I want to know why on earth phandroid wants honeycomb to be on phones! Its made for tablets and they want it to be on phones? We dont want an os for phones on tablets so why does phandroid want something made for a tablet on a phone?? We already have a great os made for a phone and its getting tweaked come gingerbread so what on earth do you want honeycomb on phones for????
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Why phandroid?
- Thread starter ttdub
- Start date
At a recent interview, Andy Rubin said that it would be on phones. He didn't say how soon or which ones.
davidnmegan6907
Android Expert
Well look at it this way years back I had a nissan 280zx that I swapped out a 380 hp camaro engine made the zx stand up with power. But you think I would drop that 2.8 into a camaro? I think not.
This could all be a mountain out of a molehill.
One account of the tablet-friendly work I'd read was that one thing the OS did was some scaling of app icons (one example) so that they wouldn't be all one size and tiny on a larger screen. No reason stuff like that wouldn't xlate well enough to a smaller screen.
Also, I noted with interest early this morning this news, replacing a common rumor we've all heard:
Honeycomb will not require dual-core CPU as minimum hardware spec -- Engadget
One account of the tablet-friendly work I'd read was that one thing the OS did was some scaling of app icons (one example) so that they wouldn't be all one size and tiny on a larger screen. No reason stuff like that wouldn't xlate well enough to a smaller screen.
Also, I noted with interest early this morning this news, replacing a common rumor we've all heard:
Honeycomb will not require dual-core CPU as minimum hardware spec -- Engadget
^Understand and agree, just suggesting that until the facts are published by Google, we can't know if that's right or if it's somehow modular in a way where that's not an issue. I think we'll have to wait and see.
For the longest time, we had the idea that Gingerbread would be UI only, not performance improvements. Now that it's got performance improvements, I'd like it, but with my vendor's UI, Sense. We again think Honeycomb is just about the UI - until Google's clear about it, we're just accepting press releases and rumors. Again.
For the longest time, we had the idea that Gingerbread would be UI only, not performance improvements. Now that it's got performance improvements, I'd like it, but with my vendor's UI, Sense. We again think Honeycomb is just about the UI - until Google's clear about it, we're just accepting press releases and rumors. Again.
lordofthereef
Android Expert
Just because something is developed for the tablets world doesn't mean there can't be great features in it that can be incorporated into a phone version. Perhpas I haven't seen enough of honeycomb to be a good judge, but I don't really see it as being impossible on a phone, by any means, so longs as things are properly scaled down, which I am sure they would be.
^Understand and agree, just suggesting that until the facts are published by Google, we can't know if that's right or if it's somehow modular in a way where that's not an issue. I think we'll have to wait and see.
For the longest time, we had the idea that Gingerbread would be UI only, not performance improvements. Now that it's got performance improvements, I'd like it, but with my vendor's UI, Sense. We again think Honeycomb is just about the UI - until Google's clear about it, we're just accepting press releases and rumors. Again.
And I was thinking gingerbread was all about ui as well so it didnt make sense to me to then completely revamp it after gingerbread just came out. And I understand what youre saying... I personally don't like urge nav. Buttons being in the ui on small devices... It just takes up space when you can have hardware buttons
lordofthereef
Android Expert
Right. I suppose my question for you then, is what should we call what we want to see? IMO it is just easier to say we want a phone version of Honeycomb, rather than say I want Honeycomb minus the X Y Z features due to them being a tablet only thing. FWIW I am sure more features in Honeycomb will be able to make it to our phones than not.
The problem is that honeycomb isnt like an add on, its like a completely dif. Os... I didnt buy an android phone to get windows 7 if you get what I'm saying... Dont get me wrong it looks awesome on a tablet... Phone not so much
Andy Rubin said Honeycomb was good for phones and tablets.
It's the vendors saying Honeycomb is a tablet version of Android.
We're hearing the vendors tell us that what we're seeing is pure Honeycomb - not Google.
There may be nothing to fix here, or changes to name. Look to the official Google / YouTube or Android Developer's pages for the real deal on Honeycomb, when they're ready to announce. As only the stratospheric few have Gingerbread yet, I'd wait a few days on that one.
Either the leaked version of that video was wrong - or Andy misspoke. I have no idea how to gauge that either way.
It's the vendors saying Honeycomb is a tablet version of Android.
We're hearing the vendors tell us that what we're seeing is pure Honeycomb - not Google.
There may be nothing to fix here, or changes to name. Look to the official Google / YouTube or Android Developer's pages for the real deal on Honeycomb, when they're ready to announce. As only the stratospheric few have Gingerbread yet, I'd wait a few days on that one.
Either the leaked version of that video was wrong - or Andy misspoke. I have no idea how to gauge that either way.
Andy Rubin said Honeycomb was good for phones and tablets.
It's the vendors saying Honeycomb is a tablet version of Android.
We're hearing the vendors tell us that what we're seeing is pure Honeycomb - not Google.
There may be nothing to fix here, or changes to name. Look to the official Google / YouTube or Android Developer's pages for the real deal on Honeycomb, when they're ready to announce. As only the stratospheric few have Gingerbread yet, I'd wait a few days on that one.
Either the leaked version of that video was wrong - or Andy misspoke. I have no idea how to gauge that either way.
But even the guy from motorola at ces said it was made from the ground up for tablets... Thats odd you say it wasnt
We're not communicating, you're proving my point.
It was a guy from Motorola who said that.
When Google says it, completely officially and on the record, that will be another matter entirely.
Andy Rubin is in charge of Android at Google, you know. He's the guy that said it was for phones and tablets - not me, I'm just passing it along.
Listen to the discussion from 4:28 to 4:43 of the video here:
Video And Screenshots Of Android 3.0′s Surprise Appearance
It was a guy from Motorola who said that.
When Google says it, completely officially and on the record, that will be another matter entirely.
Andy Rubin is in charge of Android at Google, you know. He's the guy that said it was for phones and tablets - not me, I'm just passing it along.
Listen to the discussion from 4:28 to 4:43 of the video here:
Video And Screenshots Of Android 3.0′s Surprise Appearance
They need to communicate better with google then...we could at least say they made it with tablets in mind
lordofthereef
Android Expert
I guess I don;t understand what about Honeycomb's build makes it innately not work on a phone in your eyes.
The S in CES stands for Show.
Going back to the first CES, there's always some marketing guy misspeaking that we consumers have to figure out later.
Honeycomb's definition - the only one we can trust so far - is in that video.
Until there's more, it's all hearsay. None of us outsiders can really judge if it's 1% or 99% accurate.
lordofthereef
Android Expert
I have seen the other vids. FWIW I don't think it has too much going on with the 3D background. That is more of a polish than a feature IMO. The informatio is still presented the same, just "prettier". Widgets can also have as little or as much in them as the writer cares to provide. I am certain widgets would not be the exact same between the different OSs. I guess I go back to the statement that the things you have listed doesn;t innately make the OS written for tablets and only tablets. Those things should be incredibly easy to alter in a phone version.
Allow me to use an example...
have you seen iOS on an iPhone versus the iPad? The version is the same, many/most of the features are the same, but the iPad version often has more information available at a glance (a good example off the top of my head is the web browser... however I have never owned an iPad so I am going from memory from videos). Since the iPad came out after iPhone, it is simple to think these things were just added in to the iPad version. To be quite frank, this sort of thing can also be thought of as being taken out. You mentioned the 3D UI. While I am by no means convinced that it is too busy for a cell phone version of the OS, if Google decides it is, they can simple remove it and keep the "old" one. I personally do not see that happening though.
And it's a reportedly leaked video. Funky that it looked so good - yet insanely different than any other Google vid.
I claim shenanigans.
I claim shenanigans.