Android 8.1 Oreo(blog.google)
blog.google
Android 8.1 Oreo
https://www.blog.google/products/android/introducing-android-oreo-go-edition/
117 comments
I for one was wondering if they spoke to their Google Go (Golang) team when they named the Go edition 'Google' app 'Google Go'. There will be some very confused users when they search for 'google go' from now on.
It's probably intentional: "Go" is a great word for marketing, it's simple and short and easy to remember and implies getting stuff done or being active, it's the first two letters in "Google", it's overall a good fit for this use-case, and these probably all outweigh the fact that some programmers already have a different idea of what it means, given most Android users aren't programmers, and this is a user-facing word (if I understood correctly, "YouTube Go" will be the name of the YouTube app on the home screen, etc).
I'm a software dev and it confused me initially as well since I thought now you can write Go native apps for Android...
Google's just been in some kind of a brain freeze lately... they still can't get a useful chat client that everyone uses (i.e. like whatsapp, or viber even), they royally screwed the pooch by removing the 3.5 mm jack on the Pixel 2.... had screen issues with it as well...
Somebody is asleep at the wheel at Google.
Google's just been in some kind of a brain freeze lately... they still can't get a useful chat client that everyone uses (i.e. like whatsapp, or viber even), they royally screwed the pooch by removing the 3.5 mm jack on the Pixel 2.... had screen issues with it as well...
Somebody is asleep at the wheel at Google.
Its similar to when blizzard had two games to market "Heros of the Storm" and "Heart of the Swarm" (HOTS). The are taking up more and more of the search space for the phrase "Go" so if they have 10 products that say "go" and a competitor has 1 product then a search might just bump that company away from ever being known and as long as the confusion still takes you to google, google will take that burden.
I doubt the target demographic of Android Go is going to know (or even have ever heard of) android-go or Go Mobile.
That's the point. They will be very confused when they Google for help with their phones.
Will they though? If I search for stuff like "Android Go" or "Android Go [insert theoretical troubleshooting issue here]", I don't see anything related to Golang. (I actually see more irrelevant results for Pokemon Go for some reason.)
I think our search results look very different from theirs.
I really don't think that the choice of a very common two letter sequence as the name for go the language was made with even the faintest expectation of exclusivity. It would be wrong to grant the language something it never asked for.
the word go/ is the go word at google
[deleted]
If they wrote Android in Go, then it most definitely would be more lean than the current Java clutter that is underlying the platform. Add to that the dev tools would use about 100x less resources!
Who knows, maybe Fuchsia will go in that direction. It might help native Android apps get to the performance of native iOS apps, if developers are willing to invest in a new toolchain. They'd probably have to redo the whole API though.
> It might help native Android apps get to the performance of native iOS apps,
I'm curious as to the performance differences of Android and "native" iOS apps. Their primary languages are both compiled down to native machine code and they're both garbage collected. Any performance differences that exit would appear to be minor. In fact, considering the iPhone CPU's are about twice as fast you would think this performance gap would be greater, yet it is not. Now, I realize speed tests between these platforms isn't an accurate metric in measuring app performance, but it is interesting nonetheless how an Android phone with a CPU half as fast can so easily beat the best of what Apple has to offer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qARozmOb9PY
I'm curious as to the performance differences of Android and "native" iOS apps. Their primary languages are both compiled down to native machine code and they're both garbage collected. Any performance differences that exit would appear to be minor. In fact, considering the iPhone CPU's are about twice as fast you would think this performance gap would be greater, yet it is not. Now, I realize speed tests between these platforms isn't an accurate metric in measuring app performance, but it is interesting nonetheless how an Android phone with a CPU half as fast can so easily beat the best of what Apple has to offer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qARozmOb9PY
Native Android apps launch faster on slower previous generation hardware than native iOS apps and have for years[1].
[1] https://youtu.be/hPhkPXVxISY
[1] https://youtu.be/hPhkPXVxISY
it also would align with their Futter on mobile efforts as flutter can run on top of go...
This is probably the first feeler in the new Android OS being go and moving towards a native go on android solution replacing java...which declaws the Oracle judgement entirely..
Looks like Android native is heading to Go from Java..
This is probably the first feeler in the new Android OS being go and moving towards a native go on android solution replacing java...which declaws the Oracle judgement entirely..
Looks like Android native is heading to Go from Java..
What? They don't mention anything about Golang.
Apparently some Java apps are replaced with Go versions.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/12/google-releases-andr...
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/12/google-releases-andr...
This doesn't say anything at all about Go the language (golang).
So Android GO is Android lite - a non bloat, cut down version of android that will run upon phones with specifications artificially obsoleted by previous versions of android and yet will we now see it released for these `old` phones to make them usable again? Probably not.
For me the first NExus 7 tablet was a prime example of what happens, released - ran fine, Android update and became darn near unusable, and then dropped.
Android today needs 2 gig of ram to work, less and the cracks show. Tomorrow it will be more.
This is always a repeated cycle in operating systems, they bloat up, then eventually have a cycle of removing the fat. Windows been thru this cycle many times.
But calling it Android Go Edition, may sound cool as a marketing buzz, but utterly distracts from what it is as well as confusing given GoLang. More so as todays entry level phones where only a couple of years ago, premium specifications. Things move on and progress, but the amount of artificial obsoletion of mobile phones today by Android at a consumer level is frankly scary and avoidable. Two years from new to being forgotten is a recent change in mobile phones and without custommade roms, unavoidable as you effectively get forced to buy a new phone, just to stay secure.
Why can't they have LTE editions for phones.
For me the first NExus 7 tablet was a prime example of what happens, released - ran fine, Android update and became darn near unusable, and then dropped.
Android today needs 2 gig of ram to work, less and the cracks show. Tomorrow it will be more.
This is always a repeated cycle in operating systems, they bloat up, then eventually have a cycle of removing the fat. Windows been thru this cycle many times.
But calling it Android Go Edition, may sound cool as a marketing buzz, but utterly distracts from what it is as well as confusing given GoLang. More so as todays entry level phones where only a couple of years ago, premium specifications. Things move on and progress, but the amount of artificial obsoletion of mobile phones today by Android at a consumer level is frankly scary and avoidable. Two years from new to being forgotten is a recent change in mobile phones and without custommade roms, unavoidable as you effectively get forced to buy a new phone, just to stay secure.
Why can't they have LTE editions for phones.
> This is always a repeated cycle in operating systems, they bloat up, then eventually have a cycle of removing the fat. Windows been thru this cycle many times.
I worked at Microsoft during Windows 7 & 8. There was a strict edict that minimum hardware requirements would not be increased and we were expected to improve performance on the same hardware.
Have you actually seen windows get worse over the last ~9 years since vista or is this an impression that's just too hard to shake?
I worked at Microsoft during Windows 7 & 8. There was a strict edict that minimum hardware requirements would not be increased and we were expected to improve performance on the same hardware.
Have you actually seen windows get worse over the last ~9 years since vista or is this an impression that's just too hard to shake?
It's probably an impression pushed by people who didn't regularly use those versions of Windows.
W7 performed great and W8.1 (I skipped 8) only improved upon that speed and power efficiency. W8.1 with Classic Shell and before Metro spread throughout the system was my favorite OS-stays-out-of-the-way Windows.
W7 performed great and W8.1 (I skipped 8) only improved upon that speed and power efficiency. W8.1 with Classic Shell and before Metro spread throughout the system was my favorite OS-stays-out-of-the-way Windows.
I generally agree that Windows has done a good job of getting faster on the same hardware (particularly boot time) over the last 10 years, but the hardware requirements have changed.
Disabling desktop composition (the Desktop Window Manager/Aero) was a supported option on Windows 7, but is not an option for W8 and above. Windows 8 also requires NX and SSE2 support, which leaves out 2003/2004-era P4 and Athlon XPs.
Disabling desktop composition (the Desktop Window Manager/Aero) was a supported option on Windows 7, but is not an option for W8 and above. Windows 8 also requires NX and SSE2 support, which leaves out 2003/2004-era P4 and Athlon XPs.
Even if Windows 10 still supported non-SSE2 CPUs, few software packages would. Most software is compiled to use SSE for floats now.
Interestingly, disabling compositing doesn't mean increasing system requirements, because Windows 8 can do it in software. A GPU will improve your experience, however.
Interestingly, disabling compositing doesn't mean increasing system requirements, because Windows 8 can do it in software. A GPU will improve your experience, however.
Microsoft did recently increase system requirements quite a bit, I believe with the Anniversary Update.
And well, he specifically said that operating systems go through bloat and debloat phases over and over. XP to Vista was quite a step towards bloat. 7, 8, 8.1 partially debloated that again. 10 with its telemetry and increased online focus seems to chew on that, again.
But even then, it's not like Windows is a miraculous feat of efficiency. There's functionally equivalent Linux systems with down to a quarter of the resource usage.
And well, he specifically said that operating systems go through bloat and debloat phases over and over. XP to Vista was quite a step towards bloat. 7, 8, 8.1 partially debloated that again. 10 with its telemetry and increased online focus seems to chew on that, again.
But even then, it's not like Windows is a miraculous feat of efficiency. There's functionally equivalent Linux systems with down to a quarter of the resource usage.
> Have you actually seen windows get worse over the last ~9 years since vista or is this an impression that's just too hard to shake?
If Microsoft put any effort into some tooling people could use (without taking a week off work to study to learn how they work, what claims in the documentation are true vs lies, etc) discover wtf is slowing down their system and why, they might get a bit more respect from the technical community.
If Microsoft put any effort into some tooling people could use (without taking a week off work to study to learn how they work, what claims in the documentation are true vs lies, etc) discover wtf is slowing down their system and why, they might get a bit more respect from the technical community.
OT: And you did a good job of it too. I have a WP7 device that I use for the work emails and while it is strictly a Lync/Calendar/Exchange email device, it is still snappy and responsive even after all of these years.
I'm running win10 on an old laptop with 3Gb of RAM.
It's win10 enterprise LTSB but still damn impressive.
It's win10 enterprise LTSB but still damn impressive.
How did you get a LTSB license? I tried getting a license off ebay but unlike Pro licenses I have bought in the past the whole thing failed to work.
No, in fairness, since Vista they have made a very conscious effort and seem to of stuck with it.
>For me the first NExus 7 tablet was a prime example of what happens, released - ran fine, Android update and became darn near unusable, and then dropped.
The Nexus 7 2012 had degrading NAND performance because Asus skimped on the chip quality. No Android update could've prevented this.
The Nexus 7 2012 had degrading NAND performance because Asus skimped on the chip quality. No Android update could've prevented this.
And my 2013 version is still going strong - so it doesn't look like a software bloat problem to me.
My 2013 Nexus 7 only got replaced because of the battery expiring. I still liked it more than its replacement, the Nvidia shield (too heavy), and I'd like either of them way more than any android tablet still on the market.
So's mine, and I dread the day it dies. I just want a 7" tablet running stock Android, that's all, and so far as I can tell it simply doesn't exist.
Which is crazy, because it would sell like hotcakes.
Hopefully some day some Chinese company will notice this huge pile of money left on the floor.
Hopefully some day some Chinese company will notice this huge pile of money left on the floor.
I was thinking the same thing. I had another ASUS tablet from the same era that had similar issues.
People would literally install the OS on the SD Card and run inverted storage to avoid the issue.
People would literally install the OS on the SD Card and run inverted storage to avoid the issue.
I have a Nexus 9 (16gb Wifi) and situation didn't improve at all (nexus 7/9 probably my worst product purchases)
It isn't Android that's slowing down your old phone, it's apps. Time-to-market trumps everything else, especially efficiency. So until an app category matures and incumbents face competition, efficiency is a nice-to-have. To be fair to your comment, often enough it's Google's own apps that bloat. But you can run a cut-down suite of apps in 512M.
As for LTS editions, you can't have those because the bsps for the chips in those cheap phones eol sooner than the "long term."
As for LTS editions, you can't have those because the bsps for the chips in those cheap phones eol sooner than the "long term."
> the first NExus 7 tablet was a prime example of what happens
The Nexus 7 first gen also had nand that ate itself; writing over the OS just amplified this effect. I was able to upgrade it really well once I switch to a file system that worked well with the nand. F2fs.
For context; My nexus 7 now runs significantly better than my ipad mini of the same year.
The Nexus 7 first gen also had nand that ate itself; writing over the OS just amplified this effect. I was able to upgrade it really well once I switch to a file system that worked well with the nand. F2fs.
For context; My nexus 7 now runs significantly better than my ipad mini of the same year.
How do you go about doing such a thing? My Nexus 9 could do with a new lease of life...
Example search and result "{device name} rom f2fs xda"
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2678142
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2678142
The Nexus 9 shipped with f2fs out of the box.
> But calling it Android Go Edition, may sound cool as a marketing buzz, but utterly distracts from what it is as well as confusing given GoLang
This is exactly what I thought. I was expecting to read something about how they rewrote the apps with Go, and how they improved compilation times or any other thing.
This is exactly what I thought. I was expecting to read something about how they rewrote the apps with Go, and how they improved compilation times or any other thing.
Some day soon someone will release an operating system that does very little and runs on very tiny conputers, but focuses on doing the right things. Doing things that are impossible due to the “layer cake” architecture and “pro” coding tools that are the norm in the software industry.
It will look like a toy, and Hacker News will dismiss it, until they realize that teenagers are using it to write AIs and send functions via SMS and do all kinds of things that require no real computer power, just that the system was designed for such things from the start and the developer prioritized them over “running arbitrary android applications” and “multiprocess architecture” and “allowing web sites to run stupid code” and other things that are inconceivable to omit.
It will look like a toy, and Hacker News will dismiss it, until they realize that teenagers are using it to write AIs and send functions via SMS and do all kinds of things that require no real computer power, just that the system was designed for such things from the start and the developer prioritized them over “running arbitrary android applications” and “multiprocess architecture” and “allowing web sites to run stupid code” and other things that are inconceivable to omit.
This is why I wish there was a ROM that's purely focused on bringing the latest stock Android to as many devices as possible.
Right now it looks like the most popular cross device ROMs are projects like LineageOS and OmniROM, which are excellent ROMs with plenty of compelling features over stock Android, but the modifications they make to implement those extra features do incur a non-trivial cost in terms of resources needed to support newer versions of Android.
I'd be completely willing to give up all of the extra features they offer if it means I can get a cross device ROM that tracks major Android updates much more closely (ideally weeks in delay instead of months).
Maybe something like this already exists?
Right now it looks like the most popular cross device ROMs are projects like LineageOS and OmniROM, which are excellent ROMs with plenty of compelling features over stock Android, but the modifications they make to implement those extra features do incur a non-trivial cost in terms of resources needed to support newer versions of Android.
I'd be completely willing to give up all of the extra features they offer if it means I can get a cross device ROM that tracks major Android updates much more closely (ideally weeks in delay instead of months).
Maybe something like this already exists?
I just want a real 'stock' android, that is the OS, the hardware drivers, a settings app, a phone app, and a SMS app. It works out of the box and then it's TOTALLY my choice what extra apps I install onto it.
So many people call their custom ROMs 'stock' when they are anything but :(
So many people call their custom ROMs 'stock' when they are anything but :(
If available flash just AOSP or lineages without GApps. Even nexus4 runs smooth. If you need browser add Firefox focus from fdroid.
Which device? For example copperheados or any AOSP or lineageos without gapps runs fast even in nexus 4. Do not install PlayServices. I am on my 1generation moto G.
https://postmarketos.org/ will try to achieve this. But it will have a GNU/Linux userland, not an Android one.
>Why can't they have LTE editions for phones.
Because planned obsolescence makes them money.
Because planned obsolescence makes them money.
Damn it Google. Stop releasing more "editions" in an already fragmented OS market.
OEMs are refusing to push updates specially to the lower end phones. So stop giving them reasons to keep releasing new phones.
OEMs are refusing to push updates specially to the lower end phones. So stop giving them reasons to keep releasing new phones.
That's what Android One and Project Treble are for.
Android Go is meant for low end, slower connectivity devices aka "upcoming markets". I wonder if Android Go does less profiling etc. Android Go was announced half a year ago on Google I/O 2017. Here's a few sources: [1] [2]. Quoting:
"Android Go will be launched with Android O, but will be an integral part of every Android version in the future. Every Android device with 1 GB of RAM or less will be able to use Android Go. Several key points of the operating system will be optimized and tweaked to take changed specs into account:
* Android Go will have a new data counter, which will allow for better monitoring of data consumption.
* Data Saver will be enabled by default.
* The Play Store will be included with all available apps, but Android Go customized apps will be highlighted.
* Gboard, Google's keyboard app, will have new translation features.
* Google apps will be optimized for weaker chipsets and slower networks."
Keep in mind 1 GB or less means according to the article on Google Blog: 512 MB - 1 GB. So anything less than 512 MB RAM won't fly.
Data Saver [3]:
"To optimize for Data Saver mode, apps should:
* Remove unnecessary images
* Use lower resolution for remaining images
* Use lower bitrate video
* Trigger existing “lite” experiences
* Compress data
* Respect metered vs. unmetered network status even when Data Saver is off
Conversely, to work well with Data Saver, apps should not:
* Autoplay videos
* Prefetch content/attachments
* Download updates / code
* Ask to be whitelisted unless background data is truly part of core functionality
* Treat whitelisting as a license to use more bandwidth"
I'm not sure whether Data Saver mode uses Google proxies.
The article on Google Blog is actually a decent read as well. It explains how on 8 GB flash storage, 50% is available with Android Go, and apps are 50% size.
Its unclear to me how Google benefits from Android Go apart from happy customers. I'm giving some hints throughout my post but nothing conclusive. The name is also confusing given their programming language, Go.
[1] https://www.androidpit.com/what-is-android-go
[2] https://www.androidauthority.com/android-go-773037/
[3] https://source.android.com/devices/tech/connect/data-saver
Android Go is meant for low end, slower connectivity devices aka "upcoming markets". I wonder if Android Go does less profiling etc. Android Go was announced half a year ago on Google I/O 2017. Here's a few sources: [1] [2]. Quoting:
"Android Go will be launched with Android O, but will be an integral part of every Android version in the future. Every Android device with 1 GB of RAM or less will be able to use Android Go. Several key points of the operating system will be optimized and tweaked to take changed specs into account:
* Android Go will have a new data counter, which will allow for better monitoring of data consumption.
* Data Saver will be enabled by default.
* The Play Store will be included with all available apps, but Android Go customized apps will be highlighted.
* Gboard, Google's keyboard app, will have new translation features.
* Google apps will be optimized for weaker chipsets and slower networks."
Keep in mind 1 GB or less means according to the article on Google Blog: 512 MB - 1 GB. So anything less than 512 MB RAM won't fly.
Data Saver [3]:
"To optimize for Data Saver mode, apps should:
* Remove unnecessary images
* Use lower resolution for remaining images
* Use lower bitrate video
* Trigger existing “lite” experiences
* Compress data
* Respect metered vs. unmetered network status even when Data Saver is off
Conversely, to work well with Data Saver, apps should not:
* Autoplay videos
* Prefetch content/attachments
* Download updates / code
* Ask to be whitelisted unless background data is truly part of core functionality
* Treat whitelisting as a license to use more bandwidth"
I'm not sure whether Data Saver mode uses Google proxies.
The article on Google Blog is actually a decent read as well. It explains how on 8 GB flash storage, 50% is available with Android Go, and apps are 50% size.
Its unclear to me how Google benefits from Android Go apart from happy customers. I'm giving some hints throughout my post but nothing conclusive. The name is also confusing given their programming language, Go.
[1] https://www.androidpit.com/what-is-android-go
[2] https://www.androidauthority.com/android-go-773037/
[3] https://source.android.com/devices/tech/connect/data-saver
Google made a disastrous decision to make Project Treble an optional framework. The end result is that even though supporting it would allow phones to get faster updates, the vast majority of OEMs who updated their phones to Oreo don't support it.[0]
Basically, Google said, "With this awesome new thing, you the consumer can continue to easily get updates for years without having to wait for the OEMs to push updates!" and the OEMs said, "Yeah...we don't think we want to support that."
[0]http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/11/26/phones-updated-suppo...
Basically, Google said, "With this awesome new thing, you the consumer can continue to easily get updates for years without having to wait for the OEMs to push updates!" and the OEMs said, "Yeah...we don't think we want to support that."
[0]http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/11/26/phones-updated-suppo...
IIRC, all phones shipping with Oreo are required to support Treble.
Also, Treble doesn't allow you to get updates "without having to wait for the OEMs", it just makes it easier for OEMs to update Android, since they no longer have to rely on chip manufacturers (e.g. Qualcomm) to provide updated drivers for the new OS version.
Also, Treble doesn't allow you to get updates "without having to wait for the OEMs", it just makes it easier for OEMs to update Android, since they no longer have to rely on chip manufacturers (e.g. Qualcomm) to provide updated drivers for the new OS version.
> IIRC, all phones shipping with Oreo are required to support Treble.
"Shipping" is the keyword. So OEMs can get around that trivially by shipping the phone with Nougat and promising to update to Oreo very shortly thereafter, thereby bypassing the requirement. Look no further than the recently launched OnePlus 5T:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/11/21/oneplus-confirms-won...
I would not be surprised if they intentionally did it this way just to get around the Project Treble requirements.
> Also, Treble doesn't allow you to get updates "without having to wait for the OEMs", it just makes it easier for OEMs to update Android
This is true, but it could also allow one to more easily flash ROMs onto the device without the usual unlocking the bootleader process, which would in theory let people then put a ROM onto their phone that's still getting updates, a la LineageOS. OEMS, predictably, probably see that as a drawback.
"Shipping" is the keyword. So OEMs can get around that trivially by shipping the phone with Nougat and promising to update to Oreo very shortly thereafter, thereby bypassing the requirement. Look no further than the recently launched OnePlus 5T:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/11/21/oneplus-confirms-won...
I would not be surprised if they intentionally did it this way just to get around the Project Treble requirements.
> Also, Treble doesn't allow you to get updates "without having to wait for the OEMs", it just makes it easier for OEMs to update Android
This is true, but it could also allow one to more easily flash ROMs onto the device without the usual unlocking the bootleader process, which would in theory let people then put a ROM onto their phone that's still getting updates, a la LineageOS. OEMS, predictably, probably see that as a drawback.
Yup, so the best thing to do now is only buying phones with Android Oreo installed at launch. If that means not buying a phone, so be it. Or, if your situation demands a phone, buy a temporary, cheap 2nd hand.
Supporting Treble does not mean you will get updates on a Treble certified device, because Google is not requiring OEMs to actually push updates.
It is up to each OEM to choose to update, or not.
Also, there are many OEMs that only now are starting to sell new devices with Android 7, who knows if and when they will bother to move to Android 8.
It is up to each OEM to choose to update, or not.
Also, there are many OEMs that only now are starting to sell new devices with Android 7, who knows if and when they will bother to move to Android 8.
Wake me up when OEMs actually do push updates on Treble certified devices, as Google is not requiring them to do so.
Data saver is available since 6.x or 7.x and it doesn't use proxies at the moment.
Historically, not having a light version of Android often just encouraged crazy hardware vendors to choose an even worse form of fragmentation: sticking to an older version of Android.
If those are the two choices, I think it's better to have everyone on a different flavor of the current release. At least then users have a better shot at getting security updates and app developers don't have to target quite as wide a range of API levels.
If those are the two choices, I think it's better to have everyone on a different flavor of the current release. At least then users have a better shot at getting security updates and app developers don't have to target quite as wide a range of API levels.
The Go Edition seems to be a lower-resource build of Android, with fewer installed apps and even those spec'ed for low-end machines.
I would love this on my Note 3.
I would love this on my Note 3.
So except for the new, reduced applications and some changed defaults in the settings it does not seem to be any different than the normal 8.1? Or am I missing something?
The "tuned Play Store" looks like it just has a new featured pane but if it actually ships with performance enhancements I can't understand why they would not ship them to the defualt Play Store. Mine is terribly laggy on my Nexus 6P.
The "tuned Play Store" looks like it just has a new featured pane but if it actually ships with performance enhancements I can't understand why they would not ship them to the defualt Play Store. Mine is terribly laggy on my Nexus 6P.
It looks like there are a number of OS level optimisations that make it faster; not just tuned lighter apps. It would be nice if this was a setting for all devices...
When saw post my first thought was "I knew it! Google's been working on avoiding Java/Oracle and planning to let us write apps in golang all this time. Here it is!" Wrong "Go" it seems.
Go doesn't seem to me as a good choice to develop apps. Why do you think they would move to Go? I would go to kotlin instead of other language if I needed to replace java
I assumed Go would be high on the list due to the fact that they have full control over it (avoiding Oracle and their lawyers) and it has good performance. I agree that Kotlin is probably a better language for writing Android apps. Having done a ton of Java, I was pleasantly surprised at how lovely it is to work with.
Golang doesn't seem a good choice for native apps because it lacks a UI framework.
It seems to me that if you want to make apps for users with Golang, you would make webapps. If you're making webapps, you don't need to put Go on Android.
It seems to me that if you want to make apps for users with Golang, you would make webapps. If you're making webapps, you don't need to put Go on Android.
I presume standard android rules apply and I'll never see this on my current handset (Moto C, 6mo/new)
Most likely. This was the most jarring thing when I came over to Android. The lack of available updates is embarrassing. Not just talking about $40 walmart specials either.
Mediatek is very bad in releasing kernel source. See XDA/lineage os before buying next phone.
Personally, I look forward to the stackoverflow questions tagging Android Go specific problems and being redirected to Golang issues.
Would it be possible to download and flash this on my phone (Samsung Galaxy S3(d2spr)) - which currently has LineageOS installed? https://lineageos.org/
And if so, is there a download link for the ROM or an ETA for when it will become available?
Here I thought android couldn’t possibly become more fragmented. Kudos Google.
The OS and API surface is the same. Why did you comment without even checking what the article is about? What's the point except the useless ignorant snark?
As far as I can tell, the OS is the same, but the Google apps are different.
Renaming everything with the added suffix of Go seems like a bit of an odd choice to me?
Wouldn't it just make sense to optimize the original version? Having multiple naming conventions seems like an invite to confusion.
Wouldn't it just make sense to optimize the original version? Having multiple naming conventions seems like an invite to confusion.
Yes, and creating a new product with a familiar name has some benefits. To the consumer it gives them familiarity without expectation, they know from the name what it does and what to expect in limitations (e.g. Go = minimalist). On the developer it gives them the freedom to ignore or abandon unpopular, limited use, or difficult to implement features in the name of stream lining a product.
I spent 10 minutes looking up and down to make sure the GO has nothing to do with Golang. Why picking such a name?
Thought Android is trying to replace Java with Go...especially they keep call this a Go Edition.
Thought Android is trying to replace Java with Go...especially they keep call this a Go Edition.
So,if I pay for a more expensive phone, I get bloatware?
> ...you’d think that you’d want that for every Android phone. But in this case, that’s not necessarily true; optimizing an app to take up less storage can also mean it takes a little longer to launch. On phones where storage is at a premium, you optimize for that. On most high-end phones, however, you’d rather get those milliseconds back.
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/5/16736260/google-android-o...
Facebook has Messenger Lite in these same markets. It doesn't do all the stuff Messenger does (like video chat), but it's a better experience for people with worse devices or worse connectivity.
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/5/16736260/google-android-o...
Facebook has Messenger Lite in these same markets. It doesn't do all the stuff Messenger does (like video chat), but it's a better experience for people with worse devices or worse connectivity.
I'm torn here...
On one side, I'm thankful that slimmer versions of platforms (seemingly like this Android Oreo) emerge to help bring in "entry-level" or even lower-powered devices to leverage modern-day (digital) benefits. I believe this helps avoid needing to constantly buy ever-newer devices, because the older devices can still be used effectively, for longer. I saw this with MS Windows: it used to be absolutely necessary to have a pretty beefy machine to run the minimalist of MS Windows Vista. But recently, can now run Windows 7 or 10 on more modest machines...leading to a bit more longevity of machine usage, savings on hardware purchase costs, and hey, yes, a tiny less negative impact on the environment (by reducing constant new "junk" tossed into junk yards, etc.).
...But on the other side, I wonder why didn't these platform producers - Google and Microsoft alike - create these slimmer platforms to begin with? The benefits of a slimmer platforms are nothing new, and don't seem like some weird set of concepts. That is, i don't think its unfair of me to ask these Googles and Microsofts of the world: why didn't they think of this sooner, why don't they always think of this sooner? A slimmer, more optimized platform that allows for broader use among that many more devices...duh! Then, I wonder, well, there's got to be some incentive for why these companies fill some versions of their platforms with ungodly amounts of bloat, right? Is it some shady alignment with other partners, where ideal performance for consumers is only a secondary goal (to say, the higher goals of benefiting a partner)? Is it some sort of dark, planned obsolescence, to get people to buy a new device every couple of years? Is it simple incompetence of key leaders of relevant platforms, who could common sense into the near-future? Or, some tangled combination of all of the above?
I think the answer lies somewhere above my pay-grade.
On one side, I'm thankful that slimmer versions of platforms (seemingly like this Android Oreo) emerge to help bring in "entry-level" or even lower-powered devices to leverage modern-day (digital) benefits. I believe this helps avoid needing to constantly buy ever-newer devices, because the older devices can still be used effectively, for longer. I saw this with MS Windows: it used to be absolutely necessary to have a pretty beefy machine to run the minimalist of MS Windows Vista. But recently, can now run Windows 7 or 10 on more modest machines...leading to a bit more longevity of machine usage, savings on hardware purchase costs, and hey, yes, a tiny less negative impact on the environment (by reducing constant new "junk" tossed into junk yards, etc.).
...But on the other side, I wonder why didn't these platform producers - Google and Microsoft alike - create these slimmer platforms to begin with? The benefits of a slimmer platforms are nothing new, and don't seem like some weird set of concepts. That is, i don't think its unfair of me to ask these Googles and Microsofts of the world: why didn't they think of this sooner, why don't they always think of this sooner? A slimmer, more optimized platform that allows for broader use among that many more devices...duh! Then, I wonder, well, there's got to be some incentive for why these companies fill some versions of their platforms with ungodly amounts of bloat, right? Is it some shady alignment with other partners, where ideal performance for consumers is only a secondary goal (to say, the higher goals of benefiting a partner)? Is it some sort of dark, planned obsolescence, to get people to buy a new device every couple of years? Is it simple incompetence of key leaders of relevant platforms, who could common sense into the near-future? Or, some tangled combination of all of the above?
I think the answer lies somewhere above my pay-grade.
> ...But on the other side, I wonder why didn't these platform producers - Google and Microsoft alike - create these slimmer platforms to begin with?
They did, mobile OSes started about ten years ago for devices whose power was but a fraction of what we have today. Stuff just got added over time. One could argue iOS had the more efficient approach in that their OS and apps were made in a native language instead of on the JVM (and it took about five years for Android to catch up in terms of performance and UX), but the main thing is that Android used to be slimmer.
At one point you have to either strip out 90% of the features that were added over time, or start from scratch. It's an example of feature creep, bloat, bitrot, all that stuff.
They did, mobile OSes started about ten years ago for devices whose power was but a fraction of what we have today. Stuff just got added over time. One could argue iOS had the more efficient approach in that their OS and apps were made in a native language instead of on the JVM (and it took about five years for Android to catch up in terms of performance and UX), but the main thing is that Android used to be slimmer.
At one point you have to either strip out 90% of the features that were added over time, or start from scratch. It's an example of feature creep, bloat, bitrot, all that stuff.
Google Go - the app
Google Go - the language
Android Go - the OS
I really wish Google had thought of this name better. The best name that Google has ever come up with for India is Tez, the payments app.
It means "fast", so has good recall. And there is literally no SEO competition.
Google Go - the language
Android Go - the OS
I really wish Google had thought of this name better. The best name that Google has ever come up with for India is Tez, the payments app.
It means "fast", so has good recall. And there is literally no SEO competition.
For a search-company, they sure don't like to use good keywords for their products.
"google go" can now mean: - Go, the programming language - Alpha Go, an AI playing Go, the game - Android Go, whatever this is
Am I forgetting something?
"google go" can now mean: - Go, the programming language - Alpha Go, an AI playing Go, the game - Android Go, whatever this is
Am I forgetting something?
They're ramping up to announce a Google/Inspector Gadget crossover.
This sounds nice. I have an older phone and don't care about shiny things. Does anyone know if this will be available to install on regular Android phones (not just those from "partners")?
If it's like most android releases, you're either going to have to pray your carrier releases a version (not going to happen) or wait for someone from the android community to build a ROM specifically for your device.
[deleted]
So is this a release-release or just a "limited to our partners" release?
I suspect this has some runtime tradeoffs. Probably apps are optimized for space and not performance.
Which is probably better for a non tech user. Nothing worse than, I can't take more pictures where is all my space gone.
Which is probably better for a non tech user. Nothing worse than, I can't take more pictures where is all my space gone.
As far as I've checked the main difference is in the prepackaged more lightweight apps. The only other difference is that data saver is on by default (available for awhile) and that the notification monitor service is disabled to prevent apps from starting in the background.
Wow, the design of this blog site is horrid. The top and bottom bars take up at times nearly half the screen, much of it just covering up the content with empty space.
Are there any specifications to create a flavor of Android apps to specifically target Android Go Edition (similar to the Go version of Google apps)?
Of course, directly from Google:
Building for billions https://developer.android.com/develop/quality-guidelines/bui...
Building for billions https://developer.android.com/develop/quality-guidelines/bui...
Thank you for the link!
I'd rather they bake many of the Android Go space improvements into the core Android platform, rather than fracturing the OS/apps.
I wonder if it will run on a Nexus 4 or HTC Wildfire. Would be nice to see if I can do without a new phone after my current OPO breaks.
Indeed, has potential to rejuvenate older phones, albeit from custom roms. But I'm still trying to find the minimum specifications for this flavour of Android. Anybody have any ideas?
It's probably going to be a feature present on the latest low end SoCs from Qualcomm not present on SoCs prior to 2016.
You could add config_lowram to your /system/build.prop . reduces animations but much faster.
You can run Lineage OS on Nexus 4. There is already beta version built on Android Oreo. Nexus 4 is has 2 gigs of RAM and decent CPU. So not exactly target for this Go thing.
I hadn't heard of this before and was expecting some kind of Golang support rather than just a lightweight Android version. What's with Google appending and prepending product names with 'go' willy-nilly!?
Same here. It took me several paragraphs before I discarded chance it is about golang rewrite of Android.
Reminds me of late 90s Microsoft calling everything .NET
> What's with Google appending and prepending product names with 'go' willy-nilly!?
_go_ogle?
_go_ogle?
Right?
[0]: https://github.com/xlab/android-go [1]: https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Mobile [2]: https://www.android.com/versions/oreo-8-0/go-edition/