[CALUG] Android versions

[Rajiv Gunja]

Actually, 3.2 is already out on many tablets, viz Acer and Archos. (Samsung
should be testing it with their touchwiz interface).

I think 3.x builds for Phones are from XDA and not really Google. (Since
they made a big fuss and how all the media reacted saying that it is not a
true Open Source OS).

4.x is supposed to be for both phones and tablets. Its release has been
pushed to Oct 27th. But not sure if they are going to stick with that date.

It will be interesting to see what tablet features have made it to phone.

-GGR
--
Rajiv G Gunja
Blog: http://ossrocks.blogspot.com


On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 19:16, Bryan J Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:

> Nevermind. They just bumped the version.
>
> There have been 3.1 builds on phones, but none released. Seems they decided
> to fork the builds.
>
> This must have been very recent, given the 3.1 pre-release builds.
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> B B <billy20771 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 3.x IS tablet only.
>>
>> 4.x (Ice Cream Sandwich) is the one that will be on both phones and tablets
>>
>>
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: Bryan J Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>
>> > Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Subject: Re: [CALUG] Android versions
>>
>> > To: Rajiv Gunja <opn.src.rocks at gmail.com>, "waltechmail at yahoo.com"
>> > <waltechmail at yahoo.com>
>>
>> > Cc: "calug at unknownlamer.org" <calug at unknownlamer.org>
>> >
>> > There will be Android 3.x Smartphones.  The early SDKs and foci were
>>
>> > on Tablets, because 2.x was not really designed well for tablets and
>> > larger screens.  But 3.x is definitely not a tablet-only series.
>> > Google is also asserting a heafty number of hardware and other
>>
>> > requirements for Smartphones running 3.x, to guarantee minimum
>> > experience levels.  Such was not the case in 2.x.
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> > From: Rajiv Gunja <opn.src.rocks at gmail.com>
>>
>> > Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2011 11:06 PM
>> >
>> >
>> > Android 2.x was released to all phone manufacturers as open source and
>> > many companies started putting that OS on tablets, which it was not
>> > meant for. This created a bad representation of Android against Apple,
>>
>> > as it was looked upon as immature and some even went to say that
>> > Android was insecure.
>> >
>> > So Google, released Honeycomb, 3.x which was designed only for tablets
>> > and made sure that applications which would not work on tablets namely
>>
>> > large screens, could not be installed on that OS.
>> >
>> > The difference between the OS is the interface and how the OS is used,
>> > namely the status bar, task list, setup control, etc.
>> >
>> > If you are planning to buy a
>> tablet, I would suggest go with 3.x, as
>> > it is designed for a tablet.
>> >
>> > I have a samsung galaxy tab 10.1 and it runs 3.1. Acer and other
>> > manufacturers have already moved on to 3.2.
>> > If you are looking at Archos, wait for the 8.9" to come out before you
>>
>> > invest in the 10.1" (G9)
>> > Archos is way cheaper than Samsung, but they also have an option of
>> > buying a tablet with 250 GB SSD.
>> >
>> > -GGR
>> > --
>> > Rajiv G Gunja
>> > Blog: http://ossrocks.blogspot.com
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 17:33, Walt Smith <waltechmail at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>HI,
>> >>
>>
>> >>Just wondering if anyone was familiar with the
>> >>Android market ... specifically the version usage.
>> >>This is strictly a curiosity Q.
>> >>
>> >>I've seen
>> advertisements from some of the more inexpensive
>> >>"pad"/small tablet makers that look like new products
>> >>at low prices.   Many seemingly new advertise Android say, 2.2
>> >>vs a 3.1 thats reaching the market.
>>
>> >>
>> >>Are makers actually introducing new product with a much "older"
>> >>Android version ? If so, why? And what is the difference between
>> >>Android 2.x and 3.x, other than ( speculating ) "newer" hardware ?
>>
>> >>
>> >>I would assume there is also better software functionality, but why
>> >>aren't the cheaper tablets/pads using later SW?
>> >>
>> >>thx,
>> >>
>> >>Walt.....
>> >>Celebrating over 14,000 emails in my Yahoo Inbox !
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> >>CALUG mailing list
>> >>CALUG at unknownlamer.org
>> >>http://lists.unknownlamer.org/listinfo/calug
>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> > CALUG mailing list
>> > CALUG at unknownlamer.org
>> > http://lists.unknownlamer.org/listinfo/calug
>>
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> > CALUG mailing list
>> > CALUG at unknownlamer.org
>> > http://lists.unknownlamer.org/listinfo/calug
>>
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> CALUG mailing list
>> CALUG at unknownlamer.org
>> http://lists.unknownlamer.org/listinfo/calug
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CALUG mailing list
> CALUG at unknownlamer.org
> http://lists.unknownlamer.org/listinfo/calug
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.unknownlamer.org/pipermail/calug/attachments/20111011/7d264924/attachment.htm