Android is open source, that doesn't mean Android devices have to be.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Ouch.
>
> Bang goes the open source idea.
>
> Disconnect wrote:
>> The building-for-dream page points to the script (extract-files.sh):
>> adb pull /system/etc/AudioFilter.csv proprietary/AudioFilter.csv
>> adb pull /system/etc/AudioPara4.csv proprietary/AudioPara4.csv
>> adb pull /system/etc/gps.conf proprietary/gps.conf
>> adb pull /system/etc/firmware/brf6300.bin proprietary/brf6300.bin
>> adb pull /system/bin/akmd proprietary/akmd
>> adb pull /system/lib/libhtc_ril.so proprietary/libhtc_ril.so
>> adb pull /system/lib/libaudioeq.so proprietary/libaudioeq.so
>> adb pull /system/lib/libqcamera.so proprietary/libqcamera.so
>> adb pull /system/lib/libgps.so proprietary/libgps.so
>> adb pull /system/lib/libhgl.so proprietary/libhgl.so
>> adb pull /system/etc/wifi/Fw1251r1c.bin proprietary/Fw1251r1c.bin
>> adb pull /system/etc/wifi/tiwlan.ini proprietary/tiwlan.ini
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Any pointers to what the proprietary binaries are?, there are
>>     probably a
>>     few people who'd like to work on open source equivalents or methods of
>>     removing the dependencies.
>>
>>     Al
>>
>>     Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote:
>>     > On the open-source side of things, the biggest problem is that the
>>     > port of Android to the HTC Dream (the which is the ADP1 hardware)
>>     > relies on proprietary binaries that aren't conveniently available to
>>     > the general public, and even the current solution of reading the 1.0
>>     > or 1.1 version of those binaries from an existing device isn't
>>     > properly developed or maintained. I don't know how practical it
>>     is for
>>     > "outsiders" to try to help on that front, though it sounds
>>     > theoretically possible. But that discussion isn't relevant on this
>>     > list.
>>     >
>>     > On the SDK side of things, sadly I'm really afraid that everything
>>     > that needs to be done can only be done by "insiders".
>>     >
>>     > JBQ
>>     >
>>     > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >> JBQ,
>>     >>
>>     >> Are there any problems with the ADP1 build that you can share
>>     with the
>>     >> list, maybe someone here can help.
>>     >>
>>     >> Al.
>>     >>
>>     >> Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote:
>>     >>
>>     >>> It would take more effort to support 2 developer devices
>>     instead of 1.
>>     >>> The current message from the developer community is crystal
>>     clear: the
>>     >>> effort that's currently being spent on the ADP1 by the people
>>     who can
>>     >>> resolve the current issues with it is frustratingly
>>     inadequate. Adding
>>     >>> a second device on those people's plate is unlikely to make things
>>     >>> better.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> JBQ
>>     >>>
>>     >>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Daniel <[email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>> You only have to look at the "fun" people are having trying
>>     to get an
>>     >>>>> updated ADP1 image to see how the support for developer
>>     devices is
>>     >>>>> falling a fair way short of where it should be (remember,
>>     the ADP1 which
>>     >>>>> is targetted at developers can't see paid-for apps yet, so
>>     the very
>>     >>>>> people who are suppose to be writing the apps can't see what
>>     the users
>>     >>>>> are saying).
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>> Is that an issue that would require double the effort to
>>     resolve if
>>     >>>> there was more than one developer phone available? Or would the
>>     >>>> solution on the ADP1 also solve the problem on the ADP2?
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>> I doubt that a G2 would be cheaper than a G1 in terms of
>>     buying it and
>>     >>>>> shipping it as a developer phone, so I can't see why there
>>     would be a
>>     >>>>> solid reason to do it. If you don't like the current ADP
>>     costs, why not
>>     >>>>> pick up a FreeRunner from Koolu, or use one of the ports for
>>     some of the
>>     >>>>> commodity hardware that's already available (e.g. NITdroid
>>     on an N810).
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>>>
>>     >>>> The handset cost is not the real issue here - it's more about
>>     having a
>>     >>>> variety of handsets available for developers, as well as the
>>     various
>>     >>>> marketing and promotional activities that might be undertaken
>>     by a
>>     >>>> firm developing with Android.  Amongst other things, some
>>     people have
>>     >>>> commented on the G1's physical appearance, and the G1 has
>>     battery life
>>     >>>> issues.
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> Thanks for the heads-up about FreeRunner, I had not seen that
>>     phone,
>>     >>>> although I notice they don't offer quad band.
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     >> --
>>     >>
>>     >> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ *
>>     >>
>>     >> ======
>>     >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
>>     >> company number  6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
>>     >> 152-160 City Road, London,  EC1V 2NX, UK.
>>     >>
>>     >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
>>     >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or
>>     it's
>>     >> subsidiaries.
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>
>
> --
>
> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ *
>
> ======
> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> company number  6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> 152-160 City Road, London,  EC1V 2NX, UK.
>
> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> subsidiaries.
>
>
> >
>



-- 
Romain Guy
Android framework engineer
[email protected]

Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time
to provide private support.  All such questions should be posted on
public forums, where I and others can see and answer them

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to