2.3 for San Fran

[Guest fonix232]

Ahaa , could this be the beginning of an easier way to theme our phones? Interesting.

I don't think so. Google said that Gingerbread's UI renewal is just to prevent manufacturers from creating own UI's (thus creating fragmentation), by supplying the phones with properly designed, innovative UI.

[Guest k0nrad]

Well, actually they meant it with Honeycomb, which is supposed to undergo a major overhaul of the UI.

As you can easily see, changes in UI between Froyo and Gingerbread are merely cosmetic. It has better look, more elegant and mature, I agree, but the way you use it is basically the same.

It is a visual facelift, not interface design change.

[Guest majnu]

Well, actually they meant it with Honeycomb, which is supposed to undergo a major overhaul of the UI.

As you can easily see, changes in UI between Froyo and Gingerbread are merely cosmetic. It has better look, more elegant and mature, I agree, but the way you use it is basically the same.

It is a visual facelift, not interface design change.

so is there any point in upgrading? should I just use a stable 2.2 froyo and install the gingerbread theme instead.

[Guest Phoenix Silver]

so is there any point in upgrading? should I just use a stable 2.2 froyo and install the gingerbread theme instead.

of course it's heavilly in development

few things work

[Guest rjm2k]

so is there any point in upgrading? should I just use a stable 2.2 froyo and install the gingerbread theme instead.

As a normal user, no point whatsoever upgrading.

[Guest cobhc]

How would you describe a user for whom it is worth upgrading then?

Edited December 21, 2010 by cobhc

[Guest BArtNimal]

How would you describe a user for whom it is worth upgrading then?

a user who likes and more important has the knowledge and ability to tinker with it, to fix it and improve it. or just someone who wants a taste of the newest android release, but who needs to understand that a lot of stuff will not work perfectly or not work at all.

btw, thanks to all the guys who work on this and the other roms and make them usable for the rest of us who cant :)

[Guest rjm2k]

How would you describe a user for whom it is worth upgrading then?

Someone who is a developer who can help improve it or someone curious to know what it looks like but knows that their phone will not be useful whilst it is on there, can't make calls, send sms, connect to wifi, use the sd card, performance is extremely slow etc.

Someone who is willing to put it on, have a look and then restore the backup they made before they upgraded.

[Guest fonix232]

How would you describe a user for whom it is worth upgrading then?

Someone, who has experience with Android, wants to tinker with the system, and knows how to debug, use DDMS, and wants to help development.

[Guest cobhc]

I must have misunderstood, I thought you meant 2.3 in general, not just the build that we're trying to get working on the Blade...

[Guest k0nrad]

I think that in general, 2.3, when good, working build will be available, is worth upgrading to, as it brings some under the hood changes nevertheless. Hard to tell now, as no device was given an official upgrade from Froyo yet, but I expect further performance boost. Not nearly as significant as with Eclair to Froyo transition, but still.

I referred to the User Interface changes as a cosmetic facelift only, not to the whole release of 2.3.

Edited December 21, 2010 by k0nrad

[Guest Aquilo]

As a normal user, no point whatsoever upgrading.

I disagree, unless you like image banding and poor SKIA performance.

http://www.curious-creature.org/2010/12/08...-and-dithering/

[Guest Twiggeh]

I disagree, unless you like image banding and poor SKIA performance.

http://www.curious-creature.org/2010/12/08...-and-dithering/

He was referring to the 2.3 ROM posted in this thread, not 2.3 in general

[Guest nabeelk]

So when will it ready for the 'User' ? (i mean 2.3 :)

[Guest Swimmerboy]

So when will it ready for the 'User' ? (i mean 2.3 :)

Months most likely - most of the bugs have only just been worked out of Froyo. Even then the FM Radio doesn't work.

It'll start getting there soon enough, but I'm sure bits of it wont work, or will run slowly etc and it'll gradually snowball into something workable. Where you jump in on the action is up to you, but for a day-to-day phone with no crashes etc I wouldn't be holding my breath.

[Guest olionair]

so what version of 2.3 are available for my san fran?

[Guest Lew247]

so what version of 2.3 are available for my san fran?

If you want to use the San Francisco as a phone - none

as stated already it will be many months before there is a proper working version that is reliable enough to actually use

[Guest olionair]

If you want to use the San Francisco as a phone - none

as stated already it will be many months before there is a proper working version that is reliable enough to actually use

thanks

[Guest olionair]

whats the progress?

[Guest tcpaulh]

whats the progress?

Loads. Definitely ready for primetime. It's all in the big invisible thread. Amazing really. Many months of progress in only a few days. You should try it

[Guest Matty-p]

Loads. Definitely ready for primetime. It's all in the big invisible thread. Amazing really. Many months of progress in only a few days. You should try it

Dunno about tom but i havent been ablr to look at it for weeks maybe look at wifi and ril this weekend dunno

[Guest Tom G]

I haven't had time. The wifi problem should just be something I screwed up. I haven't looked at the codeaurora code yet, but it probably has working audio without any modifications (I was using a customised libaudio in aosp based on the caf froyo libaudio). The hardware acceleration might work a bit better with codeaurora as well.

I will try to have a look at the codeaurora code and 2.3.1 over the next few days, but I may not have time. I will try to get some source up as well (though I haven't changed/added much).

[Guest rjm2k]

The wifi problem should just be something I screwed up.

Lol, you could say that, something to do with the following lines dissapearing from build.prop...

wifi.interface=wlan0

wifi.supplicant_scan_interval=180

Attached is a fix to be applied thru clockwork :(

As for RIL there's all sorts of Quallcom stuff gets loaded up during boot via init.rc etc, have you included all of that in your rom?

gb02wififix.zip

Edited December 30, 2010 by rjm2k

[Guest Tom G]

Lol, you could say that, something to do with the following lines dissapearing from build.prop...

wifi.interface=wlan0

wifi.supplicant_scan_interval=180

Attached is a fix to be applied thru clockwork :(

As for RIL there's all sorts of Quallcom stuff gets loaded up during boot via init.rc etc, have you included all of that in your rom?

That would do it. The scan_interval should be shorter. 180 will be good for battery, but it means it will only look for APs once every 3 minutes. I've been using 15 in my recent roms.

[Guest Matty-p]

ok worked on my own build again yesterday. change list from my last rom , i have put in bold what its got that toms latest rom dosent

audio!!

now asop rather than from sdk

.32 kernal too but hasent made a big differance

all of the gapps and the asociated libs,jar stuff in framework,and permisions all working fine!

wifi still works was never broken

fully working fm radio

all in a update zip rather than fastboot even works with new clockwork

still no ril

will upload in a bit if anyone wants it ?

remember its alpha devs/alpa testers only HERES THE DOWNLOAD LINK - http://bit.ly/mattypasop

flash via clockwork - as always im not responible for any damage caused to your phone

http://bit.ly/mattypasop

EDIT:FM RADIO NOT FULLY WORKING-worked once then tried again and got fc's the 11th starting of the app got me a working radio closed and the 12th fc'd again basically radio dosent really work - not too sure why it is and then it isn't working will look into it at the weekend

Edited January 2, 2011 by Matty-p