Baidu forks Android to introduce its own mobile OS for China - Page 3

The next thing for Google to do.... abandon Android cold, naturally. Just like their every other so called 'inventions' (read COPY).

Netflix has said their problems with Android have been with security and DRM. They said they cannot guarantee proper DRM support which is required by their contracts with the studios.

Except, Google is dragging this $12.5/$3.5 Billion Boat Anchor...

Alas, what to do, what to do...

... Just a thought, Google could, say, spend $500,000 or so, lobbying the FTC/Justice to disallow the Google/MMI acquisition... and save themselves $3+ Billion.

Edit: It is possible that Google has been executing a Plan B -- building, from scratch, a Mobile OS that doesn't violate others' IP -- and yet provides a compatibility path for Android Apps... this would certainly give Google some options vis-a-vis Android...

"that crowd of sheeple who will need to spend a night in the queue to get the iPhone X the very first day it is released, otherwise their life is ruined forever."

iPhone sales are clearly beyond people who are fans of Apple products. It is a popular product among the general consumer market.

Funny, but the developer of Angry Birds doesn't agree with you that it isn't a big deal:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20023199-264.html
""With our latest update, we worked hard to bring Angry Birds to even more Android devices. Despite our efforts, we were unsuccessful in delivering optimal performance,"
"it's going to create a second version of its flagship game for lower-end Android devices after finding "severe performance issues."


Or maybe:
http://gizmodo.com/5693428/angry-bir...entation-means
"despite having "hesitated to create multiple versions of Angry Birds" for Android, that's exactly what they're being forced to do in order to meet their goal of having it available on as many Android phones as possible."

And that was before some of the latest big forks.
Anyone who says that fragmentation isn't a problem for Android is dreaming.

Or close it, make hardware and try to invent (copy) Apple's business model.

The Baidu fork will probably have hooks so that the Chinese Communist Party can keep tabs on what people are saying and clamp down on any sedition and thoughtcrimes. It'll also have phone tracking software so the government can track the whereabouts of all citizens AT ALL TIMES.

OS X has always been UNIX. NeXTStep is BSD 4.3 Unix. Openstep is BSD 4.3 Unix.



Should extend BB Code to include TIMG tag.

Nice... Where is QNX?

I'd be concerned that the application icons for contacts, phone and folders are almost a pixel reproduction of the iOS ones.

Very good question.

The problem isn't running old existing apps on new releases. The problem is that Google releases new versions of Android with API improvements that developers can't use because the vast majority is running Froyo or earlier. That limits what Google can do to fix anything.

The ball is out of Google's court in large part because the "openness" of Android means that new devices can ship with an old version and never get updated. Even popular mass-market phones like the Droid Incredible still haven't received an update to last December's Gingerbread 2.3.

So Google can release 4.0 ICS this fall alongside iOS 5.0, but while modern iOS devices will be able to upgrade immediately, Android users will have to wait around for 3 to 6 to 9 months to see if their phone maker will bother to issue a release. There's lots of examples of phones that were never updated.

No tablets were upgraded to 3.0 that I know of, and new tablet variants are continuing to ship with a core version of Android from last summer.

And yet the press refers to "Android" as if it means something. It increasingly doesn't. It's like referring to Windows Mobile/Phone 7 as being the same thing as Windows XP/7. THey are only similar in branding, not technology.

And all those figures saying that the Android smartphone platform is bigger than the iPhone neglect to point out that those phones are fragmented into sub platforms of different API levels and hardware differences that prevent popular apps from running across Android devices.

Netflix for Android runs on like a minor handful of phones. Yet people talk like you can watch Netflix on Android. Well sure, if you have a brand new phone of a very short list of devices. iOS means something.

You can talk about iPhones from 2008 not running the latest OS, but Droid Incredible is the phone Verizon was selling to users when iPhone 4 was launched this spring. It still can't run the Android OS from nearly a year ago.

On of Apple's focuses is the prevent or limit fragmentation, or in other words, limits the number of OS X versions and hardware versions it supports.

Apple is pretty relentless about this. The customer does not have nearly as much freedom of choice when buying into Apple, as those buying into Windows, or the new breed to hardware supporting Android and clones.

There is many pros and cons to seemingly unlimited choices. There are also pros and cons to limiting choice. Apple's products at this point set the standard and so they can control the (their) market well.

Standards are necessary to develop and maintain quality, limiting innovation in some cases. We'll just have to see how these differing cultures play out.

I think where you two are not seeing eye-to-eye is the fact that OS X wasn't "officially" registered as Unix until Leopard (10.5). Prior to that, it was more accurate to say it was Unix-based. I honestly don't know the ins-and-outs of what it means to be a registered Unix but OS X only achieved that designation with 10.5.

Truly splitting hairs, I know, but hopefully that clarifies the point you're arguing.

Neither has Linux ever been registered, but they are a UNIX like Operating System.

By the way, UNIX Registration was a lot different back in the day.

http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/

They didn't start it up until 1993 this certification process, when SCO owned the certification process and only SCO certified itself along with some unknown LLC corporation.

System V, BSD and variations of both were up and running long before then, including NeXTStep.

That sounds about right to me.

I think the right answer is the apple answer. Limited choices is the way to go here. No two ways about it. Unlimited choices offers up too much and isn't even a great business strategy. You want limited choices without being too limited. Limiting choices shouldn't affect the overall user experience negatively and nor should the openness affect the user experience negatively. Its not going to play out because time and time again it's been shown that a balance of limited choice will always rule the day. Being completely open is not in most end users best interests nor is it a good business strategy so far.

It is: Star Trek hasn't yet 'started', as of 2011

China mobile are not doing anything wrong. In fact it's what I was hoping Amazon would do with the Kindle. Make it's own fork of Android with its own unique application store and not to be compatible with existing ones. Then they could push their own fully curated store for their customers.

That's true, aha, Star Trek copied Apple. In the future!!

The problem with some Android manufacturers is that they have to make a version of Android for each particular model.

Some phones run one skin... some run another. That's why it takes months before an Android phone can be upgraded to the latest version.

But really.... they would rather not take the time to do that. They are busy pumping out new phones every month.

If you're a company with over a dozen models coming out every year... you focus on new sales... not supporting old models.

If I buy an Android phone tomorrow... what are the chances it will run Ice Cream Sandwich someday?

I haven't used Baidu, is it similar to Google? It seems like these guys just do everything Google does, but in China. Search, maps, phone OS...

Well your tinfoil hat is showing.


Most apps from before version X work flawlessly on version X...like 95%+ those that don't would have to be either 1.X old or unsupported by the devs which is not Google's fault at all.


never go full retard.


Funny...Google refusing to cave to China's totalitarian rules yet Apple and MS not minding said rules and you still wanna say Google sucks? lol

Let the f**kfest begin!

Always trying to have the world their way. Gotta love the chinese.

But they do make a mean spring roll.

Maybe, but meanwhile, all these forks are counted as 'Android' to prove how 'Android' is taking over the world in market share.

Fact of the matter is that Android is starting to move from a stable, well-defined phone-OS to a toolbox for phone manufacturers to pick and choose whatever they need. This is great for them, but there is simply no denying that for developers and users, it will create frustrating incompatibilities and limit app selection.

We've been there before, just about 5 years ago, if you remember. The only people installing 'apps' back then were geeks and professionals, and it took a lot of figuring out which phone could do what, which apps would work on said phone, where to get said apps, how to get them, how to pay for them, how to get support, how to get updates. I don't think I have to tell you what happened that changed all of this, and made smartphones and apps a commodity that everyone could use and enjoy without having to think about hardware, OS's, app stores, payment options, and other things that you get for free if you allow spinning off multiple versions of the same platform. Collective memory appears to be pretty short, especially among Android fans

As an aside: I always have to laugh when people point to Windows, Linux or OS X as 'proof' that fragmentation is not an issue, I mean, just look at all these different OS's, screen sizes, hardware specs etc, right? As if it's still not clear that most people actually hate using computers, and as if one of OS X's strengths isn't that it provides a uniform and easy experience on all supported hardware.

Have you bothered to read what I was replying to ?

I completely agree with you that iPhone is great and popular product, adopted by many of the general consumer market and have no problem with it.

I was talking about that little group of people who absolutely needs to have the latest iPhone on the day it is released, or the latest update of the OS within 30 minutes the download link is published. The original post claimed this is major disadvantage of Android. My reply was that it is only "important" for a very narrow group of users and majority of mobile users don't really care at all.

Got my point now ?

I was just replying to previous post that claimed that this is major problem for Android. Glad to see we both agree this is not a major deal.


I got your point. But this is just a nature of things based on fact the Apple has virtually just one model of the phone and there are plenty of choices for Android. Want iPhone with HW keyboard ? Waterproof iPhone ? No way, that's just the other side of the coin.

Yes there are phones, even fairly recently released, that run pre-Gingerbread OS, which makes the developer more difficult. But it is pretty much the same with iOS, too. There are many users who never update to latest OS, because they don't have computer with iTunes, or whatever other reason. There are still users of older iPhones. There is iPod Touch.

As a result you need to take backward compatibility and installed base into consideration both on Android and iOS.

The most important thing : it's not that Froyo API and Gingerbread API is completely different. There are some changes, mostly some new things you can do, but majority of the apps run just fine or you can dynamically adapt your app based on the version of OS. There is great support for this in Android. There are even libraries that you can link with your app, so you can get lots of Honeycomb functionality even on the old devices.

Yes, there are multiple versions of Android, as there are multiple versions of iOS, but it is really not that big deal for the developer. People tend to see HTC with Sense UI or Droid with Motoblur and say the platform is so different, but from the developers perspective, there is no difference at all, the platform is very homogeneous and Google is doing very decent job there.

What are you talking about? You can't run apps designed for iOS 4.x on iOS 3.x because they rely on software features in the OS that aren't available on iOS 3. The solution? Install iOS 4, which is a free upgrade (and yes, it does run on iPhone 3G).

For what it's worth though, I'm a developer, and I am still able to support iOS 3.x with new apps as long as they don't rely on iOS4.x features. It's harder to do because there's a bunch of stuff that's easier on iOS 4.x due to the new APIs, but the point is that if developers don't support iOS 3.x it's because they chose not not to, not because Apple doesn't let them.

This is in no way comparable to Android fragmentation. Apple supports iPhones for upwards of two years after release with new, free OS updates. By comparison, brand new Android phones sometimes ship with old OS versions and can't even be upgraded to the current OS, let alone future releases.

Buy an Apple phone -> supported for two years or more
Buy an Android phone -> may already be obsolete when you unbox it

Not saying this to offend you, but you really come off as being in denial about Android fragmentation, and that way failing to recognize the real reasons why Netflix isn't on your Galaxy Tab or why you have to root some devices to run Tegra games.

The point is: fragmentation is not just about what the hardware and software *can* do, but also what people companies and *actually do with it*. Like someone before me pointed out, Netflix has contracts that require them to warrant a certain level of security, and this takes time and money for each OS and each piece of hardware, so they decide to support only a few. Nvidia wants to promote their own hardware, so they decide to make deals with game companies to have their games only run on Tegra, even though other chips would work just fine. Amazon wants to have you buy everything through Amazon, so they leave out competing offerings and make their own app store. Companies like Epic and Id have products that are so expensive to develop and maintain, and are so critically dependent on hardware features, that they don't want to take a gamble investing too much into the Android platform. Developers and content providers who want to sell stuff do not want to have to deal with 20 different app stores and payment systems, so they pick one or two and leave the others out. I can go on for hours.

None of these examples are about hardware, but about logistics, cost-benefit analysis, risk, corporate politics, promoting own products, etc. If you can't see how this kind of fragmentation decreases value for the end-user, you are either blind or in denial.

Then, after all of this, comes the hardware fragmentation, which is also a pretty big issue for many types of applications. Not for a Twitter client, but definitely for a game studio. The Angry Birds example you linked is pretty ironic, seeing that shortly after that statement, Rovio actually apologized about how shitty their Android port ran on many handsets, and promised to create simplified version of it. It doesn't matter if it ran shitty because of ads, because if Rovio thought they could offer the game on Android without ads and still make good money, they wouldn't have to include ads in the first place. The same thinking goes for many other Android applications by the way: they need to include ads, because there are simply too many Android users who cannot buy the ad-free version, or simply don't want to because they are trained to think applications have to be 'free'. It's a real issue that is keeping AAA titles away from Android, even with the largest marketshare, there are thousands of AAA apps that are exclusively on iOS, yet there are virtually none that are exclusive on Android.

Yes, Android fragmentation can be an issue for some minor number of applications. My son has run into some games he'd like to run that aren't compatible with his inexpensive prepaid phone. Not at all common, but there are a few. So I'd have to agree that hardware choices by the handset manufacturer's can cause some app compatibility problems, an issue that will need to be addressed. Google has indicated they agree with that assessment and are attempting to get the Handset Alliance members to standardize pertinent hardware. No idea if they'll be successful.

But IMHO it's no more of an issue for the developers and users than the inability to even find good apps in Apple's Appstore. Not offering categories, or even an easy way to find highly rated applications, makes finding and purchasing newly released but quality apps a big problem. If you don't know the name you're looking for, how do you find them? Stumbling around? If I'm interested in subscribing to a tech magazine, how do I search? Or looking for a time manager, same question. The Android Market doesn't have the same problems in identifying quality apps in the area you're interested in. Search by name, keyword, categories or rating.

Both platforms have issues with the application markets. One is poorly designed (IMO), failing to anticipate that the huge number of apps if offers would create it's own problems, a issue that goes on uncorrected. The other has different hardware combos limiting some app compatibility, along with some apps reportedly not being the same quality as their iOS counterpart. There's very few active devices on old OS versions creating an incompatibility problem.
So which app store is worse? Which creates more roadblocks for a new developer?

I agree up to the point that there is lots of improvements possible to the iOS app store, especially in app search and discovery. I don't really see how the Android Market is any better in that regard though, especially because it's so easy for rogue developers to jinx the search results by submitting copy-cat apps, apps that are intentionally miscategorized, apps with duplicate icons, apps with incorrect descriptions, etc. This is not even considering the fact that as a developer, you will have to submit your app to multiple app stores to cover many Android devices.


My personal opinion is that both App Stores have usability issues, but most definitely the iOS app store provides a much better experience for both end-users and developers. I have my own game in the iOS App Store, and submitting, selling and supporting it was a breeze. I know every iOS device to date except the 2G and the Apple TV can run it. People can find it very easily just typing the name, or a few keywords from the description. Just search for 'DOS retro' and you'll find my app in the results, on page 1, without having to even know what it is called.

I really don't see how much easier it should get, and how you can possibly assert the Android Market and all market spin-offs from other Android manufacturers create 'less roadblocks for new developers'.

And Dell is going to use Baidu..... Amazing.


Of course it does. The consumer doesn't need to know if Baidu is an Android fork - the developer does. The developer will treat it as another version of Android which requires additional resources in order to support. More problems, fewer apps.


No, but it's getting close:
http://www.tgdaily.com/general-scien...tects-diseases


Close to zero in my experience. My daughter's first Android phone was 1.6 - but it was purchased long after 2.2 was on the market. In spite of Motorola's continued promises that 2.2 would be supported some day, as of today, there's still no update for that phone with our carrier. Then her phone was stolen so she got another Android phone - about a month ago. it's running 2.2 - again with no sign of an upgrade EVER being available.

Menno and Gatorguy aren't so much in denial as that they are paid to deny.

I'm not saying that one is better (or worse) than the other. The question was meant to spark discussion.

Curious if your Android version is easier to find, and how it's been received compared to the iOS one? Did you have a lot of issues in creating the app for Android, or find it necessary to limit the features to improve compatibility? Honest question.

Honest answer: I didn't port it to Android. I did consider it, but I decided not to do so for 3 simple reasons that have nothing to do with fragmentation:

1) I don't have an Android device myself (but some friends and family members do, so I did spend some time with various ones, being a hardware geek and all ). It's not really a huge problem though since I could pick up a low-end device for peanuts, and the game would work perfectly on it, anything with OpenGL ES would do (it runs perfectly on the 1st gen iPod touch for example).
2) The graphics library I used (Cocos2D) does not have a stable, feature complete Android version. Someone did start an Android port but it never got anywhere near the feature set and stability of the iOS version. Redoing all the graphics code (which emulates old-school ASCII rendering) would mean I would have to re-do half of the game, and I would have to re-do it without all the convenience that made me decide to use Cocos2D in the first place, instead of directly programming to OpenGL.
3) I really despise Java programming. In my day job I program C/C++/Python/Matlab and -unfortunately- Java, at home I also program Objective-C and PHP. No language gets on my nerves as much as Java, I find it a real PITA and don't get a whole lot of fun out of it (which is the only reason I created an iOS game).

Fair enough.

I misunderstood one of your earlier posts and thought you had developed for both platforms.

this graphic isn't really accurate. it has the linux kernel listed but doesn't list other kernels it lists 'operating systems'.
os x is built on Apple's XNU kernel which is made up of MACH code and FreeBSD code. MACH was unix-like it wasn't Unix until certified as being able to be called UNIX later on.
Linux is still unix-like and not certified as UNIX.

And I'm telling you, that problem is bullshit. If that DRM was required by studios, it would be BUILT IN to the .apk (which it used to be). But with the newest version of the application, for several versions now infact, all you have to do is side-load it onto your device and it works flawlessly. You'll also notice that the list of "approved" devices has no pattern to it. All chipsets, all OS "skins" and multiple OS versions are represented. The block is purely a political move, or at least something done for non-DRM reasons. If it was a DRM issue, then ALL tegra2 devices would be certified, not just one or two of them.

Note, this is NOT hacking the software itself. I don't believe you should do this if there are DRM issues involved (no matter what I think about said issues) because doing that will just give the studios fuel for the fire. This is why I haven't downloaded the "modified" Google Video file that will let me play rentals on my Rooted phone. All you have to do with the netflix is pull the file from a phone it can be installed on, and then side-load it, unaltered, into your new device.

When you install the app, it checks to make sure it can install, and then when you sign in it registers it with the service. At both points, DRM would be checked. And guess what? It passes. Netflix will work on basically ANY smartphone/tablet, but for whatever reason Netflix is only allowing certain devices to download it directly from the market.