No announcement yet.

Android 13 Sources Released To AOSP

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by mirmirmir View Post
    More and more features become proprietary and exclusive to pixel. That's a crappy move by google.
    With calyxos you can use a pixel degoogled very well.
    I usw calyxos since 2 months and it is really great.


    • #12
      Originally posted by timofonic View Post

      That sounds gross.

      Why privileges for input? That should be managed apart. Surfaceflinger seems weird.
      It's "managed" by the kernel but, like in every other user-facing interface, the scheduling heuristics are spread across display servers, toolkits and the applications themselves. With surfaceflinger specifically, the problem was that 100% io/cpu loops that went through surfaceflinger's own APIs would be prioritized over drawing the courser and handling shortcuts. Windows has a similar problem where some stalled games could halt the system and prevent CTRL+ALT+DELETE from bringing up the taskmgr.

      There's a similar issue with linux and the file servers that often comes up with NFT mounts and server disconnects that can even turn login-in to a tty impossible under some circumstances...

      Anyhow, all these problems fall under the "scheduling" issues and since that's a hard problem (fundamentally the math solution is either unknown or impossible), you're always going to have some issues with that.


      • #13
        I've been overall pretty happy with AOSP recently, shame vendors seem to be hellbent on making bad choices

        Originally posted by mirmirmir View Post

        There are many cool features that are proprietary, which is fine by me by the way, although some are once open source, they locked it in later version. but here I want to talk some basic stuff that google neglect to open source, like keyboard langage support. it only supports Latin keyboard. So if you are japanese/chinese/Indian/Arab or Russian, well no luck for you. Also camera app is too basic, like the very least i expect all camera sensors you can find a modern phone be used. But nope, you have to install another camera app to use your camera.
        So now I would like to re ask the question he asked, which features are now proptietary and/or locked to pixel? and now I will also ask, which ones are now locked down but were open source?

        Originally posted by c117152 View Post
        Looks like they polished up the big screen PC interface to something half usable:

        Though if memory serves, the big problem for desktop / kiosk use was that inputs (mouse, keyboard and digitizer) in surfaceflinger aren't privileged so a demanding app could lock up the whole interface at least until the scheduler brought up the "Wait/Kill dialog box".
        the work the fellas at AG are doing works better in my experience, but it is nice to see android putting in some work


        • #14
          Originally posted by direc85 View Post

          You also can't (well, couldn't when I last tried) to change a calendar colour in Google Calendar app. Where's a(n third-party) app for that, luckily!
          Right? What makes it so egregious is that it's so easy, so simple for them to do it if they wanted to, 5-10 lines of code at the very most to enable such basic expected functionality... but will they do it? no, and wanting these sorts of features can't not have come up in user testing. So why?


          • #15
            Originally posted by mirmirmir View Post
            More and more features become proprietary and exclusive to pixel. That's a crappy move by google.
            meh. AOSP is 90% theater anyway: Google is happy to pretend to honor the license they're bound by when it means getting free labor for the drudgery of maintaining a codebase and doesn't have any risk of actually giving up even a shred of control, let alone enabling competition; but on a practical level Android is about as open as IOS.


            • #16
              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              wanting these sorts of features can't not have come up in user testing. So why?
              Same reason as GNOME. And MS. And Mozilla. And anybody else you can think of.

              Mediocre UI designers get butthurt over the idea that *anyone* thinks their "artistic vision" is less than perfect, so they campaign to have any configuration removed. If 40% of users change even just one option, that means only 60% of them *at best* think your choices are even tolerable, and narcissists appreciate evidence that they suck at their job even less than most people. Besides, it's your fault for being colorblind, or having poor eyesight, or buying a phone with a low-end panel. (Remember, the core tenets of modern UI design are "F**k accessibility, f**k the handicapped, f**k the poor, f**k everybody else who isn't *!*ME*!*").

              Since that also means less work for the developers - because no matter how trivial it is, it *is* work - they're generally pretty happen to come on board, and that goes doubly so for QA. Fewer capabilities and less testing means a shorter, easier project, so now the managers are on board too, and the 1 or 2 staff who want to put out a good product get overruled.