Verizon announces the Pantech Perception – mid-range Android you can control without touching
1. gallitoking (Posts: 4630; Member since: 17 May 2011)
ICS out of the box, that is something I can never understand from Android, JB is the current OS why manufacturers keep using ICS.... wow...
3. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
Maybe license for Adroid Jelly Bean costs more than for Android Ice Cream Sandwich and that's why manufacturers don't want to buy license for Adroid Jelly Bean for their mid-range devices?
5. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
Yes, I have and how that changes what I have just said?
6. semipro1337 (Posts: 59; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)
Um because Android is open source, basically free, I don't think licensing is the issue as much as manufacturing laziness. They probably don't want to change the code of their gimmic to work with jb....
8. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
First of all Android OS isn't based on the one and single license, different parts of Android OS has different licenses. And that's mean that there is bunch of different requirements for commercial and non commercial use of software. Even though the software is open-source, device manufacturers cannot use Google's Android trademark unless Google certifies that the device complies with their terms and Compatibility Definition Document (CDD). Devices must also meet this definition to be eligible to license Google's closed-source applications, including Google Play and so on and on... In simple words, in case you are manufacturer and you want to use Android OS for commercial purposes, you will have to deal with a bunch of licenses and various legal terms and agreements...
10. semipro1337 (Posts: 59; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)
Ok but where does cost come into play? All that comes free of charge to manufacturers, just because you have to agree to their terms and licensing for certain aspects of android, doesn't mean you have to pay to do so. All free software I have ever used has always had an End User Agreement that I had to accept but never had to pay for... So go ahead, try to explain your cost is the issue argument again.
13. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
1. First of all, if you hadn't noticed my comment #3 wasn't a statement, it was more guessing and that's why it ended with "?" symbol.
2. If you will open http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A
ndroid_(operating_system)you will see a part named "Licensing" and this part also has paragraph named "Non-free software" !
3. Also another fact which proves that Android OS isn't totally free, it is already known that all manufacturers who use Android OS in their devices, should pay certain tax per each device to the Microsoft.
14. semipro1337 (Posts: 59; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)
paying taxes to microsoft is NOT a license fee.
Google Play does NOT have to be included, as Amazons kindle doesnt have it, they dont have to pay for that part of it.
Android=linux, Linux = open source = basic functionality and OS is FREE.
Bells and whistles are not FREE and that is where some extra money comes into play.
I can download Android right now and put it on anything I want and not pay a dime, and do this legaly.
15. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
"Google Play does NOT have to be included, as Amazons kindle doesnt have it, they dont have to pay for that part of it."
Can you prove that Amazon didn't paid for that?
17. semipro1337 (Posts: 59; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)
No i cant prove that they dont pay for it, but why would they have to pay for something they dont use? All they did was use a free os, android, in its basic form and then put their own skin and app store on it.
18. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4579; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
I think you should read this: http://goo.gl/O6V1A
11. Whateverman (Posts: 3150; Member since: 17 May 2009)
I agree, this doesn't make much sense at all. This thing is already two steps behind other new devices coming out at the same time. It could also be because of a delayed launch, I remember it being announced a couple months ago. Still a good looking phone for a mid-range device.
19. jsdechavez (Posts: 652; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
Cheaper parts. Android is not waiting for the current OS to mature when it upgrades. Too fast I guess.
7. chocolaking (Posts: 421; Member since: 22 May 2012)
looks like a nice gudget for mid-range..
9. goulav (Posts: 4; Member since: 03 Jan 2012)
Probably when development for the phone started, ICS was stable. That's probably what they built off and are most likely working on a JB update. And with the motion controls, those probably have deep integration within the framework of the OS, so it may not be a simple port or migration to newer OS than what it was developed on........ just a thought.
12. F14Tomcat (Posts: 4; Member since: 17 Apr 2013)
I would agree with that. Remember, the first FCC filing for this phone was on 07 SEP 2012. I also get angry when people say "but the motion sense thing was already announced in the GS4". They don't seem to remember (or even know) that the GS4 didn't get to the FCC until the end of March of this year. So, who copied whom?
That said, I've been following this phone since it was first leaked in January, back when the GS3 was still $200 on contract. Now that you can pick up a GS3 for $50, my choice of cell phone just got very interesting! The Droid DNA can be had for $50 as well, but I have to go through a Verizon website where I can get an employee discount from my company, and they still want $200 for the DNA. Decisions, decisions! :-)
20. TheBitterTruth (unregistered)
Why don't they release thier phones worldwide?