Linaro supercharging Android and showing the power of Open Source
0. phoneArena posted on 14 Jun 2012, 20:52
Those of you who pay attention may have noticed that Google and Apple have settled into an interesting routine with their respective updates for mobile products. Apple tends to focus on big software updates one year...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. mas11 posted on 14 Jun 2012, 21:03 11
So does this mean that most devices running or getting ICS will see Jelly Bean, since it is enhancing performance not redesigning the UI?
7. MichaelHeller posted on 14 Jun 2012, 21:58 7
This has nothing to do with it really, but yes devices running or getting ICS should eventually see the Jelly Bean update. All updates should get pushed to all compatible devices. The only outlier there has ever been in the Android line is Honeycomb. Everything else should make it out, assuming manufacturers do it.
22. ahomad posted on 15 Jun 2012, 06:38 0
Honeycomb is android version made for tablets only. Jellybeans is also romured to be aimed for tablets improvements as well (given that android tablets not doing well). so we might not see this update hitting android phones.
25. MichaelHeller posted on 15 Jun 2012, 11:50 2
Jelly Bean is rumored to be launching with the Nexus tablet. It's not rumored to be exclusive to tablets.
17. jove39 posted on 15 Jun 2012, 01:06 2
Officially...forget it...but dev community won't take long...since code base will be similarly structured and they'll be done with optimizations for ICS by then
2. Captain_Doug posted on 14 Jun 2012, 21:16 5
I love this stuff. "Oh PS, the OS you really really like can be even faster without hardware changes" Music to my ears.
8. MichaelHeller posted on 14 Jun 2012, 22:00 9
Actually, it's more like Android could be even faster if the code were optimized more. Google focused on UI and features with ICS (as with Froyo), so it will be focusing on optimizations now. We're hoping Linaro is part of that, but it will happen either way.
21. ahomad posted on 15 Jun 2012, 06:34 0
I am not sure if I understood correctly, you said ICS update was mainly updating UI and features, but what I usually read in any topic is that ICS made huge performance upgrade. there seems to be conflict in here or am I confused?
26. MichaelHeller posted on 15 Jun 2012, 11:51 0
There was a huge performance upgrade with ICS, but that wasn't the main focus of the update. The point is that Google could have optimized the software more than it did, but chose to focus more on UI and features.
3. eDiesel posted on 14 Jun 2012, 21:20 16
Once again.... open source at its finest. Everybody helps everybody. Im glad its not gluttonous and closed minded.
13. kanonk posted on 14 Jun 2012, 23:21 0
"closed binary blobs" - blob means binary large object, wich makes it "closed binary binary large objects" =)
14. thunderising posted on 14 Jun 2012, 23:22 1
Optimize for low end SOCs like Cortex A5, A8 and all. Quad cores don't need this!
15. MichaelHeller posted on 15 Jun 2012, 00:09 8
Yes, let's all spend our time optimizing for obsolete hardware!
18. jove39 posted on 15 Jun 2012, 01:19 1
Its very easy to say google engineer's didn't optimized code...but when you have delivery deadline pressure...priorities change...first and top most priority is to release defect-free build...we postpone optimizations to next build (mean postponed forever) and hardly ever revisit...but rarely it happens that we plan a build which is not functional enhancement but based solely on optimization.
I hope google could cleanup stuff...and release refreshed Android 4.1...It'll be really cool...I am not sure if someone had tried compiling 4.0.4 build here...I tried from AOSP...it has butt load of warnings...and make script need couple of tweak to make it work out of the box (has problem with open jdk)...Anyway...I hope google comes clean...incorporate all suggestions of Linaro team...and we get best ever Android build :)
20. TylerGrunter posted on 15 Jun 2012, 05:36 0
Michael, do you mind to check this two sentences?
a) "closed binary blobs", a blob is a binary large object, so there is not binary blob is redundant. "closed blobs" or "closed binary objects, also called blobs"
b) "which should allow for easier updating of the kernel by causing trouble with the binary blobs". Do you wanted to say this "which should allow for easier updating of the kernel WITHTOUT causing trouble with the blobs"?
27. MichaelHeller posted on 15 Jun 2012, 11:55 0
edited. sorry about that. I was just quoting from the Linaro literature, which refers to them as "closed binary blobs". Obviously, I'm not a coder, so I was trusting them on that.
29. TylerGrunter posted on 17 Jun 2012, 06:28 0
No problem, in fact is common mistake the Linux developers make. A blob is just a large binary, which includes images, videos, etc. So in order to differenciate the "executable code in binary" the call it just "binary". Why? Because in Linux there used to be two tipes of files in the filesystem: text or binary. At that time the only binaries where the exectuable ones (no need for images or videos in shell, really), so executables are still called binaries in Linux. Therefore they are not "really wrong" naming them binary blobs.
The name should be changed as binary blob sounds stupid, but old customs die hard.
But hey, it could be just me being too picky. ;)
23. nicholassss posted on 15 Jun 2012, 11:08 0
Why not have google hire these nerdy dudes to optimize the code after a stable version has been released. make it official. then the every day chap can get these in updates. And us nerds would also benefit because we could still do whatever we wanted with our phones but we'd be starting off that much better.
24. nicholassss posted on 15 Jun 2012, 11:09 0
I know google has a lot more red tape to cut through before they can release stuff, but ti seems like it it can be made so much better, it should be made so much better, you know what I mean?