I am Happy the 2.1 Launcher is Not Coming to Us

[Mercuie]

I personally think visually the 2.1 Launcher is nicer looking and wouldn't mind it included in the 2.1 update, if!!! and only if they fix the issues we all know it has. If Moto can tinker with it enough to have it running bug free in portrait and landscape mode, to have it load with the speed of our current launcher, and to not have random other bugs that it has now. Otherwise, no way. I can download it on my own if i want that. On a non OCed droid it seems to run a little sluggish.

Livewalls on the other hand. Why not? They run fine. They might even be able to work around the interactive thing. Its not like its magically tied to the 2nd launcher. All the downloaded ones work fine with interaction, i don't see why Moto couldn't get their hands on non launcher dependent versions from google. I don't use them at all, but they're fun to show to friends, and some people have some cute ideas (like the boat that sails left or right depending on your phone position). At least with livewalls you do have the choice if you want to use them or not unlike the launcher.

If you don't want em, i know a lot here are skilled enough to remove them from their device.

I don't think any of anything being said in this post or about what we get in 2.1 or not is worth getting heated up over though.

On a side note, sometimes updates do happen you don't like and its forced upon you. I hated the new lock screen, not enough to call verizon, but its about the same deal as the launcher. Im sure some people hated when xbox updated to the new xbox experience, or when ps3 added... animated wallpapers...

I dunno, updates are updates, we get what we get, we deal with it. No user should have say of WE SHOULD GET THIS or I HATE THIS SO WE SHOULDN'T HAVE IT. Who is any of us to dictate their opinions on to others. Luckily we live with many brilliant rom builders and coders who can fix what the updates change.

 

[DeltaLead]

But cell phones can be compared to computers. Now more than ever actually. There is a significant percentage of Droid users who use their phone in a way that more closely resembles a PC than a phone. In fact, for many people, I bet the amount of phone calls they make are negligible compared to the amount of time they use their phone in a way that emulates PC-style functionality.

The launching of the Droid did not prompt the development of 2.0, competition did. Vista did not prompt the development of Windows 7, competition did. Thats the difference. Also, you cannot compare cell phones to computers until

1. They are not tied to cellular networks, and thus no longer subject to carrier interference with OS updates.
2. You can choose what OS you want on them, or choose to downgrade, once again, without carrier or manufacturer interference.
3. You can upgrade parts of them.
4. There are multiple companies competing with each other for OS dominance, and is not tied to the hardware.

I could go on and on, but I am sure you see where I am going with this. Just because phones now have comparable CPUs and GPUs, does not make them equal to computers in capability, or flexibility. One day, maybe, but today is not that day.

I'd posit that the reason smartphones and computers should be compared to each other not b/c that they have similar uses, but that they depend on similar business models.

For Android to succeed as a platform, it needs developers to buy into the platform. Developers and apps exponentially add functionality that differentiates a smartphone from a regular phone. If I was limited to the stock apps on my Droid, there wouldn't be much that my Droid could do over my old cell phone (save maybe the Facebook app, but realistically, it doesn't do much anyway on a normal basis).

But then, if that's true, how are computers so different from smartphones? I can't do much with just Microsoft XP, or Vista, or 7, I need other programs to add functionality to my computer.

So if developers are so important, then any OS maker should cater to them, one of which is ensuring the platform remains somewhat consistent either by never updating (which is a bit self-defeating), enforce the existance of only one updated version (Apple's iPhone), or limit the number of versions supported at a given time (Microsoft's XP, Vista, and 7).

While I realize there's another topic talking about Android's fragmentation problem (see http://www.droidforums.net/forum/an...e-androids-self-destruction-derby-begins.html), I think it's relevant for the discussion here b/c we as users should be able to demand that we get the latest features and updates. Otherwise, if you have an umpteenth number of different Android versions out in the wild, it'd be awfully difficult to program an Android app for anything, as you'd have to deal with the innumerable compatibility issue.

So it's in Google's interest to have the latest version of Android be the dominant version out in the wild, and it's in my interest b/c I like having flashy new features on my Droid.

Where your points come in, I think, is that MT and Verizon don't have that same exact incentive to make sure our phones have the latest and greatest. You're right to point out that we cannot chose to downgrade or upgrade our phone's OS at will. But Microsoft can exert infleunce by refusing to sell or support obsolete versions of Windows.

And now with phones, Google is trying to accomplish the same thing, but is doing so by trying to ensure that certain popular phones will set the trend and have the lastest Android OS on them with the Nexus One or the Google Experience. With our Droids, we may have to depend on MT and Verizon for those updates, but I was certainly hoping that Google would try to exert more influence on MT and Verizon if only to make sure Android doesn't upgrade itself into oblivion. Smartphones and computers need to have the same end result in order to remain profitable.

I want Android to remain in play and compete with the iPhone. And I'm doing that by tapping my foot impatiently for 2.1, and every other upgrade that hopefully come after it.



But to actually be on topic, I'd agree with you. I'm really only looking forward to 5 home screens. The rest of all the shiny new whistles aren't very intriguing (well maybe the rumored multi-touch). If that's not coming in 2.1, I'll probably try out Home+++.

 

[adrynalyne]

Where your points come in, I think, is that MT and Verizon don't have that same exact incentive to make sure our phones have the latest and greatest.

Oh I agree. Its planned obsolescence, and makes perfect business sense.

Not that I am happy about it, but it is what it is.

 

[adrynalyne]

FWIW, an alleged Moto employee on another forum claims that the update we are getting is a complete redo, and that it will have live walls.

Take it with a grain of salt, of course.

 

[patriot839]

FWIW, an alleged Moto employee on another forum claims that the update we are getting is a complete redo, and that it will have live walls.

Take it with a grain of salt, of course.

I believe this is correct from the vauge responses i get from VZ reps aswell as moto reps but like you said a grain of salt

 

[JonKyu]

Ugh totatlly agree with the OP, I HATE the new app drawer and that stupid physics "lock" thing it's so unresponsive and slooow. I do however like the dot things.

All I really want is the dot things with the modified working buttons for browser and phone and the 2.0.1 app drawer. So I just wish they would paste the modified 2.1 launcher w/out the new drawer ontop of the 2.0.1 drawer and I'd be very very very happy and of course it has to be stable and not... evil :icon_evil: like it is now.

But of course I would want to get it in the update just so we're up-to-date with our Nexus Brethren. And for the sole fact that devs will be able to take it apart and modify it to our liking, I mainly want it so devs have a stable base that works with our Droids.

 

[adrynalyne]

Definitely a fan of the dots as well

Personally, I'd kill for a dock of sorts. Home++ has the right idea, just not the stability.

 

[JonKyu]

Definitely a fan of the dots as well

Personally, I'd kill for a dock of sorts. Home++ has the right idea, just not the stability.

That'd be nice, Home++ worked well for me for a while and was very functional. However, yeah it FC's too much not sure if the dev is even working on it.

 

[gatorbait]

I'd posit that the reason smartphones and computers should be compared to each other not b/c that they have similar uses, but that they depend on similar business models.

I was going to post a reply back to adrynalyne, but you beat me to it. This is what it really boils down to. This thread is about the 2.1 update, and the Android OS is similar to PC OSs in that the reasons they update their software follow a similar business model. Microsoft doesn't send out updates to Windows because they are nice, they do it because it makes good business sense. The same thing goes with Android. If you want to keep the customers happy, you listen to their feedback and send out updates that address that feedback. Because if Company X doesn't do that, Company Y will step in and deliver what customers want.

Now, adrynalyne also touched on the difference in their business models. For phones, multiple companies have a finger in the pie. It is in Google's best interest to send out OS upgrades, but Google's interests potentially don't align fully with Motorola and Verizon's. However, since Android is available across many manufacturer's phones and many networks, if Moto and Verizon fail to deliver Google's full updates in a timely manner, it could lead to opportunities for other companies to step in and do so. Pissing off customers is not a good thing for these companies now that we are starting to have more choice.

 

[r-dubya]

Where your points come in, I think, is that MT and Verizon don't have that same exact incentive to make sure our phones have the latest and greatest.

Oh I agree. Its planned obsolescence, and makes perfect business sense.

Not that I am happy about it, but it is what it is.

That is the wonderful thing about open source. If you don't like it, CHANGE IT!!! What a wonderful platform we have.

 

[adrynalyne]

The problem is, while Android is open source, Google, carriers and hardware manufacturers do what they can to deny the ability to modify the software on the handsets. The business models of these companies is NOT compatible with the OSS model. Heck, we have to hack the phones just to get root access to be able to do what we should have been allowed to do in the first place. I am surprised there haven't been lawsuits launched.

It would be like GNU/Linux OS being released open source, but only being allowed to be installed by OEMs.

 

[JonKyu]

The problem is, while Android is open source, Google, carriers and hardware manufacturers do what they can to deny the ability to modify the software on the handsets. The business models of these companies is NOT compatible with the OSS model. Heck, we have to hack the phones just to get root access to be able to do what we should have been allowed to do in the first place. I am surprised there haven't been lawsuits launched.

It would be like GNU/Linux OS being released open source, but only being allowed to be installed by OEMs.

I agree, It's frustrating that devs can't have access to all the info that they have as from my experience custom ROMs makes my phone experience an even richer one.

I'm not sure (as I'm definitely far from being knowledgeable about GPUs and CPUs) but I feel like even our GPUs aren't being utilized to their fullest potential. Do you know if games utilize our GPUs? I have a strange image in my head that our GPU's feel like dead weight at the moment.

 

[blue rocket]

personally i love the new launcher...hate the slider and overall look of it. hoping that it will be added to 2.1 for Droid...hence the delay.

 

[DeltaLead]

That is the wonderful thing about open source. If you don't like it, CHANGE IT!!! What a wonderful platform we have.

The problem is, while Android is open source, Google, carriers and hardware manufacturers do what they can to deny the ability to modify the software on the handsets. The business models of these companies is NOT compatible with the OSS model. Heck, we have to hack the phones just to get root access to be able to do what we should have been allowed to do in the first place. I am surprised there haven't been lawsuits launched.

It would be like GNU/Linux OS being released open source, but only being allowed to be installed by OEMs.

I agree with adrynalyne in that Android being open source is really of little value for smartphones as we cannot realistically modify Android and install the modifications onto our phones without potential consequences, a problem computers don't have to deal with.

As much as I'm a fan of open source software, with Android, we might just have to accept this as a necessary evil since phones, as a customer's experience, are tied to a carrier's ability to provide cell service. I can understand a carrier's sense of hesitancy to allow unfettered access to modifying the software of a phone.

 

[Where'sMyCoffe?]

This is what Apple's COO Tim Cook said during a interview:

Q: Are all pieces of the iPhone OS platform complete or is there more to come?

A: The word "complete" isn't in our dictionary. We're always innovating and always looking to obsolete ourselves. The ecosystem and platform are really good, and the foundation is in place, but clearly it will continue to get better.

Apple COO Tim Cook Speaks at Goldman Sachs Conference - Mac Rumors
This is how a company should think. No offense to some of you, but some of you think the opposite of this. Saying things like... "the OS is fine, we have apps/hacks/roms for the rest"... if Google/Apple thought like that... we'd be so behind in smartphones and their operating system. Mr. Cook here is saying they are always on the edge of their seat trying to innovate, and not stay still and be content.

Bottom line, everyone doesn't like the same thing. We either are going to get it, or it should be a option. I don't think advancements should be selfishly proclaimed like "oh i hate this new advancement, we should not have it, im glad"... because frankly... you aren't the only person owning the phone, but you are entitled to your opinion. I think advancements like this new app drawer, should be optional, but of course set to default with the new update.