ICS a disappointment?

[xBlackDroid]

Hi all, after watching some videos of the SDK for HC, I have been both surprised and disappointed because I expected a revolution most notorious for this new OS and only seem to alter the appearance like Touchwizz style and I am surprised that the optimization by Tiamat, in my opinion provides a perfect scenario, much more possibilities both in appearance and applications than ICS

somevideos from SDK ICS Tablets

http://es.engadget.com/2011/10/19/un-primer-vistazo-a-ice-cream-sandwich-para-tablets/

 

[musashiken]

I'm definitely happy with ICS. The improvements are good for phones. For tablets, think of it as a refinement to Honeycomb.

In anycase ICS does really deliver on Google's promise to unify phones and tablets.

 

[xBlackDroid]

I agree with you, for smartphone is an excellent update has new features, although almost everything is extrapolated from the HC

 

[gqstatus0685]

It was really meant for phones.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

 

[ZanshinG1]

It was really meant for phones.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

How do you figure that?

 

[RMerlin]

I frankly don't know what you were expecting exactly. This is an update to an existing OS, not a new OS. And there are a LOT of changes under the hood that haven't been really discussed at the Samsung/Google event. Something like turning the Recent button into an actual Task Manager is a very nice features. Built-in screenshot capabilities is another long-time requested feature that is in ICS. Sure, a lot of the other changes are targeted at phones, but Android is first of all a mobile device OS.

Look at http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-4.0-highlights.html for a closer detail at changes in 4.0. And look at all the non-visible, under-the-hood changes that are nonetheless major, even if they do not represent any visual or end-user impact at first: http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-4.0.html

To me, ICS looks exactly what it should have been: first of all a serious spit-shine done at Android, giving the bit of polish people often complained it lacked. And it also brings a lot of new goodies to the table.

 

[Kippui]

Its because we have some of the features on our tablets that our phones had to live without....

I'm going to be happy when our tablets run most apps on the market like phones without issue.

 

[RMerlin]

Slightly unrelated note: Andy Rubin said at AsiaD that ICS should be opensourced a few weeks after the Galaxy Nexus launch. That will allow ROM modders to come up to plenty of new features for our tablets.

 

[s14tam]

I'm definitely happy with ICS. The improvements are good for phones. For tablets, think of it as a refinement to Honeycomb.

In anycase ICS does really deliver on Google's promise to unify phones and tablets.

Agreed. Actually, ICS is what honeycomb should have been. Motorola actually rushed Google for the developement of 3.0 to release with the xoom. Anyways that's their reasoning for not releasing the source for HC and why they are going to be releasing the code for ICS. They didn't want people to developed a platform that was rushed.

 

[csseale]

Rushed or not it works great as a tablet os.

There is alot of honeycomb in ics you can easily tell that hc was a transitional os but alot better than most other transitional OS's like.....windows ME or vista....so not sure how rushed it was.

 

[Xevilious]

Hi all, after watching some videos of the SDK for HC, I have been both surprised and disappointed because I expected a revolution most notorious for this new OS and only seem to alter the appearance like Touchwizz style and I am surprised that the optimization by Tiamat, in my opinion provides a perfect scenario, much more possibilities both in appearance and applications than ICS

somevideos from SDK ICS Tablets

http://es.engadget.com/2011/10/19/un-primer-vistazo-a-ice-cream-sandwich-para-tablets/

Uh, no. I think if you were disappointed than your expectations were too high. If you've used Honeycomb, then very little in ICS should surprise you, given that Google is simply using ICS as a vehicle to link phones with the work already accomplished on their tablet OS. Honeycomb is great, and I look forward to getting ICS on both my Nexus S and my Xoom, given that Honeycomb (to me) is superior in almost every way to Gingerbread.

 

[3devious]

Rushed or not it works great as a tablet os.

I disagree. We lost features. The central complaint about the original Galaxy Tab was that it was basically a big phone. Not much has changed with Honeycomb and until very recently, that big phone had more functionality than our devices (which are bigger big phones.)

Sent from my Xoom using xda premium

 

[ZanshinG1]

Calling any iteration of Android "rushed" demonstrates a misunderstanding of Google's core development philosophy.

 

[s14tam]

Rushed or not it works great as a tablet os.

There is alot of honeycomb in ics you can easily tell that hc was a transitional os but alot better than most other transitional OS's like.....windows ME or vista....so not sure how rushed it was.

Again Motorola pushed google for a tablet os to produce the xoom. Again, its their reason for not releasing the source for HC. Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Licensing

 

[double1]

Jellybean will focus more on tablets. With a plethora of quad core tablets about to be unleashed, devs should jump at the chance to develop richer applications that can harness the power of 4 cores.

 

[csseale]

I disagree. We lost features. The central complaint about the original Galaxy Tab was that it was basically a big phone. Not much has changed with Honeycomb and until very recently, that big phone had more functionality than our devices (which are bigger big phones.)

Sent from my Xoom using xda premium

Galaxy tab was a big phone..just as the ipad was. They are both running os built for phones....hc is nothing like a phone and was built with tablets in mind. So the comparision is kinda ridiculous.

 

[csseale]

Again Motorola pushed google for a tablet os to produce the xoom. Again, its their reason for not releasing the source for HC. Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Licensing

I am fully aware of the history. But it was far from a bad release and does not feel rushed. It fits perfect. And ics is not filling very many holes in hc. So if you don't like hc then I'm afraid you wont like ics.

All they did was merge hc with the phone world and eliminated the phone only part. Ics is hc with a dialpad.

 

[csseale]

Calling any iteration of Android "rushed" demonstrates a misunderstanding of Google's core development philosophy.

Wow...I agree with you...crazy

 

[s14tam]

Calling any iteration of Android "rushed" demonstrates a misunderstanding of Google's core development philosophy.

Wow...I agree with you...crazy

So are you both saying that Google would never in a million years push production of a product while omitting some features to make a deadline? If honeycomb was what Android 3.0 was always meant to be, then Google would have had no problem with releasing the source for it as they have been doing for all previous versions. If you really understood androids history, then you either have insider knowledge or are demonstrating a misunderstanding of reality.

 

[ZanshinG1]

So are you both saying that Google would never in a million years push production of a product while omitting some features to make a deadline? If honeycomb was what Android 3.0 was always meant to be, then Google would have had no problem with releasing the source for it as they have been doing for all previous versions. If you really understood androids history, then you either have insider knowledge or are demonstrating a misunderstanding of reality.

Release early, release often is a core google philosophy.

The lack of a honeycomb source release has nothing to do with being "rushed". According to Rubin, it was to prevent the proliferation of phones with a non-phone optimized OS.