The Playbook and Ice Cream Sandwich
I'm generally not one for conspiracy theories, but after reading What the Android App Player means for BlackBerry and reading some of the comments, I had a thought, and I have decided against my better judgement to share it and see what people have to say about it. This is not a rumor I read somewhere, merely spitballing.
The Playbook was released April 19th without the Android app player as we all know, but we were under the impression that an update would follow sometime in the future and bestow its greatness upon us.
Blackberry World was at the beginning of May, and this is where we saw the demo of the android player.
Fast forward to May 10th, about 2 weeks after release and only days after Blackberry World, give or take, and in the opening keynote of Google I|O, we get the announcement of Ice Cream Sandwich, the next iteration of Android which will succeed Gingerbread/Honeycomb (Uniting Phone and Tablet)
Now, I think either:
1. Google gave RIM no prior warning of the announcement of ICS
2. RIM knew about ICS but was too late to show anything but the Gingerbread player.
This iteration promises to unite the tablet and the phone, which I would assume means that apps developed for Gingerbread and a phone screen would no longer be just that, and that all apps would be compatible with ICS.
One of the comments I read in the blog post by Joseph was touching on the fact that Android apps are not native Blackberry apps and will not work natively with the Playbook. What if ICS is able to have apps run seamlessly with QNX?
Official Google Blog
Now, the leaked player resembles Gingerbread, the defacto phone OS. With Honeycomb arriving as a dedicated tablet OS, it would be hard to believe that they would leave it at 2.3, so maybe development was shifted to Honeycomb somewhere before April 19th, and then was forced to shift again with the announcement of ICS in May?
Maybe someone can clarify if Google releases source code to hardware manufacturers before the source code is publicly released?
Thoughts, comments, concerns on this wacko theory?
I know it's a lot of what-ifs, but the pieces of the puzzle in terms of delays and releases seems to coincide no?
- CrackBerry Abuser
07-27-11, 06:08 PM #6
- 454 Posts
- 07-27-11, 06:13 PM #7
Right now there isnt enough HC specific apps to warrant develop for RIM. 2.3 Gingerbread will play most all of the android market BUT they are mostly for phones. They all work on HC too for the most part though. ICS will unify the OS's more but i dont see app development really taking advantage of this for a while. RIM needs to get the GB version down right now and make that is good as they can. It should satisfy most peoples needs.
Honestly, like i have mentioned before, the NDK should be a bigger priority so the PB can stand on its own and not use the android and BBOS player as crutches and have its own ecosystem. This ecosystem can then filter down to the QNX phones due next year. If not then they arent going to have any apps for the new phones too which would be a bigger issue, just as it is now. They can rely on android saving them for everything really.
Last edited by howarmat; 07-27-11 at 06:18 PM.
- 07-27-11, 06:19 PM #8
RIM can only do the app player for 2.3.3 because the source code is out. They aren't working with Google on the App Player, just taking advantage of the fact the the source code is out and free for anyone to use. Google never release 3.0 source because it was a disaster. I don't think they are going to release 3.1 either. 4.0, Ice Cream Sandwich, should be the reunification for the OS and run on both phones and tablets and will likely have source released. As soon as source is released, RIM can start working on it and turn 4.0 back into a TabletOS app.
- CrackBerry Abuser
07-28-11, 09:48 PM #10
- 102 Posts
From that what I read player is emulator. Emulator is aplication that changes imput or out put. eg I control my computer via wii remoute wich is conected via bluetooth.
So it is emulating whole os so theoreticly you can upgraede it just when update comes out. Unfortunetly we all probably know that android os are made costomlly for each tablet phone. So we cant upgrade it without rim.
The real question is WHAT TAKES THEM SO LONG. I uderstend ptoblem with it. Maybe it is part of plan to rase atention( they suceded. When I put key work in google news I see only android player and us aprovment.)
In addition to my Playbook, I also have an Asus Transformer, which I also quite like - Now, Asus has released the Eee Pad Kernel Code for Android 3.1 OS (V188.8.131.52) - I'm not sure if that would be equivalent to the source for HC, or if this is totally different than pure HC source code?
I downloaded 3.2 today, and it does improve the compatibility with a lot of the applications which were designed for 2.3/phone screens. It's mostly a grandiose zoom feature, but it helps a little.
I value all of the points made, but the fact that the time period for the android functionality is dragging on is still bugging me.
I realize that RIM may not have done the greatest job in other areas - HOWEVER, I refuse to believe that there isn't a better reason for the long time frame other than incompetence. I realize that people are still waiting for native email etc. - I don't dispute that.
My overall feeling is that there is a VALID REASON why we haven't seen these features yet. I believe that a corporation of that size deserves the benefit of the doubt, because despite what people would have you believe, there is no way they would have survived long if they are as irresponsable as people believe them to be.
My initial speculation about ICS was because I thought the timing was right.
The android OS is becoming increasingly fragmented, and they hope to end this with 4.0 -- the key feature will be to make it easier for developers, and not force them to develop for so many different shapes and sizes of phones and tablets. The playbook is a tablet, is it not?
It still feels like RIM rushed to launch they Playbook -- maybe they have learned from that mistake? Maybe they are being patient this time, and taking the time to ensure that everything is ready to go before releasing the finished product, no matter how badly people want it.
- CrackBerry Addict
07-29-11, 12:25 AM #13
- 597 Posts
Jim Balsillie said that they were using 2.3 because it's open source. the others are not as Google is trying to reign in manufacturers.
People are still getting too fixated on Android and missing the point of QNX being able to run any open source language in a VM. As well as any POSIX program. No conspiracy needed.
- 07-29-11, 12:54 AM #15
Google and RIM are not talking at all.
Bing is the preferred search engine and map - not Google (maps)
Android on Google - Google does not participate because RIM will sell the apps thru App World after approval.
ICS on PB? Not as long as the source is not open - its not a virtual machine, its an interpreter for the Android-code. (not exactly a VM, because it doesn't run a whole OS)
- 07-29-11, 03:12 AM #17
One thing to bear in mind is that while they are not quite as good as custom-designed apps for a tablet, the gingerbread apps work far better on a tablet than the dire 2x option you get when using iphone apps on an ipad, so there is much less of a downside to running them.
- 07-29-11, 05:18 AM #19
The real question everyone should be asking is "Will the idea of the android app player now force google to no longer open source android?"
I mean it pretty much means their competitors can copy the best of android and offer more than what android can offer at this point in time.
RIM can now offer apps that it doesn't have. if apple did it, or course they don't need it, but it would mean they could stick it to their biggest competitor.
- CrackBerry Genius of Geniuses
07-29-11, 05:25 AM #20
- 12,764 Posts
- Optional, but not needed.
I think google wants to prevent people from making the latest version of the x86 android project, that's why they keep their source code delayed. It makes sense.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
- CrackBerry Newbie
12-10-11, 03:37 PM #21
- 8 Posts
ICS was ported to the Fire 2 days ago. since playbook has same internal components as the Fire, can an ICS port not equally work for playbook?
I tweeted that question to the dingleberry dev and he wrote back:
"So do people really want to see Android on the playbook ? I mean if that's what you want I can focus on that.. But QNX > Android "