The good

[God Ginrai]

and also tablets

Funny, I don't remember Google announcing any Tablets with the G1.

Next time, read an article before you cite it. From the History section of that same article:

Android, Inc. was founded in Palo Alto, California in October 2003 by Andy Rubin (co-founder of Danger),[29] Rich Miner (co-founder of Wildfire Communications, Inc.),[30] Nick Sears[31] (once VP at T-Mobile), and Chris White (headed design and interface development at WebTV)[13] to develop, in Rubin's words "smarter mobile devices that are more aware of its owner's location and preferences".[13] The early intentions of the company were to develop an advanced operating system for digital cameras, when it was realised that the market for the devices was not large enough, and diverted their efforts to producing a smartphone operating system to rival those of Symbian and Windows Mobile.[32] Despite the past accomplishments of the founders and early employees, Android Inc. operated secretly, revealing only that it was working on software for mobile phones.[13] That same year, Rubin ran out of money. Steve Perlman, a close friend of Rubin, brought him $10,000 in cash in an envelope and refused a stake in the company.[33]

Google acquired Android Inc. on August 17, 2005; key employees of Android Inc., including Rubin, Miner and White, stayed at the company after the acquisition.[13] Not much was known about Android Inc. at the time, but many assumed that Google was planning to enter the mobile phone market with this move.[13] At Google, the team led by Rubin developed a mobile device platform powered by the Linux kernel. Google marketed the platform to handset makers and carriers on the promise of providing a flexible, upgradable system. Google had lined up a series of hardware component and software partners and signaled to carriers that it was open to various degrees of cooperation on their part.

It says quite clearly right here that it was an OS designed for smartphones which was bought by Google.

The tablet market didn't even exist when Android finally released in 2008. The Motorola Xoom, one of the earliest Android tablets, wouldn't even come out until 3 years later in 2011. It wasn't until the iPad was announced in 2010 that anyone even considered using Android in a tablet form-factor.

-God Ginrai

 

[SNESFAN]

So GNU/LINUX Linux was originally designed for x86 PC desktops, the focus has obviously changed to a much broader platform since then, servers, laptops etc. Would you describe linux as a "personal computer OS" or would you describe it as something a bit less limiting?

EDIT: rolls eyes @ klumpen

 

[Klumpen]

So linux was designed for x86 PC desktops, the focus has obviously changed to a much broader platform since then, servers, laptops etc. Is linux still a "personal computer OS" or would you describe it as something a bit more?

It's just a kernel.

 

[God Ginrai]

So GNU/LINUX Linux was originally designed for x86 PC desktops, the focus has obviously changed to a much broader platform since then, servers, laptops etc. Would you describe linux as a "personal computer OS" or would you describe it as something a bit less limiting?

I haven't seen any source that says it was designed for the x86 architecture, or any architecture in particular.

Also, back when Linux was designed, there wasn't really a distinction between desktop and mobile. There was mostly just mainframe and personal computers.

EDIT: Also, don't feel the need to change what you call it because of Klumpen. The Linux Kernel is called "The Linux Kernel", not Linux.

-God Ginrai

 

[Neelix]

http://www.thelinuxdaily.com/2010/04/the-first-linux-announcement-from-linus-torvalds/

- Neelix

 

[SNESFAN]

The identification based on initial concept I seriously doubt are people's reasoning for identifying it that way. What is more likely happening is I see people calling it a phone OS as downplaying and discrediting it's current functionality. That is the actual point I'm making. but It doesn't matter, whatever, forward on with drilling my off topic topic into the ground.

EDIT: the part you quoted said the initial target was a camera OS anyway, which was later then adapted it into something for smartphones due to the lack of a market. It reinforces that they were looking forward to it being a multi-platform OS which were all mobile devices with touchscreens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#The_creation_of_Linux

Linus made linux for his personal use on his personal computer which was an 386 desktop correct?

Where GNU linux starts and linux as only the kenel ends as an all encompassing term Linux is up for debate I don't care to get into. But using your own logic that android didn't exist for tablets due to the lack of tablets, then linux was designed for personal computer originally because of the lack of other platforms.

The main point being the identification even if technically accurate can be used in a way to downplay something's functionality, going back to the first point that I made.

Calling the pandora a 4 inch tablet with a keyboard, rather than a miniature laptop. both technically correct, one sounds awesome, the other sounds limiting. I was expecting one thing, but I experienced something a little less than that in this regard. The pyra's features should change that based off how I feel if things were added I'd feel differently in the areas I identified.

 

[Neelix]

You're right...  It's time to update my definition of Android.   I will no longer call it a "Phone OS"....  Clearly it's now a "Glorified Phone OS"!    *GDR*

- Neelix

(Earth:  Mostly Harmless)

 

[SNESFAN]

:shakes head: I have a feeling I'm being poked and prodded

Just call it a mobile OS, it's fair and not discrediting and still differentiates it from a desktop

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system

 

[oxym]

I've heard a rumor (may be not confirmed) that before Android became a 'phone OS' (or mobile OS) it was prepared to be used on cameras.


I guess it explains why I have so negative attitude towards it.

 

[moxie]

No, I'm talking about what kind of camera we would get on the pandora if ED tried to get hold of one given financial and technical constraints...

Without trying to go into a 10 page debate repeat, having all these good quality features and hardware, I don't buy that a $20-30 rear camera is going to be some kind of negative tipping point.

Probably not, but that kind of price point ($20-$30 on the final price), after subtracting the usual VAT, extra complexity of board, extra complexity in manufacture and case, will not buy you any sort of camera hardware except one that

doesn't hold a candle to recent phone cameras and it has no flash.

 

[Grench]

No, I'm talking about what kind of camera we would get on the pandora if ED tried to get hold of one given financial and technical constraints...

Without trying to go into a 10 page debate repeat, having all these good quality features and hardware, I don't buy that a $20-30 rear camera is going to be some kind of negative tipping point.

Probably not, but that kind of price point ($20-$30 on the final price), after subtracting the usual VAT, extra complexity of board, extra complexity in manufacture and case, will not buy you any sort of camera hardware except one that

doesn't hold a candle to recent phone cameras and it has no flash.

Don't forget the additional software and driver development time & $$$$ that would have to be centered around just making that one component 'work'.

 

[God Ginrai]

EDIT: the part you quoted said the initial target was a camera OS anyway, which was later then adapted it into something for smartphones due to the lack of a market. It reinforces that they were looking forward to it being a multi-platform OS which were all mobile devices with touchscreens.

 No, once again, you did not read it. The article states that the early intentions of the company were to create a camera OS and that they diverted their efforts to building the smartphone OS. Palm did the same thing with webOS, they were working on Prima, and then a couple of developers built Luna over a weekend, using none of the code from Prima.

But using your own logic that android didn't exist for tablets due to the lack of tablets, then linux was designed for personal computer originally because of the lack of other platforms.

That is exactly what I was getting at with my comment referring to personal computers and mainframes.

Calling the pandora a 4 inch tablet with a keyboard, rather than a miniature laptop. both technically correct, one sounds awesome, the other sounds limiting. I was expecting one thing, but I experienced something a little less than that in this regard. The pyra's features should change that based off how I feel if things were added I'd feel differently in the areas I identified.

Not really. Tablet means just a screen. Tablet PC is the term for a laptop which can act as a tablet. Also, the word "miniature" has often carried connotations of a reduced featureset in exchange for the novelty or portability of the reduced size, so I don't see how the Pandora does not satisfy the definition of "miniature laptop". Besides, this argument is moot, because the Pandora is largely marketed as a gaming device, homebrew handheld, or a UMPC. And it easily fits the definitions of all 3 of those to a T.

-God Ginrai

 

[Natsu]

Probably not, but that kind of price point ($20-$30 on the final price), after subtracting the usual VAT, extra complexity of board, extra complexity in manufacture and case, will not buy you any sort of camera hardware except one that

Still not buying it even with that in mind. I don't see it raising the price much higher. (I know. I know. I'm not


the one making the thing.)


How does a $20-30 phone camera become a 3ds camera just because the work put into it?


In any case, we aren't going to agree on this.

Don't forget the additional software and driver development time & $$$$ that would have to be centered around just making that one component 'work'.

Says the one coming into this with a paranoia outlook bias of the camera?


Anyway, like the screen? Like the Pyra itself. He could have went with a lower price


and lower resolution screen, but he made this one worked.

I can't believe the camera is the point where it get hit with the "too much money, too much time" thing when

the camera is like one of the pull in customers features, especially for the phone and tablet crowd. 

 

[Yoyobuae]

I can't believe the camera is the point where it get hit with the "too much money, too much time" thing when

the camera is like one of the pull in customers features, especially for the phone and tablet crowd. 

Should the pyra even try to pull in the "phone and tablet crowd" in the first place? That crowd will probably continue just buying phone and tablets. They are just not the target audience, IMO.

The screen is important to people which value a PC/Gaming handheld device, the camera ... not so much. That's probably why it was not included in the initial design.

 

[Natsu]

Should the pyra even try to pull in the "phone and tablet crowd" in the first place?

Considering it's already going to with 3G/4G, yes.

 

[Yoyobuae]

Should the pyra even try to pull in the "phone and tablet crowd" in the first place?

Considering it's already going to with 3G/4G, yes.

Don't think 3G/4G modem was a move intended to pull the "phone and tablet crowd". Mobile internet is just damn useful in a ultra mobile PC type device with physical keyboard (actually, it's probably useful in just about any mobile device).

 

[spud42]

I've heard a rumor (may be not confirmed) that before Android became a 'phone OS' (or mobile OS) it was prepared to be used on cameras.


I guess it explains why I have so negative attitude towards it.

lol.. you need to develop your photography puns more ....... maybe i should have just let this slide ......

 

[_wb_]

Android is an OS designed to make the best out of heterogeneous hardware with wildly varying screen sizes and pixel densities and limited input methods (e.g. touch only).

GNU/Linux was not originally designed for x86. Back in the early 1980s, x86 did not have a monopoly position yet on the desktop PC market. I think Motorola 68000 was the first target architecture of gcc, and it was clear from the very beginning that GNU would be all about having portable software that works on a variety of architectures -- that is one of the main reasons to make software Free in the first place (the term "Open Source" was invented much later). It is true though that the Linux kernel was originally written for 386 without portability in mind (using lots of x86 assembler code), but that rapidly changed when it got picked up by the Free Software community.

 

[toastylynx]

Android is an OS designed to make the best out of heterogeneous hardware with wildly varying screen sizes and pixel densities and limited input methods (e.g. touch only).

GNU/Linux was not originally designed for x86. Back in the early 1980s, x86 did not have a monopoly position yet on the desktop PC market. I think Motorola 68000 was the first target architecture of gcc, and it was clear from the very beginning that GNU would be all about having portable software that works on a variety of architectures -- that is one of the main reasons to make software Free in the first place (the term "Open Source" was invented much later). It is true though that the Linux kernel was originally written for 386 without portability in mind (using lots of x86 assembler code), but that rapidly changed when it got picked up by the Free Software community.

Might want to be careful with the wording there, since the GNU bits were made for the GNU operating system which at the time lacked a Kernel. GNU/Linux i.e. the Linux kernel with GNU userland and utilities was indeed first done on an Intel chip. That's all mindless terminology quibbling, though.


It is true that Linux was made more portable as time went on.

 

[Neelix]

SNESFAN was correct when he originally said "Linux was originally designed for x86 PC desktops" .  

GNU may not have been but GNU wasn't really what he was talking about,  he just modified his terminology to satisfy Klumpen.

- Neelix