Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica) [LWN.net]

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 23, 2010 19:19 UTC (Sun) by busterb (subscriber, #560) [Link]

Android has had VPN support in general since 1.6 - PPTP, L2TP and IPSec.

I just installed the latest 2.1 Cyanogenmod port to the G1, and it also includes OpenVPN, though this appears to be an addition beyond the standard features. But hey, open-source at its best!

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 23, 2010 21:29 UTC (Sun) by Kit (guest, #55925) [Link]

Just because the Android platform is open doesn't mean that the carriers will have a sudden change of heart and want to give out un-crippled phones.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 24, 2010 6:56 UTC (Mon) by BackSeat (subscriber, #1886) [Link]

Crippling by the telcos is a separate subject (and is the reason why I bought a vanilla HTC Hero). The point remains that the "openness" of Android doesn't extend to giving users root access without recourse to hacking. That, in my book, is not "open".

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 24, 2010 9:03 UTC (Mon) by alankila (subscriber, #47141) [Link]

I guess this could be used to illustrate the difference between open source and free software.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 24, 2010 9:19 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Also some of the cost of closed hardware.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 24, 2010 5:39 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

I use the Cyanogenmod firmware on my G1 (which I picked up used, poor me and no money for a Nexus or N900)

It's great. Wifi tethering, USB tethering, Support for installing programs on the SD card, Debian Chroot (even with LXDE desktop!, but lack of RAM cripples that and the Android memory management scheme breaks down if you use swap).

And OpenVPN support. :) So if you need features like that it should be possible to add them; as long as your not paying for a locked down phone. Can't really help though if you need it for 'the enterprise' or anything like that, unfortunately. There is OpenVPN available from the Android Marketplace, but you need to have root ability to get the thing to work.

(no Vorbis streaming support yet (*cry*). HOWEVER with Webm coming out then that should be fantastic! Pulseaudio + Gstreamer streaming Ogg/Webm over Webm + RTP or HTTP to my phone would be fantastic. Even better if I could get Vp8 working!)

I'll NEVER EVER by a phone I can't change the firmware on and I'll only buy phones supported by third parties, if I can help it. The utility of the phone has increased massively because of this and should not be passed up by anybody else that is a huge of a geek as me.

Not to also mention that the Cyanogenmod folks are getting a 2.x firmware image built for my G1/Dream and I should even be able to upgrade to Froyo in the future, which should be very cool. This should help out with the performance of the various game system emulators.

---------------------------------------------------------

If I only had a Nexus One it would be a slam dunk. Nothing else available on the market could ever come close to it. I had my doubts about Android; but in terms of usability for handhelds nothing else in the OSS world comes close to touching it. It's a great lesson on putting together user interfaces and making complex systems easy to use. (except for the upgrading BS you have to go through to get apps updated, but that should be fixed in 2.2)

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 14:16 UTC (Tue) by Aissen (subscriber, #59976) [Link]

Google did its part of the job, and the Nexus One can be rooted without hacks using the bootloader unlock provided by Google (fastboot oem unlock). Maybe that's why no "hacks" were released to root the Nexus One.
But you loose every guaranties in the process on your hardware. (technically you could burn down the phone in software if you play with power regulators, cpu frequency, radio power, etc.)

Also, the Nexus One is sold SIM-unlocked, whatever plan you buy it with.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 10:50 UTC (Tue) by sebas (subscriber, #51660) [Link]

I think LWN readers can well understand argument beyond "that crap is slow because they're using the wrong language (or framework)". Besides, the original article talks about great speed enhancements with native code on Android 2.2, which you completely dismiss.

Maybe you can spread your wisdom in a slightly more useful manner and relate to both article, and real-world use cases where it matters? A bit of technical background instead of ungrounded statements wouldn't hurt as well.

I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just poor form to make this kind statements in a forum like LWN without any kind of backup, background information or technical details.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 11:13 UTC (Tue) by sylware (guest, #35259) [Link]

Indeed, but it is also unfair to let the LWN users think android is a marvel of technology.
I see 2 things:
- I have been a cyanogen user on HTC dream (lately android 2.1) for nearly a year. The reactivity and speed are just cra* for a 500MHz system: opening an app, opening the keyboard, scrolling... waiting ages for the screen to change orientation etc etc... all that is painfully slow on a everyday use basis.
- I see all the work done on speeding android as a proof:"yes, android is slow, and we are trying hard to make its speed bearable" (thx java!).

That means the java thing was a very bad move, but quite less worse than to delay google entry on the mobile OS market. Android is buy far the less worse *working* mobile OS we have.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 13:20 UTC (Tue) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

Just a thought. Maybe Google is not stupid and got exactly what they wanted.
A language that is beyond popular, fairly productive, hardware independent and has great potential for speed up.

Just look at the GoogleTV running on Atom and maybe, just maybe Google just thought long term and was willing to live with slow devices for a few years.

If you like C so much you are free to reimplement all the parts of Android that need improvement in C (with the NDK).

A Nexus One with 2.2 certainly isn't slow anymore. From what I have seen it is the fastest handset at the moment.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 15:40 UTC (Tue) by sylware (guest, #35259) [Link]

The proper way would be: a binary/C based framework to accomodate all languages with bindings.

JNI coding is just a *pain*. What would need to be done: recoding the framework in C, then code bindings for their java.

As I said, indeed google got exactly what they wanted:the less worse of mobile OSes they could get ASAP on the market to counter apple with its iphone.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 28, 2010 9:58 UTC (Fri) by sylware (guest, #35259) [Link]

Yesterday I got side by side:
- HTC desire (android 2.1) 1 Ghz
- old iphone
- HTC dream (android 2.1) 500 Mhz

Both HTC are *obviously* way slower than the iphone from a user experience. The dream was closer to a joke than anything compared to the iphone (special prize in app opening).

Google has to do something to get a binary/C/ASM coded mobile OS with all in-kernel proper hardware acceleration (and not dirty user space pass-through). This is a lot of work and forget MeeGo because it's C++ and also FSO because it's vala.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 28, 2010 13:43 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I don't think Google are especially likely to pander to your no-language-but-C-is-tolerable prejudices. ('Forget MeeGo because it's C++'? We were talking about speed. C++ is not especially slower than C: both are compiled down to raw asm, after all.)

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted Jun 3, 2010 10:40 UTC (Thu) by sylware (guest, #35259) [Link]

My opinion on C++ is not based on speed/reactivity (it was for java but the following apply for java too... and more).

A proper C++ compiler is a monster compared to a proper C compiler, and that without any optimization framework. I dislike my software being dependent on a piece of software that is that hard to rewrite. "A kernel is already enough" sort of illustrate my opinion. I know many other components have faulted (from my point of view) the same way, but I feel better to remove them than add more. Till gcc does not need a C++ compiler to compile its C compiler, I'll stay quiet. If the steering comity decided othewise and it does happen, I will start to depart from gcc or try to make gcc C++ parts needed for the C optimizing compiler optional. In the case I depart from it, I'll feel the pain of losing the optimization part of gcc, but I'll try my best to depart from it. There are not many alternatives, since I do contribute GNU GPL only code...

Additionnaly, as I percieve it (I was a C++ coder), C++ helps too much (way more than C) coders to create brain damaged object orientish designs that ends up kludge/bloat. The mental dicipline in order to avoid such deviance can perfectly be applied to C too, then better be C which is easier to write a compiler for.

This is a part of my personal perception of that specific issue which explains for a bigger part my choices and my behavior: for all software use cases, I'm looking to reduce as much as possible size/complexity of the software stack. I really dislike the feature freakness and "over abstraction" many coders are falling for (I try to avoid it myself, it's hard). Down to the C++ issue, actually I do feel the same way for all langages. C is the less worse choice in my opinion.

BTW, I'll post that on the C++-GCC thread too...

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted Jun 8, 2010 20:44 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I really dislike the feature freakness and "over abstraction" many coders are falling for

If you think GCC wouldn't benefit from a language capable of greater abstraction, you have never even glanced at its code. It's not written in C now: it's written in a language sort of like C only extended past all sanity by a horrendous forest of macros and classes-in-C hacks (like langhooks et al) and garbage collection to work around the simplemindedness of C memory management. (There are fewer hacks than there used to be, but not by much.)

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted May 25, 2010 12:55 UTC (Tue) by alankila (subscriber, #47141) [Link]

Perhaps the problem is partially that android doesn't actually execute java. It executes a related language called dalvik. It comes with its own replacement .jar format and virtual machine. Java is quite fast, really, but its memory usage is awful.

With dalvik, they have found ways to achieve what is probably the lowest memory usage for any java-style system yet, but performance went down the drain. Now that they are getting some of the lost performance back, hopefully without spending too much memory on the dynamically compiled native code.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people would write applications for android in C. C is a low productivity language, like it or not. And you can't fix that by adding a lot of different runtimes for other languages with bindings to C, because it takes a serious effort to do the memory usage optimizations they did do for dalvik. I quite like the idea that the baseline is java-like language rather than C, I just wish they'd have got around to adding the JIT sooner.

Speedy Android 2.2 hits with tethering, push framework, more (ars technica)

Posted Jun 7, 2010 14:35 UTC (Mon) by SecretEuroPatentAgentMan (guest, #66656) [Link]

Many cellphones use ARM processors, of which probably a few use the Jazelle accelerator. Since JVM is stack oriented and Dalvik is register oriented it appears unlikely that Jazelle will be of much help in executing Dalvik. A "Dazelle" eccelerator would be useful.