphones came around.

 

[Patranus]

So, let me get this straight... Google now has separate OS's for their cell phones (Android 2.x), tablets (Android 3.x), netbooks (Chrome OS), and servers (Sorry, that one isn't public yet)? Who do they think they are, Microsoft?

You forgot TVs.

 

[snikt]

I'm not sure why Google is having such a problem here.

Maybe its not a problem; maybe its by choice. At work, our developers created an app. that a majority of our users use in our enterprise. This is no small app that they developed, it has replaced the prior system that had been in place for nearly 30+ years. (Think Mainframe stuff). But I digress, the app. has been designed to be optimized for resolutions of at least 1600x1200. If the resolution on a monitor is changed and the app. is launched the app. prompts the user that it is optimized for a resolution of 1600x1200.

 

[zerocool84]

The iPad OS isn't *exactly* the same as the iPhone OS, either. Its a customized version for tablets. I don't really see a problem with it, so long as the underlying OS remains similar enough and apps are compatible.

Yea I don't know why this is a big deal. You need a dedicated OS for tablets. As we've seen, a phone OS designed for a small screen doesn't translate well to larger screens. Apple did this, companies do this with Windows on tablets, RIM is doing it, and now Google is doing it.

 

[Deeko]

Now before we get all huffy about the merits of how Google is managing their codebase - lets not forget that its hearsay. We don't know that the code has officially forked - that was speculation by the article.

For example - the Gmail app could very well have the same underlying engine/data model between tablet and smartphone, with a separate UI layer. Is that really so horrendous? Its not only intended for different screen sizes and resolutions, but different input and usage styles. I really don't see the problem, from a UI perspective, in maintaining common middle and lower lever code, with separate & independent UI layers.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Does anyone actually think Google has stopped OS development for phones now that 3.0 is out for tablets and is, by some accounts, sort of a dedicated tablet OS? Oh, and the idea that phones will never see resolutions like current tablets is shortsighted as well.


Brian

 

[s44]

He skirts around this particular issue, but Matias Duarte's interview with Engadget has interesting Honeycomb tidbits (on all devices... eventually): no more physical button requirements, easier multitask switching, a context-sensitive application bar, and... unfortunately, no end to manufacturer skinning.