ie8 fix

Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

Google has forked Android

By | January 26, 2011, 4:51pm PST

Summary: There’s no official word, but it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to see that Android 3 will be for tablets only while the Android 2.x line is for smartphones.

The last thing I wanted to see was Android to split into two “official” versions. Well, guess what, for all intents and purposes that’s what’s happened. Ack!

It’s bad enough that Android has multiple current versions. Then, Xavier Ducrohet, Android SDK (Software Development Kit) Tech Lead, announced “Android 3.0 (Honeycomb) is a new version of the Android platform that is designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes, particularly tablets.”

I asked multiple people at Google if they could expand on this news. None of this could.

So, I’ll spell out what I think is happening here. We’re seeing an Android fork. There will be one line for smartphones, the current Android 2.3, Gingerbread, line, and the forthcoming Android 3, Honeycomb, line.

According to Ducrohet, besides Android’s common features set—multitasking, notifications, and widgets—Honeycomb will have a new UI (user interface) framework for creating great apps for larger screen devices; high-performance 2D and 3D graphics using a built-in OpenGL (Open Graphics Library); support for multicore processors; rich multimedia; new Bluetooth APIs (application programming interfaces) and enterprise enhancements such as encrypted storage and password expiration. That’s all great, but really do we need to split Android into two parts to do this?

If you look at the Android Honeycomb highlights, it becomes even clearer that Honeycomb is going its own way. There is some good news for developers who don’t want to re-do their Android 2.x work for Honeycomb. As the Web page states, while “The new UI brings fresh paradigms for interaction, navigation, and customization and makes them available to all applications—even those built for earlier versions of the platform. Applications written for Android 3.0 are able to use an extended set of UI objects, powerful graphics, and media capabilities to engage users in new ways.”

There’s the rub. If you write apps. for Honeycomb and the coming flood of Android tablets, it sounds like you’re not going to be able to easily backport them to Android smartphones. Sure you could just write for Android 2.x, but your 2.x compliant applications won’t look half-as-good running on tablets. No developer who wants to make money is going to do that.

I like Honeycomb’s new features. They sound great. I just object to Google to turning Android into two separate but unequal platforms Sure, the hardware was never going to be the same, but did Google really need to make two platforms? Apple seems to be doing OK with iOS for everything from iPad Touch devices to iPad.

For Android developers the bottom line is going to mean more work because they’ll need to write two different versions of every single application. Like I said at the top: “Ack!”

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system

Disclosure

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is a freelance writer. He does not own stocks or other investments in any technology company.

Biography

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system; 300bps was a fast Internet connection; WordStar was the state of the art word processor; and we liked it!

His work has been published in everything from highly technical publications (IEEE Computer, ACM NetWorker, Byte) to business publications (eWEEK, InformationWeek, ZDNet) to popular technology (Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, PC World) to the mainstream press (Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, BusinessWeek).

93
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Google has forked Android
FAULKNE 13th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
cj100570@... 26th Jan 2011
It makes perfect sense. But I guess you would have to make it sound sensationalist to get page hits.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
Pete "athynz" Athens 27th Jan 2011
@cj100570@... How does this make sense? Like the man said Apple has no issues with iOS running on iPod Touches/ iPhone and iPads...

Android users get to enjoy even MORE fragmentation when Google should have been focused on a unifying platform.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
VRSpock 27th Jan 2011
@athynz
Speaking of fragmentation. I take note of the honeycomb feature of scalable DRM. Does this mean Netflix will most likely show up on Honeycomb devices only?

With all the fragmentation, and google's track record, I'm leaning very heavily toward getting an iPod Touch or iPad.

I was waiting to see what Microsoft does in the tablet market as well....and I am very pro Microsoft....but it seems they are a day late and a dollar short...at least when it comes to consumer level tablets.

So far, the iPod Touch and iPad both give me the Netflix app that I want as a consumer and the ability to remote desktop into servers that I want/need for work, along with Exchange access.

Apple sucks on the desktop....but it looks like they may have gotten it right on the tablet.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
crazydanr@... 27th Jan 2011
@VRSpock

I just got my hands on the HP Slate, and I have to admin, it's pretty nice if you want a tablet that runs full apps. It's not for everyone, plenty of people here still love the iPad, but I need full fledged apps to do my job, so it works pretty well. Seems like MS could tweak the UI a bit and get a tablet version of the OS that has all the capabilities in a reasonable time frame, I'm not sure what the delay is.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
blueskip 27th Jan 2011
@athynz Honeycomb has already been hacked to use on phones. And guess what??? It works just fine.

I have and LOVE Android, and would never use any Apple garbage. Android is made to run on many devices NOT necessarily made by Google. Let me know when Apple's iOS can do that. (never) Give this fanboy **** a rest already. It's really getting old. People are tired of hearing it.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
Zc456 Updated - 27th Jan 2011
@athynz
When you think about it does. I mean look at how the iPad began, the first version of iOS for iPad was a direct fork of the current 3.0 and in a retrospective still is. 3.2.x were all iPad only.

It isn't fragmentation when it's targeted to a totally different set of devices, anyway. Just like the iPad version of iOS. Android 3.0 Honeycomb is for tablets, not phones. I just wonder if the current 2.x line will ever get off of, well, 2.x.
0 Votes
+ -
Give this fanboy **** a rest already.
matthew_maurice 27th Jan 2011
@blueskip "I have and LOVE Android, and would never use any Apple garbage." Pot. Kettle. Black.
0 Votes
+ -
It makes sense if you want more functionality
Schoolboy Bob 27th Jan 2011
@athynz They are building another Android platform, for larger, more powerful machines, and (hopefully) it is still an "open system" (whatever that means these days).

ios isn't really in the same category. It is a subset of functionality that the vendor deems appropriate. There is nothing open about the system (except that Apple didn't write the core), and generally it is running on at least somewhat wimpy hardware (especially the ipad and most of the older stuff).
0 Votes
+ -
so what - no big deal
Ron Bergundy 27th Jan 2011
@athynz
because googles been forking over their users since the begining so this is nothing new that they forking android - anything to fork people some more.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
ExploreMN 27th Jan 2011
@VRSpock
If it wasn't for fragmentation you wouldn't even have a choice of Android tablet. You would have 1 tablet to pick from and it would be made by Google and that would be it...in other words, it would be just like Apple.

Fragmentation, despite the hype, is a good thing. If apps have problems it is because of poorly designed programs. Android is set up to be scalable and hardware independent. However, that aside, fragmentation occurs because you have 500 different devices all running the OS. As a result, you can get a $249 Nook color, a $299 Archos 101, a $3495 Motorola Xoom, etc etc (yes, I'm mocking the Xoom's price).
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
TRDRACER21 28th Jan 2011
@athynz ios ipad iphone same os doesnt take a dummy to fig that out.. fragmentation? can you use multitasking on a 3g iphone "NO" or add wallpaper "NO" AINT THAT FRAGMENTATION??? basically you gotta buy a new phone
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
non-biased 4th Feb 2011
@blueskip Pot meet kettle. Are you that blinded by your hatred of Apple that you can see you are at least as much a fanboy of Android as you accuse athynz of being for Apple? I also find it funny you talk about hacking the OS to make it do something when that was never good enough for all you haters when talking about iOS.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
RE: Google has forked Android
sjvn@... 27th Jan 2011
@cj100570@... No, I really do think it's a mistake that could end up hurting Android adoption by developers and eventually by users. Who wants to 'buy' an app. for their tablet if it only works well on a smartphone? We're already beginning to see users being annoyed by apps that will work with the newest versions of Android 2.x but not with earlier versions. This is only to make things more complicated for buyers, and that's never, ever a good move in any market.

Steven
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
YetAnotherBob 27th Jan 2011
@sjvn@...

Steven, I have a first gen Moto Droid, and with thesoftware update, it runs all of the apps I have loaded. What is the nature of phone applications that won't run? is it memory or procdessor speed? I haven't seen the problem.

PS, Google always intended for these 'forks'. Remember Chrome OS? I am not sure that Android could run the larger screens without a change in video software.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
30otnix 28th Jan 2011
@sjvn@...
From the dawn of computing all applications have had minimal software and hardware requirements. Why is android being pegged as the only one where this is a problem?

Sure there are apps that are made for 2.x that wont work on 1.x devices but the market filters those apps out.

As for this "fork" as you call it, I really didn't read it that way. Yes, there will be applications that are built specifically for tablets/honeycomb but it seems to me that developers should be able to write on application that conforms the the OS and form factor. If I'm wrong please explain.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
tatiGmail 26th Jan 2011
Quite frankly, I don't want my tablet to look like my phone. But, I hope my apps work on both devices. It could also mean a little matter of moving away from the Oracle lawsuit?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
Habiloso Updated - 28th Jan 2011
@BioNerd

I suspect that one of the reasons for the success of Apple products is the consistent interface. Pick-up and iPod touch, iPhone, iPad and the interface is the same; there is no additional learning experience. That might not make sense to someone who is highly adept with technology, but it makes a lot of sense for most general users. You might want "everything" to be difference, but I bet pounds to peanuts the average user does not.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
BioNerd Updated - 27th Jan 2011
@ptorning Tablets are more powerful and have bigger screens. You want tabbed browsing, home widgets, desktops for different work setups in tablets, like you have in a computer.

Also, because it is bigger it doesn't make sense to rely on hardware buttons because it harder to control them when you need both hands. In a phone, clicking on buttons can be done with one hand and it doesn't matter if it is in landscape or portrait. Now, see how weird it is to push the iPad button in portrait mode. That is just wrong.

A tablet experience must be different because the form factor changes everything. Unless all you want is a bigger phone, it is better to design an interface that better fits the tablets format.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
reyonlines Updated - 27th Jan 2011
@ptorning
I agree with you, having a consistent user interface is one of the key ingredient as of why Apple has succeeded with their devises. One of the things I hate about Android based phones is that the UI varies from manufacturer to another, therefore making user learning curve a bit harder.

Now, when it comes with tablets, I'm not so sure I want to have the exact interface as my phone since these two have different screen real-state. From a developer stand point, I agree, it will make it harder and make projects longer to deliver for multiple platforms. Then again, from the user's stand point, WHO CARES!!!!??? users just need to know it works, and if it does a good job install it on multiple devices.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
jeverettk 27th Jan 2011
@ptorning & reyonlines
"I agree with you, having a consistent user interface is one of the key ingredient as of why Apple has succeeded with their devises."

Actually, no creating a new OS to better match new formats was their real key to success.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
DJThuht 27th Jan 2011
@ptorning I don't want a Honda Civic engine in my Ford F350; nor do I want the seats or anything else. I want it to be built up from the bottom: bigger.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
jgm@... 27th Jan 2011
There's no reason to fork. Different screen sizes? All apps need to do is get the screen size from the OS and dynamically adjust their button size respectively. You want a different screen layout? With Linux the GUI is separate from the kernel. However, you can always add features to the existing GUI without having to create a new one. I run KDE on my desktop and my laptop, but configured differently for the respective screen sizes. I don't really see the need to split the OS, only to beef up the existing one. Heck, quad core cell phone chips are already in the pipeline! I've seen estimates that in five years cell phone SoCs will be as powerful as midrange desktops of today.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
non-biased 7th Feb 2011
@BioNerd Tablets are more powerful and have bigger screens. You want tabbed browsing, home widgets, desktops for different work setups in tablets, like you have in a computer.

No, you want those things. You need to realize that what you want is not necessarily what the rest of the world wants. You have to keep in mind that the vast majority of those that are buying these tablets are average consumers, not tech savvy people.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't see it.
rlawler 26th Jan 2011
I spent most of the day looking over the new Honeycomb SDK, and I don't see anything that's forked. I see new capabilities, but these capabilities will apply just as well to smartphones as tablets.

I think your fears are unfounded.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
snoop0x7b 27th Jan 2011
@rlawler After looking at it as well, I think the author is full of crap and is misinterpreting what Google said (maybe even on purpose to create FUD and get more impressions). I think what Google is trying to get at is that the 2-branch wasn't meant to be run on tablets (but that doesn't mean it can't be) and the 3 branch will be the first version designed to be able to be run on tablets.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
PW123987 27th Jan 2011
@snoop0x7b
Exactly. I don't even know why I read the articles at this ridiculous site - the authors never know what they're talking about, at least about Android "fragmentation".

This particular story is 100% conjecture. He starts with his conclusion that there is a distinct fork but offers nothing technical to back it up - just comments about what 3.0 is adding. Even if 3.0 were forked temporarily, there's zero evidence that 3.1 wouldn't come out to reconcile the differences and allow deployment to phones and tablets. Same as iPad did.

For anyone who believes this nonsense, here's what you're missing. My laptop has a trackpad that needs Windows to support it, and my desktop PC doesn't, but that doesn't mean a single version of Windows can't support both kinds of computers. It's pretty basic and simple. Stop the FUD.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
snoop0x7b 28th Jan 2011
@PW123987

Well technically speaking we're talking about a different branch in the same project, which is the norm. They started working on 2.0 while they were working on 1.6 updates as well. Branching doesn't necessarily preclude updates either.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
non-biased 7th Feb 2011
@snoop0x7b After looking at it as well, I think the author is full of crap and is misinterpreting what Google said (maybe even on purpose to create FUD and get more impressions).

Certainly wouldn't be the first (or last I am sure) time that has happened on ZD for any given hot topic sad
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
Rama.NET Updated - 26th Jan 2011
That is bad. I am not saying apps will not work or will work, that is different, but definitely developers have to cater for it when they are developing apps for the platform. It is definitely bad choice. They could have written an abstract layer that recognizes the type of device just like iOS does and provided the controls and framework that is suitable for it operate. This is without seeing the sdk, I am saying. I reserve my words.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
drphysx 27th Jan 2011
@Rama.NET Actually apps DO WORK on both phones and tablets, without doing two versions of the app.

A tablet needs a different UI, period. A bunch of dumb icons isn't enough.

What Google's doing makes perfect sense and in fact, Honeycomb already seems like YEARS ahead of iOS on tablets!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
snoop0x7b 27th Jan 2011
@Rama.NET The SDK hasn't really changed significantly. There's just a whole bunch of new features exposed that make sense for tablets. You won't have to redevelop apps, only add on parts to use new features if it's appropriate.

Plus, I think abstracting the app's capabilities by device type is something the developer should be doing, all the OS should be doing is telling you what the device can do and what's available services-wise it's up to you to determine how to substitute one piece of hardware for another, or alternatively place in your manifest file a set of requirements(which if they are not met, the app will not be installable or even shown in the market).
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
superlinkx 26th Jan 2011
Based on how I read it, it is built for tablets, but doesn't say anything about it not working on smaller screens. In fact, there are a couple of vague references to using it on smaller screens, and if I were to load the preview, I bet I could create an Evo based AVM and have it run Gingerbread. The main thing is that tablet specific UI features in Gingerbread won't work on phones, but will be able to handle the phone's smaller interface. Basically, Gingerbread will work on phones and will give them access to common API's, but things that require a larger screen or other tablet features won't work the same way on phones.

Basically, Honeycomb is about the tablets, but will run on any device, just like any other Android version.
@superlinkx

...in your first paragraph?

"I bet I could create an Evo based AVM and have it run Gingerbread" - Yes, because it's a 2.3 meant for phones.

"The main thing is that tablet specific UI features in Gingerbread won't work on phones" - Are there tablet specific UI features in 2.3 (Gingerbread)?

"Basically, Gingerbread will work on phones and will give them access to common API's, but things that require a larger screen or other tablet features won't work the same way on phones." - Do you mean Honeycomb? Because of course Gingerbread will work on Phones, it's designed for phones!

"Basically, Honeycomb is about the tablets, but will run on any device, just like any other Android version." - This I understand, but did you mean Honeycomb all the way through?
0 Votes
+ -
That's pure FUD and you probably know that
rivasdiaz@... 26th Jan 2011
The Android Honeycomb API is totally backward compatible with Android SDK 2.3. The new version is an incremental upgrade, with a new UI, and that's it. Maybe it's the biggest change until now in Android. But I'm 100% sure that next version of Android released for phones will be 100% compatible with Honeycomb. Reading the released docs, even just the platform highlights is more than enough to see that. Man, maybe at the API level this change is smaller than from 1.6 to 2.0. And for sure in the DavlikVM the change is smaller than from 2.1 to 2.2.

Stop doing that, you are confusing people, and spreading FUD.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
snoop0x7b 27th Jan 2011
@rivasdiaz@... Exactly. I've only recently begun ascribing willful spreading of FUD and stupidity to ZDNet authors though.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
chuckfalzone 26th Jan 2011
Re: "There?s the rub. If you write apps. for Honeycomb and the coming flood of Android tablets, it sounds like you?re not going to be able to easily backport them to Android smartphones," the Android team addressed this in their announcments today here: http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html#compatibility
@chuckfalzone

Compatibility with existing apps
Android 3.0 brings a new UI designed for tablets and other larger screen devices, but it also is fully compatible with applications developed for earlier versions of the platform, or for smaller screen sizes. Existing applications can seamlessly participate in the new holographic UI theme without code changes, by adding a single attribute in their manifest files. The platform emulates the Menu key, which is replaced by the overflow menu in the Action Bar in the new UI. Developers wanting to take fuller advantage of larger screen sizes can also create dedicated layouts and assets for larger screens and add them to their existing applications.
0 Votes
+ -
Even if your Doomsday Scenario were true this is quite likely a step in the path to uniting these very different device platforms. Doing it this way gets Honeycomb and Android tablets some traction (and very much needed it is too) without wrecking the Android Smarthphone line, I would have a basic expectation that within 12 to 18 months Android 4 would bring the two lines back to a single development platform anyway and thats always assuming that this is a separation and I have yet to see any researched evidence based reporting that says it is.

I'd say its about time ZDNet forked its bloggers and tried to get back to decent reporting happy
0 Votes
+ -
Steve, we call it borrowing trouble
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 27th Jan 2011
Dig in and come up with some beef.
No worries.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
progresivo@... 27th Jan 2011
So what ?? More work for us, as a programmer I'm very happy !!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
Will T 27th Jan 2011
Is iOS that same for ipad and ipod/iphone?
I think there are quite a few small differences, and that is all it sounds like google is doing.
@Will T

...graphics and icons in the package. So from what is said here: http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-92644-1767150 it is a similar process with Android.

But we'll see when the developers get their mits on it.
0 Votes
+ -
Hangover
Hasam1991 27th Jan 2011
I have Android hang over already, can't wait to stop using it!!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
YetAnotherBob 27th Jan 2011
@Hasam1991

Then stop.

But, Apple or WinP7? which will have the most chance of making money. Lots of Apples, but also lots of competing apps.

WP7, maybe there will be phones out there soon. Not a lot of competition, but very few customers. Also, Microsoft has a reputation of eating it's developers, if they ever do make any money.

Since I've seen in some of your other posts that you are a Windows fanboy, just go with it and hope for the best.

Me, I'm happy with a year old Droid. But then, I;m easy to please.
0 Votes
+ -
then they'll add the phone to the tablet
sparkle farkle 27th Jan 2011
and leave gingerbread behind
0 Votes
+ -
Pure Speculation
nak10101 27th Jan 2011
This is pure speculation on the authors part and not to mention old news. We will just have to wait and see what really happens.
0 Votes
+ -
Google is a Fail because
keoz 27th Jan 2011
they don't care about the developers only about the consumers and that's stupid, no happy developers -> no apps -> no consumers, this is what Microsoft is very aware of that's why we have the same development experience in phones, desktop and the web, period.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google has forked Android
PW123987 27th Jan 2011
@keoz
You should read the rest of the comments here. This article is a farce, as all other zdnet articles on the same topic are. Just bizarre that they continue to publish nonsense.
0 Votes
+ -
Highly Unlikely
CFWhitman Updated - 27th Jan 2011
Even if Google had decided to have two concurrent versions of Android, it wouldn't really be a fork, because a fork is a split of development groups who want to pursue different directions with a code base. They share no work in common, except that if one team sees code in the other's repository that they like, they can copy it assuming that it's all open source.

If Google were pursuing two separate concurrent versions of Android, it would be what is normally referred to as a "branch" rather than a "fork." As long as people understand that the projects wouldn't be totally separate, though, this is just a matter of semantics.

Really, though, Android 3.0 being a separate branch of Android only for tablets seems highly unlikely. What is more likely is that Android 3.0 will have a UI available that is suitable for larger tablets and one that is suitable for smaller handsets. I rather doubt that they will continue with 2.x releases for handsets and 3.x releases for tablets.
0 Votes
+ -
Good point and thoughtful reply.
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 27th Jan 2011
@CFWhitman

Turns out, you are correct in your assessment.
0 Votes
+ -
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix