incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Android] Android versioning phase-out (2.1 and 3.x)??
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:20:28 GMT
Again if we're talking about the Galaxy Tab 10.1 P7510 (including the
special Google IO 2011 one). Samsung updated it last month [1]. If you
didn't get the OTA (not likely for the Google IO one) you can manually
update it. That wikipedia page is likely out of date.

I don't think 3.x is relevant anymore.

I am also in favor of dropping 2.1. I say we support 2.3 and above (yeah
skip 2.2).

[1]
http://www.samsung.com/us/support/SupportOwnersFAQPopup.do?faq_id=FAQ00046726&fm_seq=49755

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> According to http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html 3.x
> has around 2.1% market share, which is not insignificant.
>
> However, according to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices the only
> *popular
> * devices that haven't been upgraded to 4.x yet are the initial samsung
> galaxy tabs, and those are dated devices now and it is widely rumored they
> may also see updates to 4.x (wishful thinking?)
>
> Anyway, I had a galaxy tab 10, and I think cordova support is the least of
> its problems ;)
>
> Big +1 on deprecating 3.x from me.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > Pre-emptive deprecation! I like it!
> >
> > On 9/18/12 11:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > >I think if we're waiting 6 months, it would be good to deprecate 3.x
> now.
> > >That way in 6 months if we want to drop it, we can.
> > >
> > >
> > >On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> OK, How about we do the following:
> > >>
> > >> 1. Announce that 2.1 will be dropped six months from now, as per our
> > >> deprecation policy
> > >> 2. Keep support for Android 3.x for the time being and watch to see
> > >> the percentages drop
> > >>
> > >> Honestly, I think our deprecation policy is far too long, but given
> > >> how it was created, I understand the reason for it.  What do people
> > >> think?
> > >>
> > >> Joe
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Michael Brooks
> > >> <michael@michaelbrooks.ca> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 1. We are having a tough time finding and keeping Android 2.1
> devices
> > >> >> (most get upgraded to 2.3 or just die)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > This is a pain-point that I've felt many times. When I have found
a
> > >> device,
> > >> > there are enough "quirks" on the browser that it's not worth the
> > >> > development time to support the small percentage of users. Usually,
> > >>I've
> > >> > end up supporting 2.3+.
> > >> >
> > >> > +1 for dropping 2.1.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'll abstain from voting on Honeycomb because I have very little
> > >> experience
> > >> > with that tablet / Android OS.
> > >> >
> > >> > Michael
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Braden Shepherdson
> > >><braden@chromium.org
> > >> >wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> If manufacturers and carriers are rescuing the Galaxy Tabs (the
> only
> > >> >> Honeycomb device with any real penetration, I think) then we can
> > >>justify
> > >> >> dropping support for it eventually. On the other hand, if the
only
> > >>thing
> > >> >> stopping it is hardware acceleration, we could easily turn hardware
> > >> >> acceleration back on and have a "how to fix Honeycomb" doc as
> Andrew
> > >> >> suggested.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> +1 to dropping 2.1
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > +1 for dropping 2.1
> > >> >> > +1 for dropping 3.whatever-it-was honeycomb
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > ...in 2.2 or should we issue a general warning and wait a
couple
> of
> > >> >> > releases?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> >> > > Apparently the wifi tablets were only updated last week
to ICS
> > >>(the
> > >> 3G
> > >> >> > > updates came first). Also, manual update:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-tab-10-1-p7510-android-4-0-4-ics-u
> > >>elpl-update-official-110369/
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
> > >>wrote:
> > >> >> > >> Verizon just announced today (yes today!):
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/09/17/verizon-galaxy-tab-10-1-ice-cream
> > >>-sandwich-update-rolling-out-now/
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> T-mobile announced 2 weeks back:
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/03/t-mobile-samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-andro
> > >>id-ics-update/
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> Apparently its available in Canada since end of
August 2012:
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.androidcentral.com/telus-bell-and-rogers-samsung-galaxy-tab-10
> > >>1-andoid-404-updates-now-available
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/forums/forumtopicpage/board-id/Gener
> > >>alCareSupport/message-id/355
> > >> >> > >>
> > >> >> > >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Simon MacDonald
> > >> >> > >> <simon.macdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > >>> Me either. My Galaxy 10.1 Tab is still running
3.1.
> > >> >> > >>>
> > >> >> > >>> Simon Mac Donald
> > >> >> > >>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > >> >> > >>>
> > >> >> > >>>
> > >> >> > >>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Joe Bowser
<
> bowserj@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >>>> Funny, I never got that update.
> > >> >> > >>>> On Sep 17, 2012 5:34 PM, "Anis KADRI" <anis.kadri@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >>>>
> > >> >> > >>>>> Talking about the Samsung Galaxy Tab
10.1
> > >> >> > >>>>>
> > >> >> > >>>>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Anis
KADRI <
> > >> anis.kadri@gmail.com>
> > >> >> > wrote:
> > >> >> > >>>>>
> > >> >> > >>>>> > That was last year and Samsung
has updated them to 4.0.3
> > >>:-)
> > >> >> > >>>>> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:29 PM,
Joe Bowser <
> > >> bowserj@gmail.com>
> > >> >> > wrote:
> > >> >> > >>>>> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:22
PM, Brion Vibber <
> > >> >> > bvibber@wikimedia.org>
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > I would not mind dropping
2.1; our apps for Wikipedia
> > >>have
> > >> >> been
> > >> >> > 2.2+
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> anyway
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > due to breakages in the
2.1 browser.
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > 3/3.2 would be slightly
sad to miss only because there
> > >>are
> > >> >> > Honeycomb
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > tablets that haven't received
ICS updates, including
> my
> > >> Galaxy
> > >> >> > Tab
> > >> >> > >>>>> 10.1
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> but
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > ... let's be honest there's
not a lot of them out
> there.
> > >> I'm
> > >> >> > not sure
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> how
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > to blacklist those particular
versions in the
> > >> AndroidManifest
> > >> >> > however
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> while
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> > still being compatible
with 2.2/2.3...
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >>
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> That's a very good point. 
I'm almost convinced that the
> > >>3.1
> > >> on
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> Google's dashboard is literally
the Samsung Galaxy Tab
> > >>10.1
> > >> >> > devices
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> that Google gave away at IO
a couple of years ago that
> > >>were
> > >> >> pretty
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> much orphaned by Samsung because
they had a broken
> build.
> > >> >> > >>>>> >>
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> By far, Honeycomb was probably
the worst version of
> > >>Android
> > >> >> ever,
> > >> >> > and
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> I've been using it since 1.0
and remember how bad 2.0
> was
> > >> when
> > >> >> it
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> first came out on the Droid/Milestone.
 We can't even
> > >> deprecate
> > >> >> it
> > >> >> > >>>>> >> cleanly.
> > >> >> > >>>>> >>
> > >> >> > >>>>> >
> > >> >> > >>>>> >
> > >> >> > >>>>>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message